RSS

April 21, 2009

Clemens Schneider, Freiheitswerk, (2)

In my opinion nationalism derives from an anxiety of mankind for self-affirmation. There is a kind of psychogenic tendency in ourselves to confine in order to create and secure our identity. That’s why I’m convinced, that nationalism isn’t just an ideology, but more a sort of disposition of human nature, that vests itself with an ideological costume.
Nationalism, in fact, is prevalent in societies or among individuals who lack identity. (As you wrote: “The search for identity seems to be one of the greater tasks for people in today’s world.”) This can be observed with single persons (e. g. followers of nationalist movements) as well as with states (e. g. Russia). The more self-confidence a person or a community has, the less need is there for confine and demarcation.
In a nutshell: Nationalism is a problem which derives from human nature and therefor will always remain an imminent threat.

April 22, 2009

amarjyoti acharya

One can not help and agree with the conclusions here. Though the creation of nationalism has also been a feature of state-craft - to ensure a certain coherence and continued validity of the state. The validity of the state continues as long as the reasons why the state had to come into existence are at play. The failures of states to banish disorder and anarchy does not diminish the state or its relevance. Globalization merely enjoins an expansion of the civilized arena of law and order. It of course has been the raison d’ệtre of states, when it speaks of order, of ensuring certain freedoms (ideally the notion of negative freedom that it is supposed to ensure for every of its citizens - the idea of the contractual state) and the concomitant necessity of the state to protect those rights from any external and any internal threats. The need for the state to variously distinguish itself(ves) from other states, or the expansion of the the area in recognition of shared concerns and values (the EU) makes globalization an expansion of the earlier concerns, including the exapnsion of the responsibilities of the state, in its newer roles or newer realities. The newer realities also contain newer threats and the need to negotiate one's ways around such threats, while the state or combination of states or an expanded area of jurisdiction (shared or common or specific areas) works towards the removal of such threats to the individual rights - that do include necessary values and principles of interactions. Between the rationale of the state and globalization - there is very little difference in the needs of the two. Between the older ideas of the state and the newer expansion of recognitions of shared values and concerns (in terms of socializations that account for nationalism as a factor), nationalism continues to be as has been correctly captured by Schneider here.