What is the Benefit of the National Order?

Having discussed the defects of the nation-based system, we must now complete our analysis by looking at the other side. What is the benefit of the national order?

Arguably, nothing much. Nationalism is a parasite that feeds on humanity, promoting only its own good. As governments pursue nationalist motives, their actions are not what is best for humanity, the citizens, or even the state itself but. They only strengthen nationalism itself. An example is an arms race between nations.

One could argue that nationalism provides people with a shared identity that brings them together as a community. But it also alienates them from many more people in other nations. Nationalism makes a person an insider to some of the world, but a stranger to the rest; it is more exclusive than inclusive. Compared to that, it is better for everyone to recognise their humanity rather than nationality, so that everyone is part of the ingroup and no one is left out.

The sense of common belonging provided by a nation can just as well be extended to all of humanity. Therefore nationalism offers no special advantage on this basis. In fact nationalist identification possesses many negative aspects which are absent in identification with humanity: outgroup and ingroup differentiation, outgroup exclusion, and intergroup hostility.

Yet if one wishes to continue maintaining an exclusive identity rather than an inclusive one, the problems it creates must still be considered. Is the imagination of a commonality and the bonds it fosters worth the millions butchered in its name? The answer would be a resounding no if not for indoctrination.

Another common argument goes that nationalism motivates many people towards positive actions, for example, responsible citizenship and public service. The point here (which I have made in previous writings in another context) is that models and goodness arise from an individual's character, not from a belief system such as nationalism. Nationalism is, in the best case, only a medium through which they emerge. In the same way it also brings out the worst side of human nature.

There would be no problem with nationalism if these effects were balanced. But the balance is against nationalism because a) its positive motivations are directed at a small share of the population, and have a lesser impact, while the negatives are directed at a much larger number and have greater effects; and b) it legitimises and institutionalises negative practises such as war, placing them beyond the constraints of normal morality.

So nationalism is no virtue, even though a large share of the population considers it one. It is not an absolute principle that must be followed, and there is nothing morally desirable about being a patriot. It is merely a political ideology, one of many concepts about organising the world. It can be rejected or opposed, and there is nothing immoral about doing so.

In many states nationalism has helped to unite a population of several identity groups and ensure stability. But it stops at the national level, and there is no further move towards unity. The alternative system of word integration goes even further, and unites all humanity, so nationalism offers no benefit here in comparison.

The national system cannot be justified on grounds of either unity or division. If people should be united (as nationalists argue for transcending sub-national identities), then we should also transcend nations and have a world state. If it is better for people to be divided (as nationalists would argue against a world government) then even nations should be broken up into smaller groups until there is anarchy. Whichever is the case, nationalism is not the optimal system. Judging from the fact that the national system is an improvement on the smaller states that preceded it, and that humanity has advanced with greater unification, it seems that it is better case and therefore the world should be integrated.

What is so special about the nationalist system that hardly anyone questions it or believes that there could be something better? Nationalism has such absolute dominance not because it is particularly favourable, but because it has never been made to justify itself. Humans of the world, put it to the test; and we may find the key to a world that is today a dream.