nationalism, imperialism, and militarism - thoughts

I am a 5th grade American History teacher. In our state, I teach from Reconstruction to the current day. Two of the curriculum standards that I teach each year are "define nationalism, imperialism, and militarism and how these led to WWI," and "Explain how a resurgence in national, imperialism, and militarism led to WWII."

When I was first teaching my students about these terms, one very observant child responded, "Mrs. V., that sounds like what we have today." Give that kid a cookie! She realized something that few Americans have seemed to figure out.

Nationalism is extreme national pride. It is a devotion to the interests and culture of a nation. It is a belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively.

Imperialism is the policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations. Or as our 5th grade textbook says, "when a nation directly or indirectly controls the government and/or economy of another nation."

Militarism is a policy in which military preparedness is of primary importance to a state. Or the 5th grade textbook definition: "The belief that the military is the answer to problems a nation has."

What is passing for patriotism in this nation is really nationalism. The definition of patriotism is "love and devotion to your country." Compare that to nationalism. One can be patriotic and still disagree with the policies of one's country, but nationalism does not allow for those differences. What we have had in this nation since 9/11 is not patriotism. It is nationalism. "Either you are with us, or you are against us," George Bush declared. Either you agree with this administration and you are patriotic, or you do not and are unpatriotic. Bush has confused patriotism with nationalism. With true patrotism, sometimes disagreeing with your country's policies is a direct result of you loving your country.

Nation building is the modern 21st century version of imperialism. This process of nation building has two very distinct phases. The first involves stabilizing the country, offering humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, rebuilding the infrastructure, and jump-starting the economy. The second phase begins after stability has been achieved, and consists of creating self-sustaining political and economic institutions that will ultimately permit competent democratic governance and economic growth. The unspoken aim, however, in nation building is to create a government that is friendly to the government and policies of the United States. In Iraq, this process first required the overthrow of the existing government. The 2nd phase, which we are now in, is the stablization of that country - which means the subduing of those opposed to our aims. In other words, we first must dominate and control that nation (imperialism) before any efforts to build and maintain an independent state can succeed.

Militarism has become the means by which our government can carry out its policies. All the world is a threat and we must protect ourselves by any necessary means. We are the world's remaining super power and we must use that power to subdue the elements on this planet opposed to democracy. There is a new world order and our place in that order is at the head. I believe this pretty well sums up our international policies under this administration.

Militarism, Imperialism, and Nationalism have led to two world wars thus far in our history. They are always present in times of war. Whether it's the Revolutionary War where Americans were fighting (militarism) for independence (nationalism) from imperial control (imperialism) or the war today in Iraq - these three "isms" are always lurking beneath the surface.

however, orwell had some thoughts..

By "nationalism" I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled "good" or "bad." But secondly -- and this is much more important -- I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests. Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By "patriotism" I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseperable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individual

http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/nationalism.html

"Nationalism, in the extended sense in which I am using the word, includes such movments and tendencies as Communism, political Catholocism, Zionism, Antisemitism, Trotskyism and Pacifism."
http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/nationalism.html

So you can be a pacifist-nationalist?!?

I like Orwell, but I'm not sure his definition is very useful. I'm still trying to get a handle on exactly what he's talking about.

Would that be Pacifist-nationalism?What about the salt march in India? I am asking, not a statement, so what do you think?

Anyway I don't think he was subject to the delusions Orwell mentions. Though I like how communism and nationalism fit under his concept. People that get all insane about their race or nationality are crazy to talk to. I think maybe Orwell is describing the psychological side.

"My people are great."
"They have always been great."
"They will show you other people."
"Anything to the contrary is a lie."

I had a Serbian friend with excessive national pride (nationalism?). She wouldn't believe me that Serbs didn't invent the potato or the fork. Silly crazy things.

in the US, by the fifth grade kids have been exposed to nationalistic propaganda for at least six years...

It is so important to start talking to kids from the earliest days about these kinds of issues. Obviously you talk to a kindergartner or first grader differently than a fifth grader.

But by 5th grade kids are definitely ready for these concepts, and they definitely should be talking about them.

George W, Bush aka The War President has got the USMC taking reprisals for mercenaries, closing newspapers, and targeting world press-scarcely promoting anything except more anti-Americanism worldwide.:grr:

The kids are not to young to learn that as we did in grade school. I was in grade school in the 40's but we were learning that stuff as we all knew what Germany was and was doing, also other countries. I also think, on this site, we all know what each ism means but it is to bad out govt does not.

Less an insider's account of what has happened in the White House than an insider's account of what should happen in the White House and, by extension of the administration's power, elsewhere. The book, by the former chairman of the Pentagon's Defence Policy Board and a former White House speechwriter, calls for those who pose a threat to be neutralised or destroyed. Mr Frum, the speechwriter credited with coining the term "axis of evil," and Mr Perle, a former assistant Secretary of Defence, advocates "an aggressive, activist approach to stomping out terrorism both within America's borders and in other countries as well".

Their plan calls for the US to overthrow the government of Iran, abandon support of a Palestinian state, blockade North Korea, use strong-arm tactics with Syria and China, disregard much of Europe as allies, and sever ties with Saudi Arabia. The book had a limited impact but was seen as a support from the political right for the strike against Iraq at a time when the controversy over the failure to discover WMD continued to rage.

An End to Evil, by Richard Perle and David Frum. Published by Random House, December 2003
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=516301

all that you described sounds like jingoism--extreme chauvinism or nationalism marked especially by a belligerent foreign policy. (from the Merriam-Webster dictionary)