Why have nationalists viewed the nation state as a political ideal?

The basic belief of nationalism is that the nation is or should be the central principle of political organisation and a nation state is a sovereign political association within which citizenship and nationality overlap. For nationalists, the nation state is therefore the highest and most desirable form of political organisation. In fact the goal of nationalism is the founding of a nation state.

The great strength of the nation state is that it offers the prospect of both cultural cohesion and political unity as when people with a common cultural or ethnic identity gain the right to self-government, nationality and citizenship coincide.

Also the political sovereignty in a nation state resides with the people or nation itself. Nationalism represents the idea of popular self-government with government carried out either by the people or for the people in accordance with their national interest.

This has led nationalists to believe that the forces that have created a world of independent nation states are natural and irresistible and no other social group could constitute a meaningful political community. The nation state therefore is the only viable political unit.

This is reflected in the different nationalist traditions. The ultimate goal of liberal nationalism is the construction of a world of independent nation states as is the goal of liberal internationalism.

Young, Angry and White

In July 2009, almost a million voters chose the BNP in the EU elections. As well as the traditional BNP voters explaining this success, a recent survey found one in 20 young people would vote BNP. In this Channel 4 documentary, Peter Beard follows 19-year-old Kieren who is considering joining the BNP but is unsure that the party represents his views. As the Channel 4 summary put it, "t

his fascinating First Cut documentary offers an insight into a young person's attraction to a party whose policies and image continue to cause extreme controversy throughout the country."

Kieren is part of a new generation of far right recruits, "I do want to see an all white Britain. An immediate stop to immigration and repatriation which would follow”.

Walking down the high street, Kieren points out Halal and Carribean food shops saying he doesn't like all of these things being around. He sees them as a threat, culturally changing his town and destroying what his town is about saying that “its just catering for minority groups but it seems like the majority of the high streets are getting taken over by that” and that he doesn't want it "on my doorstep".

Talking about being a nationalist, Kieren says “you have to be a pessimist about the whole society. You gotta be quite angry and depressed and think oh this is horrible everything about this life is just rotten. But then once you have an alternative once you have an answer which manifests itself via the BNP you can only look forward and try and be optimistic”.

The first thought that comes to someone hearing Kieren have such extreme views is that it must come from his family and friends, but that is where you would be wrong. His mum doesn’t want herself or Kieren brothers to be involved in filming the documentary. His mum comes from a background of liberal voters and doesn’t agree with her sons views. Kieren's parents split up when he was one years old and he didn't have a male role model growing up. This has made him want a strong family when he has children and he wants to be the 'breadwinner'. Five years ago, his Dad moved to Wales with his new wife and children and Kieren sees him a few times a year. His dad is a labour voter and says of BNP leader Nick Griffin, “the way he says things makes him look like a complete racist”. He also disagrees with his sons views. After his Dad moved away, life became difficult for Kieren. He and his mum later had to move out of London because of domestic violence and then move again because of another 'woman beater'. He made friends with nationalists from his old London area of Barnet online and then his friendships grew and he was welcomed into their group. He says that he felt like he belonged to something and found it quite comforting.

Kieren doesn't agree with mixed race relationships, hanging a banner in his garden saying "love music, hate race mixing", a twisted pun on the slogan "love music, hate racism". Asked about mixed relationships he said "as a matter of principle I'm against immigration and multiculturalism. Our own women, by fraternising with the other races, they're part of the problem as far as I’m concerned”. Kieren has a girlfriend called Amy. He questioned her heritage, thinking she had an 'oriental look in her face'. She had to ring her sister to confirm that there was no Chinese in her family and he still didn’t believe it. He admitted he wouldn't have dated her if she had Chinese in her family. Kieren thinks that "people should be around their own type of people” and thinks "multiculturalism cannot work, as a concept, or will work...just from looking at social circles, from studying it. I would welcome people to live amongst each other in harmony but I don’t think it can happen”.

He has also made a new group of friends, none of which are nationalist or agree with his views. One of his friends asked Kieren “how do you feel about me losing my virginity to a black girl?” to which he responded “you know how I feel about that and I told you at the time that you hate your own race...Its a form of genocide”. Despite everyone around him disagreeing with his views, Kieren is unashamed to be honest with them, saying things like “its not that I don’t see people as unequal, its that in my life I want people like me around me” and “if they want to call me a racist then fine, I’m a racist, I’ll happily be a racist but I don’t think its racism and I think the word racism needs redefining and we need to have a common sense acknowledgement of what it actually is”. His friends and girlfriend looked very awkward being around while he said these things.

