HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » BoB/JPR folks are best un...

Mon Nov 21, 2016, 03:26 AM

 

BoB/JPR folks are best understood in the context of Orwell's description of negative nationalism

I talk about Nationalism and Negative Nationalism as Orwell describes them in his "Notes on Nationalism" a lot and that is because in politics, you see that kind of behavior quite a bit, particularly when someone or some group becomes over the top about something.
http://orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat
.
.
.

It is also worth emphasising once again that nationalist feeling can be purely negative. There are, for example, Trotskyists who have become simply enemies of the U.S.S.R. without developing a corresponding loyalty to any other unit. When one grasps the implications of this, the nature of what I mean by nationalism becomes a good deal clearer. A nationalist is one who thinks solely, or mainly, in terms of competitive prestige. He may be a positive or a negative nationalist that is, he may use his mental energy either in boosting or in denigrating but at any rate his thoughts always turn on victories, defeats, triumphs and humiliations. He sees history, especially contemporary history, as the endless rise and decline of great power units, and every event that happens seems to him a demonstration that his own side is on the upgrade and some hated rival is on the downgrade. But finally, it is important not to confuse nationalism with mere worship of success. The nationalist does not go on the principle of simply ganging up with the strongest side. On the contrary, having picked his side, he persuades himself that it is the strongest, and is able to stick to his belief even when the facts are overwhelmingly against him. Nationalism is power-hunger tempered by self-deception. Every nationalist is capable of the most flagrant dishonesty, but he is also since he is conscious of serving something bigger than himself unshakeably certain of being in the right.


I would say that BoB and JPR folks are negative nationalists with Hillary and the DNC being their chosen antagonists. An example of how they fit the nationalist description, albeit a negative one, is made more clear when Orwell describes a few unique characteristics of nationalism, particularly "instability" and transferability

Instability. The intensity with which they are held does not prevent nationalist loyalties from being transferable. To begin with, as I have pointed out already, they can be and often are fastened up on some foreign country. One quite commonly finds that great national leaders, or the founders of nationalist movements, do not even belong to the country they have glorified. Sometimes they are outright foreigners, or more often they come from peripheral areas where nationality is doubtful. Examples are Stalin, Hitler, Napoleon, de Valera, Disraeli, Poincare, Beaverbrook. The Pan-German movement was in part the creation of an Englishman, Houston Chamberlain. For the past fifty or a hundred years, transferred nationalism has been a common phenomenon among literary intellectuals. With Lafcadio Hearne the transference was to Japan, with Carlyle and many others of his time to Germany, and in our own age it is usually to Russia. But the peculiarly interesting fact is that re-transference is also possible. A country or other unit which has been worshipped for years may suddenly become detestable, and some other object of affection may take its place with almost no interval. In the first version of H. G. Wells's Outline of History, and others of his writings about that time, one finds the United States praised almost as extravagantly as Russia is praised by Communists today: yet within a few years this uncritical admiration had turned into hostility. The bigoted Communist who changes in a space of weeks, or even days, into an equally bigoted Trotskyist is a common spectacle. In continental Europe Fascist movements were largely recruited from among Communists, and the opposite process may well happen within the next few years. What remains constant in the nationalist is his state of mind: the object of his feelings is changeable, and may be imaginary.


How do progressives end up supporting Trump? "A country or other unit which has been worshipped for years may suddenly become detestable, and some other object of affection may take its place with almost no interval." That's how you go from devotion to left progressivism to Trumpism.

Anyone who hasn't read Orwell's Notes on Nationalism, or who have not read it in a while should click on the above link and check it out. Beyond BoB/JPR types, support of Trump is all about Nationalism.

3 replies, 958 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 3 replies Author Time Post
Reply BoB/JPR folks are best understood in the context of Orwell's description of negative nationalism (Original post)
stevenleser Nov 2016 OP
ucrdem Nov 2016 #1
lunasun Nov 2016 #2
Demsrule86 Nov 2016 #3

Response to stevenleser (Original post)

Mon Nov 21, 2016, 04:05 AM

1. I thought I'd miss them.

I don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Original post)

Mon Nov 21, 2016, 10:18 AM

2. Rec to read later

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Original post)

Mon Nov 21, 2016, 10:40 AM

3. Very good point...they are heads to the tails of the Trump supporting coin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread