Here I begin my first discussion article, in which I plan to discuss topics which are less relevant and focussed on current events. Instead I will discuss broader, more abstract issues which I have been reading about, discussing at university, or listening to. This first one will be the first of my Nations series, and I’ll discuss whether nations, having achieved nationhood as a sovereign state, then need to have the ugly underbelly of nationalism – Fascism or Nazism – purged from them in order to realise and understand the destructive forces that nationalism can release.

You may be wondering as to why I used the motto of the French Revolution as the cover of this discussion, considering they are far from fascist or conservative ideals. However, scholars and professors who have written about the revolution, as well as I am my fellow students have come to agree that for better or for worse, the revolution has been deeply entwined with the French nationalist movement; the revolution planted the seeds the French the concept of Laïcité, which means a specifically French secularism and view on how government should be run. It is a firm if ageing part of the French national identity, which is what I hope to discuss in the Nations series of articles. Furthermore, it’s from this initially harmless nationalist sentiment that more destructive forms of national pride flow.

After the Second World War, the second annihilation of the European continent unleashed by Germany in the 20th Century, the victorious powers who occupied Germany realised that they had to bury the intense nationalist ideology in Germany that had led it into two World Wars. It must have been of particular note to the US, France and Britain that in both cases Germany had fought against powers whose governing processes were far  ore liberal and democratic than its own. Also, another note was that after the First World War, having left Germany crippled and to its own devices, it had turned down a much darker path than anyone could have possibly predicted. It is from this that the policy of denazification was put into place, in order to ensure that a party like the NSDAP could never enter German politics again. In the west, the policy impactedmany aspects of German society, but in particular meant the inclusion specific lines in the Grundgesetz (constitution) which banned anti-democratic parties, made several human rights including human dignity inalienable, and severely reduced the scope for emergency powers of any kind. This went hand in hand with the attempt to democratise Germany, and, coupled with the Germans’ own experience led to nationalist ideas having an enormously reduced role in German public life. Patriotism was unheard of in Germany perhaps until the fall of the wall in ’89, and Wiedervereinigung in 1990. At the same time the Marshall Plan was implemented, which led to a major reinvigoration of the German middle-class. The middle-classes, whilst historically quite nationalist, are the traditional bulwark of liberal democracy. The German middle-class however were less willing in 1933 to defend their rights and liberties; liberal parties had traditionally been weak in the German Reichstag and despite having developed a strong civil society by the time they were given democratic freedoms in the 1920s, Germany’s middle-class ultimately turned against those freedoms. Through a wounded sense of national identity caused by the Versailles Diktat, and intense fear of Communism, the bourgeoisie in Germany became disillusioned with democracy and many voted for the Nazi party. In 1949, having experienced the worst that nationalism could lead to, they were not going to make that mistake again, and given a new lease of life with American money, they built a civil liberal tradition which had been missing from the first period of German democracy.

In the east, whilst pursued with different methods and motives, the doctrine of anti-fascism was at the centre of the GDR society’s ideology; even the wall was built in the name of anti-fascism. Furthermore, the national identity was far removed from the public sphere. The upshot is, that whilst having experienced two vastly different social systems after 1945, by the time it united in 1990, German society was devoid of popular nationalist movements. Italy too, having been the birthplace of fascism, had the cultural burden of knowing it fell to intensely ugly and tragic nationalist fervour. Spain, after it emerged from the Franco dictatorship, immediately moved to join the European Community, in order to embed itself in western democratic society, and distance itself as much as possible from its nationalist past. Of course, I’m not saying that there is no nationalism in these countries anymore, there is in every country; the presence of AfD is testament to that. However, it’s the fact that AfD are widely perceived as a joke in Germany that matters; the sheer weight of the impression on German society, that nationalism is toxic and poisonous a nation’s body politic, that it’s a force for destruction and should never be used in mainstream politics. The impression really has left its mark, and I think, despite the rise of more right wing groups at the moment, it will be a long time before nationalist rhetoric will be acceptable in German politics.

