This piece continues where my earlier Why I am not a Liberal left off. People often find it easier to define themselves by first defining what they are not, and that is even more true for someone like myself, who is still in the process of being defined, If you will. I think that the development of one’s personal world view and political thinking is a life-long process for those who devote much time to the study of society.
First of all, nationalism is a very broad and often misused term that represents several, sometimes very different and even conflicting, ideologies and movements. So what do I mean by it in the context of this essay? My nationalism is largely beyond specific political issues – metapolitical. It stems from an organic view of society and from a sense of historical continuity. It is a nationalism that supports all nations’ aspirations for independence and self-determination, a nationalism that recognizes humans as individuals in the context of a greater collective and rejects the detachment of the individual from her community.
I am a nationalist for several reasons – some of them pragmatic, some of them more ideological or even emotional. Let us start with the pragmatic. First of all, an organic community, that is linked and bound together by tradition, history, values and interests is a society of great social cohesion and social stability under normal circumstances. My national awakening, if you may, was very much a response to the splintering of previously cohesive societies into a group of conflicts. While the left has always maintained class conflict for ideological reasons, mass-immigration creates more groups with diverging interests, and as is the left’s habit, it agitates against the interests of the old, established groups in favour of the new-comers. This is why we have anti-racist campaigns that only target white racism, why racism has been ‘monopolized’ as something only whites practic, and why anything resembling ethnic awareness and identity, never mind collective ethnic identity, among the native Europeans is condemned and smeared as a concept. A cohesive society is stable and more or less harmonious compared to societies that are not cohesive. Multiculturalism assumes that several groups would somehow share interests without sharing values and identity – this is wishful thinking as we (should) have learned by now. A homogenous society with strong group identity is likely to create strong group solidarity, while in a multi-ethnic society trust between ethnic groups as well as individuals (of all ethnicities) decreases. You know how old people always lament how it used to be safe to leave your doors unlocked, that old tune? Well, they have point. From a more global point of view, I see the nation-state as an optimal form of international political organization, as units of international politics. When nation and state are more or less inseperable, the nation keeps the state under check.
My nationalism also has a distinctly idealist element. I see national and cultural awarness, self-determination and continuity as something axiomatically positive. The human animal is a strange and complex creature, that has created a variety of cultures and a diverse collection of societies. This is human cultural evolution, and being a nationalist means encouraging the continuation of this cultural evolution. Nationalism as I see it is a very natural form of political thinking. This kind of group solidarity has existed through-out human history, and it will continue to do so. Any attempts to ignore human nature are likely to backfire. For example, the current multicultural madness that is threatening European nations will likely backfire in the form of balkanization and splintering of society into competing interest blocs – which will mean the end of any kind of meaningful democracy. The human tendency to ’stick to your own’ will not go away despite social engineering.
Nationalism is often depicted as an old-fashioned, backward, regressive and primitive ideology. The truth is that it is primitive, or at least it reflects the primal nature of humanity, but old-fashioned? Only in the way that speaking, having arms or emotions is old-fashioned. Group identity and communal interests are not something confined to a certain time and space, but something ever present within humanity. Nationalists, who are stuck in the past are old-fashioned, and they are more like national romantics in a sense. But nationalism can be every bit as modern and forward looking as any other ideology.
From a more psychological point of view, a strong individual and collective identity is the path to a strong sense of belonging and meaning, and a sense of meaning is the key to self-actualization, which in turn is what makes people happy with themselves and their lives. The deconstructionism that seeks to ‘emancipate’ the individual from a multitude of social constructs only deprives the individual of her meaning.
