I lived in another country for a few years when I was a child, and unless an American has lived somewhere where actual martial law exists, or regular terrorism, etc. then I take any heavy-handed criticism of present-day United States with a grain of salt.
Speaking of national anthems, every time Max Verstappen wins an F1 race (I'm a fan of F1) I groan because the Netherlands has a super long anthem. Which I have just learned is...wait for it...an acrostic poem for William of Orange. Wow. Meanwhile, the French national anthem is, shall we say, grim. Are you familiar with the English translation?
Maybe the reason Americans don't learn other languages is so that we can ignore other national anthems. Instead of hearing "we're going to cut your throats you sons of bitches" we hear "croissant, croissant, hehe hognhogn."
"Historically, people joined armies for five reasons: 1) Money, 2) Plunder, 3) Feudal obligations, 4) Religious fervor, 5) To get off this goddamned farm any way possible (number five is the great underappreciated driver of human history)."
I would add a sixth and thoroughly modern reason: (6) I am poor and the government will give me lots of free stuff if I join the military (room & board, health care, travel, education, etc.).
Benign nationalism basically says 'our country does some things better than others, not as a matter of fact, but as a matter of us being better than them inherently'. If you were only stating these points of national identity as a matter of fact, there wouldn't be a sense of pride and need for celebration over these facts. These attitudes only exist because countries are in competition with one another, even if it feels like your celebration is small, closed in scope, and has nothing to do with anyone else.
I can get how attacking people's national identity is bad for winning elections, but since 2016 that sort of fear is built into every decision liberals seem to make, and has no bearing on the actual correctness of decisions. I think even petty nationalism is stupid, for the same reasons it has always been stupid: we shouldn't base the value of people on dice rolls. If open borders are implemented and anyone can become a citizen for free, maybe i'll let America and Japan celebrate their cheeseburgers and anime. It would maybe make sense at that point.
I'm not especially patriotic, and I'm wary of nationalism. But I'm rethinking my perspective, so I'll provide a counterpoint. Benign nationalism might be like love of one's family. I don't love my family more than other families because I think my family is inherently better than others, or even does some things better than others. I love it because it's *my* family--the one I was born into and choose every day to sustain, the one that has made me who I am. I don't have any reason to believe in the superiority of my family (and I don't), but I do have a reason of another sort--namely, its special and precious role in my life history--to love my family over others. Love of country might be justifiable on similar grounds. Canada is not inherently superior to other countries (I don't know if any Canadian believes this!), but it is *my* country, the one that has shaped me and to which I belong, and that might be reason enough to love Canada over other countries.
Just subscribed. Found this after reading your Persuasion piece, which was most excellent (I read snippets aloud to my spouse)! This piece is great too.
> And it won’t hurt to explore the ways that liberalism is compatible with national identity, because national identity isn’t going anywhere any time soon.
Just like national identity replaced smaller allegiances, belonging to the global tribe of liberals (as Scott Alexander called it, Blue Tribe) can and should replace national identity.
I agree up to a point, Jeff, but would argue that when national identity largely subsumes individual identity, you get wacko thinking and behavior. See Eric Hoffer's "The True Believer."
"The True Believer" is a great read, and I completely agree that nationalism can be (and often is) taken way too far. I think I'm arguing that we need to allow for a dollop of nationalism -- one to two smidges.
I lived in another country for a few years when I was a child, and unless an American has lived somewhere where actual martial law exists, or regular terrorism, etc. then I take any heavy-handed criticism of present-day United States with a grain of salt.
Speaking of national anthems, every time Max Verstappen wins an F1 race (I'm a fan of F1) I groan because the Netherlands has a super long anthem. Which I have just learned is...wait for it...an acrostic poem for William of Orange. Wow. Meanwhile, the French national anthem is, shall we say, grim. Are you familiar with the English translation?
Maybe the reason Americans don't learn other languages is so that we can ignore other national anthems. Instead of hearing "we're going to cut your throats you sons of bitches" we hear "croissant, croissant, hehe hognhogn."
If Jeff adds a few dozen members who are in your league, Erin Etheridge, the comments section could be as much fun as the articles.
That really long Dutch anthem is just one of 15 verses. It's sooo long.
I also groan when he wins, but that's because I'm a Lewis Hamilton fan.
Same. My husband always roots for Bottas.
First article I read here, definitely going to read more and subscribe.
Awesome! Thank you!
(another sucker falls for my scam...)
Also discovered through Persuasion and subscribed. This is a treasure trove.
"Historically, people joined armies for five reasons: 1) Money, 2) Plunder, 3) Feudal obligations, 4) Religious fervor, 5) To get off this goddamned farm any way possible (number five is the great underappreciated driver of human history)."
I would add a sixth and thoroughly modern reason: (6) I am poor and the government will give me lots of free stuff if I join the military (room & board, health care, travel, education, etc.).
Benign nationalism basically says 'our country does some things better than others, not as a matter of fact, but as a matter of us being better than them inherently'. If you were only stating these points of national identity as a matter of fact, there wouldn't be a sense of pride and need for celebration over these facts. These attitudes only exist because countries are in competition with one another, even if it feels like your celebration is small, closed in scope, and has nothing to do with anyone else.
I can get how attacking people's national identity is bad for winning elections, but since 2016 that sort of fear is built into every decision liberals seem to make, and has no bearing on the actual correctness of decisions. I think even petty nationalism is stupid, for the same reasons it has always been stupid: we shouldn't base the value of people on dice rolls. If open borders are implemented and anyone can become a citizen for free, maybe i'll let America and Japan celebrate their cheeseburgers and anime. It would maybe make sense at that point.
I'm not especially patriotic, and I'm wary of nationalism. But I'm rethinking my perspective, so I'll provide a counterpoint. Benign nationalism might be like love of one's family. I don't love my family more than other families because I think my family is inherently better than others, or even does some things better than others. I love it because it's *my* family--the one I was born into and choose every day to sustain, the one that has made me who I am. I don't have any reason to believe in the superiority of my family (and I don't), but I do have a reason of another sort--namely, its special and precious role in my life history--to love my family over others. Love of country might be justifiable on similar grounds. Canada is not inherently superior to other countries (I don't know if any Canadian believes this!), but it is *my* country, the one that has shaped me and to which I belong, and that might be reason enough to love Canada over other countries.
Just subscribed. Found this after reading your Persuasion piece, which was most excellent (I read snippets aloud to my spouse)! This piece is great too.
Great article, Jeff. You’ve fine your homework with history here.
I can't recommend Mike Duncan's "Revolutions" podcast enough. He covers a lot of this stuff.
Speaking of war without the shooting: https://youtu.be/cOeFhSzoTuc
Wow this was a good read
> And it won’t hurt to explore the ways that liberalism is compatible with national identity, because national identity isn’t going anywhere any time soon.
Just like national identity replaced smaller allegiances, belonging to the global tribe of liberals (as Scott Alexander called it, Blue Tribe) can and should replace national identity.
I agree up to a point, Jeff, but would argue that when national identity largely subsumes individual identity, you get wacko thinking and behavior. See Eric Hoffer's "The True Believer."
"The True Believer" is a great read, and I completely agree that nationalism can be (and often is) taken way too far. I think I'm arguing that we need to allow for a dollop of nationalism -- one to two smidges.
“Fine” should be DONE. Damn spell check☹️