Reddit Reddit reviews Blood and Belonging

We found 2 Reddit comments about Blood and Belonging. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Books
Political Ideologies & Doctrines
Nationalism
Politics & Social Sciences
Politics & Government
Blood and Belonging
Check price on Amazon

2 Reddit comments about Blood and Belonging:

u/4514N_DUD3 · 5 pointsr/AskAnAmerican

OK, I'm gonna go full Murica' here so be warned.


There's many different forms of nationalism. The ones that are being referred to in relation to this conversation is civic nationalism and ethnic nationalism.


The US developed to adopt a form known as civic nationalism (at least so today in modern times) where it is simply the love of your country. It is grounded on the principle of a union of many different people. We are a very young country and we're a "new" group of people called Americans. We don't have the same millenniums of history that much of the rest of the world have. All we really have are each other and a symbol to stand behind that binds us together. So while Europeans are bound by ethnicity - a single place, a single culture, a single identity, a single group of people; we are who are from many ethnicities and places all around the world are bound by the idea of multiculturalism. There is no overwhelming single major ethnicity in America and that flag represent the many people from all all over the world that now inhabits the U.S. This is a nation of immigrants - there are only a select few that can truly call themselves non-immigrant and those are of course the natives that had been here long before European settlers arrived. So what do you do when you have all these different people from all walks of life in a single place? What can you do so that there won't conflict between us due to our differences? You give them something to stand behind - symbol of some sorts, and that is the Star Spangled Banner.


Civic nationalism (or American Nationalism as you referred to it in your question) doesn't carry the same amount of potential danger of that ethnic nationalism has. Europeans have always been embroiled in ethnic nationalism and in many cases, still are today and yes this has cause two world wars that killed tens of millions of people. As we learned from history some of the underlying causes was sense of superiority can cause territorial expansion, subjugation of "inferior groups of people" (Imperial Japan) or even flat out genocide (Nazi Germany). That is why when Europeans look at us, they feel creeped out and uncomfortable because they had a bad history of nationalism, while most of us on the other hand, don't really quite understand nationalism like they do. To them we are just simply indoctrinating little kids into fascism. Or that we're committing idolatry, as in we are worshiping some sort of an idol. And you kinda have to understand where they're coming from because the reasons why they feel that way towards us are legitimate because ... Well yeah, ethnic nationalism has indeed lead to some pretty horrible events.


That being said, civic nationalism too does carry it's own dangers as well, examples of which includes our awful treatment of the native Americans or perhaps further away from home like in the Philippines. It is especially dangerous when someone interprets it the wrong way as well because it can easily become fascism instead. Also, that's not to say that America doesn't have a portion of our population who are also embroiled in ethnic nationalism as well and have certain racist viewpoints. And of course, yes, we sure we do brag about how great we are with a smug sense of superiority quite often.


Regardless, the pledge of allegiance is a way to instill a sense of patriotism and cohesion among Americans because it's not meant to divide but to unite everyone within standing republic, a single nation that is indivisible that believes in the principles of liberty and justice for all.


Most people stopped reciting the pledge by the time they're a high school freshman anyways, and most of the hate are by people who aren't necessarily against the pledge, but wants the "under god" part removed as it doesn't really reflect the multiculturalism of America and that it's simply something that is left over from the cold war. Those who wants to do away with it completely are the same ones that think similarly to those like the Europeans who compare it to the Nazi salute (which I don't blame them because it does seem like so depending on the perspective).


My personal (and bias) perspective of this issue as an immigrant to this country is that... yes, it did integrate me into the American society. It helped me assimilated into a place foreign to me and eased me into my new home. So I guess you can say it was indoctrination, but i also would say that it's not necessarily a bad thing either. It worked as it intended to as it was meant to instill as sense of patriotism. So long as it remains to be the "right kind" of civic nationalism that we have right now, I don't see much harm in it at all. Once it becomes a "we are superior to these people and they should all die" mentality, then that's when you raise the red flags. However, I don't see that happening at all during this day and age.

edit: I highly suggest Blood and Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism by Michael Ignatieff, I read it a while back at my campus library and the source for the info above. Or if you're not too big into reading then here's a wiki overview

u/metalliska · 3 pointsr/DebateAnarchism

I've read a good chapter in this book which goes into the differences between civic nationalism and ethnic nationalism.

I list Titoists as the exceptional tankies due to lack of major food shortage, and the fact that he was a worker for most of his "career".