When deciding whether to join the BNP, he watched the infamous episode of Question Time (read about question time here) with BNP leader Nick Griffin. He said “theres never been a question time like this. I enjoy this show normally”. He is extremely disappointed with Nick Griffins performance and unsure whether they still represent his views. This disappointment was made stronger by the news that the BNP could be extending their membership to allow non-whites to join their party. Kieren doesn’t join the BNP. Instead he attends the annual National Front remembrance march. The National Front are a far-right party that have stronger views than the BNP and are arguably more racist and elitist.

The filmer, Peter Beard, talks to a militant group who also grew disillusioned with the BNP. They only agreed to talk if they could be in disguise. The man speaking for the group said “we would like to see England returned to the hands of the people who have the blood right to this country... their blood is in this soil... we have seen the filth flooding through our streets, we have seen a consumerist nation overtake a moral nation”.

Kieren admits that there can be problems with not wanting to integrate with other races. “A lot of nationalists might suffer from social problems I suppose. You don’t really want to indulge in a social life with people who don’t see everything along the route lines as you. I don’t not want to have a life. Nationalisms brilliant and I put all of my thought into it but at the same time I’m 19 and I want to live a normal life”. Sometimes his nationalist views provide a worry to Kieren: “I want to do well and I feel like I’ve turned it around from not being in school to being in education. I want to enjoy university and have a great time and I want to enjoy a successful career. It shouldn’t be considered wrong for me to say how I feel no matter how un socially acceptable it is I’m not doing it in an aggressive manner. I do worry that my honesty in that regard could hold me back."

If you live in the UK, you can watch this documentary here: Young, Angry and White

Democracy in action: Question Time

In the years since it was first broadcast on 25 September 1979, Question Time has become something of a national institution, offering British voters a unique opportunity to quiz top decision-makers on the events of the day.

The panels are drawn from significant figures in politics as well as industry, the media and entertainment.

But at the heart of Question Time is the audience - both in the studio and at home.

The programme is recorded in front of a live audience from around 2030 each Thursday.

The recording is done in a single take, precisely as if it were broadcast live. Some exchanges occasionally have to be edited out for legal or taste/decency reasons.

(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/about_the_show/default.stm)

Question time is the public's opportunity to question politicians on their actions and their views on current issues within the UK. It is one of the few ways that the public can directly speak to politicians and is a very often effective debate. The clips below demonstrate some of the topics that have come up in question time. The first video is from arguably the most famous episode of Question Time, with BNP leader Nick Griffin. To read more about the BNP click here. The second video is talking about the recession and the banks bonuses. The third video is about the MPs expenses and second homes. The fourth video discusses Sarah Palin. The fifth video is about the torture of suspected terrorists.

Do you have question time in your country? Do you think it is an effective programme? Leave a comment and let us know!

How to make your voice heard 101

This fantastic video was posted on http://blogs.cqpolitics.com by Craig Crawford. It does talk in terms of contacting in the US but the tips are definitely usable in other countries.

Check out our poll!

At the very bottom of the blog is a poll which very few have spotted, asking what you think are the biggest problems facing the world today. Scroll down and tell us what you think!

Tower Block of Commons: Episode 2

This episode gives the MP's the experience of bringing up children in council housing on state benefits and so they all went to live with different families. Jobseekers allowance is £64.30 a week and after paying for rent and household bills, the MPs expenses must be no more than £5 a day. While Liberal Democrat MP Mark Oaten and Conservative MP Tim Loughton comment on how difficult it will be and how tight they will have to be, Labour MP Austin Mitchell dismisses it saying "I'm not making any attempt to live on that, I think that's silly."

