3 ms·

>> Those 200 million Muslims who live in India and are part of the Indian nation, yet they're not Indian enough for the nationalists What's the difference betw

>> Those 200 million Muslims who live in India and are part of the Indian nation, yet they're not Indian enough for the nationalists What's the difference between that and a religious war then? Nationalism in the US originally meant that American Protestants were going to be Americans first and Protestants second, and American Catholics were going to be Americans first and Catholics second. Nationalism was about putting national identity above other forms of identity. White nationalism isn't nationalism, it's just racism. Nationalism means that those people who you have nothing in common with? Well, now you have this one thing. Not to be sound all pro-nationalist here, I'm more of a city-state guy, most problems don't need national solutions. But nationalism, at its best, is a way to combat the bigotry you are talking about, not to exacerbate it.

plumble 6y ago
What does it matter what some historical US nationalist movement was going for? "Ethnic nationalism" is clearly what's gaining traction the world over, and being discussed. They use the not-unfamiliar conflation of race/religion/nationality based on some ethnic mythos, to equate patriotism with purity of a local monoculture. Is there some "true nationalist" group out there of any prominence?
dan-robertson 6y ago
This is a pretty one-sided view of nationalism. You make it sound like a unifying thing when a key point is usually creating a cohesive identity which excludes certain groups. Though it is true that much nationalism in America has been civic nationalism, which is mostly formed around citizenship and shared values (but note also the southern nationalism formed around different shared values, and the nativism starting in the middle of the 19th century). Here is a study of contemporary American nationalism: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/bonikowski/files/bonikowski_and_dimaggio_-_varieties_of_american_popular_nationalism.pdf https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/bonikowski/files/bonikowsk... The nationalists being talked about in the article are Hindu nationalists. They explicitly want to create a shared identity that excludes Muslims.

plumble 6y ago

What does it matter what some historical US nationalist movement was going for? "Ethnic nationalism" is clearly what's gaining traction the world over, and being discussed. They use the not-unfamiliar conflation of race/religion/nationality based on some ethnic mythos, to equate patriotism with purity of a local monoculture. Is there some "true nationalist" group out there of any prominence?

dan-robertson 6y ago

This is a pretty one-sided view of nationalism. You make it sound like a unifying thing when a key point is usually creating a cohesive identity which excludes certain groups. Though it is true that much nationalism in America has been civic nationalism, which is mostly formed around citizenship and shared values (but note also the southern nationalism formed around different shared values, and the nativism starting in the middle of the 19th century). Here is a study of contemporary American nationalism: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/bonikowski/files/bonikowski_and_dimaggio_-_varieties_of_american_popular_nationalism.pdf https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/bonikowski/files/bonikowsk... The nationalists being talked about in the article are Hindu nationalists. They explicitly want to create a shared identity that excludes Muslims.