Why is nationalism decreasing...

Both of the World Wars started in Europe, and both were, to a certain extent, caused by nationalism, so I'd guess that's why.

Considering the bulk of European musicians I listen to are nationalistic, I find that surprising.

And they tend to be a lot more ethnic solidarity about it, as well. Patriotism seems a lot more racial for Europeans. And they don't seem to be as afraid of fascist symbolism as we are. While invading the Middle East, we've at least kept politically correct enough about it to put blacks on the cover of our military units.

While groups in Europe are outright attacking out diversity. And writing songs such as "This is Europe, not L.A.". The idea of representing their countries with someone who doesn't seem ethnically appropriate seems to ethnically appall many Europeans.

European Nationalism definitely doesn't seem as multiracial, to put it mildly.

"because modern communication brings the people closer together."

This. If I wouldn't speak english, I would have to keep listening to other Hungarians all the time, at home, making up propaganda about about how beautiful the Hungarian women are, how diverse Hungarian language is, (especially the cuss words), how genius all the hungarian inventors were, for inventing matches, vitamin C, and Rubik's cube, and so on.

All of there things that produce national pride are based on a system that only works if you don't hear "the other side of the story".

But if I'm looking at Hungary through the eyes of a more global community, these exaggerated points of pride start to sound irrelevant, and Hungary is becoming more and more like "that tiny country somewhere around Eastern Europe, with the name that sounds almost like "hungry"", in my own mind as well.

It's true that nationalism is also increasing in certain other circles, at the same time, but that doesn't have much future.

edited 28th Dec '10 3:16:00 AM by EternalSeptember

While I despise Plaid Cymru (Wales' nationalist party) and the Scottish Nationalist Party, I would never describe them as racist or fascistic, because they lean somewhat to the left.

The British National Party on the other hand are a bunch of racist thugs. Luckily, they aren't popular at all beyond the average "they terk are jerbs" crowd and despite their best efforts they have been utterly thwarted in trying to win seats in Parliament.

edited 28th Dec '10 5:50:38 AM by pagad

Nationalism is definitely on the rise in Europe, as far as I can tell.

I cannot say that I am thrilled by that.

Why is nationalism a good thing again?

Its okay to take pride in your country, but to me at least, Nationalism usually implies the thought that your country is the best, no matter what it does, and that everyone else is wrong and just jealous of you.

edited 28th Dec '10 6:44:12 AM by Thorn14

Nationalism, proof that tribalism is alive and well.

I don't think there's anything wrong with being proud of your nation, though people assume I'm a red blooded nationalist because I'm in the military, though I didn't join to serve my country. This means it's very entertaining when I run into legitimate nationalists and we debate, they end up with a rather nasty surprise.

You won't really even see a hint of nationalism from me until others start to criticize my country in ways that I don't agree with. I guess it's kind of some complex to where it's ok to talk shit about your own country, but when someone else starts talking shit about mine and I don't agree with what they are saying, I get offended. Unfortunately many Europeans end up thinking I'm a nationalist, because they always want to act so smug about their own culture and imply that we're all barbarians here in the US because of some issues that we handle differently than them for cultural reasons.

One thing I am proud of, however, is that for us nationalism very rarely has anything to do with ethnicity. Being American is about just that, being an American. Where as Europe seems to make a big deal out of racial identity. Part of this is because of where I'm from in the US, the West Coast doesn't have too many ethnic issues, the East Coast however, is very different in that regard. It baffles me why people care what type of white others are, to me, Italian/Canadian/German/English/Russian/French/etc/etc is all just "white".

Can't find 2010 statistics, but here's 2009's rate of national pride. America's 80% might sound impressive, but it's now middle-of-the-road, compared to being the proudest country in the world in 2006. (By the way, Australia's the proudest among the countries studied, and Japan's the least proud. This is hardly a comprehensive list, though—I doubt many people in Colombia or Equatorial New Guinea are particularly proud at the moment.)

I don't see why Japan has so little pride, the country doesn't seem that bad. Well, most of the things I hear as "problems Japan has" aren't that bad. I'd say the sexism is the biggest one.

You aren't allowed to be proud of anything in Japan

^^

I think it has more to do with being a culture of humility, as well as the internal strife that comes from being a country full of xenophobic traditionalists clashing with a wild and very liberal young generation.

Ah.

It baffles me why people care what type of white others are, to me, Italian/Canadian/German/English/Russian/French/etc/etc is all just "white".

So people should take pride in a meaningless "racial" construct, while ignoring actual cultural heritages? It's absolutely idiotic to proud to be white, black, Amerindian, Asian, because these are all very subjective, non-cohesive groups. But there's nothing wrong with being proud to be Hungarian, or Igbo, or Guarani, or Laotian.

edited 28th Dec '10 10:47:48 PM by Tsukubus

Thread Hop, but why is pride any more warranted because you're more related?

It's not an issue of being related. Your cultural heritage is a critical component of how you're raised and is thus often a huge part of who you are as an individual. But words like white or black or Asian are not real indications of those.

Ah. Sorry for misunderstanding.

@Zarstro: Never say Die about nationalism-

JAPAN? HUMBLE?

edited 29th Dec '10 5:00:45 AM by RawPower

I just think its slightly odd, why take pride in your nation? For the most part pay its taxes, abide by its laws and be happy you have a family and friends there but why be proud of it?

