Nationalism as we know it was brought to us by Napoleon ... unintentionally, still very effectively, as he united peoples against his rule
Those people, if memory serves, were in the Holy Roman Empire and the Russian Empire.
The basis for nationalism, the nation-state, was invented only at the peace of Westphalia, not that long before Napoleon
Only 150 years. By this measure Napoleon also lived not that long ago.
There are healthy, benign, mediocre, unhealthy, and positively evil forms of nationalism .... ethnic nationalisms can fall into the latter class, to the extent that they promote the establishment of Excludostaats
Ethnic nation states are ALL by and for a nationality, be it English, French or German. The majority of Kurds who want to establish an independent Kurdistan (= land of the Kurds) are doing it for the Kurds, not the Arabs or Turkomen in their country (you like the word so much, let's use it for somebody with a well established sense of nationality that predates 1950). The Tibetans who want to be independent of Chinese rule want it for the sake of the Tibetans, not the Chinese. Everybody wants an "excludostaat" by your definition...yet you use the word only for the Zionists. Because you feel that the French and the Germans and the Kurds and the Tibetans deserve a state, but Jews do not.
Incidentally, what the Kurds are trying to do under American protection is exactly what the Zionists were trying to do under British protection. The Sunnis of Mosul are reacting just like the Palestinian did, with terrorism. Yet strangely, I don't hear about the sufferings of "indigenous" from you in their case. Wonder why not. |
