Nationalism has been defined as follows:
"loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups."
The author of your quotation contends that nationalism tends to lead to war. There are certainly many examples of this in history. The Nazis, for example, believed that the German nation was superior to all others. Thus, they embarked on a campaign of conquering their neighbors (such as Poland, Russia, France) and slaughtering Jews.
The author states that nationionalism often leads to dissension and distress. Dissension means division and disagreement between different people or groups. Distress means suffering or discomfort.
Examining source help please? Thank you very much!Analyze and interpret the following source and explain the ideological perspective reflected in the source. Discuss the prinicples of nationalism and explain any key terms or concepts used in the source. " Though born out of good intentions, nationalism has proven time and again to lead to bloodshed. The spirit of nationalism has never ceased to ben human intentions to the service of dissension and distress".
The source holds a strong bias against nationalist identity and the implications of it. To a certain extent, there is historical data to support the source's claims. In the worst of calamities on the world stage or in regional history, claims of nationalism and the zealous love of country have helped to set the stage for some of the most heinous of political and human actions. Nazi Germany is but one of many such examples. The assertion of nationalism helped to establish German influence throughout Europe, forcing other nations to submit to the will of the Nazi party. Nationalism, the zealous expression of national pride, has a tendency to come at the cost of other nations' sovereignty.
Examining source help please? Thank you very much!Analyze and interpret the following source and explain the ideological perspective reflected in the source. Discuss the prinicples of nationalism and explain any key terms or concepts used in the source. " Though born out of good intentions, nationalism has proven time and again to lead to bloodshed. The spirit of nationalism has never ceased to ben human intentions to the service of dissension and distress".
This statement is clearly given from what we might call a globalist perspective. The author of this statement clearly believes that nationalism is a harmful influence and should be eradicated if possible.
Nationalism is the idea that your particular nation is in some way special and is better than other nations in significant ways. From a nationalist perspective, you are a citizen of your particular country first, not a "citizen of the world." Therefore, you should prefer your country to other countries and should work to make your country stronger, not caring about what happens to other countries.
Examining source help please? Thank you very much! Analyze and interpret the following source. Explain the ideological perspective reflected in the source. Discuss the principles of nationalism and explain any keys terms or concepts used in the source. "No nation can make itself secure by seeking supremacy over all others. We all share responsibility for each other's security, and only by working to make each other secure can we hope to achieve lasting security for ourselves."
It seems to me that the source is advocating a sense of international cooperation in the new globalized setting. When Kofi Annan spoke these words in 2006, he was advocating a sense of understanding or a paradigm that sought to enhance international unity outside of nationalist based supremacy. In his own mind, the globalization that had emerged in the new century is a force that has to be embraced. In this understanding, nationalist based aggressive superiority does not benefit anyone because globalization has linked all nations to one another. It is no longer the antiquated paradigm of one nation taking on another. Trade and commerce have made nations dependent on one another. Information access and the sharing of understanding through technology has also increased our interdependence on one another. This paradigm has forced a reevaluation of old ideologies like nationalism and nation building on the premise of superiority. Rather, Annan seems to be suggesting that cooperation and tolerance has...
See This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. Enjoy eNotes ad-free and cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
to replace this premise which he sees a flawed, in general. The speech seems to be suggesting that America can take the lead in this realm, which is unique given the nation's own involvement at the time with wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
Examining source help please? Thank you very much! Analyze and interpret the following source. Explain the ideological perspective reflected in the source. Discuss the principles of nationalism and explain any keys terms or concepts used in the source. " Nationalism, reflecting the urge of self- determination, concerns the aspirations of a people, who believe themselves to be united, yo rule themselves and not be controlled by others. The kindred ideas of nationalism both act as forces for convergence or divergence."
This source seems to be relatively sympathetic to the ideas of nationalism, although it is not completely sympathetic to those ideas.
I say that it is sympathetic (meaning that it is ideologically okay with the idea of nationalism) because of the way it describes nationalism. It portrays nationalism as a desire not to be dominated by others. This makes nationalism seem quite reasonable. It does not make nationalism look like the aggressive force that it can, arguably, be (like how it helped make the Nazis aggressive).
The reason I say this source is not completely sympathetic is the last sentence. It implies that nationalism can pull people apart as well as bring them together.
Examining source help please? Thank you very much! Analyze and interpret the following source. Explain the ideological perspective reflected in the source. Discuss the principles of nationalism and explain any keys terms or concepts used in the source.
The previous post's thoughts on likening alcoholism's intoxication to nationalism is valid. I think that the cartoon seeks to enhance the idea that nationalism and love of country can be quite intoxicating, clouding judgement and impairing sensible actions, similar to alcoholic consumption. In this light, the cartoon is seeking to make a statement about those who embrace nationalism as the only way to express nation based identity. Similar to an alcoholic who needs intervention and help in order to make better choices and live a more healthy life, the person who is inundated with nationalism is in much the same predicament. The source is expressing a bias, through subtle humor, that displays nationalism as a destructive force on both personal and political levels.
Examining source help please? Thank you very much! Analyze and interpret the following source. Explain the ideological perspective reflected in the source. Discuss the principles of nationalism and explain any keys terms or concepts used in the source.
The person who drew this cartoon clearly feels that nationalism, like alcoholism, is a disease. Given that the person who died of nationalism is a soldier, the artist also feels that nationalism is the cause of most wars.
Nationalism is the idea that a person's own country is superior to other countries. Because of this, a nationalist identifies with his country over other countries and does not really think that other countries deserve as much respect as his own.
The artist's ideological perspective is that nationalism is a destructive ideology. He thinks that this sort of attitude leads people to fight and kill one another.
Examining source help please? Thank you very much! Analyze and interpret the following source. Explain the ideological perspective reflected in the source. Discuss the principles of nationalism and explain any keys terms or concepts used in the source. " Nationalism, reflecting the urge of self- determination, concerns the aspirations of a people, who believe themselves to be united, yo rule themselves and not be controlled by others. The kindred ideas of nationalism both act as forces for convergence or divergence."
I would suggest that you begin your analysis by determining who the speaker/writer is. What is their background, motivation for saying this? Then look at the context under which the quote was given. Who is the audience that is being addressed? And finally, what was the purpose of the quote? Was the author trying to convince someone of the importance of nationalism, speaking out against it?
You also need to know what nationalism is: extreme patriotism for one's country. Knowing that should help you pick out other key terms/concepts in the quote. If you are unsure if a term is related, such as self-determination, you will want to define them as you go through the quotation.
Examining source help please? Thank you very much! Analyze and interpret the following source. Explain the ideological perspective reflected in the source. Discuss the principles of nationalism and explain any keys terms or concepts used in the source. "No nation can make itself secure by seeking supremacy over all others. We all share responsibility for each other's security, and only by working to make each other secure can we hope to achieve lasting security for ourselves."
This source is an example of an ideology that is the total opposite of nationalism.
The whole idea of nationalism is that your own country is better than other countries and has no need for their help or really for much interaction with them at all. Your country does its own thing and tries to make other countries do what it wants. It does not try to cooperate with them -- to the extent possible it just does what it wants.
This quote puts forth the idea that countries must work together for some common good. Nationalism rejects the idea of a common good. It is an "every country for itself" sort of an idea.