Reality is different than theory. China ,Vietnam and India had long fought for their independence and there are certain amount of libs who likes the white skin libs and fascists. If healthy left wing nationalism is there its very good for the 3rd world countries. Be it Venezuela, Nicaragua or China. I would say Russian nationalism is also very left wing (at least what Vijay Prashad implied ), their nostalgia for soviet past and heroic deeds of their grandpas and nannies. Certainly USSR didn’t focus enough for its own people and development and result is that what we know today.
I can’t argue against the fact thar nationalism has helped AES countries in the past given that it is another tool in the toolbox and that material reality might have dictated its utility at the time but it is still something we rather abandon for the greater ultimate goal akin to religion simply because it inevitably draws borders between cultures and individuals and feeds racism and xenophobia. I think we understand each other. I’m sorry to say that healthy nationalism is an oxymoron IMO.
Nationalism isn’t a binary, it’s a spectrum of policies. In a world that prohibits capital controls (for underdeveloped countries) to keep countries underdeveloped, nationalist capital controls are good.
Now see that nuance exists in the nationalism question and try to think dialectically about it instead of dogmatically.
I don’t think “nationalism” is the correct term for what you are describing and I don’t like your condescending tone. Nationalism kills multiculturalism. People can disagree, what the hell?
Reality is different than theory. China ,Vietnam and India had long fought for their independence and there are certain amount of libs who likes the white skin libs and fascists. If healthy left wing nationalism is there its very good for the 3rd world countries. Be it Venezuela, Nicaragua or China. I would say Russian nationalism is also very left wing (at least what Vijay Prashad implied ), their nostalgia for soviet past and heroic deeds of their grandpas and nannies. Certainly USSR didn’t focus enough for its own people and development and result is that what we know today.
I can’t argue against the fact thar nationalism has helped AES countries in the past given that it is another tool in the toolbox and that material reality might have dictated its utility at the time but it is still something we rather abandon for the greater ultimate goal akin to religion simply because it inevitably draws borders between cultures and individuals and feeds racism and xenophobia. I think we understand each other. I’m sorry to say that healthy nationalism is an oxymoron IMO.
Nationalism isn’t a binary, it’s a spectrum of policies. In a world that prohibits capital controls (for underdeveloped countries) to keep countries underdeveloped, nationalist capital controls are good.
Now see that nuance exists in the nationalism question and try to think dialectically about it instead of dogmatically.
I don’t think “nationalism” is the correct term for what you are describing and I don’t like your condescending tone. Nationalism kills multiculturalism. People can disagree, what the hell?