Nationalism

joshuatree

Ok, so i don't know a whole lot about politics, and i'm just wondering, what are a nationalist's views on taxes? should they be high or low? and why? and also social welfare? views on that? oh and immigration?

Flamed Diving

Nationalism is a political view, not an economic view. You may as well ask what an atheists viewpoints on tax should be. However, Nationalists would definitely have something to say about immigration.

joshuatree

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Nationalism is a political view, not an economic view. You may as well ask what an atheists viewpoints on tax should be. However, Nationalists would definitely have something to say about immigration.

I understand that it's a political view, but so is conservatism, and they support lower taxes because they believe lower taxes will create an incentive for people to work, save, invest and engage in entreprenurial endeavours,so I thought a nationalist would have a view too.

loveissucide

Well, nationalism has nothing to do with economics so you're really barking up the wrong tree. However given the fact that nationalists seek to create a strong nation state, I would say that they would see Big Government as what is necessary to do so.

Flamed Diving

joshuatree wrote: »

I understand that it's a political view, but so is conservatism, and they support lower taxes because they believe lower taxes will create an incentive for people to work, save, invest and engage in entreprenurial endeavours,so I thought a nationalist would have a view too.

Well, is conservatism a homogeneous belief across the world? Does an American conservative share identical political ideals with a Tory? I'm not sure the Tories would be considered right-wing in the US:

Unlike Labour, we will increase spending on the NHS every year to meet rising demand and to achieve results that are amongst the best in the world. We will cut the deficit not the NHS.

http://www.conservatives.com/

Flamed Diving

loveissucide wrote: »

Well, nationalism has nothing to do with economics so you're really barking up the wrong tree. However given the fact that nationalists seek to create a strong nation state, I would say that they would see Big Government as what is necessary to do so.

Really? One could be a 'Minarchist' and still be a nationalist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minarchism

Gary L

joshuatree wrote: »

Ok, so i don't know a whole lot about politics, and i'm just wondering, what are a nationalist's views on taxes? should they be high or low? and why? and also social welfare? views on that? oh and immigration?

I've got a looser idea of nationalism, namely that it to some extent applies to anyone who thinks country of origin is a major dividing factor between people. Thats not to say it's an incorrect view.
As such I wouldn't attempt to group it tightly with any other ideology on life because its a sense I think we've all inherited. It's really only as communication and cross culture conversation increases that we could hope to see a 'people of the world'.

PomBear

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Nationalism is a political view, not an economic view. You may as well ask what an atheists viewpoints on tax should be. However, Nationalists would definitely have something to say about immigration.

Completely wrong, FF and SF are the strongist Nationalist parties in ROI, look at their immigration policies

PomBear

joshuatree wrote: »

I understand that it's a political view, but so is conservatism, and they support lower taxes because they believe lower taxes will create an incentive for people to work, save, invest and engage in entreprenurial endeavours,so I thought a nationalist would have a view too.

Conservatism and Nationalism aren't intertwined in any way shape or form, neither is Liberalism

Flamed Diving

PomBear wrote: »

Completely wrong, FF and SF are the strongist Nationalist parties in ROI, look at their immigration policies

You just contradicted yourself. :rolleyes:

PomBear

Flamed Diving wrote: »

You just contradicted yourself. :rolleyes:

How so

Flamed Diving

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Nationalists would definitely have something to say about immigration.

Statement A: Nationalists have something to say about immigration.

PomBear wrote: »

Completely wrong.

Statement B: Statement A is wrong.

PomBear wrote: »

FF and SF are the strongist Nationalist parties in ROI, look at their immigration policies

Statement C: Nationalist parties have something to say about immigration.

Flamed Diving wrote: »

You just contradicted yourself. :rolleyes:

Statement B and C cannot be both correct.

PomBear wrote: »

How so

See above.

PomBear

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Statement A: Nationalists have something to say about immigration.



Statement B: Statement A is wrong.



Statement C: Nationalist parties have something to say about immigration.



Statement B and C cannot be both correct.



See above.

and in what context was your post?

Nationalists would definitely have something to say about immigration.

Flamed Diving

PomBear wrote: »

and in what context was your post?

That a Nationalist would definitely have something to say about immigration... you thought I meant something else?

You see, when you jump to hysterical conclusions you tend to make a hames of things, like you just did. Try to read what a persons post actually says, in future, instead of reading what you want to see. As you can tell, it can get you in embarrassing situations.

Now, you are derailing the thread. So I consider this matter closed.