In episode 1, Iain Duncan Smith is replaced (because he found out his wife had cancer) by conservative MP Nadine Dorries, who did live in a council estate until she was 25 but believes things will be "very different" now. She is staying on a South Acton estate with single mums Neesha and Reena and their 8 children. The mums have very strong opinions about politicians: "I hate them because they don't do f*** all for people like me" and "you gotta be a good liar to be a politician". Austin is staying with unemployed Dave, his wife and their 3 children. Dave found Austins refusal to live on benefits for the week "disappointing" saying "anyone could do that".Mark Oaten will be staying with Sloane, her husband Mark, their 5 children and 3 cats. Tim Loughton is staying with Dean and Sarah and their 2 children who live in a 1 bedroom council house, with Dean and Sarah sleeping on the couch.

Oaten goes food shopping with his host Sloane and the family on a £150 budget. He manages to only spend £104 but is then disgusted when Sloane spends the £42 leftover on cigarettes. These vices show up in all of the different families: Dave loves to gamble on the horses and Dean is addicted to cannabis. It seems the episode is questioning the priorities of the families who are claiming to have no money. The MPs are certainly are. Oaten voices his disappointment over the cigarettes with Sloane but he is soon quietened when she looks at his MP expenses online and discovers that the taxpayer paid £116 for two irons for him. She then compared Oaten to Jekyll and Hyde, saying "you're a sweet guy and then I read all this stuff and it's like oh my God I've been lied to". Loughton has a heart to heart with Dean about his cannabis smoking and the cause behind it, finding out about Dean's troubled past, and offers him support. Austin Mitchell refuses to comment on Dave's gambling, in typical defensive politician style, claiming that it is nothing to do with the film. Austin also goes shopping with Dave, who questions him on the prices of different items. After Mitchell fails to guess the price of milk, bread and tea bags correctly, Dave said that "they say how much you need to live on but don't know how much it costs to live".

All of the MPs are then left to babysit the their hosts children. . Loughton and Oaten do the usual job of parents with young children: a lot of chasing after them and cleaning up after them. Mitchell on the other hand, is stuck as he tries to manage making dinner, leaving the baby with a full nappy (diaper). Mitchell soon finds the struggle too much and calls his wife Linda to come and help him saying that "I know it's not fair to say it's woman's work but it's not mine"

Another theme arising in this episode is immigration as Nadine Dorries host Reena has many stories to tell. First, a man from another country came and moved in to the flat beneath her and then his wife came with their "5, 6, 7" children and then on the Saturday morning, they were moved into a house. Reena was furious that after 3 months they had got a house when she had lived in London her entire life, was born in England and couldn't get a council house. Reena's last council house was taken away from her after her housing benefits were unexpectedly cut. Unable to reach an agreement to pay her rent arrears, she and her children were evicted from their home of 15 years. When Reena returned to see her neighbours, she saw that a foreign family had moved into her old house. She talks about when the bailiffs came, saying "they ripped my stuff apart" "they smashed everything right down to my kids toys. I saw them taking my kids toys and just throwing them in the back of a van".

The last issue that comes up is with the politicians themselves. Sloane asks Oaten about the stress politics has on family life and Oaten admits "yeah I screwed up my whole family life, I had an affair and screwed it all up". He talks about the scandal of sleeping with a rent boy, saying that "journalists were everywhere" and "the impact on the children was a nightmare". Tim talks about one of the problems with politics, saying "one comment wrong by politicians and its all over the papers so they have to think twice and really engage their brain before they speak and sometimes therefore skirt around what they actually want to say which is a real sadness in politics”. He also says that people have good political views but don't vote as "these people don’t make a connection between having political views and voting and that’s the fault of politicians I suppose”.

The next episode looks further at the politicians themselves as they see how they can help their hosts. Come back tomorrow to find out more!

Click here to read about episode 1

Click here to read about episode 3

Click here to read about episode 4

Did you watch this episode? What did you think? What do you think about politicians? Comment and tell us!

American Imperialistic Ideals

America is an expanding and non-stopping nation. America is perceived to be a positive nation full of vibrant different people. During the early years of America’s foundation the concept of freedom is something that brought it to its prime regarding population. There were a lot of positive perceptions about America. America was perceived to be a beacon of freedom. This is what started America’s imperialistic ideology. Too many times do we look at the positive aspect of imperialism but never do we look at the negative.