Its a set of laws and customs that you have? is that supposed to be it? Because to be honest I don't have that much in common with the man on the street, should I take pride in my country because its raised me? Maybe, but I'll pay back what I owe them, why should people feel proud of the economic region they grew up in? I know this might sound stupid, but I just don't understand it at all.

Nationalism never made much sense anyway, but let's just say nations were much smaller groups in the past and they were tightly knit and wanted to kill or enslave all other groups (There are exceptions, pacifist groups... but given that in the past the Superweapon Surprise was a very rare trope, they never lasted for long). When humans are separated into groups, hatred and denigration of the others, and glorification of one's own, including a badass name and defining one group's traits against the others' traits... it's just spontaneous behaviour (they don't even need to compete for stuff or have any actual rivalry), and nothing short of a common enemy will unite them. Nationalism is taking this concept and applying it to much looser, much bigger groups, with mixed results.

Originally people weren't very nationalistic... even a little bit after the feudal era began to draw to a close, peoples principle loyalties were to their next step up in the feudal chain, and later, whoever their employer was, compared to their nation. You can see this in the English Civil War for example; whose side the common folk fought on depended primarily upon which landowner was on whose side. People were more tribal than nationalistic; they followed their leader.

It was after the French Revolution and the fallout from that that nationalism really got going. And it was Napoleon who really mustered the full power that nationalistic and ideological hatreds can bring out. Before that only religion could really get peoples blood boiling towards groups different from themselves.

And we haven't been able to get rid of the force since...

Of course, nationalism had happened before. William Wallace and the wars of independence had engendered a deep feeling of national unity that hadn't existed in Scotland prior to Edward I's little campaign of terror northward. And of course Romans and members of Greek city states would have felt intensely nationalistic, as opposed to the more feudal Persians and Parthians to the east.

So people should take pride in a meaningless "racial" construct, while ignoring actual cultural heritages? It's absolutely idiotic to proud to be white, black, Amerindian, Asian, because these are all very subjective, non-cohesive groups. But there's nothing wrong with being proud to be Hungarian, or Igbo, or Guarani, or Laotian.

I more or less meant in regard to others. I've seen folks on the east coast actually care if someone is Italian, Jewish, Russian, Irish, etc. On the West Coast, nobody gives a shit about that sort of thing.

I mean I'm proud of my Russian and Germanic roots, both sides of my family have done a stellar job of preserving the history of our lineage throughout the centuries, but I wouldn't judge someone based on what country their DNA came from generations ago.

I guess you could say I have racism and nationalism, diet coke edition. I treat the whole issue more like a football team. I'm not particularly loyal or proud of my nation or race necessarily, but when someone else insults either, it's game time.

edited 29th Dec '10 9:55:30 AM by Barkey

That's a good way of putting it.

Not to derail, but I have to partially disagree with Tsukubus on the notion of racial identity. I say "partially" because racial identity is itself a sub-set of cultural values, and there are times where racial identity can act as a positive substitute for cultural ambiguity.

Down here in Arkansas, we have many proud Americans, but segregation is still very much a reality. Many people throughout the country have argued that African Americans should discard their identity politics and assimilate more freely. The reason why we haven't done this as easily as other ethnic groups is because we simply cannot trace our regional heritage as easily as other citizens of this country. We have what some sociologists call "the broken line", a situation where an ethnic, religious, or cultural group has been forcibly divorced from the source of their value system.

It sounds like I'm throwing the race card (and I am to some extent), but we are a special case in that we can't say "well, I'm proud of my Kenya/Ghanan/Ugandan heritage because we don't really know specifically where we came from. Some people say it shouldn't matter where you came from, but I remember as a kindergarten student hearing other classmates say "my family comes from Poland" or "my family comes from India", but when it was my turn to say the same, I could only shrug and say "maybe somewhere in Africa...". Again, it sounds trivial to some, but there's a certain ability to claim ownership to your heritage that has been lost in the black community, and in many ways, it was a luxury that was taken from us. We're still having a hard time coming to terms with that issue. Some people say we're just whining about atrocities of bondage that no longer bear relevance, but I think people still don't fully grasp the severity of the trans-atlantic slave trade and the cultural impact it is having (note the progressive tense) on both Sub-Sahara Africa and the United States.

Having said that, there are good people in this country, and while I'm not one of those people who thinks the United States is the greatest country in the universe, it's a decent place.

edited 29th Dec '10 9:52:35 AM by Aprilla

I will have you notice that such a thing as "national origins" is irrelevant in Subsahran Africa: the countries were made up, with no regard to cultural unity. Saying "Ugandan ancestors" is rather meaningless. And how can one really say one's ancestors come from one tribe or another when those tribes may be extinct, and may have left no traces, neither written nor oral.

Actually it's irrelevant in most cases, since your national originis might affect your scale of values, aesthetic sensitivities, and maners, but are irrelevant to how proud you should be of yourself, since none of those traits are yours by choice.

I understand what you're trying to say, and I can't say that I disagree. For some reason or another, I do enjoy knowing where I came from, and I take particular pride in the fact that there are so few left in my family, but we still have our whole lineage locked away, dating back to before the Crusades.

On the other hand, there's always a silver lining, at least you don't live in Africa? :P