Nationalism is a word that might have been used to describe a variety of European nationalism prior to the Industrial Revolution in Europe. But at the time the term was not widely used as a general designation for all nations. Rather, the use of the term was more to describe a certain type of political philosophy and cultural orientation that came to be known as Nationalism. The development of this particular philosophical orientation and cultural concept was facilitated by two major events: The coming of the French Revolution and the arrival of the enlightened English population after the 1660s.
In the United States, as we have seen, the idea of nationalism has been used as a rationale for maintaining economic protectionist policies that have been necessary since the nation’s beginning. And, the growth of the national economy and the relative prosperity of the United States as a whole have also served to support this kind of patriotism. But, beyond the nation’s borders, there is a broader philosophical debate about the nature of national government. For example, in Europe many people argue that true national socialism never existed because it simply did not exist in prior centuries.
A related idea is tribalism. According to tribalism, there are certain basic human necessities that are shared by all humans and these necessities are the basis of a civilized society and civilization. Tribalism was most strongly expressed in the far west where early Native Americans had deep connections to their environment and to each other. In addition, early Native American cultures were characterized by complex interwoven systems of law and religion.
Both tribalism and nationalism have been considered conservative by some modern commentators. And, they have been linked, mistakenly perhaps, to the rise of protectionist policies in the nineteenth century, which occurred as a result of increased world trade. Protectionism is a form of collective security. Proponents of nationalism point out that protectionism promotes economic growth and international commerce and that it can be compatible with democratic governments.
One of the ways that President-elect Trump is attempting to undo the damage that has been done to America’s standing in the world community, and to bolster America’s standing in the eyes of the United Nations, is his call for a strong America first approach. He said that his “vision” for America is a “wall of protection around America.” This sounds a lot like a protectionist policy, albeit one that is somewhat more moderate than protectionism. Still, many experts say that it could spell the beginning of the end for America’s global standing. Here are some things to take note of regarding the question of what exactly President-elect Trump means when he says that “America First,” and how his nationalistic policies could affect the future of the United States.
Many world leaders, including the heads of some of America’s greatest international competitors, have criticized the United States’ “protectionism” on the grounds that it hurts American interests around the world. “If anything, it’s only helping put up a wall between us and the rest of the world,” said Mexican President Peotl Mexico during his election campaign. The European Union’s chief negotiator, Guy Verhofstadt, said that” nationalism, by its very nature, is anti-liberalism and antifashionism, which means that it tends to contradict the values of the current international order.” These remarks came as a surprise to the left-leaning European social democracy, who saw Trump’s victory as a vote for protectionism against free-market capitalism.
Still, the future president of the United States seems to be laying the groundwork to pull America out of its present isolationist trend. “America First” may also serve as a warning to other nations with large U.S. trade deficits, which may choose protectionism over free-market capitalism, as evidenced by China’s recent moves to pursue its own economic interests. As this happens, the U.S. economy will once again find itself isolated, preventing it from promoting policies that could promote international cooperation and diplomacy. For example, the European Union’s leading government party, the French National Front, has been quite vocal in its calls for a “Frexit” from the European Union and the rejection of European protectionist policies. If President-elect Trump follows through on his promise to tear down trade barriers and renegotiate the NAFTA Agreement, he will likely increase European resentment and push the country even closer to isolation.
With global trade is becoming a much more contested arena, protectionism may be seen as an opportunity rather than a threat. Although protectionism may be appealing to some, it may also lead to serious damage to U.S. standing in the world community. If the U.S. decides to take a hard-line approach on trade, it will set a dangerous precedent, alienating other nations that might have been enticed to make agreements with the U.S. if it was not protectionist. Furthermore, if the U.S. pursues protectionism, it will only increase the downward pressure on wages for American workers, something that can only be good for those businesses that have chosen to employ people from abroad rather than build their operations in the U.S., which have so far enjoyed the benefits of globalization.