Media trying to make Nationalism a racist idea

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler

Couple main points:

1. I don't think it was a great idea to seize on Trump's comments for this exact reason. Somehow on the Right, in recent years the word "nationalism" has taking on different connotations.

It's almost like a lot folks basically take it to be interchangeable with the word patriotism. I know this and that's why when I want to talk about something like fascism, I make a point of saying "ultranationalism."

2. The word "nationalism" is not interchangeable with the word "patriotism." While there is some gratuitous conflation with "white nationalism" (The Hill by the way is a right-leaning outlet), the word "nationalism" has long had negative connotations that distinguish it from patriotism, going back to probably WWI. In that regard, it's many on the Right and now Trump who are trying to shift the connotations to make "nationalist" mean "super patriot."

It reminds me of when a lot of Trump supporters started identifying as "alt-right" because they couldn't accept that it wasn't some term made up by the Left to denigrate Trump supporters.

So what are the differences between "nationalism" and "patriotism?" Merriam-Webster has a page:

The Difference Between 'Patriotism' and 'Nationalism'

Let’s take a few minutes to go over the respective histories of these two words to see where and when they shared meaning and in what senses they have drifted apart.

Patriotism is the older of the two words, with published written evidence dating back to the middle of the 17th century. Patriotism came from adding the suffix of -ism to the existing word patriot, which itself came into English from the French patriote, and may be traced back further to the Greek word patrios (“of one’s father”).

We do not have any evidence of nationalism occurring until just before the 19th century, almost a hundred and fifty years after patriotism. And in its early use, from the end of the 18th century onward for a number of decades, nationalism appears to have been largely interchangeable with patriotism, with both words primarily being used to refer to a general love of one’s country.

So far so good.

These two words may have shared a distinct sense in the 19th century, but they appear to have grown apart since. Or rather, it would be more accurate to say that only nationalism has grown apart, since the meaning of patriotism has remained largely unchanged. There are still obvious areas of overlap: we define patriotism as “love for or devotion to one’s country” and nationalism in part as “loyalty and devotion to a nation.” But the definition of nationalism also includes “exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.” This exclusionary aspect is not shared by patriotism.

A somewhat subtler difference between the two words may be found in their modifiers and the ideas to which each is connected. When we examine large bodies of recent text we see that patriotism is more often used in a general sense, often in conjunction with such words as bravery, valor, duty, and devotion. Nationalism, however, tends to find itself modified by specific movements, most frequently of a political bent.

So now that we’ve briefly looked over the history of patriotism and nationalism can we draw any firm conclusions about whether one or the other is pejorative? The answer is: it depends. It seems certain that, at least with nationalism, it may mean different things to different people. Of the six different kinds of X nationalism cited just above, it is likely that most people would find some politically questionable, and others not. Patriotism is rarely used in these contexts. In U.S. usage nationalism is now perhaps most frequently associated with white nationalism, and has considerably negative connotations.

As has been brought up a number of times today, Orwell famously made clear the distinction between the two.

George Orwell - Notes on Nationalism

By ‘nationalism’ I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled ‘good’ or ‘bad’(1). But secondly — and this is much more important — I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of advancing its interests. Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.

Then he goes on to enumerate traits of nationalism. I'll post the first sentence or two from each block:

Obsession. As nearly as possible, no nationalist ever thinks, talks, or writes about anything except the superiority of his own power unit.

Instability. The intensity with which they are held does not prevent nationalist loyalties from being transferable.

Indifference to Reality. All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. A British Tory will defend self-determination in Europe and oppose it in India with no feeling of inconsistency.

I think a simple way to think of it is the difference between a moderate an extremist. Say, a moderate Christian and a Christian who would personally stone a gay person to death because the OT says that's appropriate or a moderate Muslim and a Muslim who will throw gay people off buildings. (unsurprising extremists of both have similar beliefs)

Also, here's The Mooch saying Trump isn't a nationalist and somebody should explain the nuance to him.

Lot of words (and really, one mans words (Orwell) defines your reality?) to state patriotism means one is willing to die for their country’s ideals while nationalism means ones country doesn’t/shouldn’t suffer for the benefit of other countries. It’s really an old trick to use excessive writing to cover fallacies in theory - ask any college professor.

