The paradox, people of a given country will cheat, torture, rape, and kill each other but will, with the slightest of provocations, rally under their national flag. And when the reason for that goes away, it's back to business as usual - cheat, torture, rape, and kill each other.

So why is Nationalism still tolerated and even lauded? Why is the British flag allowed to be be waved all over the place, but the Nazi flag not so much? (Feel free to substitute your own local good and bad flags here.) — unenlightened

Nationalism, amongst the people I know, has always been seen as the first step towards ethnocentric barbarism and to be greatly feared. Hitler himself started as a nationalist or Volk agitator.

For many people I think the British flag, for all the evil done under colonialism, can still be understood more benignly than a swastika flag. Nevertheless, I am sure the Union Jack is widely feared and/or hated by many (especially former colonies) and is a symbol of the bad and good done in its name. For the most part, it just doesn't yet hold the totemic power of hatred and negative emotion of the Nazi flag.

George Orwell's wrote a nice essay on this subject: Notes on Nationalism.

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them."

"Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism.... Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power."

George Orwell

Why is it that nationality talk and Nationalism in particular is so easily acceptable, and race talk and Racism is so difficult and unacceptable? — unenlightened

Nationality (supposedly) is made about people’s customs,heritage, history, religion and ideas. The flag is just propaganda and easy symbolism. Nevertheless, it depends a lot which country we are talking about... here in Spain most of the people hate the Spanish national flag. Some say it is fascist, homophobic, racist or mustiness. So it is interesting as you said why some flags are more tolerated than others or at least respected. When you go to Catalonia there are people who burn the Spanish flag. Personally I don’t get frustrated but others get annoyed. I guess being a spaniard goes further than a flag.
Also I guess it is very important here the social marketing. Apparently the UK flag which represents the British nationality doesn’t trigger a lot of people not like the nazi or URSS flag for a lot of reasons.
I remember one day I saw the following advertisement:

When you see the UK flag you think about Big Ben
When you see the American flag you think about hamburgers or big cars
When you see the Spanish flag you think about that bigot who hates gay people

Hmm... bad propaganda.

Nationality (supposedly) is made about people’s customs,heritage, history, religion and ideas. — javi2541997

There's a fair amount of pacifism in the US that clashes with flag waving, which is often associated with military action.

Military might is one way to protect a culture. Intolerance is another. Thou shalt have no gods nor skin color different from mine.

I think people are short sited on this matter, an if people started developing habits to fit a future society that we know and can demonstrate or even calculate an answer to “Fix” RACISM is to understand ONE inevitable outcome.....

EVERY Human being will change colour because of:
People breed among other colours, (even inside race), alongside countless other examples like blondes, blue eyes, green eyes and grey eyes are all going extinct slowly like gingers (google it and check credited school board studies ) beauty is in rarity! ♥️ Anyways going back to it believe look around even BLACK’S are getting lighter and lighter because of shelter, because of healthcare products that stop the sun from darkening us, an of course from evolution to change of climate.

NOW yes I’m speculating the futures a mix of ethnicities but let me tell you how THIS and only THIS isn’t the solution it’s just the equation.

When people start looking the same, we will find other ways to separate us.

Evidence is:

Mixed people in today’s society don’t get accepted by blacks or whites, so now racism increased by 300% an the problem is, now there’s catalogues of racism in what shade, Redbone, Light skin, Latte, Caramel, Toffee, Burnt Toffee, believe these are how I’ve witnessed people either value my skin or their skin and i have made the mistake myself to label myself as Caramel why? When Caramel is made to look like my skin and not the other way round.

So let me tell you the simple solution to any problem the world has because Philosophy can over complicate an equation that gives something that can allow us to feel better, emotionally, spiritually and well health.

FOR every time you have something nice to say. SAY IT.




P.s. To save anyone from getting in trouble complimenting someone on their Porceline white skin or their Shine bright like a diamond Black skin, just keep it simple:

YOU have SUCH beautiful Skin, what products do you use...Don’t make it about something they can’t control, make it about something you can learn, connect or enjoy together.

Make the world smile peeps, you don’t know who needs you or when you’re need them!

