Strange ideas? Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't until the start of the 20th century most countries either explicitly or implicitly ethno-nationalist (and mo

Strange ideas? Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't until the start of the 20th century most countries either explicitly or implicitly ethno-nationalist (and most countries still are today)? The USA itself had an effectively whites-only immigration policy until the Hart-Celler act of 1965 reversed that. Taking the opposite direction, most Slavic countries seceded along ethno-linguistic lines, e.g. the fall of the Soviet union, "Balkanization", the split of Czechoslovakia... In fact, the NYTimes themselves didn't find it strange, but wrote approvingly of such arrangements (or rather, disapprovingly of trying to change them).. at least when applied to other nations: Human rights activists said that the moves to change Kashmir’s status were only the first steps in a broader plan to erode Kashmir’s core rights and seed the area with non-Kashmiris, altering the demographics and eventually destroying its character. Previous laws barred outsiders from owning property. - https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/05/world/asia/india-pakistan-kashmir-jammu.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/05/world/asia/india-pakistan... WaPo shared their position: Kashmir’s new status could bring demographic change, drawing comparisons to the West Bank - https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/08/08/kashmirs-new-status-could-bring-demographic-change-drawing-comparisons-west-bank/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/08/08/kashmirs-new...