“Warnings about resurgent nationalism come thick and fast these days. Frans Timmermans, first vice-president of the European Commission, denounced it in a recent speech, arguing that true patriots are Europeans. The international lawyer Philippe Sands did likewise in an article that linked neo-Nazis, white supremacists, the Daily Mail and Brexit to the “poison of slow-burning nationalisms”.
“What’s striking about such diatribes, beyond their occasionally hysterical tone, is the way they conflate bigotry and extremism with national pride, as if fondness for one’s country of birth is inherently dubious. “Statehood,” wrote Sands, is the “most fake of constructs.” To him, maybe. For most of us it is the basis of popular democracy, the “only framework powerful enough to handle the big issues” – defence, taxation, infrastructure – in a responsive manner. To support or acquiesce in collective projects, people need to feel a sense of shared culture with the others involved. They do feel that at a national level; they don’t, whatever the liberal elite may like to think, at a European one.” (Rupert Cogan, Spiked).
I disagree. It was nationalism that fueled both World Wars. “Land of Hope and Glory” is a great tune from a great composer, but the composer himself, aghast at the words put to the music, was outspoken about the power of words and music to promote nationalist fervour and the devotion to an Empire that arguably had become too big, unwieldy, and prey to nationalist leaders. It is a noxious mix of tribalism, religion and nationalism that fuelled the rise of Hitler nd is now fuelling the horrible treatment of the Burmese moslems – one could go on. All over the world, and for decades, politicians have been using the nationalism card to their own ends. The EU does not prevent the exercise of democracy; it simply tries to regulate the shysters and crooks in aid of a level playing field.
I don’t believe there’s anything inherently democratic about nationalism at all. Even anti colonial nationalism, while useful for shaking off the shackles of imperial occupation, can quickly sour into strong man authoritarianism if not tempered by liberal principles. Rather, democracy takes multiple forms. Often it’s about city or county councils. A lot ought to be done at the national level, like welfare and pensions systems. But in today’s increasingly globalised world, Europe must integrate its economy if it to stand a chance of competing with China, America and India.
So it was good to see Macron make the positive case for things like a digital union and consistent environmental protections. Having said that, the Brexiteers are right insofar as there is an upper limit to European integration. Unlike Macron, I wouldn’t want the EU to make significant transfers of money. The EU budget only constitutes 1% of its GDP, and it should stay that way. It’s good to see fiscally conservative liberals like Denmark’s Venstre and Germany’s FDP making the case for reducing waste and unnecessay spending at the European level- such activities only fuel Euroscepticism. Were Britain still inside the EU, we could have pushed for further reductions in EU spending. But since we’re leaving, the EU will only become less appealing from the British perspective, which will affect us immensely despite Brexit.