Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events, politics and economics.
Post Reply
User avatar
fwiw
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 7:06 pm

Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

Post by fwiw » Sun May 10, 2020 8:04 pm

A number of participants to this forum regularly mention 'The Globalist Agenda' or 'The Globalist Deep State' as some sort of nefarious, shadowy entity responsible for much of the ills of humanity.

A quick analysis showed me that Globalism is to be understood as the antithesis of Nationalism, which would indicate that both concepts are to be discussed at once for a better understanding.

Should Buddhists embrace one over the other, as some seem to suggest, or isn't the truth of the matter just too complex to fall neatly in either category?

In other words, should Buddhists really have a black-and-white outlook on either globalism or nationalism?


From wikipedia:

Globalism:
Globalism refers to various systems with scope beyond the merely international. It is used by political scientists, such as Joseph Nye, to describe "attempts to understand all the interconnections of the modern world—and to highlight patterns that underlie (and explain) them."[1] While primarily associated with world-systems, it can be used to describe other global trends. The term is also used by detractors of globalization such as populist movements.

The term is similar to internationalism and cosmopolitanism.
...
Paul James defines globalism, "at least in its more specific use [...] as the dominant ideology and subjectivity associated with different historically-dominant formations of global extension. The definition thus implies that there were pre-modern or traditional forms of globalism and globalization long before the driving force of capitalism sought to colonize every corner of the globe, for example, going back to the Roman Empire in the second century AD, and perhaps to the Greeks of the fifth-century BC."
Manfred Steger distinguishes between different globalisms such as justice globalism, jihad globalism, and market globalism.[3] Market globalism includes the ideology of neoliberalism.
...
Alternatively, American political scientist Joseph Nye, co-founder of the international relations theory of neoliberalism, generalized the term to argue that globalism refers to any description and explanation of a world which is characterized by networks of connections that span multi-continental distances
...
It has been used to describe international endeavours begun after World War II, such as the United Nations, the Warsaw Pact, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union, and sometimes the later neoliberal and neoconservative policies of "nation building" and military interventionism between the end of the Cold War in 1991 and the beginning of the War on Terror in 2001.

Nationalism:
Nationalism is an ideology and movement that promotes interest of a particular nation (as in a group of people)[1] especially with the aim of gaining and maintaining the nation's sovereignty (self-governance) over its homeland. Nationalism holds that each nation should govern itself, free from outside interference (self-determination), that a nation is a natural and ideal basis for a polity,[2] and that the nation is the only rightful source of political power (popular sovereignty).[1][3] It further aims to build and maintain a single national identity—based on shared social characteristics such as culture, ethnicity, geographic location, language, politics (or the government), religion, traditions and belief in a shared singular history [4][5]—and to promote national unity or solidarity.[1] Nationalism, therefore, seeks to preserve and foster a nation's traditional culture, and cultural revivals have been associated with nationalist movements.[6] It also encourages pride in national achievements, and is closely linked to patriotism.[7][page needed] Nationalism is often combined with other ideologies, such as conservatism (national conservatism) or socialism (socialist nationalism)[2].

Throughout history, people have had an attachment to their kin group and traditions, to territorial authorities and to their homeland, but nationalism did not become a widely recognized concept until the 18th century.[8] There are three paradigms for understanding the origins and basis of nationalism. Primordialism (perennialism) proposes that there have always been nations and that nationalism is a natural phenomenon. Ethnosymbolism explains nationalism as a dynamic, evolutionary phenomenon and stresses the importance of symbols, myths and traditions in the development of nations and nationalism. Modernism proposes that nationalism is a recent social phenomenon that needs the socio-economic structures of modern society to exist.[9]

There are various definitions of a "nation", however, which leads to different strands of nationalism. Ethnic nationalism defines the nation in terms of shared ethnicity, heritage and culture, while civic nationalism defines the nation in terms of shared citizenship, values and institutions, and is linked to constitutional patriotism. The adoption of national identity in terms of historical development has often been a response by influential groups unsatisfied with traditional identities due to mismatch between their defined social order and the experience of that social order by its members, resulting in an anomie that nationalists seek to resolve.[10] This anomie results in a society reinterpreting identity, retaining elements deemed acceptable and removing elements deemed unacceptable, to create a unified community.[10] This development may be the result of internal structural issues or the result of resentment by an existing group or groups towards other communities, especially foreign powers that are (or are deemed to be) controlling them.[10] National symbols and flags, national anthems, national languages, national myths and other symbols of national identity are highly important in nationalism.[11][12][13][14]

