I'm actually sort-of impressed by the wide variety of different types of "extremism" that article identified. Normally, it's just "a few hillbillies wearing wifebeaters, nothing to see here, move along..."
As usual, however, the point is missed entirely.
There are people out there who genuinely hate human sub-groups because of membership differences. Such people are rightly marginalized--literal hatred is an ignoble, dangerous quality. But the vast, vast bulk of what is described as "hate" is simply ordinary human inclinations that happen to deviate from the beliefs of international elitists.
Take Tibet. The Tibetan movement (which I don't follow closely, so correct me if I'm wrong) is essentially a nationalist movement. Do we call it a "nationalist" movement? Not usually. Liberals are collectively enamored of Tibet, for some reason. If the good people of South Carolina try to secede from the union, that's a tremendous sin...and blood will have to flow. Yet...it's the same impulse. People who are just trying to govern themselves, rather than be governed. That's the heart of nationalism.
When the Chinese government moves to keep their country in one piece THAT is called nationalism. Okay, whatever. It's actually imperialism, but...whatever. Any lie will do, if it works.
People who are just trying to govern themselves, rather than be governed. That's the heart of nationalism.
This is very wrong. Do you think nationalistic parties suddenly seize to be nationalistic in the moment they get the power to rule their country? Do you think that no government appeals to nationalism of their own people?
Nationalism is anything that appeals to members of a nation to defend a each other against a real or perceived threat. Nationalism of a national state gone big - China, Russia, Japan - becomes "imperialism".
As usual, however, the point is missed entirely.
There are people out there who genuinely hate human sub-groups because of membership differences. Such people are rightly marginalized--literal hatred is an ignoble, dangerous quality. But the vast, vast bulk of what is described as "hate" is simply ordinary human inclinations that happen to deviate from the beliefs of international elitists.
Take Tibet. The Tibetan movement (which I don't follow closely, so correct me if I'm wrong) is essentially a nationalist movement. Do we call it a "nationalist" movement? Not usually. Liberals are collectively enamored of Tibet, for some reason. If the good people of South Carolina try to secede from the union, that's a tremendous sin...and blood will have to flow. Yet...it's the same impulse. People who are just trying to govern themselves, rather than be governed. That's the heart of nationalism.
When the Chinese government moves to keep their country in one piece THAT is called nationalism. Okay, whatever. It's actually imperialism, but...whatever. Any lie will do, if it works.