The first source can be interpreted as presenting an anti-nationalistic view. The source presents a message which says that people who believe in and practice nationalism are blind to the actual reality around them as they are only taught to keep to themselves because they are the most superior. The source further goes on to say that people who practice nationalism unrightfully take pride in their nations past accomplishments even though these people were not even alive when these accomplishments transpired. The main message that the source is trying to convey is that the practice of nationalism is rather foolish and a sign of ignorance because it breeds hatred among different groups of people causes feelings of superiority which can be the cause of chaos in the future. The second source can also be interpreted as presenting an anti-nationalistic view. The speaker in the second source says that nationalism is nothing but a mere tool by which certain people, such as politicians, manipulate others in order to fulfill their own goals. The speaker suggests that this is the greatest flaw and “curse” in the concept of nationalism because it causes people to once again blindly follow whatever they may be told. The source however specifically …show more content…
The first two sources insist on the perspective that nationalism is a flawed concept and thus should not be practiced because it only serves to breed hatred among people and cause some individuals to be unrightfully manipulated by others, who possess more power, such as politicians. The third source however argues a perspective which is a polar opposite to the first and second sources. It suggests that all nations have a right to practice nationalism and should not be required to practice internationalism. Hence the relationship which is drawn is that of two complete opposites namely anti-nationalism versus
Nationalism has been a potent force for change since the development of human civilization. However, opinion about the extent to which nationalism may be appropriately pursued is highly diverse, a factor that has led to immense tragedy and suffering in countless regions worldwide. While it is both appropriate and sometimes encouraged to take pride in being part of a nation, it is of the utmost importance that it is done without harming or subjugating people of another. Uniting a people by force and potentially eliminating or destroying those who may oppose it or not belong to it is unacceptable ethically, morally, and socially.
The source conveys a standpoint that is in favour of nationalism by portraying its positive aspects through the French Revolution. The quote is citing that nationalism motivated the French middle class to take action, providing the opportunity to overthrow the dominating
As the source suggests, nationalism and ultra-nationalism are not in the same category. Being that ultra-nationalism is fabricated from “power hungry” individuals, where as nationalism is a “profoundly constructive
During World War I, many national militaries took control and the initiative to go into war and many citizens took pride in going to the war, they felt it was an honour to serve their country. The war was thought as a way to end all conflict in the future, but that was not true.This belief of the early 20th century would contradict the perspective shown in Arthur Schopenhauer because he believes it is foolish to think laying your life for a nation is preposterous, and undeniable absurd. A historic figure that would disagree with Schopenhauer’s views is Napoleon Bonaparte because his whole reputation was to conquer and he was a militant man, his whole persona was identified by his militant accomplishments and he believes that it was proud great nationalistic pride to his nation. “ To conquer a nation first disarm its citizens,’ Adolf Hitler’s quote here is a similar view that connects to the one Schopenhauer believes in. Both say that the be a successful it should not be a militant based foundation, but a calm and peaceful nation is the way to be prosperous. This national force could be deemed as a civic opinion. Schopenhauer civic values could be seen as peace, unity, or even pacifism. Nationalism is about a nation being connected to one another, one who sees pride in their nation, and has a sense of belonging thorough culture, geography, and in this case civic nationalism, and it is just one of the view driving forces in nationalism in the past, or modern
Nationalism is a political, economic and social ideology, doctrine and practice describing the “advocacy of or support for the interests of one’s own nation”, especially above the interests of other outside nations, individuals, and regions (“Nationalism”). It is a conscious state of mind where individuals believe their duty and loyalty is to the nation-state. It believes that a nation is the most crucial aspect for human social life because it gives a nation a sense of unity by promoting the shared interests and identities of the individuals such as language, race, religion etc. (“Nationalism”). Therefore, the aim of nationalism is to preserve and promote the nation’s culture as opposed to other cultures. Politically, the goal is gaining and
World War I, also known as “The Great War”, was a global war that revolved mainly around Europe. It took place from 1914 to 1918. This was a very brutal war that caused many casualties. The soldiers who survived experienced severe trauma and mental discomfort. This trauma was a direct result of the violence and agony they experienced during the war. Motivation for this war was the idea of nationalism and the pride in one’s country. This war was the cause of disillusionment among many of the soldiers that were involved in it.
Source 1 expresses the views and values of civic nationalism and how individual's rights and freedoms of that society need to be protected. A civic nation emerges when individuals are united by shared beliefs and values and can live and abide peacefully together. Multiculturalism and a common national identity are often aspects that are found in a civic nation. The source strongly agrees with the ideals and principles of civic nationalism, as it supports the protection of everyone in the nation. The source would be critical of discrimination and intolerance towards specific groups, such as Muslims in the nation. While the source firmly states that “the rights and freedoms of all must be protected,” it also states that the actions of the individual
Although some have said that "nationalism is measles of humankind", in my opinion, it is not. Nationalism has led to the growth of identities, and innovations. These reasons influence us in so many good ways that we should embrace nationalism to a great extent. Although at the same time I believe that we shouldn't embrace it to the extent of where we hurt others.
Nationalism has played a crucial role in world history over the past centuries. It continues to do so today. For many, nationalism is indelibly associated with some of the worst aspects of modern history, such as the destructive confidence of the Napoleon’s army and the murderous pride of Nazi Germany. Large numbers of people, descent in their hearts, have carried out unbelievable atrocities for no better reason than their nation required them to. Authoritarian and totalitarian regime have crushed dissent, eliminated opposition, and trampled on civil liberties in the name of the nation.
Nationalism is the idea that a people who have much in common, such as language, culture and geographic proximity ought to organize in such a way that it creates a stable and enduring state. Nationalism is tied to patriotism, and it is the driving force behind the identity of a culture. Nationalism had many effects in Europe from 1815, The Congress of Vienna and beyond. In the following essay I will describe many of the consequences of nationalism on European identity, as well as some of the conflicts that it created.
When I think of the term- nationalism, I immediately think about the Olympics. The text describes nationalism as “…nation building through sport” (329).
Moreover, nationalism has positive and negative sides. Supporters of this process just see positive sides of it; however anti-supporters see the opposite. For example: Followers of the nationalism think that they have national superiority than the other nations. Moreover, I think that we are humanity and each person has equal rights. In this case we can not say that one nation has superiority than the others. Actually, nationalism real...
When we speak of nationalism, we adhere to an umbrella that covers various elements such as national identity, cultural and national consciousness, not to mention an individual’s loyalty to a nation state. Furthermore, to grasp the content of the term Nationalism systematically and how its different forms and routes; Civic and Ethnic nationalism came about, I will firstly review the definition of Nationalism discussed by the political theorist Benedict Anderson. In the reading, Imagined Communities, he defines the nation as: ‘’ It is an imagined political community- and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign’’) (Anderson 2006 ). By’’ imagined he means that individuals who define themselves as members of a nation,’’ will never know most of their members, meet them, or even hear them, yet in the minds, of each lives the image of their communion’’.
Since its impact first was felt in the nineteenth century Europe, nationalism has been an irrepressible force which has left its peculiar imprint upon the course of history....