Is nationalism just religion without a God?
It's a curious thought. You follow that [God/Country here] even though it technically doesn't make any sense to.
What do you think?
What do you think?
I suppose, technically, nationalism could certainly be classed as a type of religion (as with any ideology), since ideology itself (e.g. christianity/catholicism, fascism, communism and so on and so forth) usually has to involve some kind of faith towards it somewhere along the line, whether it's from the creative/driving force behind the ideology in question, or those that are subscribing to it.
Yes, both painfully unfounded amd illogical.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by similarBlank
It's a curious thought. You follow that [God/Country here] even though it technically doesn't make any sense to.
What do you think?
What do you think?
Nationalism and theism both put their faith in an absolute authority: the former, essentially, the State (or an idealised, nationalistic state) and the latter, God.
Both are ideologies which, intentionally or not, have historically kept the masses occupied whilst the elites divide the resources taken from the people.
As Mikhail Bakunin put it:
There is a class of people who, if hey do not believe, must at least make a semblance of believing. This class, comprising all the tormentors, all the oppressors, and all the exploiters of humanity; priests, monarchs, statesmen, soldiers, public and private financiers, officials of all sorts, policemen, gendarmes, jailers and executioners, monopolists, capitalists, tax-leeches, contractors and landlords, lawyers, economists, politicians of all shades, down to the smallest vendor of sweetmeats, all will repeat in unison those words of Voltaire: “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him”. For, you understand, “the people must have a religion”...
I submit that the religion of the State, or of the Nation, is such an invented religion. If you're a member of a religion, you tend to believe yourself to be special: you've got a one-way ticket to heaven. Similarly, to be nationalistic is to believe that your country is superior to all others because you were born into it. Both religion and nationalism/patriotism are self-serving and self-centred.
Nationalism is an infantile disease, as Einstein once said - the measles of mankind.
(edited 8 years ago)
Yeah but one is real and the other isn't.
Original post by viddy9
Nationalism and theism both put their faith in an absolute authority: the former, essentially, the State (or an idealised, nationalistic state) and the latter, God.
Both are ideologies which, intentionally or not, have historically kept the masses occupied whilst the elites divide the resources taken from the people.
As Mikhail Bakunin put it:
I submit that the religion of the State, or of the Nation, is such an invented religion. If you're a member of a religion, you tend to believe yourself to be special: you've got a one-way ticket to heaven. Similarly, to be nationalistic is to believe that your country is superior to all others because you were born into it. Both religion and nationalism/patriotism are self-serving and self-centred.
Nationalism is an infantile disease, as Einstein once said - the measles of mankind.
Both are ideologies which, intentionally or not, have historically kept the masses occupied whilst the elites divide the resources taken from the people.
As Mikhail Bakunin put it:
I submit that the religion of the State, or of the Nation, is such an invented religion. If you're a member of a religion, you tend to believe yourself to be special: you've got a one-way ticket to heaven. Similarly, to be nationalistic is to believe that your country is superior to all others because you were born into it. Both religion and nationalism/patriotism are self-serving and self-centred.
Nationalism is an infantile disease, as Einstein once said - the measles of mankind.
Religious people might believe that they're special. But they also believe that everyone can become like them if only they want to become like them. Membership is open to everyone and nonmembers' interests count as much as anybody else's. Nigerians can become Catholics and so can Swedes, Uruguayans, Chinese, etc. On equal terms. Alcoholics, unemployed, bankers, socialists, liberals, etc. It doesn't matter your background, your language or your race, you're free to join and be saved (or become "special" as you put it). Nobody stops you from becoming a member but yourself.
Nationalists however will either deny that nation states should take a non-member's interests at all in consideration or will assign x100 times the weight to a member's interests as opposed to a non-member's.
The first group is the openly racist or ethnic nationalists or strong civic nationalists. They're even represented on this forum. Those are the people who think non-Brits can **** off for all they care. They think they have no obligations to non-Brits whatever. The only interests that count are their own and those who belong to their club (Brits). The rest can die; in fact, they should die 'cos the globe is overcrowded.
I respect this group the most.
The second group is the mild civic nationalist which most people belong to even unwittingly. Apolitical, centrist, liberals, socialists, conservatives, etc.
They will say that ofc non-Brits' interests count but not as much as Brits. 'Cos if they really thought that non-Brits have interests which ought to enjoy equal consideration (because they too are people), they'd cease to be nationalists of any kind.
They're the ones who think that the UK should only admit "skilled" workers because that's what "we need". Aside from the fact that "we" don't need anything (individuals within nation states want different things and benefit from different arrangements) this view is rather like the strong nationalist view. It ultimately doesn't matter that a Nigerian will see her income triple or that an Indian will avoid death from preventable diseases like diarrhoea. Nope. If he's not "skilled" and "we" don't "need" her, she can **** off.
So no I don't see the analogy at all. Religion is funny and weird but it's open to everyone to reject it or embrace it (I'm talking about western religions, I am not really familiar with non-western religions). Nationalism as is understood today by most is positively vicious (there could be a non-toxic form of nationalism but I don't see many people advocating it).
Damn, this was a long rant.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by similarBlank
It's a curious thought. You follow that [God/Country here] even though it technically doesn't make any sense to.
What do you think?
What do you think?
How does it not make sense to contribute to your country? What doesn't make sense is not having any loyalty to the fellow human beings who collectively make it possible for you to enjoy the advantages of a democratic and just society. That is called civic nationalism and is dissimilar from fascist Nationalism.