There's a fair amount of pacifism in the US that clashes with flag waving, which is often associated with military action. — frank

Agree. But this is just another character inside of American nationality/customs symbolism
I guess all the pacifists and hippies movement criticised the flag of US because is one of the most powerful military countries all over the world. Nevertheless, this is not needed to be included of what is the actual means of the flag. If it has 50 stars I guess it is because of the representation of all the states.
What we can say apart from this is just personal beliefs or opinions.

Let me ask you a question.

If you ever visited a foreign country, say Africa - Nigeria one of the most beautiful modern places in earth with culture and heritage, would you use the same pronouns, push you're perspective of belief of how a black/white person acts, you don’t, it’s weird, when we become the minority we open our minds and respect walking in their shoes.

People are too comfortable offending people, an the same people are too sensitive to receive.

The problems within brother you have you’re answer.

Speak to strangers as if on interview, as you never know the value a stranger can bring to you’re life.

So why is Nationalism still tolerated and even lauded? Why is the British flag allowed to be be waved all over the place, but the Nazi flag not so much? (Feel free to substitute your own local good and bad flags here.) — unenlightened

You could generalize 'nationalism' further to any group identifier, including sports team, religious groups, hipster groups etc etc... I think we have a need to identify with groups, and will do it regardless. For all the negative that is associated with it, it also motivates and mobilizes to transcend the purely individualistic/selfish. Doing away with all of it also would imply also doing away with some of the positive aspects of it.

So why do we still tolerate Nationalism is a bit like asking why do we still tolerate the rain? Because it will rain regardless of us tolerating it.... and we probably wouldn't want to do away with it entirely anyway, because, aside from being unpleasant, the rain also makes the crops grow.

The question to me ends up being, what kind of groups should we aim for, and how can we get the most out of it, while minimizing/making amends for the negative?

As an aside, failing to realize this, is I think the single biggest mistake the left has made in the last couple of decades and the reason for the ascent of right wing populism.

People are too comfortable offending people, an the same people are too sensitive to receive. — Tharealist

Yes because we humans tend to different us from each other through different labels. It is weird but people do this. When we see or visit a country with customs so different from us surprise a lot. If you are a person with culture you will try to understand it and learn more about it. If you are ignorant you will criticise or underrated it.

Why is it that nationality talk and Nationalism in particular is so easily acceptable, and race talk and Racism is so difficult and unacceptable? — unenlightened

Because nationalism can unite people across a number of different boundaries like race or class. Humans naturally form into groups often based on residency; before there was a unified America people just flew and identified with their state flags: Virginia, Massachusetts, Maryland, etc.

"Make white people great again" is a ridiculous statement, but if someone were to say. e.g. "Make France great again" I don't see what's offensive about that.

Can’t make something great again if it’s never been great, people suffered.

When people suffer from only natural cause not human cause people can not be labeled great.

"Make white people great again" is a ridiculous statement, but if someone were to say. e.g. "Make France great again" I don't see what's offensive about that. — BitconnectCarlos

Well, you are just reiterating the received wisdom that @unenlightened is questioning. And the question is normative, not anthropological. Racism is just as easy to explain in anthropological terms as nationalism (at least at the just-so story level). But how is it that racism is less acceptable than nationalism or ethnocentrism, when they are so similar?

When you see the Spanish flag you think about that bigot who hates gay people — javi2541997

When you see the Spanish flag you think: "Hm, whose flag is that?" :joke:

A lot of "racist" statements that emphasize supporting or advancing the interests of a certain race aren't even deemed racist today, so lets just start with that. "Make black people great again" or "make hispanic great again" or "make french people great again" aren't really considered offensive or racist, it's really just when applied to certain groups like white people or Germans or maybe the English that it becomes offensive.

When you see the Spanish flag you think: "Hm, whose flag is that?" :joke: — SophistiCat

Lol :rofl: well I don’t care if the people don’t recognise it because I will always show the flag of my city instead. Madrid! Spain is full of regionalism. It looks like it has countries inside itself.

[img]http://

Aw, you have such a cute coat of arms!

Can’t make something great again if it’s never been great, people suffered.

When people suffer from only natural cause not human cause people can not be labeled great. — Tharealist

Within everything exists everything.

It makes sense to have some allegiance and affinity to the territory in which you reside, the languages, history and institutions of the people who reside there. These are meaningful things in the world which contribute to any life.