In practice, nationalism can be seen as positive or negative depending on context and individual outlook. Nationalism has been an important driver in independence movements, such as the Greek Revolution, the Irish Revolution, the Zionist movement that created modern Israel, and the dissolution of the Soviet Union.[15][16] Conversely, radical nationalism combined with racial hatred was also a key factor in the Holocaust perpetrated by Nazi Germany.[17] More recently, nationalism was an important driver of the controversial annexation of Crimea by Russia.
... just my opinion, for what it's worth

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 718
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 12:49 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

Post by DNS » Sun May 10, 2020 11:07 pm

The suttas don't discuss such worldly, political issues directly. The brahma viharas and metta is extended "boundless" to all beings, suggesting no borders, but of course it's not necessarily a political statement.

I think we currently have something of a mix. There are numerous nations on earth and yet there is much trade between nations, airports, ships and other modes of trade. The multitude of nations allows us to see what works, what doesn't work and allows nations to see and learn from this. And this mostly works. Nations that engage in trade together rarely go to war with each other.

User avatar
SethRich
Posts: 604
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 8:57 pm

Re: Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

Post by SethRich » Mon May 11, 2020 12:42 am

Greetings,

It's not a very good definition of globalism, so unfortunately it won't set the discussion up well to account for the issues raised.

Globalism is basically a form of supra-national governance. Consider the European Union, the United Nations, the World Health Organisation, World Trade Organisation, World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the like. The ultimate expression of Globalism, would be a one-world government, known colloquially as the "New World Order."

(Side note: A lot of NGOs have parasitical relations to such organisations, and need to be considered in the big picture in terms of the money flows involved)

The antonym of Globalism is Nationism, as it's about national governance, and maintaining, rather than delegating national sovereignty. The more common term, "nationalism" is like "nationism", although nationalism typically implies a degree of patriotism in the mix too, whereas the term nationism is neutral on that front.

All this is different to globalisation, which is not directly connected with either globalism or nationism, and can work under either. Conflating globalisation with globalism is a common misconception, and if done by those in the know, is usually done to make nationalism appear insular, whereas in truth it's not. Under nationalism, countries will have bilateral trade (and other) agreements with one another. Under globalism, you have something akin the EU, where the EU decides certain matters on behalf of its member states.

As you were...

:candle:
"He goes to hell, the one who asserts what didn’t take place" (Ud 4.8)
"Let us neither be perpetrators nor victims!" (DN26)

"Transition to greatness" (Donald J. Trump)

:candle: "...his name was Seth Rich..."

Bundokji
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

Post by Bundokji » Mon May 11, 2020 2:39 am

Globalism cannot be separated from certain technological advancements that led to it, especially in the fields of communication and telecommunications. Globalism to nationalism is somehow similar to secularism to religion where proponents of the former deemed the later as redundant.

Any rhetoric that conveys universal values over a more local and confined value system appeals to idealists, who are, by definition, prefer seeking a perfect description of reality than reality itself. This leads to the term "progressive" which is an endless pursuant of the ideal or utopia that can be eventually achieved by finding the universal essence that all humans already have but unaware of it, and probably force them to embrace it. When this universal ideal is grasped by everyone, then we are all equal before it, and then justice would prevail.

When the description above is applied to nationalists, conservatives, traditionalists and the religious, it does not come as a surprise that their confined ideologies have been promoting exactly the same things, except that they live it as a daily practice more than pursuing it as a rhetoric. A world of national bigots and ideologues seems to be more interesting as diversity is allowed to express itself rather than being suppressed as dangerous, deluded and backward (not progressive).

Whatever comes up as a reaction to an outdated old, still holds into its roots as an inseparable shadow.
..."Monks, live with yourself as your island, yourself as your refuge, with nothing else as your refuge. Live with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, with nothing else as your refuge. [1] And how does a monk live with himself as his island, himself as his refuge, with nothing else as his refuge; with the Dhamma as his island, the Dhamma as his refuge, with nothing else as his refuge? There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is how a monk lives with himself as his island, himself as his refuge, with nothing else as his refuge; with the Dhamma as his island, the Dhamma as his refuge, with nothing else as his refuge.