PomBear

Flamed Diving wrote: »

That a Nationalist would definitely have something to say about immigration... you thought I meant something else?

You see, when you jump to hysterical conclusions you tend to make a hames of things, like you just did. Try to read what a persons post actually says, in future, instead of reading what you want to see. As you can tell, it can get you in embarrassing situations.

Now, you are derailing the thread. So I consider this matter closed.

Someones not happy about the prospect of work tomorrow

Flamed Diving

PomBear wrote: »

Someones not happy about the prospect of work tomorrow

I'm a postgrad student. As said before:

when you jump to hysterical conclusions you tend to make a hames of things, like you just did.

Now, stop acting like a child and let it go.

Lockstep

Nationalism can be inclusive or exclusive and really cannot be seen in a one-size-fits-all term. Fascism and Nazism embrace a heavy degree of extreme nationalism combined with xenophobia.
Irish nationalist groups like Sinn Féin tend to be more inclusive and while glorifying Ireland and it's past, as a party do not seek to prevent immigrants from being a part of this nation.

PomBear

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I'm a postgrad student. As said before:



Now, stop acting like a child and let it go.

You seemed to try say nationalists would have something to say in terms of anti immigration, I would have the same interpretation as many others

Flamed Diving

PomBear wrote: »

You seemed to try say nationalists would have something to say in terms of anti immigration, I would have the same interpretation as many others

Nope. All in your mind.

Overheal

Nationalism is to Economics like Vegitarianism is to Heavy Metal....

But, the one thing a Nationalist would probably tell you is they believe in protectionism tactics; that is, heavy taxation of foreign imports. Similar to what's been going on frequently between 1st and 3rd world countries.

PomBear

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Nope. All in your mind.

What were you trying to say so?

Flamed Diving

PomBear wrote: »

What were you trying to say so?

No more than I posted. Sorry if this is too hard for you to take.

southsiderosie

Gary L wrote: »

I've got a looser idea of nationalism, namely that it to some extent applies to anyone who thinks country of origin is a major dividing factor between people. Thats not to say it's an incorrect view.
As such I wouldn't attempt to group it tightly with any other ideology on life because its a sense I think we've all inherited. It's really only as communication and cross culture conversation increases that we could hope to see a 'people of the world'.

Actually, developments in communication technology and mass media have historically helped to fuel nationalism, not dampen it. Benedict Anderson pointed this out in Imagined Communities; mass media makes it easier to spread propaganda and mass-produce culturally and linguistically materials cheaply. He used Magyars and the printing press as an example, but certainly the internet makes this process even easier.

Remmet

When we talk about nationalists are we really talkin bout republicans or are we talkin nationalists as in what the word means everywhere else?? - Sieg Heil types which we dont really have much of (thank god) in Ireland.

Republicans are nearly always left-wing and therefore would be in favor of high tax on the rich and I suppose in general and then good public services? Also immigration isn't an issue amongst republicans.

Nationalists: No idea bout taxes but I think immigration is an obvious one

dsmythy

Remmet wrote: »

When we talk about nationalists are we really talkin bout republicans or are we talkin nationalists as in what the word means everywhere else?? - Sieg Heil types which we dont really have much of (thank god) in Ireland.

Republicans are nearly always left-wing and therefore would be in favor of high tax on the rich and I suppose in general and then good public services? Also immigration isn't an issue amongst republicans.

Nationalists: No idea bout taxes but I think immigration is an obvious one

Nationalism does not equal Nazism.

Looking at various Nationalist movements across Europe their taxation policies range from ultra-progressive to total conservative. So it depends on the group in question OP.

MysNthR0p3

Where's the confusion between Nationalism and Immigration coming from?

Nationalism is a "devotion and loyalty to one's own nation; patriotism". I'm a Nationalist. I think Ireland is and should be a sovereign nation. I also believe (being an Irish "republican" (as opposed to the US definition)), that the ideal would be to have a 32 county Ireland with Ulster being part of The State.

Those are my beliefs as a Nationalist (and republican).

I also believe that people of any nationality may live and work here provided they are willing to abide by the laws of The State. I actually think we're better off being multicultural. Likewise I believe that people who favour Unionism have every right to live in Ulster as they most likely have been there for hundreds of years anyway. Just because they don't believe as I do doesn't negate their right to live where they do.

Those are my beliefs on immigration.

How are people confusing one term with the other?

