Two people in the last two days have been telling us what a stupid and dangerous thing nationalism is. Former Irish ambassador to Britain Dáithi Ó Ceallaigh was at the McGill Summer School and says that nationalism makes him tremble. “I am very frightened of nationalism and I am afraid we are, throughout Europe going back towards it.It may be very nice and sound great but, for me, it’s worrying”. He adds that you can easily find yourself in a position “where the person who is not like you is somehow not entirely human”.
The other person to put the boot into nationalism was Tony Blair. He thinks the SNP ( yes, you’re right, Virginia – the party that practically wiped out Labour in Scotland) is engaged in “the oldest politics in the world. It is the politics of the first caveman council where the caveman came out from the council where there had been difficult decisions and pointed with his club across the forest and said, ‘there over there, they are the problem’…However you dress it up, it is a reactionary political philosophy.”
Well, who’d have thunk it? Mr Ó Ceallaigh presumably spent much of his life defending the interests of Ireland, or at least the twenty-six counties. Would that not count as nationalism? Next year there will be a great deal of commemorating and celebrating of the men and women of 1916: will that not be nationalism? When Enda Kenny hauls his Cabinet up to Sligo and when there’s an announcement about the number of jobs got for Letterkenny – is that not nationalism? He did it all for us, we Irish, whether we live in Dublin or Mayo or Sligo or Donegal. (Shut up, Virginia – of course he didn’t get jobs for Bellaghy or Belfast or Bangor. What do you take him for – an internationalist?)
Mr Blair is also a bit surprising. I seem to remember a time when he was busy inviting Noel Gallagher and others to 10 Downing Street so they could all share and take pride in Britpop. I seem to remember him impressing on us how much at risk Britain was from all those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that could be programmed to explode over Britain inside 45 minutes. And wasn’t he rather actively British, the time of Princess Di’s curious death, when he shored up the Royals and generally tried to calm down the over-excited English people? The fact that he didn’t give a damn about their demonstrations against the Iraq invasion only showed the strength of his belief that he knew what was best for Britain.
The fact of the matter is that both Ó Ceallaigh and Blair are anti-nationalism when it seems it might somehow hurt their interests. The Blair case is blindingly obvious: the SNP slaughtered Labour in Scotland; the SNP is, by name and nature, a nationalist party; ergo, nationalism is a Bad Thing. Similarly with Ó Ceallaigh: he hasn’t come out and said it, but no prizes for guessing that he’s aiming to shore up the traditional parties in Donegal. Sinn Féin are making striking inroads into areas which were solidly Fianna Fail or Fine Gael. Sinn Féin are unabashedly nationalist. Therefore nationalism is a Bad Thing – in fact, a very Frightening Thing.
Cobblers, lads. Nationalism is a perfectly healthy and commendable thing. It can of course become twisted when, for example, people sing about how “Britons never never shall be slaves!’ and begin to chuck pieces of a football stand on the opposing team’s supporters gathered below. It can become a menace when it declares itself a master race and establishes an empire, dispossessing the native people and leading them to see themselves as inferior beings. But it doesn’t have to be like that. It can be used to help people take legitimate pride in their culture, their history, their appetite for life. The most frightening thing about the Ó Ceallaigh/ Blair twaddle is that there may be some people, in Britain or Ireland, who will think they’re not talking Grade A, fork-tongued tripe.
Too true Jude. The thing is that they confuse nationalism with national chauvinism. The first is a sense of belonging forged by our cultural DNA and it takes pride in what makes us different. Far from being exclusivist, it appreciates and celebrates the diversity that makes the world interesting. The other is a nasty philosophy that says that my cultural DNA trumps all others, that if it is superior then there’s is somehow inferior … it can be xenophobic, is only really comfortable in its own cultural space and will even try to replicate that cultural space when abroad (personally I avoid Irish-themed pubs in other countries). When push comes to shove, it is ‘the dislike of unlike’ as playwright and author Eugene McCabe once described it. As a nationalist, however, I say vive la difference. John Lennon’s imagined world of sameness is an appalling vista (in my opinion), as is the image of any ‘dominant race’ imposing its will on other ‘lesser’ peoples.
Forums like The McGill Summer school ,The West Belfast Festival etc are excellent places for people to voice their opinions and they are only that ….opinions .However when certain people become so puffed -up with the delusion of their own importance ,that they suddenly believe they know everything and believe that their opinions alone are sacrosanct , that’s when it becomes dangerous. I am a Nationalist and Republican and the definition I have of Nationalism…..” The strong belief that the interests of a particular nation-state are of primary importance. Also, the belief that a people who share a common language, history, and culture should constitute an independent nation, free of foreign domination. ” The primary importance in this definition ,in my opinion , only refers to the nation-state and doesn’t imply a threat to any other race or nation , Nationalism is that pride , that binding factor , which holds people of different creeds ,different politics and different aspirations together and I believe without it, a country has no soul….it’s just a country!
Perhaps Mr O’ Ceallaigh’s remarks should be considered in a wider context?
