คำบรรยาย YouTube:
NATIONALISM: An Idea That Swept the World

ไม่ต้องนั่งดูวิดีโอทั้งหมด — รับคำบรรยายฉบับเต็ม ค้นหาคีย์เวิร์ด และคัดลอกด้วยคลิกเดียว

แชร์:

AutoDub

เข้าใจวิดีโอ YouTube ภาษาต่างประเทศ

พากย์ YouTube เป็นภาษาไทยแบบอิมเมอร์ซีฟ

ทลายกำแพงภาษา เปิดรับเนื้อหาคุณภาพจากทั่วโลก

ใช้ฟรี

คำบรรยายวิดีโอ

สรุปวิดีโอ

Summary

Core Theme

Nationalism is a powerful and often underestimated political ideology that posits the nation as the fundamental unit of political organization, demanding primary loyalty and collective action from its members for the nation's interests and autonomy.

Mind Map

คลิกเพื่อขยาย

คลิกเพื่อสำรวจ Mind Map แบบอินเตอร์แอคทีฟฉบับเต็ม

in the modern world we typically hold

that there are four great political

ideologies liberalism which prioritizes

individual rights socialism which

prioritizes socioeconomic equality

conservatism which prioritizes tradition

and nationalism which prioritizes the

nation of the four nationalism is

perhaps the most powerful it's also

almost certainly the most neglected over

the last few centuries nationalism has

shaped the world to an extent far beyond

what many realize many of its tenants

are now simply taken for granted seen as

self-evident truths that widely go

unacknowledged and unquestioned in the

20th and 21st century nationalism has

seen unprecedented political success

after the fall of the Soviet Union it

has arguably become the dominant

ideology on Earth but what is it what is

nationalism I could offer a famous

definition it's a political principle

which holds that the political and the

national unit should be congruent or I

could point at famous examples of it but

I think the best place to start with

nationalism to gain a full appreciation

for it is to roll the clock back to look

at nationalism as it came into existence

and evolved over time and shaped the

world we're going to start with

something concrete the nation you know

what a nation is it has a flag a

territory a people and an Anthem the

United Nations is a coalition of Nations

but the world didn't used to be covered

in Nations nations in terms of world

history are fairly new mostly cropping

century while we mostly had before

nations were political societies tied to

individuals or families like Emperors or

royal families those societ were tied to

territories but the borders of those

territories tended to be somewhat

Loosely understood and open to

interpretation for example I could talk

about the history of China and trace it

back to Antiquity and doing that makes

sense in a way if I talk about what

China was like 2,000 years ago you

understand well enough what I mean but

until modern times there was no

conception of a country called China

delineated by precise borders its own

government and whose political leaders

could come and go over time while China

as a political entity still remained

before the nation of China came into

being it was fixed around the concept of

dynasties people are the subjects of

dynasties not citizens of a country

called China there was no Sovereign

political entity above the dynasty that

would be there to hold the Chinese

people together if the dynasty collapsed

and that was more or less the case until

fairly recently with other societies

around the world we did have what you

could call National nationalities the

Greek nationality is a standout early

example of that when people in ancient

times around the aan peninsula recognize

themselves and each other as Greek but

they never came together to form the

nation of Greece until modern times when

they fought against the Ottoman Empire

in the 1820s and made the country of

Greece in 1830 instead the ancient

Greeks were politically tied to city

states that fought one another and only

occasionally banded together when

circumstances seemed to C for it the

idea of nationality came into existence

over time and typically happened by way

of contrast the ancient Greeks for

example called Outsiders Barbaro

barbarians that's because the Greek's

mocked language that sounded to them as

crude it sounded like people were saying

barbar by focusing on that foreignness

it made the Greeks realize their own

commonality their common language common

culture and identity a sense of common

identity also tended to develop through

War for example when the English won a

battle against the French in the Hundred

Years War they responded by dancing in

the streets of London and in France

where national identity was less

developed at the time the Hundred Years

War confirmed and defined its nationhood

by uniting against the English the

French discovered themselves as a people

as a historian put it in seeing the

English close up they felt themselves to

be France but even as these

nationalities emerged over time we still

didn't have Nations the idea of the

nation as we understand the word now was

a conscious one developed about 300

years later there was one country in

particular that theorized about the

nation and turned it into the ideology

of nationalism in a way that we'd

recognize today and that country was

France this is that story in 18th

century Europe industrialization was

beginning populations were swelling and

something like a middle class was

developing people were growing wealthier

and more literate communication and

transportation technology was developing

and regular people began to gather in

cities communicate with one another and

think philosophically about the world

that was especially true in France and

even more true in Paris which became the

intellectual Hub of Europe in that

culture many words in French either

first appeared or were redefined Society

hom land civilization public and even

public opinion until that point in

history people may have believed that

they had some sort of regional

significance maybe to their local

communities but history and culture in

the grander sense were mostly thought to

be made by standout individuals the

select few who made their mark on the

world everyone else the overwhelming

majority of people sort of just melted

into the story undocumented unrecognized

and unremembered but these new French

terms portrayed a trend regular people

started to think that they were the ones

who truly mattered the ones who were

truly shaping something even as large as

France the elite few suddenly started to

seem over represented overly powerful

over time that led regular people to

challenge an old political order one

dominated by hierarchies and privilege

they started to call it the old regime

regime the Anan regime but that raises a

question if the old social order was

removed then what replaces it what

Authority would hold people together

basically what replaces a monarchy they

increasingly arrived at an answer that

political identity and political

Authority comes from the people if it's