Amhran Nua

Overheal wrote: »

But, the one thing a Nationalist would probably tell you is they believe in protectionism tactics; that is, heavy taxation of foreign imports. Similar to what's been going on frequently between 1st and 3rd world countries.

Thats not nationalism, its economic protectionism, and makes sense in many cases - for example the EU has heavy tarriffs on Chinese imports of clothes and shoes to protect local producers. In terms of food its simple war proofing, you don't want your food supply to be dependent on the tinpot dictator du jour. And it can work both ways, you can't purchase or own land in the Philippines as a foreigner, for example.

MysNthR0p3 wrote: »

Where's the confusion between Nationalism and Immigration coming from?

I think a lot of people have a horror of nationlism because of the problems caused in its name in the last century, notably world war 2. This is also one of the reasons some wish to see national identities subsumed into the larger EU mass (not naming any particular countries here), which is a really bad idea. However, its a force like any other, and can be harnessed for creative value as well as destructive.

amacachi

Personally I see nationalism along with religion, parochialism etc. as nothing but a hindrance to the development of all the people of the world.

Eliot Rosewater

Amhran Nua wrote: »

I think a lot of people have a horror of nationlism because of the problems caused in its name in the last century, notably world war 2.

In Ireland it is also due to the fact that the whole population is forced to swallow the Nationalists' pipe dream through compulsory Irish; that anyone who doesn't subscribe to the "Erin Go Bragh" attitude is to be looked down upon; and that Irish culture is superior just because it is the culture one is born into.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

This is also one of the reasons some wish to see national identities subsumed into the larger EU mass (not naming any particular countries here), which is a really bad idea.

Why do you think that?

Amhran Nua

amacachi wrote: »

Personally I see nationalism along with religion, parochialism etc. as nothing but a hindrance to the development of all the people of the world.

You're confusing those wrapped in the flag to further their own agendas (wearing the green jersey) with true cultural expression, art, poetry, music and dance, among others, which express the cultural/national identity of a people, the two are deeply intertwined. These are creative things and should be encouraged to enrich the world for everyone else.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

In Ireland it is also due to the fact that the whole population is forced to swallow the Nationalists' pipe dream through compulsory Irish; that anyone who doesn't subscribe to the "Erin Go Bragh" attitude is to be looked down upon; and that Irish culture is superior just because it is the culture one is born into.

There is a lot more to Irish culture than the language, no idea where you are getting the hokey tourist image uber alles, and most cultures have a certain amount of self respect, sorry if you find that offensive.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Why do you think that?

You think its a good idea to replace unique cultural identities with a beaurocracy?

Iwasfrozen

Amhran Nua wrote: »

You're confusing those wrapped in the flag to further their own agendas (wearing the green jersey) with true cultural expression, art, poetry, music and dance, among others, which express the cultural/national identity of a people, the two are deeply intertwined. These are creative things and should be encouraged to enrich the world for everyone else.

The problem with nationalism is that one will not only devote themselves to , poetry, music and dance they will also shout down any other form of , poetry, music and dance that is "not Irish". The problem is that nationalism always fosters a sense of racism and "I'm better then you because I'm from Ireland attitude."

Amhran Nua wrote: »

There is a lot more to Irish culture than the language, no idea where you are getting the hokey tourist image uber alles, and most cultures have a certain amount of self respect, sorry if you find that offensive.

Are you or are you not in favour of mandatory Irish for the Leaving Cert ?

Amhran Nua wrote: »

You think its a good idea to replace unique cultural identities with a beaurocracy?

If it means we never see another World War II then yes.

lmtduffy

Amhran Nua wrote: »

You're confusing those wrapped in the flag to further their own agendas (wearing the green jersey) with true cultural expression, art, poetry, music and dance, among others, which express the cultural/national identity of a people, the two are deeply intertwined. These are creative things and should be encouraged to enrich the world for everyone else.

Culture and national identity are not and should not be seen as the same thing.

You think its a good idea to replace unique cultural identities with a beaurocracy?

Not what's happening, do you think its a good idea to replace Galway, Cork, Dublin cultures with the bureaucracy of an Irish state?

What's happening, just like what happens in a traditional nation, is the formal establishment of Multi-nation/actor relationships.
Nothing is being replaced, we are compounding our "unique" cultural identity with that of others in a formal and administrative manner.

Amhran Nua

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The problem with nationalism is that one will not only devote themselves to , poetry, music and dance they will also shout down any other form of , poetry, music and dance that is "not Irish". The problem is that nationalism always fosters a sense of racism and "I'm better then you because I'm from Ireland attitude."

