The case for nations

If you asked an average person what a nation is, you’d most likely get a definition that is synonymous with a country. A part of the world that is ruled over by a particular government.  In most modern usages of the word, they’d be right.  People use nation interchangeably with state or country all the time.  However, the real meaning of what a nation means is much more profound.

A nation is more than geography and politics.  It is a people.  A people that can be defined through shared origins, customs, history, language, and culture.  We often associate nations with their country because the land itself is an integral part to each of these things.

Nations are an ancient concept. They’ve been with us since the very first tribes banded together. Nations have been seen as an essential part of human identity ever since.  Nations work so well because they allow entire populations to form around a common set of ideas and goals.  This allows for a level of cooperation and understanding that would otherwise be impossible.

With the recent rise of globalism, a new paradigm has been put forth as an alternative to nations.   Globalism is the refutation that there is anything inherently different between human cultures.  It is based around the concept that with modern technical advancements, nations are an obsolete way of thinking about peoples.

If you can travel around the world in hours and speak to anybody across any distance instantly over the phone, why bother trying to find commonality with people around you?  If you can make my product cheaper in a sweatshop half way around the world and just ship it here, why bother having a factory here?  If your country is a third world hellhole, why bother trying to make it better when you can move to a rich country by simply getting on a plane?

This sort of thinking has made the elites of the world very rich in the last half century.  It has also brought millions of foreigners and alien cultures into lands where they would not otherwise belong.  It is extremely clear who benefits from the transition from nations to this new globalist paradigm. It is a bit more murky who loses out.

The transition away from nations has affected almost everyone but in a more intangible and less distinct way.  We are losing essentially everything we’ve inherited from our ancestors.  As Hollywood films expand to more  countries, we lose more languages.  As McDonald’s expands their restaurant count, we lose more local cuisine. As the NAFTA and EU expand, more countries lose their national sovereignty.

As globalism continues to rise, we’ll all lose.  For a few more dollars, we’ll lose the very things that make life worth living.  We’ll lose our identities.

Advertisements

One response to “The case for nations

  1. Pingback: Putting the rage in suffrage | NOVUS SÆCULUM OBSCURUM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s