According to Dictionary.com, nationalism is, “The strong belief that the interests of a particular nation-state are of primary importance. Also, the belief that a people who share a common language, history, and culture should constitute an independent nation, free of foreign domination.” To me, nationalism could just be having pride for one’s country and being biased toward that country because of it. It is often given a negative connotation but should not always be thought of as a negative thing. Although I believe that it could be a somewhat negative thing depending on the individual and how they express their pride for their nation. Some individuals, especially Americans, take nationalism to the point where they are not open to the ways any other country does things which often comes off as ignorance instead of pride. 
Zakaria sees danger in the rise of nationalism because he believes that the rest of the world will eventually become globalized while the US will just remain closed minded and not open to changing its ways to better work with the rest of the world. Zakaria states, “Americans rarely benchmark to global standards because they are sure that their way must be the best and most advanced. The result is that they are increasingly suspicious of this emerging global era.” I believe Americans feel that by the world becoming globalized, the U.S may no longer be the single greatest superpower in the world and that is worrisome to many Americans.
Over the years, Americans have been known to show concern when any other country looks to be surpassing the U.S in things like economic success, technological advances, etc. American citizens tend to think that we as a country should be the best at everything and any country who might be better than us at something is a ‘threat’. In his article, “Broken BRICs-Why the Rest Stopped Rising” Sharma states that, “In due time, the sense of many Americans today that asian juggernauts are swiftly taking over the US economy will be remembered as one of the country’s periodic bouts of paranoia, akin to the hype that accompanied Japan’s ascent in the 1980’s”. Sharma clearly thinks that we have nothing to worry about as a country because although occasionally countries fluctuate and look as though they are giving Americans a run for their money, they never completely rise to the level the U.S is at. Sharma believes that we could eventually see some “breakout nations” in the future, but it will happen a very long time from now if we ever do see such a thing.
In France, citizens did not really have much of a sense of extreme nationalism until the French Revolution. Before the French Revolution, France was divided by various regions and religions. The citizens of France identified themselves more as subjects of a certain ruler before the French Revolution. Instead of feeling a strong loyalty to the state, they felt a strong loyalty to their ruler or their religion. The French Revolution changed the way French citizens saw themselves in relation to the state. During the Revolution, the French citizens were fighting as a part of their nation’s first really serious National Army. This gave citizens a sense of pride as they believed they were fighting for their own cause as a nation. The Revolution promoted the idea that citizens had an important stake in the state and, in a sense, owned the state (enotes). It stressed the idea that all French people were citizens of the same state; therefore, creating a strong sense of nationalism.
In terms of inequality in France, there is “rising income inequality, increasingly evident differences in opportunities for young people from immigrant communities, and rather different levels of schooling available to different communities in France” (Little). The one inequality in France that I can personally attest to is the different levels of schooling that are available to the different communities within France. I lived with a French family for a little under a month a few years back. Upon returning, when I was talking with the other students who went to France with my program, we noticed significant differences in the French schools we attended.
These differences included differences in the qualities of the school environments, in the teachers, and in the curriculum and methods in which the students were being taught. Some schools were fairly pristine and nice whereas others were dirty, dull looking, and just an unorganized mess. The teachers at some of the schools were high quality teachers who took the students’ education seriously whereas some of the teachers at other schools were lazy, unorganized, and just let the students run wild in their classrooms. I believe actions are being taken to standardize the curriculum across France and make sure every student is learning what they need to be at the same pace as all other students in France. I do not believe though, that much is being done to clean up the schools that simply do not look like high quality, safe places for students to learn. Although the quality of education students are receiving is not determined by the way schools look, I still hope that the President of France will take steps to change this soon.
Bibliography
Dictionary.com. Nationalism. (2015). Retrieved September 19, 2015.
How was nationalism an effect of the French Revolution? - Homework Help - eNotes.com. (2013, January 15). Retrieved September 19, 2015.
Little, D. (2009, March 11). Understanding Society. Retrieved September 19, 2015.
Sharma, R. (2012). Foreign Affairs. In Broken BRICs: Why the Rest Stopped Rising (6th ed., Vol. 91, p. 6).
Zakaria, F. (2011). The Cup Runneth Over. In The post-American world: Release 2.0 (p. 59). New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
No comments:
Post a Comment