Which is worse: Nationalism or Racism? Or are they the same thing?

[howard112211]

I tend to think that both concepts are pretty much the same thing.

Whether one thinks that people of the same skin color should "stick together" or that people who by sheer coincidence have similar citizenships should stick together, does not make much of a difference.

They both are based on a primitive instinct that has its origin in the tribal stage of the evolution of homo sapiens. Namely, the instinct that one should assist the own tribe and fear the other tribes.

That instinct made sense at this stage of developement, since it was beneficial for the survival of a particular tribe. At this stage, the biggest threat to humans came from other humans. In todays world this instinct is largely obsolete, and has become in itsself a source of danger.

[crim son]

1. By definition they are different responses

but yeah, the emotion that provokes them is probably the same.

[cali]

2. there are differences.

I see your point, but there are considerable difference.

[boobooday]

3. They are the same only in that they are both counterproductive

and that they are fear responses to a perceived (sometimes manufactured) threat.

A shorthand way of defining an other.

It's something we will always do, but the shorthand way leads to trouble.

[Taitertots]

4. There are similarities and differences

People in an area working together for the benefit of everyone is a good thing. Believing that as a group you have intrinsic superiority is foolish.

Do you believe we can get to where we care about all the people of the world without first caring about all the people in our nation? Don't confuse nationalism with community, public service, and deserved pride for progress.

The selfish refusal to support the common good is how we got into this economic meltdown. It is why many refuse national health care.

[Nye Bevan]

5. "I love my country" = Nationalism, "I hate black people" = Racism.

Not so similar.

[izquierdista]

7. What about "I hate other countries"?

To make your comparison a bit better.

[Nye Bevan]

8. "I hate other countries" = Xenophobia (nt)

[cali]

10. um, no. to quote Fredrick Reck-Mallazcwen

Nationalism: A state of mind in which a man hates another country more than he loves his own.

[Nye Bevan]

17. Zionists are nationalists

Do Zionists hate other countries more than they love Israel?

[RaleighNCDUer]

26. There's no hatred of Palestinians in the settlement? nt

[cali]

27. I don't know. some do.

Nationalism is about supremacy. That's what Reck-Mallezcwen was saying. And he was definitely in a position to have an educated opinion on the subject.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Reck-Malleczewen

[Tsar_Bomba]

23. "My Country love it or leave it" = Nationalism

[RaleighNCDUer]

25. So "It's heritage not hate" and "it's just about White Pride" are not racism? nt

[lunatica]

6. Both are "us against them"

So is Jingoism which is hatred of anyone not of the same nationality.

[Romulox]

9. Doubt the OP can define "nationalism"

The entire purpose of a national government is to promote the interests of that nation.

So, by all means, please show me a definition of "nationalism" that does not make our head of state, e.g., the greatest "nationalist" of all--I simply don't believe you can.

[howard112211]

11. My definition of nationalism:

The belief that there is some kind of connection between people of the same nationality, that doesn't exist between people of separate nationalities, which implies a moral imperative that a person should side with the people of his own nation when a conflict between different nations arises.

edit: IMO A head of state becomes a "nationalist" when he works for the interests of his country at the expense of other countries. A non-nationalist head of state would be one that seeks the common good when interacting with other countries.

[Romulox]

12. Um, your definition makes anyone who passed HS civics a "nationalist"

"The belief that there is some kind of connection between people of the same nationality"

Um, how about the 1040 form. If I believe in IRS 1040, does that make me a "nationalist"? Because that is "some kind" of connection between people of the same nationality and I. And I believe it exists. :shrug:

(Citizenship is obviously the most basic "some kind of connection". Your definition needs to be revised.)

"A non-nationalist head of state would be one that seeks the common good when interacting with other countries."

Any examples not derived from a novelization of the Star Trek: Voyager series? :rofl: All kidding aside, name such a "non-nationalist head of state", if you would! :hi:

[howard112211]

13. I'm talking about some connection aside from arbitrary definitions.

As for the head of state: No one is purely a non-nationalist, I reckon. But non-nationalist tendencies have been demonstrated repeatedly, for instance in the post WWII era by those who founded the united nations.

[Romulox]

15. So national citizenship is an "arbitrary definition"?

And yet it determines so much of our lives--the 1040 form (which is the basic IRS tax return form) is only a tiny example. It's hard to accept your premise.

I think you mean that we are one nationality or another by an accident of birth. That's true. But once we are born, we are bound to the country of our birth in many non-arbitrary ways.

"by those who founded the united nations."

