Since the inauguration of President Trump, the difference between patriotism and nationalism has attained new heights or division between the two is blurred. — Wallows

Where is the empirical evidence for the claim that patriotism or nationalism has increased under the current administration? Without it, this thread becomes just another anti-Trump rant.

Where is the empirical evidence for the claim that patriotism or nationalism has increased under the current administration? Without it, this thread becomes just another anti-Trump rant. — Hanover

Surely, you must be kidding if you think that there is no correlation between the Trump anti-immigrant anti-European (not paying their due to NATO) and anti-establishment rhetoric and the present state of the union?

I contend that patriotism was higher under Reagan and GW and that it is now more acceptable in the US to be critical of America within America, which now brings increased conflict between critics and traditionalists.

I do think without an empirical showing of your premise that unhealthy nationalism is on the rise and that it is related to Trump, yours is just another tired anti-Trump rant that ought be relegated to the single thread reserved for that purpose.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it

-George Santayana

Mostly misunderstood, What Santayana meant to convey is; if nobody finds the significance in history, progress will be neglected and therefore the causes for the problems arisen will most likely happen again.

When patriotic, you understand the progress and you acknowledge the bad and the good things your country has done. When nationalistic, you neglect the progress and believe your country is superior then others are inferior despite any reason. The early gives your love of country a sense of responsibility, the latter is unjustified arrogance, bigotry, and false superiority.

Can you beef this up with some kind of empirical support and a bit more analysis (like taking a position on your own question)? Otherwise, as @Hanover suggested, it may be more suited to being merged into the Trump thread.

It seems to me that the way the terms are generally used, patriotism is conceived as a 'good thing', whereas nationalism is morally dubious.

So rather than emphasise the parochial with mere evidence, I would like to wonder whether they are the same thing differently regarded, or if the one is a perversion of the other. I take the latter view.

I suggest that having a commitment to one's government to the land, to the people one lives with is a great moral improvement on the narrow self-concern of the individualist, and this is the essence of patriotism.

And nationalism is that perversion that makes of that commitment a larger self; that is thus overly concerned with borders and distinctions, and sets 'me and mine' in opposition to all things foreign.

Now if I take this conceptual distinction back to the parochial, I start to see in the increase of internal division, in the concern with borders, and foreigners as threats, a consistent movement from patriotism to nationalism both in the US and the UK, and elsewhere.

Theres really no difference between patriotism and nationalism however, nationalism is often associated with fascism and racism. Because of this association nationalism is often used to degrade people who take any pride in their country whereas patriotism generally just has a more positive connotation.

Do you guys think nationalism would have some sort of correlation to white supremacy? I think they are somewhat synonymous. Unobtrusively, it seems that the concept of nationalism was taken of white supremacy: bigotry, unjustified superiority, and prejudiced elitism.

Prior to WWII they were pretty much synonymous terms. Since then “nationalism” has had an obvious negative tilt.

Like another commentor said, I can't distinguish patriotism from nationalism.

In my opinion, the line you're discussing is crossed when a feeling of objective superiority and xenophobic views develop.

The distinction appears to come from the French Revolution, prior to which the King was France and the people his subjects - patriotic, loyal to the identity of France that was their King. Nationalism determined that the identity of France was constituted by its people, not its King.

Patriotism is about action in defense of the country to which one is loyal. It is a love for country. Nationalism is more about identity. Where I think nationalism takes on a negative connotation is when one expands the notion of pragmatic self-interest to this national level of identity.

As I see it, the distinction between patriotism and nationalism is one of oppression and control, with the former accentuating and promoting the positive through celebration and encouragement and the latter imposing upon and oppressing those identified as threats.

I see it similar to the distinction between ethnic pride and racism, with it being perfectly acceptable to have an Oktoberfest with a biergarten and schnitzel and celebration of German culture, but unacceptable to hold an Aryan superiority rally.

Now if I take this conceptual distinction back to the parochial, I start to see in the increase of internal division, in the concern with borders, and foreigners as threats, a consistent movement from patriotism to nationalism both in the US and the UK, and elsewhere. — unenlightened

Agreed (from my UK perspective). I think generally patriotism is based on pride in your country's culture and achievements. Nationalism is based on a fear of foreigners who might harm that culture. Patriots have no enemies. Nationalists (in this sense) see enemies everywhere.

So, where does one draw the line between patriotism and nationalism? — Wallows

Patriotism is a form of love. One wishes to share in the spirit of love. Nationalism, at least in current usage, is a form of hate that wants to have it all and share nothing.

As such nationalism is entirely self-interested, patriotism other-interested. Nationalism ultimately irrational because it denies what is. Patriotism rational, because it acknowledges the other.

So, where does one draw the line between patriotism and nationalism? — Wallows

Patriotism = people refer to something positive
Nationalism = people refer to something negative

Of course, the most simple line to be drawn is that love of something doesn't mean you find it superior to everything else and look condescendingly or have hostility towards others. For example, I've noticed that one of the most patriotic people, those who do cherish their country and culture, are ex-pats. And they, as aliens working in a foreign country, usually don't behave 'nationalistically' among the foreigners.

I think it's a bit confusing how today the word 'nationalism' is tried to be made a synonym to patriotism.

Do you guys think nationalism would have some sort of correlation to white supremacy? I think they are somewhat synonymous. — SethRy

Tell that to some Hindu nationalists or the North Koreans or practically anybody else. (Iranians are actually quite proud to be Aryans, btw.)

Yep, everything bad comes only from the white man.

In the last 25 years, "nationalism" has been degraded to an epithet associated with caucasians who are separatists supremacists, racists, etc. This transmogrification of meaning has been driven by various (often white) left-oriented groups who, apparently, dislike the whole business of nationhood, the nation state, and loyalty to a nation--all hideous, hateful, hostile institutions in their minds.

Nationalism used to be cognate with patriotism--and not in the distant past. Patriots love their country, nation, land, soil, homeland, etc.

Since the inauguration of President Trump, the difference between patriotism and nationalism has attained new heights or division between the two is blurred. — Wallows

Your statement is internally contradictory: Since Trump, you say,

a. the difference between patriotism and nationalism has attained new heights
b. division between the two is blurred

They can't at the same time be subject to both greater differentiation and blurring.

In any event, I don't think "patriotism and/or nationalism" are problematic terms for most Americans. It's the coterie of the left that is obsessed with these terms and finds them problematic.

So, where does one draw the line between patriotism and nationalism? — Wallows

My two cents' worth:

Patriotism is loving your country and wanting to help it succeed.

Nationalism is claiming your country is better than all the others, and disliking people from other countries.

The two are almost completely mutually exclusive, since nationalism tends to lead to disaster eventually.

I meant no offense. Just because I stated white supremacy does not mean I think they were the only one to blame. But yes, I accept my mistake, poor choice of words. And yes, you're right — there is no innocent country.

I meant no offense. Just because I stated white supremacy does not mean I think they were the only one to blame. But yes, I accept my mistake, poor choice of words. And yes, you're right — there is no innocent country. — SethRy

No offense taken. My point was that both things, patriotism and nationalism, are quite common phenomenon around the World.

And are there 'innocent' countries?

I think Andorra and San Marino might be quite innocent. And my neighbouring countries like Estonia and present day Sweden, Denmark or Norway aren't so bad either nowdays. Yet Iceland isn't innocent: they got carried away with aggressive banking enterprises and made a huge mess. :nerd:

I believe that theres a correlation in that white supremacists are generally nationalists, but I also think that nationalism to a degree is helpful and at times necessary to the development and progress of a country.