French Authority then that Authority

should come from the people of France

the people who live on its territory

make up its public and form its public

opinion if political identity and

political Authority comes from the

people then you could express them

together as a single political body one

that you could argue should hold

Sovereign political power a French word

came into popular use that put name to

That Body they called it the

nation the nation elsewhere in Europe at

the time typically referred to some sort

of natural division of humanity so

you're not actively creating something

but you're pointing at something that

already exists

for example you could point out that the

rich and poor are two divided Nations

French people took that concept and

slightly Twisted it they started talking

about a new kind of nation one that

didn't exist before by putting name to

it they wied a new nation into existence

this new nation they said was the French

people on the whole and even more

specifically it was the French people on

the whole so long as they didn't have

any legal privilege to be a member of

this nation you had to live under under

the same laws as everyone else and be

represented by the same government as

everyone else that meant that to these

French thinkers anyone who heal

privilege wasn't part of the nation for

example a leading Revolutionary C said

the nobility is not part of our society

at all it may be a burden for the nation

but it cannot be part of it that went

for everyone else who held legal

privilege in France including the clergy

he said if the privileged order were

removed the nation would not be

something like less but something more

which then left him with a Third Estate

the representative body for the common

mass of unprivileged French people who

at the time were being

disproportionately taxed he said the

Third Estate then contains everything

that pertains to the nation while nobody

outside the Third Estate can be

considered as part of the nation what is

the Third Estate everything that set the

French Revolution apart from the

American Revolution the French declared

that the people people could be embodied

in a single political body the Third

Estate technically only represented the

unprivileged classes and the

revolutionaries wanted to have one

single body that could claim to be the

representative of the entire French

Community privileged or not so they

abolished all the Estates and formed a

new body that could do that called the

National Assembly the National Assembly

was capable of making one decision and

therefore voicing one will which they

argued was the will of the people which

they also argued should be the Sovereign

power in France again as CIS put it the

nation exists before everything it is

the object of everything its will is

always legal it is the law itself the

French called their singular National

will the general will which was an idea

taken from the philosopher John ja

Russo's social contract which set out as

he described it to find a new form of

Association a new type of community that

defends and protects the person and

goods of each associate within that

protection is made with a common force

that unites each with all while everyone

nonetheless obeys only themselves and

remains as free as before to do that

Russo envisions a community of people

coming together as political equals so

no one has a privilege and everyone

follows the same laws this is a

community based in consent everyone

voluntarily surrenders themsel to the

authority of it this is also a community

that can be simply willed into being

everyone just has to agree to form it

the decisions expressed by that

Community are called the general Will He

said Each of Us puts his person and all

his power in common under the Supreme

direction of the general will and as a

body we receive each member as an

indivisible part of the whole so the

general will is the Supreme singular

will of the community and for the

community to be a just one and he said a

free one everyone must be forced to

follow it he said in order for the

social compact not to be an empty

formality it tacitly encompasses the

following commitment which alone can

give Force to the rest that whoever does

refuse to obey the general will will be

constrained to do so by the whole body

which means nothing else but that he be

forced to be free so in Russo's Society

everyone voluntarily surrenders thems to

the social contract therefore for making

the decisions rendered by that contract

just and equal but the political

realities in Revolutionary France meant

that the National Assembly getting

Universal consent to its Authority and

to its decrees was impossible but the

ideas of the revolutionaries were

popular and a conflict developed and

pressure built on both sides the basic

question was who has political Authority

in France the privileged order or the

nation represented by the National

Assembly over time the National Assembly

won that struggle by increasingly

resting political and financial matters

under its own control for example by

being able to pass a law that declared

all existing taxes which had not been

consented to by the nation illegal

popular revolution swept France it was

thought that if everyone submitted to

the authority of the nation France would

finally become free and equal so the

revolutionaries set out to accomplish

exactly that they set out to to

subordinate everything political in

France to the nation they demanded the

clergy bow their heads before the

Majesty of the laws and they banned the

right to organize around labor interests

saying citizens who practice a

particular profession must not be

allowed to assemble for their supposed

common interests there are no more group

interests within the state there are

only the private interests of

individuals and the general interest the

nobility too swore loyalty to the nation

as it was described everyone offered up

gave laid at the feet of the nation the

king became increasingly marginalized as

time went on as France went to war which

they said was to spread their values of

Liberty and equality the king felt

forced to acques as Marie antoanet put

it the king is not free he has to follow

the general will and for our personal

safety here he has to do what he is told

as the nation continued to rise in

status it became something that the king

could betray France was becoming the

French nation and the king became

subservient to that Nation when he tried

to veto laws from the assembly and when

he was supported by Foreign monarchs he

was finally deemed an enemy of the

people an ideological line had been

crossed the revolutionaries responded by

storming the tuler palace the King was

captured and judgment passed on his life

as maximilan robes spear put it Louie

