This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Can we abolish nationalism and live in a globalized society?
The holocaust is an integral part of education in Israel. And for years Israeli students are attending programs and are going to Poland to learn and go through an emotional process, which usually ends in an educational message. Some messages are Zionist, some talk about democracy and humanity; others grow nationalization in students and encourage them to join the army.
A lot of years have passed since the holocaust and it seems people are starting to forget around the world. The world turns more and more extreme and nationalism grows like a disease. I never truly understood why Palestinians and Jews cant live in the same land [and no, I do not discount this conflict like many people in the world do].
And I assume most of you here are global minded humanists, but don’t think racism and hatred is only among us silly Middle Eastrens, your cultures and you and I personally tend to generalize groups with out even noticing.
That’s thought led me to a kind of depression. All my family died in the holocaust for what? For the countries to continue hating one another?
I know this banal statement directly leads you to think im some kind of a weirdo not practical hippi, and believe me; im not.
But I would like you to the following question in a creative and original way [“this is human nature and we cant do nothing about it” is not an answer].
Can the world live with out extreme nationalization, with out borders, with out hatred between different groups? Can the world be fully globalized?
P.S this is my first Ted question :) hopes it will lead to an interesting debate.
Barry Abate
All civilisations must adhere to certain moral principals of cooperation to survive. Those that survive the longest are those that achieve the most wellbeing and security for its citizens. It is the conflicts from within and without that lead to war and national calapse. We are all interdependant on this solitary planet. As the resources of the planet dwindle, and nations confront each other for control, human existance itself will be called into question. .It is not a question of if; but when.
Every large problem can be broken down to its component parts and origins. In Israel it's that two peoples claim the same land. Their are only three solutions: share the land, anihilate your opponent or live in conflict. Since the spiritual principle of justice for all men is second to national aspirations there can be no peace.
Spiritual aspirations of peace and justice must take precedence over personal and national interests when they conflict, in order for the world's populations to enjoy equality and peace. In fact. to exist as a species, at all.
The changes must come from a new sense of spiritual purity that recognises the aspirations of all peoples to a fair share of the planets' recourses whatever your race, religion, or national origin.
If anyone can claim to have made the world, take it- it's yours.
Reynaldo Bautista
Jason Huffman
The world should, instead of ignoring the fact that differences exist among them, learn to embrace those differences because of their aesthetic nature. The world is a beautiful place for the person who does not walk through it finding unnecessary fault everywhere he goes.
edward long 100+
Bob Van Oosterhout 20+
I believe nationalism is a form of collective ego. I define ego as focusing on self as more important than others. Nationalism limits our vision and understanding of people from different places and cultures. It seems clear that nationalism was among the root causes of the holocaust, as well as the conditions that led to the extreme nationalism that led to the holocaust. I am unable to cite any examples where nationalism has contributed to the overall health of humanity or our planet. Yet there are countless examples of where nationalism has been a destructive or obstructive force.
I don’t believe we can abolish nationalism. It can become irrelevant as we recognize the futility of ego-centrist thinking, let go of fear and learn to open our hearts to fellow human beings and discover how interesting and fascinating we all are. This can happen when we stop electing and/or tolerating leaders whose egos shrink their vision and feed our fears.
David King
David Hamilton 50+
Julija L. 30+
David Hamilton 50+
I truly believe that the USA is the greatest country in the world, objectively... I don't even think there's a fair argument for anyone else... because we have everyone. We love everyone. Japanese and Chinese people get along here, that's something that used to be seen as almost physically impossible. We're happy to have everyone, and I don't think that leads me to want to distribute more wealth here.
My nationalism actually leads me to an opposite perspective, one of helping the world, and restoring America to being a great benefactor, and contributor to the world economy. There is another nationalism expressed in America, George Bush style nationalism, which is incompetent, and evil, and does in fact want to re distribute all the wealth in the world to rich Americans... but I would suggest that that's a rare minority here, they just get on TV a lot.
