Nationalism was not always "bad"

Nationalism has a very bad reputation. It is often distinguished from patriotism, as if patriotism took with it the good qualities of nationalism, leaving nationalism to bear the other not so desirable qualities. Nationalism, as I know it, in my part of the world, was about countries fighting for independence, often from their colonial masters. So... how did it get this bad reputation? Is it because the colonial masters did not like the locals rising up against them?

I have been interested in this idea of Pan-Africanism, which my friend termed continental patriotism. It is about the cooperation of nations. It is not about using power to fight for one's own nation's interest. It is using power to fight for the good of a group of nations. It is Tanzania and other countries helping South Africa gain freedom from apartheid. It is Cuba training nationalists to help them overthrow their colonists.

When I think of nationalism, I do not think American exceptionalism. Maybe American nationalism is of that kind. But when I think of the nationalism of many African and Asian countries, I think of locals rising up against their foreign rulers, take the Philippines and Jose Rizal for example, and asking why should the natives be treated as second-rate citizens. I think of bravery, courage, subversion, dissent... The very qualities American liberals praise...

Maybe one day I should write a paper regarding this to redeem nationalism and to tell the world the untold stories of African and Asian nationalists. The brave people... son of the soil...

See... this was written by my friend,
"So, my sister/brother, be an African. Think of what you need and want to do. Imagine it. Envision it like Mandela. Work upon it like Nyerere. Build it like Nkrumah. Create it like Sankara or die for it like Lumumba."

Africa had so many great leaders, nationalists... What is so bad about nationalism?