"Wander, monks, in your proper range, your own ancestral territory. When you wander in your proper range, your own ancestral territory, you will grow in long life, beauty, pleasure, wealth, & strength.

"And what constitutes a monk's long life? [2] There is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... founded on intent... He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. From the development & pursuit of these four bases of power, he can stay (alive) for an aeon, if he wants, or for the remainder of an aeon. This constitutes a monk's long life.

"And what constitutes a monk's beauty? There is the case where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Patimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest faults. This constitutes a monk's beauty.

"And what constitutes a monk's pleasure? There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This constitutes a monk's pleasure.

"And what constitutes a monk's wealth? There is the case where a monk keeps pervading the first direction [the east] — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with good will. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around, everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with good will: abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.

"He keeps pervading the first direction — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with compassion... imbued with appreciation...

"He keeps pervading the first direction — as well as the second direction, the third, & the fourth — with an awareness imbued with equanimity. Thus he keeps pervading above, below, & all around, everywhere & in every respect the all-encompassing world with an awareness imbued with equanimity: abundant, expansive, immeasurable, free from hostility, free from ill will.

"This constitutes a monk's wealth.

"And what constitutes a monk's strength? There is the case where a monk, through the ending of the mental fermentations, enters & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having directly known & realized them for himself right in the here & now. This constitutes a monk's strength.

"Monks, I don't envision any other single strength so hard to overcome as this: the strength of Mara. [3] And the adopting of skillful qualities is what causes this merit to increase." [4]

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the Blessed One's words.
'Too much knowledge leads to scepticism. Early devotees are the likeliest apostates, as early sinners are senile saints.' – Will Durant.

User avatar
fwiw
Posts: 1172
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 7:06 pm

Re: Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

Post by fwiw » Mon May 11, 2020 5:59 am

DNS wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 11:07 pm
The suttas don't discuss such worldly, political issues directly. The brahma viharas and metta is extended "boundless" to all beings, suggesting no borders, but of course it's not necessarily a political statement.
Yes indeed the suttas don't discuss such worldly, political issues directly, but as I understand it, the whole point of this forum is to extrapolate how the values and guidelines given in the suttas can inform us about the outlook that Buddhists should have over various areas of life, including "News, Current Events & Politics".

To your point about metta, there is a text that gives a hint into that direction, of course without being a political statement per se (emphasis mine):
"And what is the Uposatha of the Jains? There are the contemplatives called the Niganthas (Jains). They get their disciple to undertake the following practice: 'Here, my good man. Lay down the rod with regard to beings who live more than 100 leagues to the east... more than 100 leagues to the west... more than 100 leagues to the north... more than 100 leagues to the south.' Thus they get the disciple to undertake kindness & sympathy to some beings, but not to others.
So when politicians like Tulsi Gabbard speak of saving "American lives" (as if American lives would matter more than others) they are correctly criticized for not aiming at just saving "lives".

Also, this would put under serious question such ideologies as "America First" or "Americanism" which DT directly opposed to "Globalism". Especially after we've seen MAGA hats being produced in China or DT's WH trying to secure a German patent on coronavirus vaccine so that it could become a monopoly of the USA.

DNS wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 11:07 pm
I think we currently have something of a mix. There are numerous nations on earth and yet there is much trade between nations, airports, ships and other modes of trade. The multitude of nations allows us to see what works, what doesn't work and allows nations to see and learn from this. And this mostly works. Nations that engage in trade together rarely go to war with each other.
I guess it can be seen as working in the sense that there has been no major war for example tearing Europe apart in recent decades (which is one of the main arguments of "globalist" pro-EU), but it can be seen as having perhaps an even more devastating effect on the environment.

Bundokji wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 2:39 am
Any rhetoric that conveys universal values over a more local and confined value system appeals to idealists, who are, by definition, prefer seeking a perfect description of reality than reality itself. This leads to the term "progressive" which is an endless pursuant of the ideal or utopia that can be eventually achieved by finding the universal essence that all humans already have but unaware of it, and probably force them to embrace it. When this universal ideal is grasped by everyone, then we are all equal before it, and then justice would prevail.
Isn't Buddhism a "rhetoric that conveys universal values over a more local and confined value system"? Does that make Buddhism "seeking a perfect description of reality than reality itself"? Does this not amount to conflating things that are not to be conflated at all?