“The settled times at the end of the reign of Edward VII were to be seriously disrupted in Ireland by the rise of Nationalism…” (Arnold 2009:26)
In the current age of austerity, it would be interesting to establish Mr O’Ceallaigh’s opinion on the alleged fees some individuals attract for after dinner speeches. It is alleged that former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern is paid in the region of €20,000 – €30,000. It is also alleged that Mr Blair has earned in the region of £80 million since leaving office. What might Alf Garnett make of that?
Steve Bell has depicted Tony Blair in a cartoon with the caption,
“If your heart is with Corbyn, get a transplant.”
Another commentator suggests that Mr Blair has shot himself in his bullet riddled foot. Is it really the policies advocated by Mr Corbyn that Mr O’Ceallaigh and Mr Blair are frightened of?
Higher taxes on wealth?
A mandatory living wage?
Renationalisation of the railways?
Scrap nuclear weapons?
Rent controls?
Cut tuition fees?
The electorate in Scotland do not appear to consider Nationalism to be dangerous.
Perhaps the administration in Dublin might consider providing Irish water with constitutional protection in 1916 or would that be dangerous also or just a threat to performance related bonuses payable after 1916?
Before you become an internationalist you must first be a nationalist. How on earth could you have internationalism without nations? What freightens me is when one nation takes the land and territory of another nation and calls it their own much as Britain has done in Ireland and Scotland and Wales and Africa and America and Australia and almost every nation in the world as illustrated in this map:
http://www.notboredanymore.com/2013/07/britain-has-invaded-90-of-worlds.html#axzz3gi0S0EYu
Correction: Read England for Britain
Jude
Nationalism is just an extension of parochialism. The measles of mankind Einstein called it.
You only have to look at the frequent talk of planters around these pages, in referring to people who have been here for many generations to see how romantic nationalism is a dangerous notion.
Well put Giordanobruno
Nationalism can be a binding force used for good. If it is inclusive and positive and promotes culture and the well-being of all citizens then it is a good thing. If Nationalism is exclusive then it is contrary to human progress. Parochialism can be a a negative connotation for a sense of community. I guess in places there can be positive ‘parochialism’ aka a sense of belonging/community, but there can also be a suspicion of outsiders. I think an individuals view on nationalism and ‘parochialism’ really depends on how well connected the individual is with his/her community. I think we try to make up too many labels without looking at what we are really trying to categorise. I have also seen ‘positive nationalism’ and ‘negative nationalism’ exist within the same country. I have also seen Religion being positive and negative in the same country.
Excellent and thought provoking, Jude. I must be honest and admit that extreme Nationalism worries me, be it English, Irish or say, Serbian.
I class my self as a proud European and I think it healthy to dilute one’s own brand within the Union of Europe. Whilst I am proudly Irish, that comes second and I’m very pleases when abroad I can inform Spanish or French acquaintances that I wish to share my Irish culture, but similarly value their culture equally.
My rule for Nationalism is, good thing if it helps a nation throw foreign despots out, bad thing if it looks inwards and spreads fear about other people. First case, Ireland. Second case, UKIP.
Unionists during the Scots indo ref used the term nationalist almost as if it were a disease. The fact unionists are British nationalists as opposed to Scottish or Irish nationalists was lost on them.
I recently spoke to a converted Scots Nat who informed me that he switched to the Scot Nats because he was ashamed to be British after the Iraq war.
Arguably, if Mr Blair had any insight into the how his activities have impacted on the politics of the day he would be on suicide watch – having done more than any other Britisher to damage the fragile stability in the Middle Eastern politics (and in the process endanger his own country) and help to make his own party un-electable by contributing significantly to the wipe out of his own party in Scotland.
Hopefully for his own sake Tony will remain in denial about his legacy to British politics – although of course being deserving of praise for his legacy to Irish politics.
What was it somebody said about patriotism means loving your own country, whilst nationalism means hating everybody else’s? I don’t really agree with that, although there’s probably a grain of truth in it. That said, notions of ‘patriotism’ seem to be more of an American thing so much of it perhaps it boils down to language.
I think nationalism is a very different thing for the colonised than it is for the coloniser. Likewise, there is ambiguity when we see use of the word ‘National/Nationalism’ in political terms. As we have seen in recent years SNP = Good, BNP = Bad. Which in a round about way, brings us back to notions of ‘Britishness’.
There does seem to be an increasing identity shift within Britain at present. The notion of being ‘British’ seems to be well on its way to dying out. Folk tend to consider themselves either English, Scottish or Welsh. The only people you really hear these days referring to themselves as ‘British’ are our unionist neighbours here in Ireland. We live in confusing times.
Gio , references to planters on this website, if shown in a bad light , is simply because they espouse the beliefs and aspirations of the plundering thieves who caused so much mayhem and death to the native population. They have not tried to integrate, have kept themselves aloof from and foolishly believe they are superior to said population….. Not the fault of nationalism or sorry maybe the fault of extreme nationalism