It makes no sense to have allegiance or affinity to a race, which is devoid of such content.

It makes no sense to have allegiance or affinity to a race, which is devoid of such content. — NOS4A2

This is true, but it might make sense to have a sense of allegiance to a nationality/ethnic group like German or French or Lithuanian due someone's family heritage.

This, imo, is where it gets interesting and lines start getting blurred a bit: What exactly does this allegiance mean to them? How do they process negative historical events committed by these groups? "White pride" has never made any sense to me; "Russian pride" or "Italian pride" do.

George Orwell's wrote a nice essay on this subject: Notes on Nationalism.

"The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them."

"Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism.... Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power." — Tom Storm

I think this ranks as about the most idiotic thing George ever said (he didn't say that many). If he had ever seen the British Expeditionary Force trolling halfway round the world to defend our people in the Falklands, he might have had second thoughts.

You could generalize 'nationalism' further to any group identifier, including sports team, religious group, hipster groups etc etc... I think we have a need to identify with groups, and will do it regardless. For all the negative that is associated with it, it also motivates and mobilizes to transcend the purely individual/selfish. Doing away with all of it also would imply doing away with some of the positive aspects of it.

So why do we still tolerate Nationalism is a bit like asking why do we still tolerate the rain? Because it will rain regardless of us tolerating it — ChatteringMonkey

Yes, all identifications have this dual aspect of unifying and separating. We are united in excluding Them.

nationalism can unite people across a number of different boundaries like race or class. — BitconnectCarlos

Indeed. But circumstances can change and fragment that unity, as happened to Japanese Americans after Pearl harbour. Suddenly, they were not American enough.

To say of one identification that it can in some circumstances overcome the fragmentation of other identifications, is not a great recommendation. If racism happened to unify different nationalities, that would not be a cause for rejoicing.

It makes sense... It makes no sense — NOS4A2

You are merely describing your identifications, not making any analysis of them. We make sense, they make no sense.

Well, you are just reiterating the received wisdom that unenlightened is questioning. And the question is normative, not anthropological. Racism is just as easy to explain in anthropological terms as nationalism (at least at the just-so story level). But how is it that racism is less acceptable than nationalism or ethnocentrism, when they are so similar? — SophistiCat

:100: It's always nice when someone understands the topic. So far, i seem to have attracted mainly the right-wing in defensive mode, rather than comprehensive mode. But it is more a challenge to the Neo-Marxist, Postmodern destroyers of freedom that run this site. (Yes, @Baden this means you.) Turns out they are all bourgeois lickspittles of capitalism after all. Vive l'Internationale!

So why is Nationalism still tolerated and even lauded? Why is the British flag allowed to be be waved all over the place, but the Nazi flag not so much? (Feel free to substitute your own local good and bad flags here.) — unenlightened

As a neo-marxist, postmodern destroyer of freedom who broadly agrees with you, I still wouldn't mod a nationalist like a racist since there are socially acceptable ways to be a nationalist, but no ways of being a racist. Yes, logically this makes no sense if nationalism is a (more or less) disguised in-group favouritism narrative - which it is -, but you can't tell that to people and expect them to believe it just because it's true.

As for why it's more socially acceptable to be a nationalist than a racist or an ethnocentrist? I'd guess that because national identity isn't explicitly articulated in terms of race or ethnicity, the comparison goes under the radar. It seems to require a certain social+intellectual distance from the narratives of national identity to see it for what it is. It's a question of history informing aesthetic/moral taste.

Seeing it for what it is is still much different from ceasing to embody it/be effected by it though...

Why is it that nationality talk and Nationalism in particular is so easily acceptable, and race talk and Racism is so difficult and unacceptable? — unenlightened

I draw a distinction between nationalism and patriotism,. It's a matter of degree and objective. The same applies to race. There's a distinction between being a proud black man wanting to advance his interests and accomplishments and one declaring racial superiority and wanting to crush those unlike himself.

MAGA is a Trump battle cry, imbued with so much crazy idiosyncracy it's hard to identify it as a meaningful political movement.

