Hence, why nationalism could be a device that peace and international order can be achieve through. To claim is possible it is important to analyse all the different types of nationalism to see if they contain forms of internationalism.
Firstly, liberal nationalism the oldest form of nationalism stemming from the French Revolution and The Enlightenment period. The ideas of liberal nationalism are a fusion of liberal thought and nationalism. Liberals regard nationalism as a tool for promoting unity and brotherhood between pre-existing nations, instead of distrust, rivalry and possible war. This belief is built off the basis of mutual respect of national rights and characteristics between nations. It is because of this profound belief that it can be argued that liberal nationalism looks beyond the nation to ideas of internationalism. Liberal nationalists uphold the principles of natural harmony and apply it to the nations of the world. Upholding the belief that all nations are of equal status not nation is superior or inferior; which means that the achievement of national self-determination can be seen as a means of establishing a peaceful and stable international order. Liberal nationalists therefore oppose sovereignty, multinational empires and colonies. Expansionism is viewed as a threat to peace and there for disregard. All these aspect help ensure that liberal nationalism is the ideal device for the promotion of peace and international order. However, while liberal nationalism seems to beneficial for the prospects of peace and order, it does have the entailed consequence of ignoring the “dark-side” of nationalism; for example tribalism.
Similar to liberal nationalism, conservative nationalism also holds the potential to promote peace and international order. Conservative naturally places an emphasis on order, this means that conservative nationalism focuses on the promise of social cohesion and public order. Inspired by the work of Fichte who created the concept of the nation in cultural terms, conservative nationalism as a means by which society can be held together. This highlights the conservative desire for order would result in peace and international order as its provides an antidote for upheaval e.g. social revolution. Disraeli a well known conservative believed that by appealing to the national instinct of people social conflict would be avoided. However, although conservative naturalism asserts order which contribute to international order and peace there are some serious drawn-backs. The prompt emphasis that conservative nationalist place on a sense of national identity can become misguided. The issues of immigration and supranationalism (the ability of bodies with transnational or global jurisdictions to impose their will on nation-states) for the conservatives can lead to cultural diversity, which they believe can lead to instability and conflict. This can be seen within the UK conservative party ‘Euroscepticism’ as supranational bodies like the EU pose a threat to national identity. Therefore it can be suggested that conservative nationalism can also promote intolerance and bigotry through this insistence on maintaining cultural identity (purity). Resulting in conservative nationalists portraying immigrant or foreigners as a threat in general and promoting or legitimising racialist and xenophobic fears, which disrupt peace and international order.
Yet, it should be noted that not all types of nationalism are suited towards the creation of peace and international order. This is because there central beliefs and principles hinder peace and order and only promote it as an “end” not a “means”.
Fascism is a type of nationalism that has been deemed “radical” as it by no means is passive or liberal in its nature. The central goal of fascism is to unify people into a single organic whole, therefore they uphold nay aspects of life that bind people through common circumstances; for example birth and history. Yet it should be noted that fascists use nationalism in a variety of ways. For example Italian and Spanish fascists use nationalism as a vechile for uniting the state , while the Third Reich nationalism had the more important role unification and glorification. Fascism embraces an extreme version aft chauvinistic and expantionist nationalism. They regard nations as not equal and interdependent entities but as rivals in the struggle for dominance. Fascist nationalism asserts superiority for one nation over all others. This is illustrated in the ideas of Aryanism- the belief that the German people are a “master race”. Essentially this means that peace is only promoted as a end goal after wars fuelled by an inheritance of bitterness and frustration.
Another example of nationalism that can not promote peace and international order is Riight-wing Nationalism. This type of nationalism doesn’t hold much potential for peace and international order because its primary principles of imperialism, expansionism and xenophobia all remove an prospect of interdependence between nations. Expansionsm is a nations tendency to expand its territory, thus encouraging war and upheaval. This alone undermines the ability of right-wing nationalism to bring peace and order. Also it could be argue that such an intense of nationalism can give way to national chauvinism and militarism. The views held by right-wing nationalists are reffered to as an intense form of patriotism which Charles Maurras described as “ intergral nationalism”.
In conclusion, it is apparant that liberal nationalism possibly t he most suited for bring about peace and international order, followed by conservative nationalism. Yet, due to their “radical” natures include principle like xenophobia and expansionism both fascist and right-wing nationalism only have the capability to promote peace and order internationally once there is one dominant nation. Thus in this sense, peace and order become an “end”.