A world of national bigots and ideologues seems to be more interesting as diversity is allowed to express itself rather than being suppressed as dangerous, deluded and backward (not progressive).
Isn't that exactly how we ended up with two world wars?
... just my opinion, for what it's worth

User avatar
Charbel
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:14 am

Re: Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

Post by Charbel » Mon May 11, 2020 6:34 am

fwiw wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 8:04 pm
globalism or nationalism?
Nationalism brings power to a nation, as the Buddha taught in DN 16. However, the problem with nationalist strength is it creates predatory imperialism, which is now masked as globalism. The USA, Nazi Germany & Israel are classic examples of nations formed from nationalism, which later transformed into imperialism. As the USA always says, their wars & actions are to "protect American interests abroad".
fwiw wrote:
Sun May 10, 2020 8:04 pm
Should Buddhists embrace one over the other, as some seem to suggest, or isn't the truth of the matter just too complex to fall neatly in either category?
The Buddha taught about nationalism because the nation is born from local families & communities. When there is no sense of community & nation, community will eventually fail. Globalism is merely about economic trade thus can never respect local communities & uphold Dhamma. American covert imperialism in many nations and how it crushes local people is testament to the evils of globalism.
fwiw wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 5:59 am
Isn't Buddhism a "rhetoric that conveys universal values over a more local and confined value system"? Does that make Buddhism "seeking a perfect description of reality than reality itself"? Does this not amount to conflating things that are not to be conflated at all?
No because Buddhism says only those people in the Brahma realms can convey universal values. For puthujjana, Buddhism emphasises respect for mother, father, family, etc.
fwiw wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 5:59 am
A world of national bigots and ideologues seems to be more interesting as diversity is allowed to express itself rather than being suppressed as dangerous, deluded and backward (not progressive).
Isn't that exactly how we ended up with two world wars?
The wars were European Wars connected to various Empires. Nothing to do with Buddhism. WW1 started not because of nationalism but due to opposition (by the Austrian-Hungarian Empire) to (Serbian/Slavic) nationalism. The Austro-Hungarians were empire builders. That is what WW1 was about. Empires and particularly the British opportunity to crush the economic powerhouse Germany so to preserve its globalist world dominance.

What actually declined after the horrors of WW1 and WW2 was globalism or empires and what increased after WW1 and WW2 was nationalism (except for the poor Eastern Europeans who came under the yoke of the Soviet Union).
Last edited by Charbel on Mon May 11, 2020 7:26 am, edited 15 times in total.

Bundokji
Posts: 365
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:03 pm

Re: Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

Post by Bundokji » Mon May 11, 2020 6:35 am

fwiw wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 5:59 am
Isn't Buddhism a "rhetoric that conveys universal values over a more local and confined value system"? Does that make Buddhism "seeking a perfect description of reality than reality itself"? Does this not amount to conflating things that are not to be conflated at all?
Not according to my understanding of Buddhism. The teachings made clear distinctions between right view and wrong view. Had right view been universal, then we would have been born with it. In fact, Buddhism is closer to elitism than universalism emphasizing that only a few have insight.

Some Buddhists might refer to the Buddha's emphasis on virtue and wisdom rather than birth as abolishing the cast system. I think Julius Evola had some interesting thoughts on this:



Isn't that exactly how we ended up with two world wars?
This could be conflating cause and effect. The fact that tension between nations gives rise to national sentiment does not mean that nationalism is responsible for war.
'Too much knowledge leads to scepticism. Early devotees are the likeliest apostates, as early sinners are senile saints.' – Will Durant.

User avatar
Charbel
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:14 am

Re: Globalism, Nationalism in Buddhist eyes

Post by Charbel » Mon May 11, 2020 7:32 am

Bundokji wrote:
Mon May 11, 2020 6:35 am
This could be conflating cause and effect. The fact that tension between nations gives rise to national sentiment does not mean that nationalism is responsible for war.
Correct. Both WW1 & WW2 were ignited by suppressions of nationalism.

WW1 - Austria-Hungary suppressing Slavic nationalism

WW2 - Poland, with unconditional support from Britain, suppressing German nationalism.

What happened after WW1 is the Allies placed German communities into newly formed or reformed nations, such as France, Czechoslovakia & Poland. The disallowing of these German people to unite with their own culture caused WW2.

The "globalist" argument is like saying Buddhists should live with Christians, etc.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], SarathW and 104 guests