Why Civic Nationalism is a Fraud

submitted by Jacinda from (eurocanadian.ca)

all 4 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Jacinda[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

A comprehensive debunking of the concept of civic nationalism.

Some highlights:

You see, civic nationalism isn’t even nationalism because it isn’t even concerned with the preservation of a specific people, but is instead concerned with the preservation of values. A nation is made up of people, not values. A nation is a biological entity, not a political, economic or legal system. The English nation isn’t democracy, capitalism or common law, but is, in fact, the English people themselves.

[Snip...]

Ethnic nationalism, on the other hand, doesn’t suffer as severely from this problem of clashing values. This is because the foundation of an ethnic nationalist society is its people, not its values. Its values are simply a means to an end, with that end being the preservation, protection and prosperity of the people. Furthermore, values are just one of the many things that people share in common in an ethnic nationalist society, along with race, culture and language. So if there’s a clash of values, there are still plenty of things left to unite people. Such unity can, and often does, prevent the collapse of society.

[Snip...]

The implication of this relationship between people and society is that if you wish to preserve a society you must preserve the people who created it. In fact, there’s not a single example in all of human history where a racial group has been replaced or been reduced to a minority within its own society, but yet the culture and character of that society has remained unchanged. Not once, not ever. The racial replacement of a people always has, and always will, lead to the replacement of its society.

[Snip...]

Civic nationalism, as mentioned previously, is the idea that people of all different races, cultures and languages can form a nation based upon shared values. And like other utopian fantasies, such as communism, it’s always ended in failure. Some of these failures include the Roman Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. Civic nationalist societies, such as the ones just mentioned, have always failed, and will continue to fail. [Cont...]

The author points out that civic nationalism is an incoherent concept but people defend it in part because they are cowards; afraid of being called "racist" if they express a desire to live within a society created by their own ethnic kin — a result of internalizing the globalising and homogenizing values of the left.

[–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

A lot of the rhetoric from the far right about civic nationalism is wrong. Just because something isn't eternal doesn't mean it was a failure. The Roman Empire was not a failure. The homogeneous Greek city states also don't exist anymore. The majority of human history is in a sense multicultural states and empires. Even today the world outside the West are not just homogeneous nation states. Do you think Russia is a nation of only Russian slavs? Or Iran is only Persians? Even the Persian ethnic group is one that is a mixture of different races which is why a Persian can have a wide range of phenotypes. Israel is not ethno-nationalist. Jews come from all over the world but there is no conflict between the white or brown Jews. Despite different appearances they are both united with a common Jewish identity and their culture does not harness division between them. In other words there are no complaints about Ashkenazi privilege in Israel.

What is unique today is that we have multiculturalism based on mass immigration combined with a degenerated ruling class that is hostile to the interests of the majority and encourages hostiles from the minority.

[–]AFutureConcern 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A lot of the rhetoric from the far right about civic nationalism is wrong. Just because something isn't eternal doesn't mean it was a failure.

It doesn't, of course, but if you allow something to be destroyed you have failed. One can argue that civic nationalism prior to the collapse has not failed, but not if it is adopted as a purported preventative measure.

The majority of human history is in a sense multicultural states and empires. Even today the world outside the West are not just homogeneous nation states. Do you think Russia is a nation of only Russian slavs? Or Iran is only Persians? Even the Persian ethnic group is one that is a mixture of different races which is why a Persian can have a wide range of phenotypes.

Not multicultural in any sense like we have today. There was no taboo on "racism" for the majority of human history, and so groups could form identities and tribal allegiances. Leftists tend to vastly exaggerate the degree of diversity in historical societies. Travel to any village in medieval Europe and everyone there will look the same.

We could formalize this, of course, with an explicit definition and measurement of multiculturalism. For example, mean distance from grandparents' place of birth. You know what the results would be - the graph would form a hockey stick just like the population graph over time.

Israel is not ethno-nationalist. Jews come from all over the world but there is no conflict between the white or brown Jews.

Israel is exclusive about who they will let live in the country, based on ethnicity. This is something civic nationalists do not support. And I'd double check there is no conflict - it wouldn't surprise me if there were.

I think the main thing about your argument here, though, is that you're missing the point. The point is that race correlates to culture, and so the only way to be a civic nationalist is to accept the reality of race anyway.

For example, you may not care "what people skin color is so long as they agree with our values," but the reality is that skin color is a pretty good proxy for "values" anyway, at least among non-whites, who overwhelmingly vote for the left. All European nationalist movements have a very tiny nonwhite contingent.

The other issue is that nonwhites simply aren't buying civic nationalism whatsoever. They have a racial consciousness of their own (since it is not rendered taboo).

For example, blacks commit more violent crime than whites. This could be true of any racial group in principle, but in our world it's blacks. We're not going to change this without changing the culture you ostensibly wish to preserve, so, it will remain so. But blacks have a strong racial consciousness, and they really care about their higher incarceration rates. So you'll continue to get protests, until your culture is destroyed.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Israel is not ethno-nationalist. Jews come from all over the world but there is no conflict between the white or brown Jews.

Ashkenazim, Sepharadim, and Mizrahim are more genetically similar to each other than to their respective host nations (this does not hold true for Ethiopian and Indian Jews, as they have interbred too much). These Middle Eastern Jews comprise a race unto themselves. That's why, when in Europe, they have opposed European interests at every turn. That's why Israel forcibly sterilized its Ethiopian "Jewish" refugees. And that's why they can use genetic testing to exclude Russian Europeans from Israeli immigration. They have maintained their genetic distinctiveness over thousands of years, and they remain a group of hostile foreigners with a racial supremacist ideology they can use to justify any action against the goy.