A strong sense of national identity doesn't mean shouting down everyone else, unless you feel threatened by everyone else, and if you do, your problem isn't your national identity.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Are you or are you not in favour of mandatory Irish for the Leaving Cert ?

In the way its taught at the moment, no. I am in favour of it but the teaching methods and curriculum need to be revised, which the DoE is in the process of doing. I find it interesting that you phrase that as if it were a damning indictment one way or the other.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

If it means we never see another World War II then yes.

WWII had its roots in the punitive treaty of Versailles, and extreme xenophobic nationalism was just one vehicle among several that were used to heighten and focus the hatred. If it wasn't that it would have been something else - as I said, a force like any other. Also, we didn't have a world war two, our enlightened European neighbours did.

lmtduffy wrote: »

Culture and national identity are not and should not be seen as the same thing.

You cannot deny that the two are linked at a very basic level.

lmtduffy wrote: »

Not what's happening, do you think its a good idea to replace Galway, Cork, Dublin cultures with the bureaucracy of an Irish state?

The cultures of those cities have much more in common with one another than with the rest of Europe, and as such will profit culturally by working more closely together.

lmtduffy wrote: »

What's happening, just like what happens in a traditional nation, is the formal establishment of Multi-nation/actor relationships.
Nothing is being replaced, we are compounding our "unique" cultural identity with that of others in a formal and administrative manner.

Exactly what I said, verbatim that "some people" feel it would be a good thing. The European Union does not to my knowledge have as an express or implict goal the removal of national or cultural identities.

dsmythy

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The problem with nationalism is that one will not only devote themselves to , poetry, music and dance they will also shout down any other form of , poetry, music and dance that is "not Irish". The problem is that nationalism always fosters a sense of racism and "I'm better then you because I'm from Ireland attitude."

Nationalism can lead to that. Then again, Socialism can lead to nasty things too, but i doubt people are giving up on it, and so neither should Nationalism be given up on either.

lmtduffy

You cannot deny that the two are linked at a very basic level.

Culture may have nothing to do with national identity,
but national identity presents a national culture familiar but not necessarily and unlikely to be wholly shared by the people in that nation.
One has been selectively formed for political reasons,
the other formed due to people lifestyles and habits.

It can be troublesome to get them mixed up.

The cultures of those cities have much more in common with one another than with the rest of Europe, and as such will profit culturally by working more closely together.

So what is acceptable level of commonality exactly?

What is it to profit culturally?
How do you measure it?
Is it possible to have a cultural deficit?

I dont mean to seem to be on your case here but I feel these things are arbitrary and ought to be treated as such or forgotten.
For me culture is created and propagated through interaction with others.
Culture has no boundaries; you should not treat it as it does, it may have varying gradients geographically speaking but that is only due to where people settled and the lifestyle they lead, as opposed to being intrinsically linked somehow with the land they live on, though your environment does play a part in sharing your culture via your lifestyle, but that doesn't make much of a difference to the rest of what Im saying.

Exactly what I said, verbatim that "some people" feel it would be a good thing. The European Union does not to my knowledge have as an express or implict goal the removal of national or cultural identities.

yes, but it is true that the EU is playing a part in the decline of national identity, which is not necessarily a bad thing by and large and I think that culture and cultural identity at a variety of levels is becoming richer through the formalising of existing multi-nation relationships.

lmtduffy

dsmythy wrote: »

Nationalism can lead to that. Then again, Socialism can lead to nasty things too, but i doubt people are giving up on it, and so neither should Nationalism be given up on either.

What role do you see nationalism playing today that cannot be done otherwise?

Amhran Nua

lmtduffy wrote: »

but national identity presents a national culture familiar but not necessarily and unlikely to be wholly shared by the people in that nation.

And not everyone can read and write, which doesnt mean Ireland isn't a literate nation to all intents and purposes. I think you're seperating two concepts because you have observed the potentially disastrous results of one while supporting the other, not neccessarily an unjustifiable position, but causation and correlation and all that...

lmtduffy wrote: »

It can be troublesome to get them mixed up.

Only if you're looking for trouble.

lmtduffy wrote: »

So what is acceptable level of commonality exactly?

Language, heritage, art, music, all of these, but mostly the perception that a people have of their own uniqueness and where that puts them in relation to others. It may be only in the mind but then again, so is everything except the most basic needs when you get down to it.

lmtduffy wrote: »

What is it to profit culturally?
How do you measure it?
Is it possible to have a cultural deficit?