must die because the home homand must

live okay so we have this United French

Nation taking power and you could

probably see the idea of nationalism

coming into shape but the reality wasn't

so simple once in power the

revolutionaries were in a weak position

they were low on resources and felt

threatened by foreign powers who are

wary of the developments happening in

France which brought in a geopolitical

side to nationalism one that still holds

true today at that point in history the

city state was seen as being far too

small and prone to being conquered on

the other hand you had Empires which

were coming to be seen as far too big

holding too many diverse populations

together too far from their power base

which made them prone to an eventual

collapse within that the nation state

was coming to be seen as a happy medium

big enough to be geopolitically

competitive and also cohesive enough to

endure through challenges and time

people in nation states could feel bound

to one another and relatable to one

another by sharing a territory the

Homeland sharing a Common Language like

French and sharing a common culture and

history for example the French had the

Hundred Years War to commonly remember

and Jon of AR to remember as a common

French hero the problem is you have to

teach people that they're members of a

Nation it's not something that people

just grow up inherently knowing and

these ideas weren't being widely taught

they were City oriented ideas at the

time generally speaking the further you

got from cities the less people

identified with or even knew about a

French Nation to the mass of peasants

and therefore to most inhabitants of

France the meaningful world and identity

seldom extended Beyond The Village even

as late as the mid 19th century a French

Observer described the Countryside by

saying every village is still a little

world that differs from the neighboring

world as mercury does from Uranus every

village is a clan a sort of state with

its own patriotism France was also

linguistically diverse most subjects of

the king didn't speak standard French

and instead spoke a wide variety of

languages and dialects which complicated

claims at the time about France being a

singular French nation which meant that

the nation as the revolutionaries were

pitching it didn't really exist yet the

Revolutionary mirabo for example called

France nothing but an unconstituted

aggregate of disunited peoples

it was a problem that had occurred to

French thinkers in the decades before

the Revolution and in the early 1770s

John jaac Russo wrote down a solution

for it he offered it in the form of

advice to reformers in the Polish

Lithuanian Commonwealth which was

typically just called Poland Poland was

under threat at the time by its

neighbors and actually about to be

carved up by them the clarity and the

level of detail that Russo offered I

think is startling he told them the

problem was Poland was weak from Anarchy

it was disorganized and internally

divided because of that it was unstable

and at the mercy of its neighbors whims

to fix that rouso told Poland to infuse

into the entire nation the spirit of its

Confederates to establish the Republic

in the Po's own Hearts so that it will

live on in them despite anything their

oppressors may do to do that Russo said

Poland needed National institutions

those National institutions would give

form to the genius

the character the tastes and the customs

of the Polish people to the things that

cause them to be themselves rather than

another people give a different bent he

says to the passions of the polls in

doing so you will shape their minds and

hearts in a national pattern that will

set them apart from other people's in

order to raise the patriotism of the

poles to its highest possible level of

intensity he says You must begin by

giving the citizens of Poland a high

opinion of themselves and and of their

Fatherland take stories of Polish Glory

he said and carve them in sacred

characters upon each polish heart build

monuments to those stories and establish

Customs that praise The Virtuous

citizens who had the honor to suffer for

their country in the toils of the enemy

while doing that he says to avoid any

mention of the enemy because to mention

them would be to honor them too much in

short he told the polls to shed luster

on all their patriotic virtues to keep

their Minds constantly on the Fatherland

to make it their Central preoccupation

to hold it up constantly before their

eyes that must be coupled with education

to shape the souls of the citizens in a

national pattern and so to direct their

opinions their likes and dislikes to

make them patriotic by inclination the

newly born infant he says upon first

opening his eyes must gaze upon the

Fatherland and until his dying day

should behold nothing else have them

read polish literature have them learn

its provinces its roads its towns its

history and its laws let his heart and

mind be full of every noble deed every

illustrious man that was ever in Poland

so that he can tell you about them at a

moment's notice that nationalizing

template Russo said would act as a key

for the Polish state that would allow it

to unlock a great Storehouse of energy

on one hand what he's talking about here

you could say is somewhat natural States

and societies of types might build up

myths about their own greatness what was

new here was the intentionality and the

thoroughness the imperative to educate

and indoctrinate an entire society and

to do that in the context of nationalism

everyone was to be taught that they were

a member of a nation and the nation was

to be held up as an object of supreme

importance something that defined what

people believed and defined who they

were inside Russo's Treatise became a

major source of inspiration for the

French revolutionaries so to make the

French nation into a reality they set

out to intentionally nationalize the

people of France as one of the more

radical leaders HRI grear put it all

citizens were to be melted into the

national mass in that they were somewhat

successful they established the first

comprehensive system of national

education and tried to make Paris into

the artistic capital of the world

turning a Royal Palace into the first

national museum the Lou National

festivals were also planned through

those festivals and those schools French

was to be put forward as the only

language used throughout the nation a

musician was also tasked to compose a

patriotic song to celebrate France's

declaration of war against Austria the

song produced began arise Children of

the Fatherland the day of Glory has

arrived it then urges the French to

charge into battle and let the enemies

impure blood water their fields the song

produced was the the mares still the

national anthem in France [Music]