America’s imperialistic ideals were exhibited through slavery, political manuscripts, and etc. “They cannot imagine greater elegance than to drink to the foreigner’s breeches and ideas, and to strut over the globe, proud as the pompom tail of the fondled lap dog.”[1] This quote is simply explaining the idea that America spreads it cultures through many different aspects. Americans had taken Africans from their homeland and had the Africans resorted to slavery. The Americans then had stripped the Africans of their culture and assimilated them to American culture. This is the ideal of imperialism which is to spread your way of life to as many people as possible.

The people who instituted this imperialistic ideology believed that it was a needed intervention. The intervention caused for America to step in and bring order since it was viewed as the policemen to the Western Hemisphere. “Chronic wrong-doing, or an impotence which results in a general loosening of the ties of civilized society, may in America, as elsewhere, ultimately require intervention by some civilized nation” [2]. America has now been established as a superpower and begins to expand its control. Americans began to realize how powerful control really is and is now acting upon it. By them acting upon it they are influencing other people and nations to be docile and allow America to take control.

America has also exploited other nations for their natural resources due to its imperialistic nature. “They have a great natural riches, and if within their borders the reign and justice obtains, prosperity is sure to come to them. While they thus obey the primary laws of civilized society they may rest assured that they will be treated by us in a spirit of cordial and helpful sympathy.”[3] America has hidden intentions of controlling the nation. Americans knows that the nation may be weary of allowing another nation to come in and change policies. Americans also thought of a way to bypass such suspicious thoughts by diminishing them before they started. By assuring the nation that they will be treated well allows for Americans to get closer to expanding.

America is looking out for its best interest with any move that is made. America does wants to be portrayed in a positive manner. Any publicity it can get will be spreading its control. “ All that this country desires is to see the neighboring countries stable, orderly, and prosperous”. Americans are expanding control since the country it may help may speak well of them. It is true when people say that word of mouth is sometimes the best advertising. The communication between different countries slowly helped emerge America as a superpower.

---

[1] Robert H. Holden , Latin America and the United States: The Character of the United States (New York: Oxford Publishing, 2000), 62

[2] Theodore Roosevelt, Latin America and the United States: The Roosevelt Corollary to the United States (New York: Oxford Publishing, 1904), 101

[3] Theodore Roosevelt, Latin America and the United States: The Roosevelt Corollary to the United States (New York: Oxford Publishing, 1904), 102

Cortez A., U.S.

Tower Block of Commons: Episode 1

In the UK, the television Channel 4 is well known for its documentaries that tackle controversial but fascinating subjects. One that aired its last episode yesterday was the Tower Block of Commons which took 4 politicians and sent them to live in the roughest areas for a week so they could really experience what life is like.

The first politician was Iain Duncan Smith, the former conservative leader who said that he liked "the idea of taking politicians out of their comfort zone and making them sweat a little bit. No one ot fall back on. It's good." He would be spending the next two days on the Carpenters estate in East London with 19 year old Charise, sleeping on her sofa.

The second was Tim Loughton, the Conservatives shadow children's minister. He was sent to Birmingham's gang divided Newtown Estate. He would be staying on the blow-up mattress in the living room of single mum Natina, her 6 month old baby and her mother. On hearing where he would be staying, Loughton said "Birmingham. It's got a lot of tower blocks. And no conservative MPs".

The third was Mark Oaten, a Liberal Democrat MP that was once hinted at becoming the next Lib Dem Leader, until a sex scandal of him having sex with a rent boy. He is married with 2 children. Mark Oaten stayed in a Dagenham towerblock which he said "feels like one of those old communist blocks" and after constantly having to enter codes to get into the building, he compared it to "prison... It's like Fort Notts".

The final MP was veteran Labour backbencher Austin Mitchell who stayed in Hull but would only agree to take part in the programme if he could have his wife with him, they could bring some of their possessions and they could have their own council flat. Their first two days were helped by Selina, 29 who, before their arrival, said "these politicians don't do nothing. They're making bloody good money just for arguing in a parliament. I could be an MP". On arriving in their new home, Mitchell's wife said it "looks a bit like a prison".

For the polticians, the first part of settling in to their new lives is to change their outfits. As Mark Oatens host Cathy put it, "if you wear a suit, you’d get egged around here. The kids would egg you because you stand out too much”. The politicians clearly felt very awkward in their new attire, swapping shirts and ties for Nike and tracksuits. The culture difference in fashion was immediately made clear when Tim was laughed at by his host Natina and her mother for how he did his laces.

