The Case for Nationalism, by Rich Lowry

Politically aware conservatives will remember that National Review was a the chronicler of the Never Trump movement, those Republicans who opposed Trump throughout the 2016 election and into the first years of his presidency.  Some Never Trumpers have warmed to Trump, others persist in their opposition.  NR editor Rich Lowry may not be a big Trump fan, but on at least one issue, he will readily stand in Trump's corner.  In The Case for Nationalism: How It Made Us Powerful, United, and Free he tries to redeem the word nationalism from those who responded negatively to Trump's use of the term.

Given that fact that the left (as well as many on the right) will take every word Trump says and twist it beyond all recognition, it's not surprising that when Trump says "nationalism" they hear "Nazi."  Now, it's true that "Nazi" stands for "national socialism," but Lowry points out that "Nationalism has been a current in the world for centuries, touching every corner of the globe, and somehow only the Germans produced Nazism."  In other words, as Lowry examines socialism around the world and through history, only 20th century Germany produced that toxic, deadly perversion of nationalism.

Trump's nationalism is simple, non-race-based, and should be non-controversial: "We need to adopt immigration and trade policies with our own interests foremost in mind."  Lowry digs deeper than that, providing some historical background of nationalism generally, and specifically the American experience.  His biggest target is the idea that American is a nation of ideas.  He argues instead that at the American founding, "no one believed they were creating 'an idea,' rather than a nation-state."  Over time, historical events such as the Civil War, the moon landing, and the Civil Rights Movement solidified our national identity.

The decades since those unifying eras, especially the last 20-30 years, have seen an increase in immigration accompanied by a decrease in national unity.  The rise of identity politics and the deemphasis of cultural assimilation have contributed to the fracturing of American identity.  Lowry states that "wanting immigrants to become fully part of us [via assimilation] is not xenophobia but the opposite.  It reflects a belief that our culture can and should be embraced by people from varied backgrounds."

All things considered, "the focus of US policy should be the national interest.  We can know (and should) about the world, we (and should) forge international alliances, we can (and should) trade with the rest of the world.  But the animating goal of our government should be promoting the interests of its own citizens."  That is what Trump believes, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.


Thanks to Edelweiss and the publisher for the complimentary electronic review copy!