The Failure of Nations: A Reply to Henry George

“So claiming that the Nazis’ nationalism and imperialism were exceptional strikes me as untrue. Almost all of the modern nation-states held up as examples made exceptions of Westphalian principles for themselves, often invoking national glory or superiority as an excuse.”

Introduction

I greatly enjoyed Henry George’s recent piece in Merion West, “The Need for Nations,” which I think ranks with his piece on Arendt as among his finest for this outlet. His recent article is the culmination of a series of pieces which defend nationalism against its critics while trying to diagnose the problems of modernity. I have empathized with parts of this project, such as his reading of Arendt on loneliness. Others, such as his reading of the seminal discursive theorist Edward Said, I found more problematic. But George is always engaging and thoughtful, and he and I decided to engage in this exchange to try and better frame the debate between those who support nationalism and those who are critical of it and argue for the internationalist project.

In this article, I am going to point out where I think George makes some relevant points for the nationalist position. However, I will devote most of my time to demonstrating why I think some of his arguments are either more problematic or ultimately untenable. I will conclude by briefly rehashing the argument I made in my four part series “The Case for Humanity” that internationalism is a viable and desirable project.

The Case for Nationalism

George makes several intertwined arguments for why the nation-state should be the preferred form of political organization. I am extrapolating these positions from the text of his article and will discuss each in turn in the section below.

1: Human Nature Tends Towards Violence and Chaos

Like many on the political right, George is a qualified pessimist about human nature. At the start of his article, he stipulates that despite finding Hobbesian individualism unconvincing, he shares the cautious Englishman’s dark interpretation of unbridled human nature.