today but for the most part the

revolutionaries plans didn't come to

fruition France was unstable and

economically collapsing the extremism of

the French Revolution was divisive even

among the

revolutionaries as divisions Rose Terror

became an instrument of order chaos ensued

ensued

and order was only restored when

Napoleon took power consolidating France

under himself as its new emperor the

project of nation building had largely

failed in France but the idea had been

demonstrated the word nationalism was

coined in the late 1790s as observers

tried to make sense out of what had just

transpired in France France's unusual

power and geopolitical connectedness

meant that the ideas demonstrated in

France traveled far and wide the

Nationalist ideas that spread can be

understood as resting on a few points

the first is that the nation came to be

seen as the world's natural unit

especially in comparison to Empires or

multinational States like Prussia which

were starting to seem like artificial

constructs the second is that the nation

was to be the primary loyalty for

individuals and the main framework for

ties of solidarity mostly replacing ties

to local regions and to religion the

nation therefore needed to be able to

formulate clear membership criteria and

needed the ability to categorize

minorities and possibly discriminate

them finally a nation had to strive for

political autonomy within a certain

territory and needed a state of its own

to guarantee it the aspiring Nations

that emerged after 1789 typically

claimed their cause was in the name of

Freedom they wanted to make the

transition from subjects into citizens

the nation would be the new highest

Authority and its leader leaders would

typically act or at least claim to act

not in their own interests but in the

interests of the nation also as the

French demonstrated this is something

that could happen suddenly a people just

had to declare themselves a people and

declare their intention to form a nation

the first major wave was based on the

idea that colonized and enslaved peoples

had a right to their own nation that

idea swept through Latin America

starting with sandang now Haiti and

continuing through the Brazilian colon

and through the wars of Liberation led

by Simone Bolivar who recruited armies

from indigenous and mixed race

populations to establish new nations

corresponding to the old Spanish

provinces which formed Venezuela

Colombia Bolivia Ecuador and Peru while

similar events further south led to the

creation of Chile Argentina Uruguay and

Paraguay those revolutions weren't

entirely based in nationalism they were

based on an idea of the sovereign of the

people which in itself was both liberal

and National again this was most closely

inspired by the French Revolution the

American Revolution by contrast was more

heavily based in federalism you can see

the French mix of liberalism and

nationalism in their Declaration of the

rights of man which says that men are

born and remain free and equal in rights

but also that the basis of all

sovereignty resides essentially in the

nation and that no group no individual

can exercise any Authority that does not

expressly derive from it so it was that

mix of liberal and nationalist

principles that started sweeping through

the world first in Latin America then

back in Europe namely in Greece and

Italy where Italians demonstrated

unification nationalism Italian

nationalists wanted to unite the

scattered Italian states the Italian

jeppi mazini was the best known European

nationalist of his age he believed that

Nations could exist as rational

political actors that could form

coalitions like a United States of

Europe that would Foster International

Peace mazini said that required

primarily emphasizing International

loyalty your first duties he told

Italians are to humanity you are men

before you are citizens but he argued

that you need to make a nation first

before you participate internationally

he said we must exist as a nation before

associating ourselves with the Nations

which compose Humanity roughly similar

politics have since been articulated by

thinkers like wdro Wilson and you could

argue are perhaps even more roughly

embodied in organizations like NATO

bricks the European Union and the United

Nations but despite mazzini's hopes

conflict between nations often occurs

territorial disputes between nations

often occur Nations often go to war with

one another and human diversity within

any one given territory can cause

nationalist Conflict for a number of reasons

reasons

for example if you go back to John ja

Russo's recommendations for Poland to

nationalize its citizens what would

happen to the people living in Poland's

borders who don't want to identify as

poles what if they don't speak Polish

and what if they're in a region where

most people around them are like them

and not like other poles do they accept

the Polish language and polish culture

being imposed on them or do they fight

for their own Nation separate from

Poland or for that matter if Poland did

become a nation what would happen to

those who identify as poles but live

somewhere outside of Poland's borders

like Prussia at the time should they try

to get Poland to Annex parts of Prussia

to unite the poles as nationalism spread

a history of similar conflicts spread

with it that to many made hopes of

achieving International Peace through

nationalism seem naive it also created a

new type of nationalism what you could

call the nationalism of persecuted

Nation alties Zionism is probably the

most famous example of that a leading

Zionist thinker Theodore Herzel

legitimated his claim to a Jewish Nation

by saying no one can deny the gravity of