You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t see the “Mooch” as the solid “analyst” CNN obviously does. You usually use much better examples to try and make your points.

a reply to: Bloodworth

The kind that's worried American hating immigrants will destroy their property.

Or the kind that hates American, after all they support Kaepernick who said that the flag is a symbol of oppression and should not be respected.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

If you want the wall you can’t like tacos?

Ok the next time someone is against a wall but lives in a house with a door they can lock they deserve a clothesline as well

Wanting to keep illegal immigration out is vastly different than not liking people of different ethnicities

The conflation by people of disliking illegal immigration to disloyal immigrants is absurd and another attempt by the democrats to yell racism at anyone that disagrees with them

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: DBCowboy

Like already in this thread we see a list of who is not nationalist. Traditionally that would be the start of who belongs and who doesnt...

Yes. Dangerous rhetoric in this thread and all over ATS these days.

originally posted by: crtrvt

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: DBCowboy

Like already in this thread we see a list of who is not nationalist. Traditionally that would be the start of who belongs and who doesnt...

Yes. Dangerous rhetoric in this thread and all over ATS these days.

I find it hilarious people that don’t bat an eye when the left wing media calls anyone who claims to be nationalist a racist, but then finds it dangerous when people argue back against that

a reply to: theantediluvian

So let’s take your Orwell quote

His problem with nationalism seems to be the idea of forcing your nation on other people

You know, like Obama and the democrats regime changing wars

Granted trump has acted poorly is Syria, ironically the only time the left wing media has praised him

So the media is in an uproar of trumps words, but clamor for the negative reprocussions of nationalism?

Trumo explained what he meant by nationalism and it fits in with the definition

Let’s use the family example again

A patriot would be like parents that think their kids are the best

A nationalist would be a parent that also thinks that, but in addition has their primary focus being taking actions that help their kids

We need elected officials that make decisions based in the good of our country first and foremost

The alternative are the globalist that seek things like open borders and giving up national sovereignty

Lastly, can we assume that you will be giving some lengthy posts on the negative connotations of socialism and how Bernie and others are dangerously coonected to Nazis?

a reply to: crtrvt

Yes much more dangerous than saying all Republicans are racist Nazis and need to be stopped by any means necessary.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: crtrvt

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: DBCowboy

Like already in this thread we see a list of who is not nationalist. Traditionally that would be the start of who belongs and who doesnt...

Yes. Dangerous rhetoric in this thread and all over ATS these days.

I find it hilarious people that don’t bat an eye when the left wing media calls anyone who claims to be nationalist a racist, but then finds it dangerous when people argue back against that

If you read luthier's quote you would see what I referred to as dangerous rhetoric and it doesn't include arguments on word meanings and personal feelings.

a reply to: crtrvt

When people say they don't believe in borders and America was never great there is no problem calling them out on it.

The main stream media truly is disgusting.

Also quite interesting how they bring up Hitler in relationship to nationalism. They 'forget' the Nazi's were National Socialists... they miss out the Socialist part... I wonder why.

Just a little word of wisdom.

If we are in fact talking about nationalism as love of country......


Pointing out half the political population as either racist,... or communist non America loving liberals,.....neither of those is nationalist.


Trump using nationalsim to fight the media or liberals is not the kind of nationalism people are protecting on this thread.


Nationalism as America loving good citizens takes in account all Americans. Not just the club you are part of.


Let me just be very clear.

Nationalism used as a weapon against it's own population to rally opposition is not love of country. That is demagoguery and the negative side of nationalism people fear.

a reply to: luthier

Democrats: Trump will never make America great again because America was never great.

Sounds like progressives do indeed hate America.

a reply to: luthier

Trump said exactly what he meant by nationalism

Look, we know from the same media people I am talking about in this thread that they know trumo is a racist

Yet the job market for Hispanics and blacks is doing incredibly well

So when he is advocating for a robust American economy thru America first deals, all Americans, even those he disagrees with are included

Is your point trump should be congenial to the same media people that call him a racist nazi Russian puppet everyday?

I don’t think that would or should happen

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: luthier

Democrats: Trump will never make America great again because America was never great.

Sounds like progressives do indeed hate America.

Except that is about as common as trump supporting racists.

Personally I know dozens of vets who are Democrats. That's just me personally.

So before you divide up your own population maybe look at the threats we all face and try and find common ground.