I also should apologize for the harshness of my comment in regards to Judaism, I'm almost surprised it wasn't deleted. I often have very conflicting views of our support for Israel, because I see the creation of Israel, and the displacement of millions of Pallestinians, as the Muslim Holocaust... I basically think we proved that we learned absolutely nothing from Hitler after WW2... but I have to accept that that is a slim minority opinion... and it may just be wrong headed.
Julija L. 30+
Maybe 'healthy' nationalism is less of nationalism, and 'unhealthy' nationalism is simply nationalism?
But does nationalism not take a particular country in the centre and make people see everything around from that perspective? And it's not like looking at a globe to the whole world seeing everything in the same scale, but looking from the 'inside' to the 'outside'?..
David Hamilton 50+
In many ways the nationalism I describe is a global unification... but I would like to suggest that the French have a healthy nationalism about their "perpetually revolutionairy democracy", and their national healthcare system. The Germans are justifiably proud of their engineers. As long as it doesn't become that blind, "we're better than anyone else" nationalism, I think it's healthy.
I think if the world was truly to unite, and end nationalism, it would be in the way Major League Baseball is united... Everyone would still root for the home team, and have national pride, we just wouldn't need to kill people over it.
Also, I didn't suggest nationalism was good, simply that religiously institutional racism is worse, and in the modern world it is much more directly at the root of our problems, then the conflicts between Mexico and Canada... Or Germany and France even, despite their history.
Julija L. 30+
But your mentioned 'national' pride is basically such a ... silly phenomenon...
A quote for the topic:
'History is the most dangerous product which the chemistry of the mind has concocted. Its properties are well known. It produces dreams and drunkenness. It fills people with false memories, exaggerates their reactions, exacerbates old grievances, torments them in their repose, and encourages either a delirium of grandeur or a delusion of persecution. It makes whole nations bitter, arrogant, insufferable and vainglorious.' - the most interesting thing that it's Paul Valéry's, the French, quote; I'm not so sure if France is a very good example of healthy nationalism, but never mind.
David Hamilton 50+
I'm proud of American diversity, I'm not proud of The Patriot Act, or either of our current war efforts. I actually entirely disagree that the roots of nationalism have every caused as much war death or torture as religion, however. Only one type of nationalism was ever close to the dogmatic doctorine of religion in my opinion, and that was the Nazi's... I would also argue a big part of their problem was religious as well.
I actually think it's incredibly rare for two nationallities to fight... I think communism fights capitalism, and the religions fight each other, nationalism is merely a consequence. The difference between religion and nationalism, in my mind, is that nationalism is about pride, religion is about exclusion, and the devaluing of human life. To be proud of America, is not to hate Mexicans... To be Islamic, is to accept reading a book that literally says "kill the infidel". To be Christian, is to accept reading a book that literally says, "there is no path to heaven but through me". To be Jewish, is to beilieve you are the chosen race of people, and that all others are inferior... Nationalism doesn't inherently attack non believers, or people in other countries, religions, always have.
Julija L. 30+
'That it's fine to be proud of the good things you've done' - ab-so-lu-te-ly fine! But what about the things, you haven't done? I'm veeery proud of some Lithuanian scientists who have been working on lasers. Now, Lithuanian lasers are highly appreciated and evaluated around the globe, and are used in various ranges like medicine, industry, science researches. But I have no pride, for instance, for any nobel prize winners (there are no Lithuanians among them). I'm really very happy that such people exist and do their works, but I do not feel any pride.
Am I one of those scientists working on lasers? No, I'm not.
So, that's quite silly. I understand, it's hard to refuse some feelings like national pride, but let's just think about it and be more conscious about stupidities which greatly influence us.
But yes that pride is not dangerous.