the Jews situation wherever they live in

perceptible numbers they are more or

less persecuted the persecution of

people who seem foreign is a practice

that goes back to Antiquity but Herzel

framed the problem as specifically

occurring on the level of Nations for

example saying every nation in who midst

Jews live is either covertly or openly

anti-semitic because of that persecution

it was argued that Jewish people needed

their own nation which of course became

Israel as the 19th and even the 20th

century went on it became standard for

Nations to try to strengthen themselves

by implementing russan National programs

to teach their citizens that they were

members of a nation and to Foster

National loyalty pride and solidarity

for example at the end of the 19th

century the United States of America

implemented a national Pledge of

Allegiance in its schools it goes I

pledge allegiance to the flag of the

United States of America and to the

Republic for which it stands one nation

under God indivisible with liberty and

justice for all I can recite it from

memory because I was taught it as a

child because American politics also

emphasize individual Freedom it's not

something that I was forced to say if I

wanted to opt out of saying the Pledge

the authorities around me respected it

okay so I want to Pivot our attention to

a new type of nationalism but to do that

I need to bring in some philosophy the

nationalism I've been talking about so

far meaningfully although not entirely

came out of the Enlightenment

Enlightenment thought can be understood

as an emphasis on logic and rationality

and of the belief that they produce

knowledge which when accumulated adds to

human progress Enlightenment thinkers

observed humanity and concluded that

there's a common Humanity shared by

everyone which inspired the French

revolutionaries to make a new French

Nation where all French people had a

certain amount of power and a certain

amount of political dignity a key

takeaway here is that Enlightenment

principles are Universal in nature if

you think about it the whole point of

logic and rationality is to get us away

from a subjective reality and bring us

towards a universal reality when people

agree to use logic and rationality

they're agreeing to have the same

intentions to follow the same set of

rules and that way they can check one

another they can find problems in each

other's thinking and circle over time

closer and closer to the truth it's the

philosophy that science is built on

science is something that anyone

anywhere can take part in precisely

because it's Universal now now we're

going to bring in another type of

philosophy Romanticism Romanticism by

contrast appeals to emotion in its pure

most essential form it's a revolt

against received ethical and aesthetic

standards it takes the standards of the

day and turns them on their head and in

doing that creates excitement typically

by rejecting modern what are normally

called civilized values and by leaning

into Primal values values that make us

on some instinctual level feel alive

rouso is typically seen as its first

major figure though not all his writing

works as Romanticism he was most clearly

one when he rejected what everyone else

around him saw as progress for example

when he asked has the restoration of the

sciences and the Arts contributed to

purifying or to corrupting morals and he

concludes that it was the latter he said

the effect is certain the depravity real

our souls have been corrupted in

proportion as our sciences and our Arts

have advanced toward Perfection how did

he arrive at that conclusion I actually

don't think that it's the point the

excitement in the shock of the

conclusion especially to its perian

audience at the time I think was the

main point and an argument was produced

to procure that excitement Romantics

don't try to be Universal but instead

appeal to the inward self to their inner

convictions and their inner feelings

that affects how they see others two

Romantics friendly relations to others

are only possible in so far as the

others can be regarded as a projection

of their own self that often leads to an

emphasis on race or as we'll see an

emphasis on the nation but Romanticism

didn't begin in politics it was

typically in art for example in

paintings poems and literature but after

the French Revolution Romantics were led

into politics gradually through

nationalism which of the major

post-revolutionary principles offered

the most visceral excitement it was the

most vigorous the country that developed

and embodied romantic nationalism more

than anywhere was Germany Germany at the

time was far from being the European

power that we know now the German people

were scattered downtrodden and

economically behind it was far from

clear that the re was such a thing as a

German state or a German Nation if

anywhere it seemed to be embodied most

most in the Holy Roman Empire but that

was a decentralized and unusually weak

Authority a high-ranking imperial

official put it this way in 1766 he asks

what are the Germans and he answers

himself we have been for centuries a

puzzle of a political Constitution a

prey of our neighbors an object of their

scorn outstanding in the history of the

world disunited among ourselves weak

from our divisions strong enough to harm

ourselves powerless to save ourselves

eles insensitive to the honor of our

name indifferent to the glory of our

laws envious of our rulers distrusting

one another inconsistent about

principles coercive about enforcing them

a great but also a despised people a

potentially happy but actually a very

lamentable people in the late 18th

century Germans found a way to cope with

