The definition of the nation, and its relation to the state, can be pictured as a circle, with “thick” versions of identity on one side and “thin” versions on the other. On the side of thick identity are found both illiberal nationalism and illiberal multiculturalism or identity politics, which in different ways privilege descent-based communities above a common cultural or civic identity shared by citizens of a democracy. On the thin side of the circle are found both liberal nationalism, which is nonracist, and “civic patriotism,” or what the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas calls “constitutional patriotism,” which is nonnational. In “This America,” Lepore defends a version of civic patriotism against the three alternatives: illiberal nationalism, identity politics and liberal nationalism.....Traditionally I have not been a nationalist, feeling that nationalism has been so destructive. But what is the alternative? A worldwide state? A World Federation like in Star Trek where earth has united to battle Klingons?
nationalism .... eats liberalism.... Purging American identity of nationalism and refounding it on a purified liberalism is her purpose.
A thought experiment: If aliens were coming to invade - say we detected them two years away, what would happen? A united earth or every nation for itself -- Trump could make a deal to save the white people.
I'm generally a fan of Jill Lapore and have her recent opus on American history, "These Truths", still unread but on the list. She is center left which is probably where I am at politically. I'm not sure what to make of her latest collection which is reviewed below but there are some interesting points made about the illiberalism on both the left and right. I know that the hard left is anti-liberal - mocks liberals as often as the right does. This point in the review is interesting because some of us who have experienced the direct impact of groups focused on identity politics like MORE have come to similar conclusions. A possible path to power in the UFT has been tossed away by the same type of politics Lapore describes - see recent UFT election.
Lepore’s critique of illiberal identity politics is so brief it is easily overlooked. Of the left she writes: “A politics of identity replaced a politics of nationality. In the end, they weren’t very different from each other.” Lepore was less circumspect in a Rolling Stone interview about her previous book “These Truths”: “And so you have this conservative ‘we are colorblind’ American history, and then you have this very lefty history that can’t find a source of inspiration in the nation’s past and therefore can’t really plot a path forward to power.”I think I myself have moved away from hard left toward liberalism but always am teetering. These are big ideas but also local - we can apply some of the same discussions to the Democratic Party - ie, the Caban/Katz Queens DA struggle, or struggles inside the UFT where the leadership comes from both a liberal and illiberal tradition.
History with all its angles of interpretation is important in order to understand the present and see into the future - but always there is context which is often left out. That is why it is important to get together with others on some regular basis to talk things over, which a bunch of us are doing this week.
Nonfiction
