Nationalism

Very few words in the English language evoke such strong emotions. As a word, we have been taught to fear it. As an ideology we have been conditioned to fight against it and its adherents. It conjures images of Hitler and Mussolini. In the minds of many Americans it walks hand-in-hand with feelings of racial supremacy.

It seems that Americans are out of step with the rest of the world. A quick search on the internet shows that in this day and age, nationalism is a far cry from what we have been taught. We find nationalist or movements for nationalism exist around the globe. In Scotland, the ruling party is the Scottish National Party. Political parties exist all over the world with some form of "national", "nationalist" or "nationalism" as part of their name or mission.

If this is case, then what we have been taught is wrong. Nationalism exists regardless of race or religion. We can find it in multiethnic areas as well as areas steeped with religious pluralism. In the modern mainstream expressions of nationalism you will be hard pressed to find the goose-stepping racist diatribes that we have been taught must always accompany nationalism.

We have been lied to. To understand why and how, we need only look at the textbook definition of nationalism. While some variation exists, most definitions agree that nationalism is:

Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation and the belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals.

Aspirations for national independence in a country under foreign domination.

This definition is very telling in that we see what nationalism actually is and, through seeing what it is not, we can see who benefits the most from placing a stigma on it.

Shattering the existing paradigm of nationalism leads us further into the "rabbit hole". Just like Alice in Wonderland, we have to enter to see how far down it goes. The world that we enter into is one where nationalism is not evil or racist. Rather it is a raw force that most often develops as a form of self and national awareness. It is a positive force of love for ones identity and country. This world of true nationalism is far different than the one to which we have become accustomed.

Society, mass media, and American culture teach us that nationalism is evil but seeks to indoctrinate us into American nationalism. They call any politician around the globe that acts in the best interest of their nation a radical or extremist yet always seek to impose the will of the Federal Government upon the world to protect "American interests". They insist that as children we recite a Pledge of Allegiance declaring our fealty to the flag, the Republic and reaffirming that America is "one nation". We are told that nationalism always walks hand-in-hand with imperialistic ambition and it tempts countries that embrace it to use the military to impose their political system and will upon other countries. Yet this slander comes from a country that has a military presence in almost every country in the world and actively engages in reconstructing those countries in its own image under the guise of "nation building".

The lie that we are fed about nationalism comes from those who wish to protect and expand their globalist agenda. It is this agenda that cares nothing for you, your country, your identity, your system of government, your history, your heritage or your hopes and dreams. As a matter of fact, all of those things stand contrary to their goal of global hegemony and flies in the face of their singular elitist belief that they "know what is best". Their plan is to destroy your uniqueness and distinctiveness, bring us all down to the lowest common denominator thereby making us "one".

The global elite are scared of nationalism. This was highlighted in Oslo, Norway in December of 2009. Barack Obama, President of the United States for less than one year, had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. As is customary, he traveled to Oslo to accept the award and deliver his acceptance speech. However, what he said was less than customary for a recipient of the prize. After all, he had not been in office long enough to implement any significant policy changes. The one major policy action that he took was merely an agreement with the Department of Defense and the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan to increase the number of troops deployed in the region. With no major notches on his belt for the "cause of peace" his awarding of the prize was unusual and his speech was even stranger.

His speech focused on war and justifications for it and he made a pitch for the establishment of a global order. In his assessment of the current threats to global stability and that proposed global order he inserted a strangely out-of-place statement. He cited "the growth of secessionist movements" as an underlying cause of chaos among civilians. Other than the fact that secession is not the actual cause of the chaos, it is important to understand that secession is the natural expression of nationalism under foreign domination. The previously cited definition of nationalism shows that nations under foreign domination aspire to national independence and secession is the mechanism to achieve it. It's clear that his comment was a backhanded swipe at nationalism.

This one statement, made by the President of one of the most influential countries in the world, should give pause to every Texan and American who has bought the "party line" on the legality of secession and the evils of nationalism. For him to take the time under the spotlight of the world stage to mention "secessionist movements" is telling. It tells us that we are numerous and that the global elite are afraid.

But the proliferation of nationalism should not come as a surprise. As Soviet domination in Europe crumbled and the individual Republics in the former Soviet Union began to assert their independence, author John Naisbitt wrote, what I believe is one of the most important books of our time. John Naisbitt is a best-selling author who wrote classic works of trend forecasting such as Megatrends and Megatrends 2000. These were works that identified trends in business and society that helped companies embrace the future and grow their businesses. The most amazing thing about John Naisbitt is that he was right every time. Those who heeded his forecasts made money. Those who didn't lost money.

In 1994, he penned Global Paradox. The book is about the coming telecommunications revolution and how it will impact the world. While the book focused mainly on the business aspects of this, at the time, coming revolution, his thesis and the first part of the book dealt with the geo-political aspects of this revolution. Rather than citing the former Soviet Republics or Yugoslavia, he cast his light on the tiny country of Andorra.

On March 14, 1993, the people of Andorra went to the polls and in a referendum on asserting their sovereignty and independence voted overwhelmingly in favor. For centuries they had been at the mercy of foreign powers and had even already considered themselves independent. However, they did not and had not exerted that control over their own affairs and declared their national sovereignty.

Naisbitt used Andorra as an example of how nationalism was breaking out across the globe. It was a global trend. It was here that the paradox was made manifest. As the world became more interconnected by the telecommunications revolution more and more nations wanted to take control of their own destiny. This led to the thesis of his book and formed the reason for titling the book "Global Paradox"

"The world's trends point overwhelmingly toward political independence and self-rule on the one hand, and the formation of economic alliances on the other."

This nationalistic trend has been in full force and effect for decades now. And we have seen countries popping up all over the globe. But even Naisbitt is somewhat of a "Johnny-Come-Lately". I was struck by a statistic that showed that at the end of World War 2 the world had almost 60 countries. Now, 70 years after the start of that war, that total has more than tripled to almost 200. Further, when you look at the list of nations contained within borders of other countries or states that exist as part of confederations, the total number of self-ruling, sovereign, independent countries could double again.

Looking at the chart below you can visualize the steady progression of independence since 1900.

The world has been experiencing something for decades that the United States is destined to go through. Nationalism is part of a larger trend toward self-government and cultural, economic and political expression. The forces that drive this global trend toward national autonomy are being experienced in the United States right now and Texas is at the center of this awakening.

Rather than being afraid of nationalism, we should recognize it, embrace it and hold it as the standard. It is an expression of culture, history and identity. It is the hope of a self-controlled destiny and the promise of self-government. It is the preservation of our form of government and the best defense of liberty and individual rights. It is the cause of free people and the bane of globalism. Nationalism is the winning side of multi-generational war brought by the forces that would rule over and subdue mankind. And nationalism will lead us to self-discovery and victory.