The national nature of globalization and the global nature of nationalism: Historically and methodologically entangled

Abstract

It is often assumed that psychological globalization produces tolerant, cosmopolitan outlooks, which deglobalization is now replacing with intolerance and narrow nationalism. This article argues that nationalism and cosmopolitanism, rather than being simple opposites, are entangled historically and methodologically, and that the national nature of globalization and the global nature of nationalism need to be recognized. Historically, the period of globalization coincided with the formation of the world of nation-states. Methodologically, economic calculations of globalization assume a world of nation-states. Nationalism is not only global in its reach but national consciousness is entangled with international consciousness. This entanglement may not be apparent if nationalism is equated with its extreme forms, for nationalism has everyday forms in established states. This article shows how studies of cosmopolitanism can themselves take for granted the world of nation-states within their methodologies. There are some brief suggestions about how to study banal nationalism.

In the aftermath of globalization: Antiglobalizing and deglobalizing forms of subjectivity

“…The failure of internationalist aspirations in the labor movement can turn into the opposite-that is, a heightened national worker subjectivity. Care needs to be taken to ensure that an antiglobalizing mentality does not turn into a deglobalizing or nationalistic mentality (Billig, 2023). In postcolonial and also former colonizing countries, "demands for social justice" can be "allied with often primitive tribalism" (Fanon, 1963, p. 204).…”

“…This means that a deglobalizing nationalistic subjectivity in the West may reject its own national government if it is considered liberal cosmopolitan, whereas a foreign government, even an undemocratic one, may be supported because it fights against LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) rights, feminist ideas, inclusion, diversity, and equity (i.e., what is defamed as wokeism and is a target of culture wars). It is a new version of international solidarity among antiliberal reactionary forces, or what Billig (2023) has also called "the global nature of nationalism." In addition, nationalistic deglobalizing subjectivity rejects the internationalist workers' movement or may consider the antiglobalizing program to be treacherous.…”

The politics of Chinese immigrants’ double unbelonging and deglobalization

“…The cultural-humanistic perspective sheds light on important aspects of migrant life but does not seem to help us deal with thorny political issues such as deglobalization (Billig, 2023;Khawaja et al, 2023;Stenner & Andreouli, 2023). Thus, it is necessary to modify the existing cultural-humanistic framework of belonging, and of double unbelonging for that matter.…”

“…It should be pointed out that the shift between belonging and unbelonging is rarely a natural, spontaneous process. Nationalism scholars have analyzed the role of the nationstate in defining who is legitimate in a sovereignty (Billig, 2023;Stenner & Andreouli, 2023). In their book Who Sings the Nation-State?…”

“…Inspired by theoretical psychologist Thomas Teo's (2023) discussion of the negative dialectics of globalization and mental life, I suggest that belonging and unbelonging tend to coexist in a dialectical relation, with the possibility of constituting one another. Lastly, drawing on the scholarship of nationalism (Anderson, 2006;Billig, 2023;Butler & Spivak, 2007), I discuss the roles of the nation-state and mass media in the production of unbelonging, as well as the polarizing logic of the bilateral geopolitical struggle that leads to double unbelonging.…”