David Hamilton 50+
Also, the more I thought about it, you could probably call what America did to the Indians pure nationalism, and that was horrible. Maybe nationalism and religion are about equally destructive... The only thing that's really tragic about that, is that their both inherently designed to make people better people. I don't think people choose religions, specifically to hate others, I think they choose their religion for the opposite reason, they want to learn to treat people better. I think the same is true of the founding of a nation, and a development of national pride, it should be inherently good. It should lead us to the moon... To often it doesn't.
Julija L. 30+
It's still logically silly to me, but 'totally fair' and almost unavoidable.
I think in many cases throughout the world, religion is not chosen, religion is hereditary. For example, many people are baptized at a very early age, they are used to one or another religion, it's a norm and they do not think what it's so good or wrong with it, is there any hate in it or no. Religious continuity is dependent on blinding wonderful children.
While religions seem to be 'designed', it may seem nationalism is more naturally emerged with some or much encouragement from 'above', to make men fight harder some time ago, for instance.
Alright, maybe we should end this endless talk, I don't know. For me it's clear two things: you love American diverse and I love Lithuanian scientists =] Let's call it love.
Andrew Wiggin
Marsellla Charron
Dean Salzberger
But I do agree with your message, sometimes, many times, the west is hyppocret using the "humanitarian" mask to actually work by their interest. And I also think the Lybian people have an even darker future...
Lucky Staty
[quote]can we stop the racist violent mentality within the people?[/quote]
Have a look at what Libyans have recently lost. There are YouTube videos on this. The country was prosperous and it has been said Ghadffi was color blind, meaning people from all the colors that you mention had access to employment in Libya. Amazingly this was under a dictatorship! I'm not saying racism was erased but when the whole population has free healthcare, higher education, a 50,000 gift when married to own a home, etc.,etc., you could say the kind of racism you're referring to didn't exist. But that is all gone now thanks to the "humanitarian intervention" of drones and CIA backed extremist rebels. Borders it seems are presently only things marked on a piece of paper and Sovereignty means just as much. From what I read about settlements within Israel, borders also constantly seem to move.
Marsellla Charron
There are a lot of 'melting pot' societies that push the idea of one 'American culture' (as an example) which leads to our micro cultures loosing much of their cultural heritage such as foods, language, musics, traditional beliefs and ancient knowledge. It is the fear of losing identities that manifest into racism. That being said, history and cultural background is important to ultimately understanding who we are and why we operate the way we do. As I see it, the question is, how do we keep our unique identities while respectfully working together? The more globalized the world becomes, the more we lose our historical backgrounds and become one global mono culture. Of course that adds another element which is, if we were a globalized society, what culture would dominate our perspective? In other words, who or what would be in charge of the rules and regulations in that society? How would we decide which cultural lens to look through when holding people and business to ethical standards?
Jaydeep Banerjee
Dean Salzberger
Jacob Jones
Dean Salzberger
Do you think we can unite with out a common enemy?
Jacob Jones
Lucky Staty
Ed Schulte 50+
Lucky Staty
Your question about borders should include a question of sovereignty. This is on the minds of many who see governments signing free trade acts world-wide that open the door to a completely losing any sense of national sovereignty.
Zbigniew Brzezinsk stated in his 1971 book "Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era",
“The nation-state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.” [In other words, he flushed down the drain the basic concepts of nation-state, national sovereignty and the role of the government in society, to champion a vision of a world governed by the banks and transnational corporations.] We see this today. This is about the Trilateral Commission which Brzezinsk co-founded with David Rockefeller. Except in a few situations borders which were defined after WW2 really have little consequence to the decisions of the elites vision of control. " ...without hatred between different groups?" You know as I do there are huge profits made, especially when the chaos, hatred turns to war.
Dean Salzberger
I liked your answer a lot, yet i think capitalist globalization is doing a lot of harm to the world on this topic and not only good. The gaps between poor and rich globaly are growing and growing, hate towards other groups still exists, so yes, there are white, red, yellow and black bussines mans, which are "global citizens", the world holds no borders to them. But what about the regular people?
And as you said, wars are bringing a lot of profit, but can we stop the racist violent mentality within the people?