To the extent a MAGA hat is a subtle klan hood, I agree with your concerns. To the extent it represents an attempt to increase American productivity and success, I see less concern. To the extent it's a trademark for a megalomaniac, I'd hope all true patriots would want it to disappear.

But how is it that racism is less acceptable than nationalism or ethnocentrism, when they are so similar? — SophistiCat

Probably because countries around the world tend to be conceived of as nation states, not as race states.
For example, prior to the influx of immigrants of different races into Germany and Austria, Germans and Austrians were the same race -- yet considered eachother to be different nationalities.
In that sense, nationalism seems to be relatively neutral, in the sense that it is a given -- it's simply about countries being countries.

Yes, logically this makes no sense if nationalism is a (more or less) disguised in-group favouritism narrative - which it is -, but you can't tell that to people and expect them to believe it just because it's true. — fdrake

Nationalism is in-group favoritism, but that in-group favoritism isn't (and definitely shouldn't be) overriding. If I were to travel to the UK and spot someone with a Boston Red Sox hat in a bar that would make me more likely to try to establish rapport with them, but it doesn't make us best friends. It's really just a jumping off point, nothing else.

There's a distinction between being a proud black man wanting to advance his interests and accomplishments and one declaring racial superiority and wanting to crush those unlike himself. — Hanover

What do you think about the recent push to promote black-owned products and businesses? Does that blur the distinction at all? What do you make of a proud black man who strives to support his "people?"

It's really just a jumping off point, nothing else. — BitconnectCarlos

It's a slope, yes. The nationalism enables the bad stuff so well it gets branded (rightly) the same.

f I were to travel to the UK and spot someone with a Boston Red Sox hat in a bar that would make me more likely to try to establish rapport with them, but it doesn't make us best friends. It's really just a jumping off point, nothing else. — BitconnectCarlos

Your framing makes it look like that is all nationalism tends to be. I think you know it's not!

Your framing makes it look like that is all nationalism tends to be. I think you know it's not! — fdrake

Yeah, I'm not here to defend every iteration of nationalism. I have mixed feelings towards it. The moment nationalism turns into xenophobia I'm out; in the US I think our nationalism is actually rightfully predicated on a certain tolerance and adaptability given that we are a nation of immigrants. I'm not prepared to just cede nationalism to the far right.

I'm not prepared to just cede nationalism to the far right. — BitconnectCarlos

I think what you're not prepared to cede is the "good heart" of protectionist policies; which ultimately is taking care of a community and protecting it from predators. That's orthogonal to nationalism, which is a way of deciding -usually based on sentiment- who the predators are.

I think what you're not prepared to cede is the "good heart" of protectionist policies; which ultimately is taking care of a community and protecting it from predators. That's orthogonal to nationalism, which is a way of deciding -usually based on sentiment- who the predators are. — fdrake

I'm actually not much of a protectionist. I more support free trade. What I am keeping an eye on is the fracturing of a common American identity and a progression towards a society where identity is more based along racial, ethnic, or ideological lines and conflict is not so much perceived as acceptable disagreement and instead more perceived as war.

What I am keeping an eye on is the fracturing of a common American identity and a progression towards a society where identity is more based along racial, ethnic, or ideological lines and conflict is not so much perceived as acceptable disagreement and instead more perceived as war. — BitconnectCarlos

On what basis are you separating out the national identity stuff from the racial, ethnic and ideological stuff? What makes national identity less suspicious and dangerous than those?

A quote from a book.

"The Lockian system in politics had a similar history. That system is based on private property, and therefore logically presupposes a 'state of nature' in which property is already a factor. In the course of the eighteenth century it became evident that the Lockian system presupposed something else, namely the thing which is nowadays called nationality; where nationality, like property, is conceived not as a product of political activity in the past (in which case it would have been for political history a relative presupposition) but as a 'natural' basis, an absolute presupposition, of all political activity whatever. It was in 1775 that 'the principle of nationality first asserted itself in the modern world as a dynamic political force (Toynbee, Foreign Affairs, vol. xvii, p. 316, 1939). The things that were done in the nineteenth century in the name of nationality, the things that are still done today [c. 1940], at what expense in life and wealth I shall not try to estimate, are done for the sake of an eighteenth century 'metaphysical' idea. (Collingwood, An Essay on Metaphysics pp.97-98.)