Although frankly, although you may not agree with it, even the neoconservative power politics type of nationalism is still perfectly logical and makes sense. You're not going to get anywhere in life without a little bit of self-interest and sometimes grouping together with those similar to yourself is a good way of advancing your own interests. All the 'citizen of the world' type people don't seem to understand that certain aspects of international politics/economics are a zero sum game. It's not possible for everyone to win.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Copperknickers
How does it not make sense to contribute to your country? What doesn't make sense is not having any loyalty to the fellow human beings who collectively make it possible for you to enjoy the advantages of a democratic and just society. That is called civic nationalism and is dissimilar from fascist Nationalism.
Although frankly, although you may not agree with it, even the neoconservative power politics type of nationalism is still perfectly logical and makes sense. You're not going to get anywhere in life without a little bit of self-interest and sometimes grouping together with those similar to yourself is a good way of advancing your own interests. All the 'citizen of the world' type people don't seem to understand that certain aspects of international politics/economics are a zero sum game. It's not possible for everyone to win.
Although frankly, although you may not agree with it, even the neoconservative power politics type of nationalism is still perfectly logical and makes sense. You're not going to get anywhere in life without a little bit of self-interest and sometimes grouping together with those similar to yourself is a good way of advancing your own interests. All the 'citizen of the world' type people don't seem to understand that certain aspects of international politics/economics are a zero sum game. It's not possible for everyone to win.
Yeah, I agree with you. I'm a nationalist as well, but the 'citizen of the world' types seem to propose that all nationalists are racists who think they're superior to everyone else, when I'm not like that at all. The reason I made this post was because these people seem to jump to the rescue if anyone says anything against religious beliefs yet they then go and insult people for nationalistic beliefs, when they're essentially the same thing. As far as I can see, the only differences between religion and nationalist is the word God/country and the fact that religion beliefs are, for no apparent reason, considered far more important and precious than nationalist beliefs. Saying all nationalists are racist, as quite a lot of people do, is like saying all Islamists are IS.
Original post by similarBlank
Yeah, I agree with you. I'm a nationalist as well, but the 'citizen of the world' types seem to propose that all nationalists are racists who think they're superior to everyone else, when I'm not like that at all. The reason I made this post was because these people seem to jump to the rescue if anyone says anything against religious beliefs yet they then go and insult people for nationalistic beliefs, when they're essentially the same thing. As far as I can see, the only differences between religion and nationalist is the word God/country and the fact that religion beliefs are, for no apparent reason, considered far more important and precious than nationalist beliefs. Saying all nationalists are racist, as quite a lot of people do, is like saying all Islamists are IS.
The main difference between religion and nationalism is that countries actually exist.
Original post by similarBlank
It's a curious thought. You follow that [God/Country here] even though it technically doesn't make any sense to.
What do you think?
What do you think?
No. Religion involves a set of beliefs and rituals. Nationalism is a way of defining a community by shared cutizenship and cultural heritage. They are completely different.
Original post by viddy9
Nationalism and theism both put their faith in an absolute authority: the former, essentially, the State (or an idealised, nationalistic state) and the latter, God.
Both are ideologies which, intentionally or not, have historically kept the masses occupied whilst the elites divide the resources taken from the people.
As Mikhail Bakunin put it:
I submit that the religion of the State, or of the Nation, is such an invented religion. If you're a member of a religion, you tend to believe yourself to be special: you've got a one-way ticket to heaven. Similarly, to be nationalistic is to believe that your country is superior to all others because you were born into it. Both religion and nationalism/patriotism are self-serving and self-centred.
Nationalism is an infantile disease, as Einstein once said - the measles of mankind.
Both are ideologies which, intentionally or not, have historically kept the masses occupied whilst the elites divide the resources taken from the people.
As Mikhail Bakunin put it:
I submit that the religion of the State, or of the Nation, is such an invented religion. If you're a member of a religion, you tend to believe yourself to be special: you've got a one-way ticket to heaven. Similarly, to be nationalistic is to believe that your country is superior to all others because you were born into it. Both religion and nationalism/patriotism are self-serving and self-centred.
Nationalism is an infantile disease, as Einstein once said - the measles of mankind.
The masses must be made to believe in something ludicrous or there would be anarchy and nihilism. The great men may do as they please.
In many respects, the Nation and God become synonymous, and in certain branches, the Nation is God. Nationalism is supposedly the great secularisation force, or at least it was in the 19th century, but it did this by changing what God means especially when the nation was fused with the State. Suddenly, attributes previously ascribed to God, were now ascribed to the nation state. Think about it this way, in traditional religious thought, God is always watching us, but in the modern age (post-1984 and post-Snowden) the State is always watching us. A godly attribute is now a stately one, of course there are differences between Nationalism and the State, but this model of governance occurred in the era of the Nation State.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Welcome to the Faith & Spirituality forum! Here are some guidelines...
- Finding myself.
- religion and mental health
- Muslim grouping OIC says measures needed to prevent Quran desecration
- (muslim/hindu advice)
- I'm A Muslim. Ask Me Anything!
- Im gay but a christian
- I hate being religious and it's making me depressed
- TSR Agnostic Society.
- I've lost islam and I've lost my soul
- Queer Muslim female
- Am I Muslim if I am choosing not to worship God?
- islam and christian
- Why do some soldiers rape?
- Reading Quran
- christianity and feeling god's presence
- What religion was Mary Shelley author of Frankenstein?
- I am insecure about my nose - is a sin in Christianity to get a nosejob?
- Drugs and Religion/ Christianity
- religious crisis
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