The politicians also has a chance to talk to their hosts and get to know them a bit better. Iain Duncan Smith asked his host Charise what she knew about politics and what politicians do etc, and she replied that she had no clue what happened in the houses of Parliament, or what politicians do and she heard that they just "sit in a room and talk". When asked about this comment from her later, Smith conceded that "politics is many miles away from what goes on here". Tim Loughton went to explore the local area and began talking to a man outside the newsagents. The man began to get angry about the MP expenses scandal, saying that politicians "are legitimate crooks...why having any of them been prosecuted?” and saying that they are "on another level". Attracted by the argument were some local youths and when Loughton began to talk to them he found out that they didn't know the name of the MP for their area, and in fact one of the teenagers didn't think there was one for their area. Later on when speaking to his host Natina, the topic of parenthood came up as Natina is a single parent and part of Conservative policy is a strong bias toward married families and bias against divorce and single parents. Loughton said that his parents had divorced when he was 12 and he was split up from his brothers and sisters to live with each parent and when asked "but don't you think it was better for them to be apart" he replied that he didn't think that way when he was 12, at that time he would have done anything to have them back together. When asked by Loughton, Natina said that she wouldn't want her baby's father back in her life but in her daughter's life. Austin Mitchell's host Selina took him to "buy a newspaper" and in fact took him to a local NHS Methadone clinic. Selina is a recovering heroin addict and has to go to the clinic everyday to take her methadone. Heroin use is a large problem in these areas, with the ground littered in used needles. Mark Oaten was shown around his host Cathy's house and disguested by the mould growing on the walls and terrible living conditions. He immediately moved into action, going outside with Cathy to try and get people to sign a petition to get something done. He began talking to a couple where the women didn't vote because politicians "don't listen" and the man voted for the BNP after switching from Labour because they "actually give a voice to a white person". He assures Oaten that he isn't racist whatsoever, a quality often assumed of supporters of the BNP, saying that many of his best friends are "coloured" and that "we're all human".

What was instantly made clear from this episode is the lack of understanding on both sides: the public have little awareness of what politicians are doing and politicians have little awareness of what the public are going through. It is therefore a two sided problem that will require the efforts of both sides to be resolved.

What also struck me as interesting was that the Labour MP, the party of the working class people, was the least willing to compromise. He didn't want to change into the new clothes, he brought his wife, he got his own council flat, brought expensive artwork and such with him and one night he and his wife went to dinner with rich friends.

Towards the end of the episode, you find out that Iain Duncan Smith found out his wife had cancer and had to pull out of the show. Asked what he thinks of what is going to come, he said "the other MPs will have to accommodate a whole other set of horizons. They are used to being the centre of attention in Parliament...suddenly they will see that they are in an area where most of the people there think that people like them will have forgotten them."

Well, to find out how true Smith's predictions are, you will have to read tomorrow when I post about the second episode!

Dr. Michael Eric Dyson

Question:

Describe an individual that you greatly admire. Discuss the qualities that make this person so exceptional.

The individual that I greatly admire is Dr. Michael Eric Dyson. Dr. Dyson encompasses many qualities that make him exceptional such as noticing social ills, vocabulary, and his conviction. It is very rare that a teen finds an exceptional role model that commands attention when he enters a room. It is this presence that attracts thousands of people to his lectures and oratorical interviews.

Dr. Dyson fights for equality. During his lectures sometimes he may talk about African-Americans and their roles of today’s society or the concept of segregation in today’s society. The overall message that is gathered is that we has human people should treat each other with respect. The messaged is portrayed through his actions and his eloquence as he speaks.

In his other lectures he may talk about hip hop and how its degrading today’s society. It is obvious to see that children today are turning to hip hop as an outlet for their pain and the ticket to their dream. Too many times do these children lose their sights reasonable attainable goals such as becoming doctors, lawyers, executives, financial advisors and etc. Hip hop is taking away young peoples potential for greatness since it only portrays young women as whores and young men as impudent womanizers. Dr. Dyson advocates for rappers and singers to promote a positive image so that young people could do great things. Dr. Dyson believes that if this type of social behavior persists that America will be on a downward spiral to oblivion.