The case is not the same for other European countries; none have had such a rigorous process of denazification as Germany has. Britain, France and Poland have all experienced the rise of nationalist movements in recent years, ones far stronger than AfD. Front National (FN) in France, whilst failing to achieve a major victory at the last regional elections last year, cannot be denied the fact that it has a huge number of voters supporting its ideas and beliefs, that nationalism is a positive force in society, that it should have a strong presence in national politics, and that Frenchmen should stand up and make ‘frenchness’ the most important part of French society. It goes back to that idea of Laïcité; this is something which makes us different, special – superior even. The fact is, being proud of your cultural identity is not especially offensive, and this is key to the power of nationalism; people will take part in it, perhaps even let themselves be consumed by it, without even noticing what is happening. It’s the same in Britain; I heard a lot from UKIP supporters before the elections that they were by no means racist, nationalist or any of those nasty words, but were just willing to stand up for their country. I suspect that they genuinely believed it as well; many no doubt believed that they were proud of their country and were willing to fight for it. But there is a fine line between, and pride which means you put your country first before everything, even before people who are greater need of your solidarity than fellow countrymen. Ultimately, in these countries, nationalism has not yet by any means been rewritten as a recipe for lies, chauvinism and demagoguery, to the point where if it makes you proud or angry for your county, you’ll believe it rather than actually learning the facts about a situation. Politicians like Nigel Farage, who wrap up the loss of their own power in the world in the guise of the EU ‘strangling the life out of national democracy’ as he often argues, are the very epitome of the nationalist trick; the conservatives in power sense an easy means by which to give popular support to their goals of winning power for themselves, simply by invoking the spirit of the nation, and away they go.

I have written before that PiS in Poland are pursuing very nationalist and even fascistic policies, when you look at the ideology behind their moves. Snuffing out the checks and balances designed to limit their power, by taking control of the judiciary and the press, step 2 for any authoritarian government (step 1 being promise the people everything, if only they elect you to power). But it goes deeper than this, because beyond their nationalist rhetoric, they have very statist, almost socialist proposals for Poland’s economy. Plans include paying families to have more children effectively (oh I wonder where they got that idea), with a $125/month subsidy for every child after the first until they are 18. They also attempt to double the tax-free allowance of households, a 0.44% tax on bank assets other than government securities. And even here we see the shadow of nationalist demagoguery on the wall – Finance Minister Paweł Szałamacha has promised that the Polish złoty may one day become a world reserve currency under his plans, as if that’s supposed to do anything but invoke national pride. Now, as I have also said before, I am in no way saying that PiS are comparable to the NSDAP; nevertheless, as was pointed out my a historian in a POLITICO article recently, whilst their politics smell distinctly of nationalism, there’s also the scent of socialism there; distrust of the markets and banks and high levels of government spending – what separates them is an incomprehension of market forces, rather than the belief that they are ultimately ineffective.

My last point comes down to the essence of how nationalism is awakened in people, and what can be unleashed once it is awakened. There’s an ongoing debate amongst social and political scientists about whether the nation is natural or created, something I will discuss more in the next part of the Nations series. However, suffice to say that this is unimportant for our purposes because they well and truly exist in the hearts and minds of millions of people. More crucially is what happens once the nation has been awakened. I was listening to a pod-cast recently, which I highly recommend, in which the topic of Donald Trump was being discussed, and whether he could bring fascism to America or not, considering the demagogue style he uses, the overwhelming presence of racism in his politics and also his distaste for the media or according to some, the US constitution. The fact he constantly says he will make America great again is nationalist demagogue 101, and regardless of what he truly intends to do or can do, he certainly has invoked the power of nationalism latent within people. The guy who does the pod-cast, whilst making good points, ultimately settles on the answer that he doubts Trump will be able to turn America fascist, because America is too anti-tyrant and its institutions too resilient, and frankly I disagree. One thing to be understood about fascism is that few notice its initial arrival on the political scene. Even those who do are reluctant to point it out, I think, for being seen as overreacting. Others may think that fascists won’t go through with the policies they lay out, no matter how undemocratic they are. That was the case in Germany back in 1933; not that Hitler made it clear he would bring about the Holocaust, but it was clear he wanted to tear down the republic.

The fact is that nationalism is a latent force in the people which has for hundreds of years been manipulated by the powerful and used for their own gains; Napoleon, Bismarck, even Hitler was used in an attempt to use nationalism to prop up conservative rulers. The problem is nationalism is like fire; you can whip up that fervour in the people, and use it to your own gains, but make it too big and it you will lose control, and that is where fascism and nazism begin, that is where the conservatives realise that invoking nationalism in a sovereign state can only lead to failure or disaster. Whilst it is an important point to be made that France and Britain didn’t need fascist dictatorships to create a strong, pro-democracy middle-class, neither has yet been exposed to the full destructive force of nationalism, and so don’t truly understand just how like fire it is.