First, the two things (nationalism and policy) go hand in hand, but second any kind of “nationalism” generally attempts to put one’s own group ahead of others. Thirdly, given that whites are really already rather on top in the US, their self-promotion has the power therefore to crush non-white groups utterly (the entire purpose of a “white nationalist” group is thus rather redundant since they began in a position of power and have remained so). And finally, while I accept your examples of divisions in mono-ethnic societies, they’re hardly great examples of coexistence; ones based on melanin levels are intrinsically racist and thus even less acceptable to peaceful society.
Based on the Federalist papers, I think it’s fair to say that Hamilton’s political philosophy was “Makin’ Money”. The man positively gushes when the subject comes around. I don’t know that I’ve read anything from Adams, but if that’s his wheelhouse then I would agree.
Apparently 60 million people who voted for Trump share that view.
Being a nationalist is what exactly is wrong. It’s where we get the word “Nazi” from, after all.
:dubious:
Russian Nationalists are Nazis?
Irish Nationalists?
Turkish Nationalists
Black nationalists?
Bengali Nationalist?
…
Neither what I said nor a particularly astute extrapolation of what I said.
Nationalism, per se, is problematic. A short, illustrative parable.
So, Bannon was CEO at Breitbart for the lulz?
Where are you getting that?
White nationalism is objectionable because it implies that America is a nation of, by, and for white people. That’s anathema to every founding principle of the United States.
Indeed, any kind of skin-color-based nationalism anywhere in the world is reprehensible.
And, specifically, in the United States, the idea that any one racial group is a “nation” separate from other Americans is disgusting.
There is only one nationality, American, and everyone is equally American.
The only circumstance in which nationalism might be seen as somewhat okay is if one oppressed nation is seeking independence from an oppressor nation. Once a nation-state is established, no good can come of nationalism.
It’s anathema to modern America, but historically, it’s very much in line with American history. The fact is, America was founded on three things: protestant Christianity, capitalism, and racism. I’m not saying it’s right, but those are the facts. I think we had hoped - and maybe even assumed - that we had taken America to a more advanced state in recent decades, creating a more tolerant and humane country. But white christian nationalism is making one final stand, and from its viewpoint, it could be their final chance to save their country as they see it. They’re going to pull out all the stops. We need to understand that.
If liberals and democrats want to be successful in defending themselves against this front, they’re going to have to put less emphasis on themselves as individual groups within a democracy and they’re going to have to see themselves as part of a larger tent that necessarily includes some people they might not normally stand shoulder to shoulder with, like politically incorrect blue collar white men, for instance.
Some of them are, some of them aren’t.
By it’s very nature, there’s no such thing as universalist nationalism (“Nationalists of the world, unite!”). As a result, each and every nationalist movement and school of thought is different, depending on its history and circumstances. Bengali nationalists, I’m assuming, aren’t generally racists. Irish nationalists aren’t either, but they often have religious issues. Arab nationalists are different from Egyptian nationalists, even though the groups can overlap. Zionists - Jewish nationalists - have plenty of their own baggage. American white nationalists are racists.
Nationalism by its very nature is exclusionary in effect, no matter how high minded and civic centered its proponents may be. And its often defined in opposition to another entity. So, basically all nationalism is racist by that standard. So why should American style White Nationalism be thought of as anything less valid than the others?
Legal permanent residents being stopped at the border
That was Bannon.
No, of course not, but, in America, at least, “white nationalist” is often a code for white supremacist. Groups that call themselves white nationalist tend to believe in the supremacy of the white race over the black, and that there’s an international Zionist conspiracy to control the economy, and generally support explicitly discriminatory policies against non-whites.
So whether Bannon actually is a white nationalist is one question, but generally, when Americans use the term, they mean white supremicist/racist/neo-Nazi.
This is distinct, by the way from American nationalism and Americanism, which believes in the supremacy of American culture and values, but doesn’t generally have a strong racial component. American nationalism, for instance, believes that people of all races can and should become citizens of the US and enjoy equal rights by virtue of their citizenship and loyalty.
Because of the history of white nationalism in America, particularly as it pertains to the subject of slavery. That’s my point - you can’t discuss nationalism out of context. American nationalism is different because American history is different, just as Bengali nationalism is different because Indian history is different.
White supremacist or just someone who published white supremacists for profit? What a question. Bannon has moved on considerably from being Trump’s favorite handler:
The toad is utterly unfit for that role.
(The SPLC explains White Nationalism here.)
White nationalism (e.g. the belief that America or another particular country is or should be a “white” nation) is just a milder form of white supremacism.
What’s wrong with “white power”? Doesn’t everyone want to be powerful? Am I supposed to march around yelling “white weakness”? And why can’t I raise my arm to salute? I’m only allowed to lift my arm to a certain angle just because of my race?
Please, ye best and brightest, help me understand. I’ve scratched my head so much, my scalp is bleeding!
It’s not a stretch, it’s the definition.
Just “race” nationalists. White nationalist = white supremacist. They are the same, always have been. Maybe you’re not American, so you don’t know. If you are, you’re being purposefully obtuse.
All nationalism is exclusionary and ethnocentrist, but not all of it is racist. White nationalism is explicitly racist - it’s in the fricking name. And all nationalism is shit to begin with, so there’s a limbo competition going on there…
Mind you don’t lift your arm too high when you’re scratching your head.
Also – your scalp? you want the American Indian nationalism thread, over yonder.