Nationality in the open society: Popper versus Hayes and Kohn

Abstract

Popper's attitude to nationalism can be analysed by comparison with the position taken by Hayes and Kohn, who distinguished between a communal, malevolent form of nationalism, and a civic and constitutional variant that could coexist with liberalism. By contrast, Popper welcomes communal affiliations whose diversity he perceives as essential to liberalism, while rejecting sovereignty, whether or not invested in a representative body, as a threat to the liberal open society. This perspective reverses the normative priorities that Hayes and Kohn attribute to liberalism. Its basis is Popper's adherence to a pluralist liberalism, which centres on protecting social ties rather than on representation and state organs. This denotation of liberalism competes with the legalist individualism that Hayes and Kohn identify with liberalism and therefore accommodates nationalism differently.

A Popperian Approach: Pre-service Teachers’ Preparation In Teaching English to Young Learners

“…For this reason, tolerance of diversity, be it religious, racial, and ethnic diversity, including language, are values that must be upheld. The openness of Indonesian citizens to English as a foreign language as a bridge to interact and communicate has become a necessity (Popper, 2014;Gerson, 2019;Parvin, 2010). Therefore, learning English as a foreign language has been taught from an early age.…”