Tara

On my travels around the world wide web I came across this >

And this >

Is Nationalism essentially left wing Socialist Labour? If so, they are alienating traditional Conservatives who are against mass immigration like myself. What is wrong with Thatcherite, BMW drivers? My parents voted for Thatcher and I was driven to school in a BMW and if that makes me a 'sneering ba$tard' then what does that make 'Old Labour, Socialist types'? Yes, sneering ba$tards!! Or is this a north south divide thing? If so, I'm getting sick and tired of northerners sneering at southerners, they need to get over themselves.

I would like to know what Nationalism means to others because I'm a little confused and need to be educated on this. If it means I should be embracing old Labour then I won't be supporting or voting for anybody.

__________________
I AM SPARTACUS!

tito

...That's a terrifying thing to say. Surely you realise it?

You would base your ideas on their names, and not the other way around?
Though I would concur, in part, with the sentiment. Nationalism, much like fascism, communism, nazism, environmentalism, etc. Is just another brand name for socialism.

__________________
For life, Liberty and Prosperity
http://lpuk.org/

chikrodah

It's my understanding that "nationalism" can be either left- or right-wing, depending on the other policies that the party supports.

The Nazis were National Socialists and the full name of the Party was the National Socialist German Workers' Party. However, it melded elements of both left- and right wing policies and most of its political alliances were right-wing. The NSDAP were opposed to both economic (in the Adam Smith sense) and political liberalism and were anti-capitalism in the sense that they blamed both the banking industry and "corporatism" (alleging both to be dominated by Jews) for many of Germany's problems.

The British National Party are, IIRC, more left-wing in their approach. They advocate, for example, workers' collectives and were described as "a bit too socialist for my liking" by Dr. Frank Ellis (suspended from Leeds University for his views on differences between average 'black' and 'white' intelligence). They regard their policies as ethno-nationalist, rather than racist or white-supremacist.

The National Front was formed in the '60s as a reaction to the Conservatives moving left-of-centre. The NF is far-right but lost a lot of its right-of-centre members to the Conservatives when Maggie won the 1979 election and those members realised that there was a mainstream party that they were more comfortable associating with. It eventually split, with Tyndall being expelled and forming the BNP.

As with everything political, nothing is ever as simple as the media would like it to be.

Smidgey

Nationalism is anti-individual and therefore anti-liberty. It is a collectivist left-wing ideology, just like communism or socialism (and it can obviously have different degrees of application too).

__________________
How vain is man, who boasts in fight the valour of gigantic might!

-Georg Friedrich Händel

Ken

You can identify nationalism throughout the history of Conservatism. Until it was codified into an ideology from the late 19c when it acquired liberal characteristics; I believe Hitler and Mussolini gave itits Socialist version.
The real one is derived from such as Edmund Burke "We belong to a nation as Edmund Burke explained: “A nation is not an idea only of' local extent, and individual momentary aggregation: but it is an idea of' continuity which extends in time as well as in numbers and in space. And this is a choice not of one day, or one set of people, not a tumultuary and giddy choice; it is a deliberate election of the ages and of generations; it is a constitution made by what is ten thousand times better than choice, it is made by the peculiar circumstances, occasions, tempers, dispositions, and moral and special habitudes of' the people, which disclose themselves only in a long space of time"
Enoch: "Backward travels our gaze, beyond the grenadiers and the philosophers of the eighteenth century, beyond the pikemen and the preachers of the seventeenth, back through the brash adventurous days of the first Elizabeth and the hard materialism of the Tudors, and there at last we find them, or seem to find them, in many a village church, beneath the tall tracery of a perpendicular East window and the coffered ceiling of the chantry chapel. From brass and stone, from line and effigy, their eyes look out at us, and we gaze into them, as if we would win some answer from their inscrutable silence.
‘Tell us what it is that binds us together; show us the clue that leads through a thousand years; whisper to us the secret of this charmed life of England, that we in our time may know how to hold it fast.’ What would they say? They would speak to us in our own English tongue, the tongue made for telling truth in, tuned already to songs that haunt the hearer like the sadness of spring. They would tell us of that marvellous land, so sweetly mixed of opposites in climate that all the seasons of the year appear there in their greatest perfection; of the fields amid which they built their halls, their cottages, their churches, and where the same blackthorn showered its petals upon them as upon us; they would tell us, surely, of the rivers, the hills, and of the island coasts of England. They would tell us too of a palace near the great city which the Romans built at a ford of the River Thames, a palace with many chambers and one lofty hall, with angel faces carved on the hammer beams, to which men resorted out of all England to speak on behalf of their fellows, a thing called ‘Parliament’, and from that hall went out men with fur trimmed gowns and strange caps on their heads, to judge the same judgements, and dispense the same justice, to all the people of England."
Itis about an inherited identity. It is about inheriting ourculture, history and ways from our ancestiors and passing them on unharmed to our descendents. There is an unbroken, though damaged, tradition going back to the founding of our nation and it was continued in the Conservative party until recently when the Monday Club was expelled to make the party another vehicle for Cultural Marxism. There are posters on here who have practical experience of this.

