Pros And Cons Of Ultranationalism

Geoff Mulgan suggests that “All of nationalism can be understood as a kind of collective narcissism.” Mulgan, the Chief Executive of the National Endowment for Science Technology and the Arts, describes the tendencies of nations to regard themselves as superior. These tendencies drive nations to become stronger often resulting in a superiority complex. Presently, our world is embedded in a rich history that has been influenced by great powers that have existed and still exist today. These influences come from the choices made by people who share a collective consciousness. Various senses of nationalism encourage or discourage certain actions, making countries capable of committing inhumane acts towards people. The way a nation deals with …show more content…
This extreme form of nationalism can be beneficial to the nation’s welfare, ironically it can also lead to ultranationalistic actions that put the welfare of other nations at risk. Often causing conflicts and interferences with co-operation between nations, ultranationalism pressures the people of the nation to take extreme measures to accomplish their own goals. Either that or as Davison puts it, “Ultranationalist groups often perceive threats to their existence and argue that they must engage in preventive measures, such as ethnic cleansing or deportation, to counter these dangers.” Certain policies of the ultranationalistic country can intentively discriminate and degrade other nations deemed inferior. With instances like the American Civil War creating a wake for future discriminatory feelings within America and Italian fascist leader Mussolini’s policy of irredentism, it is evident that nationalistic feelings can cause strife between other nations because of the extreme patriotic feelings of a group of people who share the same perspectives. However, nationalism is not just a social concept pertinent to negative consequences. Nationalism has given rise to the history of a people. A collective who share the same stories, traditions, and legacies all have commonalities that are characteristic of a certain …show more content…
Prior to the French Revolution, the people of France where scattered and separated politically, socially, and economically. This separation is known as the Ancien Regime and was composed of three estates. On top of this problem, the monarchy neglected the people refusing to allow minimal rights and freedoms to the Third Estate which, in turn, did not contribute to nationalistic fervor in France. After the revolution, France established themselves as a constitutional monarchy and they had various governments that had governed the people. When Napoleon had emerged from a successful coup against the Directory, France could have thought that a new tyrant had surfaced bringing them back to a monarchy once again. Ironically, Napoleon had unified the people of France under one leader regaining senses nationalism and pride. His rise to power and his image as emperor of France had united the people giving them someone to admire and be proud of to lead the country. Napoleon is responsible for expansion of French control and influence that has exceeded the country 's borders. His lasting influence is prominent today, as exemplified through the Napoleonic Code or civil laws still used in many countries. In a paradoxical statement, the American novelist, F. Scott Fitzgerald, once said, “I like France, where everybody thinks he 's Napoleon.” This patriotism that French people