The US, Russia, China et al? These are the "non-nationalist" countries? Why do you expect the founders of the UN secured permanent seats for themselves on the UN Security Council then?

[howard112211]

19. Some people have multiple citizenships.

Which country are they bound to?

I'm not arguing that Russia or China or any other country has displayed exemplary non-nationalism in the past. The politics of heads of states, which are often simply pragmatic, are also not really my point here.

I am arguing that the instinct of an individual to side
with ones own country has a plausible explanation in terms of biology and I think the explanation for racism is a similar one.

[Romulox]

21. The name for your sort of philosophy is "utopianism". I'm asking you how it can be implemented

in this world.

"I am arguing that the instinct of an individual to side
with ones own country has a plausible explanation in terms of biology and I think the explanation for racism is a similar one."

In my misspent youth, I happened to secure an English degree. One of the only tidbits I retain from those days is the patented "So What?" test.

Subject your (rather shaky) assertion to the So What? test. What is the result? I suspect I know, but your attempt to equate what you call "nationalism" to "racism" is unsuccessful. Anyone aware of their status as a citizen is a "nationalist" by your use of the term.

[howard112211]

22. I am not suggesting any sort of implementation.

I'm just stating a hypothesis. I'm looking for an explanation, not a means of changing something.

My answer to the "So what?" question therfore is: Whatever. People shall make of it what they want.

Call it "elementary research" if you like. I'm not considering any applications.

Sorry, gotta go work now.

[Romulox]

24. This is exactly the sort of work the "So What?" test is meant to do.

Thanks for being honest. :hi:

[qazplm]

14. Why do I get the sense

that nationalism to some in here is only bad when it's certain countries but not others?

Is it just the US or the West that has bad nationalism? What about Japan? Or China?

It is humanly impossible to love everyone equally, or even like everyone equally.

There will always be degrees. Family, then friends, then neighborhood, then state, then country, then world.

So long as you don't think your culture better or others worse objectively, there is nothing wrong with subjectively preferring your way of life as a nation. There is nothing dangerous at all about nationalism per se.
Like almost anything else, it is nationalism in excess that becomes the problem.

[RaleighNCDUer]

29. What you describe is citizenship, not nationalism.

My dictionary says nationalism is: 1a)devotion to one's nation; patriotism b) excessive, narrow, or jingoist patriotism; chauvanism 2) the doctrine that national interest, security, etc., are more important than international considerations.

As soon as you recognize that the only reason you believe in 1a is that you just happened to be born there, then you understand the truth of 1b and 2.

People are people regardless of which side of some invisible, imaginary boundary they happened to be born on. The future of the human species depends on humanism, not nationalism.

Not that it makes much difference - nationalism is a dying dog, anyway. Corporatism is the future, whether we like it or not.

[pampango]

16. Both are based on the random nature of where and to whom you are born.

IMHO, the US has made more progress in dealing with racism, while Europe has made more progress in dealing with nationalism. (Neither has been completely successful, but relative to each other.)

In the European Union, countries have opened their borders to each other to immigration and trade, which the US is not likely to do with Canada and Mexico. (NAFTA does this with trade, but copying the EU with respect to continental immigration is quite unthinkable to many here.) Europeans seem to accept the trade-off of some degree of national sovereignty (like control of immigration and trade barriers with the rest of Europe) for the peace and prosperity that comes with their open borders.

The US, OTOH, has done a better job of dealing with racism, largely as a result of our unique history of immigration and slavery. We have had a couple of centuries of practice at enabling people of different nationalities and cultures to coexist and a few decades of integrating African Americans more justly into our country, culture and economy. These are things that Europeans, for the most part, did not have to deal with until recently (in the case of immigrants and foreign workers).

[shadowknows69]

18. Different, but they can certainly start to merge.

[Don Caballero]

20. They are the same thing.

All of those who are against amnesty for the undocumented workers in our country claim nationalism. They are racists.

[RaleighNCDUer]

28. Both (and other ideologies as well) are based on exclusivity by accident.

You believe your nation is best only because you happened to be born there. Nobody believes in the racial superiority of some race other than the one they were born to. Catholics know that all those who don't follow the teaching of the true church will be damned - only because they were born Catholic, while ALL other religions are based on that same exclusivity by accident.

You never hear rampant nationalism being promoted for some 'other' country - it is only for your own country. It is about defining the 'other' by the accident you were born to.

Granted, there are exceptions - in the case of converts to an ideology (or nation or religion) the convert is often far more rabid than those born to it, but such cases are rare, because despite their conversion those who the convert joins will seldom fully accept the convert because, after all, he IS the 'other'.