Smidgey

Someone can be a conservative or even right wing and accept nationalism. Nationalism is still a left-wing, collectivist ideology. A libertarian who accepts public funded education, is a libertarian who accepts a socialist policy. A right-winger who accepts nationalism is a right-winger who accepts a left-wing, anti-liberty, anti-individual, collectivist ideology.

__________________
How vain is man, who boasts in fight the valour of gigantic might!

-Georg Friedrich Händel

Ken

You think in cliches. What on earth do "left" and "right-wing" mean? It is not anti individual but sees the individual as part of a community with an inherited history, religion, culture and mores. The individual could not exist as he is without those prior influences.
Libery is conferred on one through belonging to the nation and is different from the liberal conception of abstract, universal rights conferred on everyone, everywhere even if they are not connected to us. That is where the evil of imposing democracy on different peoples comes from.
Further, Conservatism does not believe in ideology but cleaves to the inherited relligion, of which ideology is a humanist replacement.

Smidgey

You confuse state and society - on the biggest mistakes of our time. Nationalism is an ideology that confuses these two, just like socialism and communism do.

Left-wing contains those ideologies that promote collectivism and statism. Nationalism is one such ideology.

Would you care to back up this statement? Laws concerning rights can only make sense from a negative conception of natural rights.

I don't understand what point you are trying to make here, could you please clarify?

__________________
How vain is man, who boasts in fight the valour of gigantic might!

-Georg Friedrich Händel

The Bear

Nationalism is simply tribalism by another name.

It's time it was put behind us.

__________________
I am an old man. I have eaten much salt.

British-Conservatism

Libertarianism and Conservatism are very different things.
Conservatives have always supported collectivism based on race and nation while Libertarians only believe in the individual.
This only changed with Thatcher.
Friedman once said: "the thing that people do not recognise is that Margaret Thatcher is not in terms of belief a Tory. She is a nineteenth-century Liberal.
Mrs. Thatcher believed in economic liberalism and stated in 1983 that "We have a duty to make sure that every penny piece we raise in taxation is spent wisely and well. For it is our party which is dedicated to good housekeeping—indeed, I would not mind betting that if Mr. Gladstone were alive today he would apply to join the Conservative Party".[3] In the 1996 Keith Joseph memorial lecture Mrs. Thatcher argued that "The kind of Conservatism which he and I...favoured would be best described as "liberal", in the old-fashioned sense. And I mean the liberalism of Mr. Gladstone, not of the latter day collectivists".
This Libertarian belief is quite similar to the Marxist view as individual being economic units.
Difference being Communists of course support collectivism based on international class solidarity.
Libertarians being the original left of course have just been out flanked by the Commies.

__________________
http://conservativedemocraticalliance.blogspot.com/