that lack of national strength and unity

by essentially getting in touch with

Germany they traveled the countryes side

in search of Germany's metaphorical

interior they looked for Germany's

rhythm in BS and folk songs they tried

to capture the sensual power of its

Landscapes through poetry they also

philosophized about the German language

calling attention to its unique

character but then going even further

claiming that words aren't just things

that describe the world but allow you to

feel the world from the inside that way

of thinking found its clearest

expression in the stern German drun

movement the storm and stress movement

but it wasn't nationalism yet it was

Germans creating a romanticized sense of

country or a romanticized sense of

nationality it was making Germany into

something subjective something interior

it was creating a deeper relationship

between subject and object a person and

a place it was something that would

allow Germans to say eventually this is

who I am that feeling crystallized into

nationalism for the first time after the

French Revolution specifically after the

French invaded German lands its clearest

proponent was a man named Ernst morit ar

ar explicitly called for the unification

of Germans into a nation in doing that

AR articulated a key feature of romantic

nationalism which is that it leans into

a sentiment that's felt or could be felt

by its Nationals that's often a

sentiment that flies in the face of the

so-called civilized world the sentiment

that that art leaned into was the shared

hatred of the French it was a sentiment

held personally by art as he recalled

upon seeing the French occupy the Rin

land here I learned to hate them as

enemies and destroyers of my people and

hardly do I see one more and my cheeks

flush hot with blood he then tapped into

that hatred as a means of arousing and

unifying Germany for example in this

poem what is the Fatherland of the

German name me the great country where

the German tongue sounds and sings songs

in God's praise that's what it ought to

be call that thine Valiant German that

is the Fatherland of the German where

anger Roots out foreign nonsense where

every French man is called enemy where

every German is called friend that is

what it ought to be it ought to be the

whole of Germany AR wanted the hatred of

the French to be the main pillar of a

new nationalism in Germany something

that would have the cohering power of a

religion as he put it let the unanimity

of your hearts be your church let hatred

of the French be your religion Let

Freedom in Fatherland be your Saints to

whom you pray so there's a strong

element of collectivism here he's trying

to get everyone to think and feel the

same things to behave the same way

nationalism by definition is a

collectivist ideology a nation is a

collective and nationalists behave

politically by collectivizing with their

Nation but some nationalisms allow for a

significant amount of individualism

while other nationalisms lean more

heavily into collectivism the Germans

ended up creating a highly collectivized

form of nationalism most fully embodied

by the

Nazis the man who developed the

philosophy of collectivism for the

Germans was Johan gutle fisha like AR

fish's nationalism matured once the

French invaded Germany a key moment for

him was seeing Napoleon ride through

Berlin in 1806 fisha in response

delivered a series of addresses to the

German Nation a German Nation

politically speaking didn't exist at the

time but there was a common language

that could be used to unite the German

people so it was on that language that

fisha focused fisha claimed that all the

neol Latin languages around him like

French were inferior since they were

tied to Latin he claimed that they were

dead languages he said to be frank they

have no mother tongue at all he pointed

out that Germans had their own original

language which he called a living

language he also claimed that it

transformed the people who spoke it

Germans he said by speaking a living

language were vitalized people for

example saying description and

characterization in such a language is

itself a directly vital and sensuous

matter representing once more one's own

entire life seizing it and intervening

in it so all these German people are

vitalized in the same way because

they're speaking the same living language

language

from there a metaphor to a body forms he

says Germans separated are a

malfunctioning body and to be strong and

overcome their problems the German

people need to come together and form a

new whole body for fisha that process

had the force of divinity behind it he

said the animating breath of the

spiritual world will take hold of our

national B's inert bones and join them

together so that they might gloriously

exist in a new and trans figured life he

argued that this wasn't something you do

just for the good of the nation he said

that if you join together with the

national body's bones you gain a

profound existential meaning a meaning

that goes beyond your own finite life he

said a man is certain that the

cultivation he has achieved remains in

his people so long as this people

endures and that this cultivation itself

becomes a lasting foundation for all

further development and it's the

universality he said of that particular

law that binds people together he said

it binds this throng into a natural

consistent hole so in this system

Germans gain meian life by being part of

their nation that makes the existence of

their Nation more important than any one

particular National that means that

Germans must be prepared to make

sacrifices for their Nation to preserve

their Nation fisha said a German must

even be prepared to die so that it might