Tourism is a good start, popularity of shows like the Lord of the Dance is another good one (around four times the populaton of Ireland have paid good money to see that). Deficits are purely mathematical concepts, so not really.

lmtduffy wrote: »

I dont mean to seem to be on your case here but I feel these things are arbitrary and ought to be treated as such or forgotten.

Well one man's art is another man's waste of time.

lmtduffy wrote: »

For me culture is created and propagated through interaction with others.

Thats called cultural cross pollinisation, which while important in its own right (witness Hellenisation of the Roman empire) isn't something to be pursued in and of itself.

lmtduffy wrote: »

Culture has no boundaries; you should not treat it as it does, it may have varying gradients geographically speaking but that is only due to where people settled and the lifestyle they lead, as opposed to being intrinsically linked somehow with the land they live on, though your environment does play a part in sharing your culture via your lifestyle, but that doesn't make much of a difference to the rest of what Im saying.

Different cultures should be celebrated for their uniqueness, not merged into a faceless morass of random spasms. This perspective is born of the fear of difference, not of some unifying nobility.

lmtduffy wrote: »

yes, but it is true that the EU is playing a part in the decline of national identity, which is not necessarily a bad thing by and large and I think that culture and cultural identity at a variety of levels is becoming richer through the formalising of existing multi-nation relationships.

So what you're saying is that the EU is removing the unpleasant elements of nationalism while encouraging the creative elements? I agree, but how would you substantiate this claim that the EU is reducing national identity?

lmtduffy

Amhran Nua wrote: »

And not everyone can read and write, which doesnt mean Ireland isn't a literate nation to all intents and purposes. I think you're seperating two concepts because you have observed the potentially disastrous results of one while supporting the other, not neccessarily an unjustifiable position, but causation and correlation and all that...

No, I am observing two concepts because they are two different concepts.

Only if you're looking for trouble.

No is troublesome not to distinguish between cultural and national identity because they are different.

Language, heritage, art, music, all of these, but mostly the perception that a people have of their own uniqueness and where that puts them in relation to others. It may be only in the mind but then again, so is everything except the most basic needs when you get down to it.

Yes but to what degree must these be the same?
What is a perception of ones own uniqueness?

Tourism is a good start, popularity of shows like the Lord of the Dance is another good one (around four times the populaton of Ireland have paid good money to see that). Deficits are purely mathematical concepts, so not really.

So you mean to profit financially from your culture as opposed to profit culturally?

Well one man's art is another man's waste of time.

care to expand beyond that adage?

Thats called cultural cross pollinisation, which while important in its own right (witness Hellenisation of the Roman empire) isn't something to be pursued in and of itself.

No not to be pursued I agree, so where do you see culture coming from if not from peoples interactions together?

Different cultures should be celebrated for their uniqueness, not merged into a faceless morass of random spasms. This perspective is born of the fear of difference, not of some unifying nobility.

Cultures should not seen as stagnant and what is this uniqueness, how can a culture no be unique?

So what you're saying is that the EU is removing the unpleasant elements of nationalism while encouraging the creative elements? I agree, but how would you substantiate this claim that the EU is reducing national identity?

The EU is leading to the decline of national identity as the importance of the nation declines as some of the powers of the nation state are integrated into a multi-nation decision making processes in the EU.
I do not think it is how you put it removing unpleasant elements and encouraging creative elements, thats a little to optimistic for me.
I would see that the reduction of our national identity allows for a fuller realisation of our cultural identity.
Nationalism by its nature is not very creative it is more likely conservative by its nature as it seeks to adhere to and preserve a national identity, and a national identity doest change easily or often.

Iwasfrozen

Amhran Nua wrote: »

A strong sense of national identity doesn't mean shouting down everyone else, unless you feel threatened by everyone else, and if you do, your problem isn't your national identity.

Nationalism starts one off on the path to racism. In order to "preserve"
cultural identity a country must ban other cultural identities to prevent them being diluted.

If we look at countries with a high population of nationalists, America, Russia, Israel. These are the countries that have no problem fúcking up other people. And of course we have nationalist parties in the world, Nazi, BNP, Republican Party, Shinn Fein. These are the parties that cause problems in the world.

Nationalism and Racism go hand in hand. If we had no Nationalism we would have no Racism.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

In the way its taught at the moment, no. I am in favour of it but the teaching methods and curriculum need to be revised, which the DoE is in the process of doing. I find it interesting that you phrase that as if it were a damning indictment one way or the other.

