In our globalised world where there are less and less linguistic and cultural barriers does it make sense to identify with our country of origin? — BigThoughtDropper

I suspect that, after WWII, national cohesion and jingoist patriotism began to wane. Now, former empires and sovereign nations seem to be fragmenting politically (US polarization, Brexit, Scottish independence). But, the "pale blue dot" image, and global communication provided by the Internet, may allow us to view ourselves as "citizens of the world" as opposed to the arbitrary boundaries of neighborhoods and nations. So, yes, it does make sense for us to expand our communities and loyalties to the whole world ecosystem. :smile:

would you say that national identities play a much reduced role in contemporary times?

would you say that national identities play a much reduced role in contemporary times? — BigThoughtDropper

I'd like to say that. But the popularity of Donald Trump's ongoing "make America great again" crusade, seems to have revived some feelings of American Exceptionalism, and Identity Politics, among politically conservative citizens. One result of that "ad-campaign" form of Nationalism is renewed animosity toward immigrants, primarily from south of the border. Another sign of retreat into "us vs them" insular nationalism is the Brexit and Scottish Independence movements. The European Union began to reunite the fragmented nations of the old Roman Empire, that were even more divided by WWII, by making their borders more porous. Which allowed some progressives to think of themselves as Europeans, instead of French or German. But recent events, including an influx of middle-eastern immigrants, has stimulated some sentiment for Hitler's (make Germany great again) notion of a glorious national identity. Even in Russia, Putin recently warned against the rise of Nazi ideology, in a nation that was a victim of that same idealization of "Race, Land, and Conquest".

After WWII, the general political trend tended toward Liberalism, and Globalism. But the signs now say that Conservatism and Isolationism are on the rise again. But, I suppose that's just another symptom of Hegel's historical Dialectic, which swings back & forth between polar-opposite worldviews. Fortunately, the average political position is usually in the moderate range between those extremes. Therefore, like Hegel, I optimistically assume that the general upward trend of history (toward enlightenment) will continue, despite brief periods of regression toward Feudalism and Fascism. :cool:


The Dialectical Spirit of History :
Like most rational historians, and unlike many rational scientists, he assumed that the world was progressing in a particular direction, and for some good reason.
http://bothandblog3.enformationism.info/page32.html

In our globalised world where there are less and less linguistic and cultural barriers does it make sense to identify with our country of origin? — BigThoughtDropper

The globalists think so. There are countervailing trends. Nationalism and national populism are on the march. Brexit for one, the Trump phenomenon for another. Nixon's going to China was a great play for the future of globalism. The plan was for China to be welcomed into the western world and to thereby become more democratized and western. If Nixon could see how that dream turned out he'd never have bothered. The rise of authoritarian and autonomous China is a great blow to the globalist dream. I'm sure you know all this.

There's definitely a place for nationalism and identification with the country of one's birth, or with ones adopted country. The next few decades will bear this out. And speaking of bears, how about them Russkies? After the fall of the Soviet regime the US had a great opportunity to become friends with a newly democratized Russia. Instead we used NATO to encircle them, pick fights over Ukraine, and generate more enmity. Another failure of globalism.

I'm all for globalism as long as it's the rest of the world becoming more like me, not the other way round.

We do have, and likely will have, national identities for quite some time. People are born into specific communities, specific small regions, specific larger areas, in nations. Language, religion, culture, food ways, politics, history, etc. all give us pieces of our identity.

The future of nationalism? Good question. Global warming is as likely to intensify national identity as weaken it. Nations that have sufficient water, food security, and stable populations will want to hold on to those goods for themselves. Nations that are located where the climate is becoming inhospitable, where the ocean is encroaching on the land, where food, water, and stability is lacking there is no advantage in national identity. The goal for people in these areas will be to get somewhere else, and as they make that attempt, their destinations are likely to recoil into national preservation. If the destination nations are swamped by climate refugees, who knows what will happen? Probably not an epidemic of human kindness.

It's likely inevitable. It forms part of our innate categorization of things to belong, at the very least, to a community of people which today is associated with a nation state.

It's not as if you could reject your national identity even if you wanted to, some of sticks, the extent of which this happens varies. A closely related question is to what degree can you try to reject those aspects of nation identity which you may not like. Some may be strongly bonded with national identities. Others may think it's more silly than useful. It has its good and bad sides.

I hope such feelings diminish to the extent they can. The problems we are facing cannot be adequately solved by identities belonging to a nation state. We need the world in some fashion.