Western Nationalists as Palestinians

Nationalism is often considered immoral because it values the interests of some people over others, rather than being universalist in its circle of concern. For nationalists themselves, the ideology is often defined by such a preference. I agree with the standard liberal critique of this worldview, but I think the universalist/particularist distinction is the weakest point on which to attack it. The bigger problem with nationalism is that it’s usually very bad for the people it claims to speak for and represent, even putting aside the interests of outgroups.

Many observers have been noting the distinction between caring about the “Palestinian cause” and the Palestinian people. As I’ve also pointed out, if you want what’s best for the actual human beings who live in Gaza, you would encourage them to seek a better life elsewhere. But there is relatively little interest in this as a solution, because it would harm the cause of Palestine, which keeps millions of individuals and their families stateless for generations for the sake of a political movement.

This kind of thinking isn’t limited to Middle Easterners. Last year, I did an X poll and found that white nationalists would prefer by over a 6:1 margin a country with 400 million Americans that is 75% white over one with 1 billion Americans that is 50% white, even though the latter would have 200 million more white people.

Συνέχεια εδώ