It is pretty much. You're displaying typical nationalist characteristics of forcing your culture on those who don't want it.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

WWII had its roots in the punitive treaty of Versailles, and extreme xenophobic nationalism was just one vehicle among several that were used to heighten and focus the hatred. If it wasn't that it would have been something else - as I said, a force like any other. Also, we didn't have a world war two, our enlightened European neighbours did.

The treaty of Versailles was a result of nationalistic British and French politicians and their desire to cripple Germany economically and militarily.

World War One, another reason the treaty of Versailles came into being, was riddled with nationalistic agendas. It is safe to say nationalism cause World War One.

This isn't even taking into account the principal of Lebensraum, Germany's military agression and the Holocaust. All of which have their roots steeped in Natioanlism.

Iwasfrozen

dsmythy wrote: »

Nationalism can lead to that. Then again, Socialism can lead to nasty things too, but i doubt people are giving up on it, and so neither should Nationalism be given up on either.

Lenin was true Socialist, he followed Marx's advice on a change of government via revolution. He genarally cared about his people and he wanted to see a true decentralised world government where everybody was equal.

Stalin however was a true Russian nationalist and had no problem destroying other countries to increase Russia's wealth. We see this with the Ukrainian famine, the invasion of Finland and Poland and the systematic rape of East Germany for forty years.

Three more reasons why Nationalism is bad for the world.

ei.sdraob

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Stalin however was a true Russian nationalist

amusingly he was Georgian ...

he played on nationalism and fear to solidify his rule

Iwasfrozen

ei.sdraob wrote: »

amusingly he was Georgian ...

he played on nationalism and fear to solidify his rule

Adolf Hitler was a German patriot yet Austrian. What's your point ?

dsmythy

lmtduffy wrote: »

What role do you see nationalism playing today that cannot be done otherwise?

Certain forms of Nationalism can have a role in the future with regards bringing people together to work towards the same goal - unity, confidence of purpose and a better Nation. A better Nation meaning a better society. For those who don't see the value in modern globalisation and Western multicultural ideology more modern newer forms of Nationalism or Patriotism are required to work within an extremely interacted, international, yet emotionally disconnected world.

ei.sdraob

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Adolf Hitler was a German patriot yet Austrian. What's your point ?

They used nationalism and played on nationalistic notions on in order to control the sheeple

... is my point

lmtduffy

dsmythy wrote: »

Certain forms of Nationalism can have a role in the future with regards bringing people together to work towards the same goal - unity, confidence of purpose and a better Nation. A better Nation meaning a better society. For those who don't see the value in modern globalisation and Western multicultural ideology more modern newer forms of Nationalism or Patriotism are required to work within an extremely interacted, international, yet emotionally disconnected world.

could you flesh this out a bit, Im not quite sure I know what you mean?

But is what you mean that nationalism can motivate people to work towards a greater nation and that it provides people with a sense of security in an increasingly globalised world?

dsmythy

lmtduffy wrote: »

could you flesh this out a bit, Im not quite sure I know what you mean?

But is what you mean that nationalism can motivate people to work towards a greater nation and that it provides people with a sense of security in an increasingly globalised world?

Well security would be one aspect of it. Confidence in their identity and place in the world another. A reconnection within communities away from many housing estates' current roles, simply a place where people live rather than a place people are a part of. A mindset which co-relates personal advancement with National and community interest another. There's several tangents one can go on within Nationalism away from the current, certainly media logic, of Nationalism being all about immigration, being 'far-right' and racism.

Iwasfrozen

ei.sdraob wrote: »

They used nationalism and played on nationalistic notions on in order to control the sheeple

... is my point

Ok... good point.

bunny shooter

Flamed Diving wrote: »

However, Nationalists would definitely have something to say about immigration.

Wolfe Tone, if he were here, might disagree with you on that

Flamed Diving

bunny shooter wrote: »

Wolfe Tone, if he were here, might disagree with you on that

How anachronistic.

bunny shooter

How so? He is heralded as the originator of current Irish Nationalism and I refer you to his embracement of the dissenters which could now be substituted with foreigners

dsmythy

bunny shooter wrote: »

How so? He is heralded as the originator of current Irish Nationalism and I refer you to his embracement of the dissenters which could now be substituted with foreigners

I always taught of him more as a founder of Irish Republicanism than Continental Nationalism in Ireland.