live and he live in it the only life

that he has ever wanted

that created a doctrine of people and

Fatherland the people give everything

even their lives for the Fatherland and

the Fatherland in turn is the people who

are kind of orgiastic brought together

as this imagined living body a set of

ideas picked up and carried out by the

Nazi party a little more than 100 years

later in such a society the love of

Fatherland must itself rule the state as

the supreme ultimate and independent

Authority no other force or principle

can be allowed to conflict with it which

fisha said was for the purpose of

creating domestic peace fisha said to

achieve this end the Natural Freedom of

the individual has to be limited in

various ways and if there were no other

considerations it would be well to

restrict the people as much as possible

uniting their activity uniformly and

keeping them under Vigilant and Lasting

supervision fish's ideas were directed

at German intellectuals and at first he

and AR mostly only found support with

students they inspired for example

members of the Burkin shaft movement

which by 1817 became notorious for

burning books that criticized it or were

considered sufficiently anti-german one

of its members in 1819 murdered a Critic

before running into the street stabbing

himself in the chest and crying out long

live the German Fatherland he survived

and was executed the Executioner though

sympathized with the ideals of the

nationalists he dismantled the

bloodstained scaffold after the event

and used the wood to build a secret

summerhouse for members of the burken

shaft to meet it was a sign if any that

romantic nationalism had taken root in

Germany Germany would finally become a

nation in 1871 when the King of Prussia

was converted to the cause but it would

face a rocky path to stability and

prosperity okay to zoom our perspective

back out nationalism again was a

European invention there were

nationalities and things that resembled

Nations but the concrete conception of

Nations and nationalism were things that

tended to emerge around the world upon

contact with Europe first in Latin

America and around the rest of Europe

and then in Asia and Africa from the

20th century on the inspiration taken

from the West Was often a conscious one

many societies around the world

effectively realized that they had the

Poland problem they were disorganized

and internally divided and and to fix

that to bring strength unity and

stability to their people they said they

must to some extent learn from the West

until the first half of the 19th century

nationalism inspired by the French was

closely linked to Liberal values but as

romantic nationalism became more popular

things began to change nationalisms

around the world started to take on a

hybrid character the ideology of Chang

kek the leader of China before Mount

seang is a good example of that Chong

called for the naming of and

extermination of domestic enemies namely

Communists he called for the spiritual

regeneration of his people for the sake

of making a strong unified and safe

China a goal he told Chinese they should

be ready to die for at any moment but

that was also with the goal of

eventually creating a democratic

pluralistic China precise labeling of

that kind of ideology isn't easy and

must just settle with calling Chong a nationalist

nationalist

as nationalism spread it began to appear

increasingly powerful even Unstoppable

many of those making that realization

were politicians who began to lean into

nationalism as part of their image and

platform that combined with developing

technology and state apparatus made a

new type of nationalism possible and the

last one we're going to talk about today

and that nationalism was fascism fascism

if we're trying to use the word

accurately is an EXT form of nationalism

the Italian fascisti were the first

official fascists they wanted to create

a single party fascist State and then

subordinate the entire Italian Nation to

that fascist state that would all be

done in the name of establishing and

heightening the greatness of the Italian

Nation as musolini put it our myth is

the nation our myth is the greatness of

the nation and to this myth this

greatness which we want to translate

into a total reality we subordinate

everything else musolini was somewhat

inspired by mzini but he rejected

internationalism as a principle that

could bind people together as he put it

the unit of loyalty was too large and he

instead focused on his own country which

developed into a passionate nationalism

as he put it to the Italian parliament

in 1925 we all know that what motivates

me is not a personal whim it is not lust

for power it is not an ignoble passion

but only an unlimited and burning love

for the Fatherland he became especially

interested in the collectivizing

potential of national Consciousness he

wanted a shared National Consciousness

to be at the center of a movement so

collectivist that it was openly

anti-individualistic all individuals

were in theory to merge their being with

the fascist State as musolini put it

fascism stresses the importance of the

state and accepts the individual only in

so far as his interests coincide

with those of the state this is taking

nationalism to such an authoritarian

degree that people essentially become

subjects again what the fascist State

officially thinks and wants its subjects

also officially think and want this

higher personality he said becomes a

nation the state creates a nation so

fascists want to destroy the existing

government and make a new state then

that state creates a nation and through

that Nation the will of the people is

realized to the nation valtion is

