Why Progressives Oppose Nationalism

Nationalism, as a political ideology, has two distinct meanings that reflect its historical and contemporary applications. For oppressed ethnicities and colonized peoples, nationalism is a drive towards local independence, political sovereignty, and autonomy, essentially encapsulating the desire to be a nation by oneself. Conversely, in fully developed nations, nationalism often manifests as a chauvinistic expression of superiority, tainted with xenophobia—a form of idealized nation-worship. This inherent contrast is crucial in understanding why progressives, who span a broad spectrum from liberal centrists to social democrats and communist revolutionaries, often oppose nationalism.

Nationalism: A Nuclear Weapon in International Relations

A recent commentary likened nationalism to a nuclear weapon in international relations. The best scenario is that no one possesses it, while the worst is that your adversary does, but you don’t. This metaphor underscores the pernicious and destabilizing nature of nationalism. Nationalism not only exalts one's nation as the pinnacle of excellence but also vilifies other nations and their achievements as inferior or evil.

The Myth of National Purity

The essence of nationalism is the belief that everything within one's nation is not only "good" but "the best." This extends to the nation's people, institutions, and economic systems, leaving no room for critique. Anything from another nation is seen as beneath contempt; not merely "bad" but "evil." This mentality dismisses the humanity of individuals from other countries, viewing them as inferior and unworthy of rights. The idea that something needs to be "fixed" in one's own system is often considered blasphemy. This sentiment can be observed in recent American nationalism, where any suggestion of systemic unfairness to marginalized groups is dismissed as ridiculous, while these groups are deemed inferior.

Exclusion and Inclusion: The Core of Nationalism

Every form of nationalism rests on the foundation that certain groups of people are not fully part of the nation. This includes immigrants, ethnic minorities, religious minorities, and those who question established authority, such as Native Americans in the U.S. The rhetoric of nationalism often aligns with "Conformity Superiority and Exclusion" rather than "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion." Thus, nationalists are not merely "unwoken," but rather ostriches with their heads in the sand, unable to accept the diversity that defines society.

The German Example: The Ugly Face of Nationalism

The case of Germany during the early 20th century provides a chilling example of how nationalism can lead to catastrophic consequences. For 12 years, the German people backed Adolf Hitler to an incredible extent. Elections were largely irrelevant as he would have won regardless, and even when the Valkyrie conspirators attempted to assassinate him, the German populace condemned the conspirators. It was only after the inevitable defeat that Hitler's popularity waned, and people distanced themselves from his regime.

Intersection with Social Justice and Woke Movements

Understanding the rejection of nationalism by progressives also involves recognizing their support for social justice and progressive policies. While nationalists may argue that they promote a robust sense of national identity, progressives tend to view such assertions as part of a broader pattern of exclusion and oppression. The progressive stance often emphasizes the value of diversity, equitable treatment, and inclusive policies that benefit all members of society, rather than privileging one group over another.

Conclusion: Nationalism, when it manifests as a chauvinistic and exclusionary ideology, is fundamentally at odds with the progressive values of equity, inclusion, and global cooperation. By recognizing and combating the harmful aspects of nationalism, societies can work towards a more harmonious and just future.