Nationalism should be used to include all Americans including those you disagree with and those with minority opinions.

If people say dumb stuff, it should be assumed they a good people who just need some good conversations.

However, default seems to be these folks are worthless scum. That doesnt help anyone but the arms dealers.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: luthier

Trump said exactly what he meant by nationalism

Look, we know from the same media people I am talking about in this thread that they know trumo is a racist

Yet the job market for Hispanics and blacks is doing incredibly well

So when he is advocating for a robust American economy thru America first deals, all Americans, even those he disagrees with are included

Is your point trump should be congenial to the same media people that call him a racist nazi Russian puppet everyday?

I don’t think that would or should happen

No trump picked a fight because he is the master of the media and knew they would bite.

I get it but it is what it is.. if you want to believe it was a sterling silver night coming in to unite the country well, I have a few dystopian novels for you to read.

Sure he is bringing us out of Obama's brave new world only to enter 1984.

a reply to: Grambler

If you want to argue about economics well we vastly differ there.

The trump economy is propped up on 800 billion in loans and it is best case scenario.

Let's hope we don't have a hiccup or stock market stumble or that number doubles.

When he gets the market to a surplus and we have sustainable growth not just tweaking regulations for temporary gains let me know.

It could happen. But not if people vote for the incombants who got us here.

More good would come from voting out the lifers regardless of party than any other political strategy.

PS the irony of big deficets....we give free money to foreign lenders....lol on the trade war.....


How about budgets and compromise between parties so we can have actual growth...how about holding Congress accountable and not wanting a dictator in a federal position.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: luthier

Trump said exactly what he meant by nationalism

Look, we know from the same media people I am talking about in this thread that they know trumo is a racist

Yet the job market for Hispanics and blacks is doing incredibly well

So when he is advocating for a robust American economy thru America first deals, all Americans, even those he disagrees with are included

Is your point trump should be congenial to the same media people that call him a racist nazi Russian puppet everyday?

I don’t think that would or should happen

No trump picked a fight because he is the master of the media and knew they would bite.

I get it but it is what it is.. if you want to believe it was a sterling silver night coming in to unite the country well, I have a few dystopian novels for you to read.

Sure he is bringing us out of Obama's brave new world only to enter 1984.

I never claimed he was a United or trying for a utopia

His entire platform from the beginning of his run was America first

I hardly think that now he doesn’t mean that by nationalism, and instead he is making racist dog whistles to get the media to hitey

a reply to: luthier

I am with you on the deficit spending being ridiculous, and it will come back to bite us

However, odd that a racist like trump would deficit spend and it would end up helping minorities

Maybe trump isn’t a racist and is just a flawed president?

There was recent clip of how Trump sees and quantifies him using that word. He see's himself as an "Economic Nationalist"
But the media is saying what he really means is a white Nationalist in the historical context of the type of nasty Nationalism that swept Germany. One big difference one Nationalism wanted to defeat and occupy all of Europe and Russia.
Trump wants his conquest to be economic, that is his Nationalism. Even with his own allies, we saw that with Canada.

Spinning it as racist is laughable.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: luthier

Trump said exactly what he meant by nationalism

Look, we know from the same media people I am talking about in this thread that they know trumo is a racist

Yet the job market for Hispanics and blacks is doing incredibly well

So when he is advocating for a robust American economy thru America first deals, all Americans, even those he disagrees with are included

Is your point trump should be congenial to the same media people that call him a racist nazi Russian puppet everyday?

I don’t think that would or should happen

No trump picked a fight because he is the master of the media and knew they would bite.

I get it but it is what it is.. if you want to believe it was a sterling silver night coming in to unite the country well, I have a few dystopian novels for you to read.

Sure he is bringing us out of Obama's brave new world only to enter 1984.

I never claimed he was a United or trying for a utopia

His entire platform from the beginning of his run was America first

I hardly think that now he doesn’t mean that by nationalism, and instead he is making racist dog whistles to get the media to hitey

Trump was a master of the media then as well. Perhaps you should study populism and tribalism.


I don't really care what dog whistle racist or just plain old nationalist.

Using we are the Americans who love America against the other side, what ever party....is a bs demagogue thing to do. Of you don't see it that's fine.

But don't act like leaders don't use nationalism to do unnationalistic things like political gain.