conferred and the people are made one it

makes them as he said aware of their

moral unity so with fascism the nation

and its subjects belong to the fascist

State and there's no restrictions on

what the fascist State can do to that

nation and to its subjects as you might

expect that allows the fascist state to

aim to entirely transform its nation and

its people according to its needs as

musolini put it fascism aims at

refashioning not only the forms of life

but their content man his character and

his faith to achieve this purpose it

enforces discipline and uses Authority

entering into the soul and ruling with

Undisputed sway both musolini and Hitler

saw the nation as a highlevel singular

organism musolini called it a living

ethical entity it had to move to stay

alive inactivity he said is death and it

specifically had to move aggressively he

said it had to make its will and power

felt and respected not just domestically

but beyond its own Frontiers a principle

musolini made good on when he invaded

Ethiopia in 1936 ples clear the way for

3,000 armored cars to advance with

Native troops in front Hitler and the

Nazis took a similar set of ideas a set

of ideas now called generic fascism but

they also included especially strong

doses of anti-semitism M and social

Darwinism anti-Semitism was tied to

German nationalism from the beginning at

first playing a minor part but getting

Support over the decades social

Darwinism was also popular around Europe

towards the end of the 19th century when

combined with nationalism it created the

doctrine that the nations with the

greatest physical mental moral material

and political power would win in the

struggle for survival or Supremacy and

they would be justified in doing so B

those ideas together and you had a

fascist state with full control over its

people it was led by men who became

convinced that some living within

Germans borders were not true Germans

they were actually parasites within the

nation they also believed that the

German people in their greatness

deserved more living space and in that

regard they had their eyes set

particularly to the east that all led to

such a disaster that the word fascism

has become perhaps the biggest

pejorative in Paul politics ever since

but nationalism still survives after the

fall of the Soviet Union and the global

decline of socialist States I think it's

fairly easy to make the case that

nationalism became the most influential

political ideology on the

planet I think that's enough said to

bring things together it's time to ask

the question what is nationalism I think

the best thing to do here is to quote a

few professionals and then take it from

there here's the first nationalism

locates the source of individual

identity within a people which is seen

as the bearer of sovereignty the central

object of loyalty and the basis of

collective solidarity another said that

nationalism can be understood as a sense

of belonging to a large Collective that

conceives of itself as a political actor

with the common language and Destiny

what is beyond doubt said another is

that the doctrine divides Humanity into

separate and distinct Nations claims

that such Nations must constitute

sovereign states and asserts that the

members of of a Nation reach freedom and

fulfillment by cultivating The Peculiar

identity of their own nation and by

sinking their own persons in the greater

whole of the nation to think about

nationalism more broadly it's a modern

solution to political organization some

organize around tradition others

organize around individual rights still

more organize around socieconomic

equality nationalists organized around

the nation they may blend in other

principles but that's the way they

primarily operate

to expand that into a definition it's a

political ideology that sees the world

as ideally divided into Nations and sees

citizens as ideally collectivizing for

the sake of the interest of those

Nations if we can accept that then it

breaks nationalism down into two main

components the first is the view that

the world is ideally divided into

Nations those nations are units of

people who are thought to have a

sufficient amount of things in common

which almost always includes a Common

Language and territory the second

component is that Nationals should

ideally politically behave by

collectivizing for their Nation since

the 20th century the first component has

swept the world and more or less become

a global belief if there's ever been

another political ideology that's had

that kind of success I'd personally be

hardpressed to name it but the second

component is still controversial and for

someone to be called a nationalist they

need to believe both they need to see

the world as ideally divided into

Nations and they also need to prioritize

the importance of national solidarity

what that nation is what its interests

are and what it asks of its Nationals

depends on the

nationalism I hope this was helpful

คลิกที่ข้อความหรือไทม์สแตมป์ใดก็ได้เพื่อข้ามไปยังช่วงเวลานั้นในวิดีโอ

แชร์:

คำบรรยายส่วนใหญ่พร้อมภายใน 5 วินาที

คัดลอกด้วยคลิกเดียว125+ ภาษาค้นหาเนื้อหาข้ามไปยังไทม์สแตมป์

วาง YouTube URL

ใส่ลิงก์วิดีโอ YouTube ใดก็ได้เพื่อรับคำบรรยายฉบับเต็ม

คำบรรยายส่วนใหญ่พร้อมภายใน 5 วินาที

ติดตั้ง Chrome Extension ของเรา

ดึงคำบรรยายได้ทันทีโดยไม่ต้องออกจาก YouTube ติดตั้ง Chrome Extension เพื่อเข้าถึงคำบรรยายวิดีโอใดก็ได้ด้วยคลิกเดียวบนหน้าวิดีโอโดยตรง

เพิ่มลงใน Chrome — ฟรี

รองรับ YouTube, Coursera, Udemy และแพลตฟอร์มการเรียนรู้อื่นๆ อีกมากมาย

รับคำบรรยายทันที: แก้ไขโดเมนในแถบที่อยู่ของคุณได้เลย!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

คำบรรยาย YouTubeกำลังเตรียมผลลัพธ์ให้คุณ…

คำบรรยาย YouTube:NATIONALISM: An Idea That Swept the World