Dr. Dyson is an eloquent speaker. Dr. Dyson speaks with poise, dignity, and conviction. When Dr. Dyson speaks it is very profound that you can’t help but notice he is a great representation of African-Americans. For example when Dr. Dyson speaks he speaks with conviction that connects with the audience. It is this connection that allows people to understand and assist in fighting for his cause. For example, Dr. Dyson says “It is very important for me to deliver my message to students and faculty at this great institution of American society because it is the ideas and thoughts of these young people that are going to shape society in the future.” I interpret this quote as Dr. Dyson stressing the importance of education and positive images. He is stressing the importance of young people learning since they are the future of America. America’s future should be bright and secure in oppose to dark and exposed.

Cortez A., U.S.

South Africa Apartheid

Question:

Describe a contemporary international event, current event, or global issue, and discuss why you feel this event was important.

An international event that I think is important is the apartheid conflict in South Africa. The apartheid conflict has attracted viewers from all over the world. The actions that political leaders seem to have taken made this a crime against humanity. The crime that I am speaking of is the segregation of races in South Africa. This action was known as the apartheid laws.

The apartheid laws were laws that restricted blacks and colored people form interacting with whites. These laws were very similar to America’s segregation laws but on a different scale. The whites in power systemically controlled blacks. For example, blacks were educated to take employment in technical areas such as mechanics or construction. This perpetuated the idea of blacks being ignorant and incompetent, only a few blacks were achieved professional status, in doing so the blacks had to attend a black university.

Racist ideologies were portrayed throughout this time period which kept blacks virtually non-existent. During the apartheid, there were 19million blacks and 4.5million whites. The logical idea would be to have placed the blacks on the most land since they occupy the most percentage of people. Instead the whites occupied 87% of South Africa land while the blacks occupied 13% of the land. As you can see the land allocation is not properly proportioned. This move put blacks at the end of the end of the social and economic ladder.

This is considered an international event because it brought back ideals that the rest of the world thought had been eradicated. It has been established that one group of people should not be oppressed because they do not fit the criteria of other people. Due to globalization the world has become a more tolerant and accepting place. We promote the idea of diversity which is what makes the apartheid so horrifying. It was almost like a second age segregation act except it was in South Africa.

In conclusion, the apartheid was an international conflict since it attracted people from all over the world. During this period the whites systemically controlled blacks through economic, educational, and social laws. Also during this period that apartheid placed blacks who seemed to be low class on the lowest amount of land available. This is type of treatment that leads to this being a crime against humanity. Now during this new age of diversity and globalization all people have the right to life, liberty, and property.

Cortez A., U.S.

What do you think about the apartheid? Do you agree with Cortez? What contemporary event or global issue do you think is important?

Letter to Arne Duncan

This is a letter I wrote when I was in 8th grade. It is regarding school segregation. I felt that it should post it since I am feeling a resurgence of activism.

Cortez A. ,US

Arne Duncan July 17, 2006

CEO of Chicago Public Schools

Central Office

Chicago, IL 60603

Dear Mr. Arne Duncan,

My name is Cortez Alexander and I am a 14 year old ninth grade student at Jane Doe Magnet School. I recently graduated from an John Doe Elementary School on Chicago’s Westside. A few weeks ago we were having an in class discussion about school segregation. From this discussion I have concluded that schools are still segregated. Segregation is when there is only one ethnic group in a facility.

School segregation is currently done now because of segregated residential areas. Due to the fact many African Americans live in segregated areas, we are now stuck in segregated schools. There should be some way to allow students to attend schools out of their area. It may also be necessary to look into why Chicago continues to be one of the most segregated cities in America.

The difference between now and the past is that it was involuntary. When segregation was legal, kids did not have a chance to interact with different ethnic groups. They had to sit there and miss learning about different cultures. Now that segregation is illegal, it seems kids cannot interact with different ethnic groups.

Segregation has made a negative impact on today’s youth. There were countless children marching for the change of segregation. That tells me if we want change, we as children are going to have to act on the problem. Which brings me to my next question why are schools still segregated, and what will it take for them to become truly integrated?

The advert by Stonewall Charity that made my day!

I saw the most fantastic thing on the bus yesterday evening. It was an advert by gay, bisexual and lesbian charity Stonewall that said nothing but:

SOME PEOPLE ARE GAY. GET OVER IT!

I couldn't have said it better myself =]