From Common Dreams (Written by Howard Zinn).
I cannot get out of my mind the recent news photos of ordinary Americans sitting on chairs, guns on laps, standing unofficial guard on the Arizona border, to make sure no Mexicans cross over into the United States. There was something horrifying in the realization that, in this twenty-first century of what we call “civilization,” we have carved up what we claim is one world into 200 artificially created entities we call “nations” and armed to apprehend or kill anyone who crosses a boundary.
Is not nationalism–that devotion to a flag, an anthem, a boundary so fierce it engenders mass murder–one of the great evils of our time, along with racism, along with religious hatred? These ways of thinking–cultivated, nurtured, indoctrinated from childhood on–have been useful to those in power, and deadly for those out of power.
Comments
12 Comments so far. Leave a comment below.Chris, you are right that those in power have always used fear to control the ignorant masses. It was a favorite tactic of Hitler and of course our current wonderful American regime. Just this week Tom Ridge admitted that all those elevated threat color coded alerts we’ve been deluged with were bogus, and that the Bush junta directed him to do it, to keep the people in fear and in line.
However, Bush is actually promoting an even more open border than it was before 9/11! He has actually reduced the border patrol since then, and has been aggressively pushing not just amnesty, but CAFTA (like NAFTA but for Cenral America too) and the PAN AMERICAN UNION. The p.a.u. will be like the EU, but for the americas, from Canada to Chile. Do you really think that this is because he loves your ideal borderless type of free livin’ world?
A borderless state is a nifty idea for a daydream, but today, here, on this planet, it is a nightmare. In fact, it has already pretty much happened since the real power is multinational and bound by no law.
But getting back to the Mexican border issue, I urge you to research just what is really happening down there… Mexican military forces have been killing americans on american soil, homes have been robbed, rapes, murder, you name it, and the border patrol, according to many of them who have done interviews, has been told basically to STAND DOWN.
These people who you see as religious hatemongers are defending their own neighborhoods from a reign of terror that their own government not only refuses to defend them against, but has encouraged and directly caused.
Google La Raza, Mecha, and the Reconquista and find out just how much the media has NOT told you about the active, state sponsored invasion that is growing out of Mexico.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I am afraid you missed the entire point of the article Jeff. It is about the evils of nationalism, not border patrol.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think it’s pretty harsh to just come out and say nationalism is one of the great evils of mankind. Nationalism is a great thing, just like religion – it’s only when they’re perverted to suit a particular agenda is when things get dicey.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes, and of course that rarely happens McGee.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nations are a 16th-century concept. Nationalism was a 19th century trend. They’re already talking about the post-national age. Howard Zinn is just playing up the evils of the system, which is his style. I’m curious what will come after this era in human history. Maybe large cultural regions will replace countires – the Americas, Europe, the Muslim world, etc.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And when we get past nationalism to the Clash of Civilizations, Howard Zinn will be there to point out the evils of civilization!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Nothing against you Cardinal. Just wanted to add on your notion of whjat coems after the nation states and the whole cultural thing.
I been wodnering about that very same question myself actually. What will come after the NS?
Anyway, I think that cultural regions will be even worse than nation states, given that it is delineated along the lines of culture, which is far more identifiable vis-a-vis being part of the nation. I think cultural regions will reinforce the notion of “us” and “them” and essentialises the people living in those regions (ie. positive and negative stereotyping). Methinks this will be even more dangerous as one’s knowledge of a region will be filtered through the media, and one’s perception of the other will hence lie at the hands of media conglomerates. Also, those that do not fit into the specified culture when in that region in all likelihood, going by past precedence, are likely to be discriminated against and harassed. Just look at how the notion of Orientalism once separated the Orient and the West, and its negative consequences that still reverberates till today.
What is “cultural” is very difficult to define, and subject to the control and manipulations of those in power to their advantage. Just my two cents on why notions of cultural regions are big, bad ideas.
Anyway, on nationalism, it is a constructed phenomenon and as earlier pointed out, came in to being during the 19th C. I think that nationalism is like fire – when it gets out of control, everyone gets burnt. It’s scary, as nationalist fervour can be akin to religious fervour as well. The moment one starts seeing things in terms of “us” and “them” and making distinct separation of things, there is a chance conflicts may arise based on such either real or imagined differences, though history has shown that it has been more of the latter than former.
Like religion, I don’t see nationalism as being “bad” or “good.” It’s pointless to give such labels, because it will not be helpful in understanding why it is in existence, or their appeal to such a wide swath of humanity. I think that given that these two forces are here to stay, it’s a necessity to understand them better and from there, have a better grasp as to how they work so we don’t get swept up in the fervour of these forces, leading to much undesired consequences for us.I know that there has been more bad than good generated by these forces, which makes it even more pertinent that we understand why they work the way they work. On nationalism, any one for Benedict Anderson? Good work he produces, though conculated at times, his writing is.
Just my .02 cents here. Hope no one minds.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Tom, my personal feelings for Samuel Huntington is that he is a racist bigot. Anyone saw his whole “hispanic-cization” of America and how the Whites will eventually be a minority in the US and how that is not desirable and blah blah blah blah?
His Clash of Civilizations never really talked about what he meant by “civilization” and he does one of those essentialising things that I was talking about in my previous post.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Tom, why do you always give me the feeling that you would be for bringing back the House Un-American Activities Committee.
Eugene, your .02 are always welcome here.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
No need to do that, Chris, because we consevatives, unlike The Left, aren’t stuck in the past!
Besides, it’s always fun when young leftists talk about “the HUAC, led by Senator Joe McCarthy . . .” and that sort of thing.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yes, I like it when old conservatives just shy of senility talk about those type of things too.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Like Pat Buchanan? I thought he was on your side now, at least on Iraq! But I don’t think he’s shy . . .
Like or Dislike:
0 
0