Nationalism, Immigration and France
British Poet Auden wrote in his “ In Memory of W.B. Yeats” –
“In the nightmare of the dark
All the dogs of Europe bark
And living nations wait
Each sequestered in its hate.”
Men are not by nature nationalist, any more than they are monarchist or republication. They become nationalist, within particular cultures and under certain conditions, and more or less nationalist depending upon particular situation. Nationalism is a learned sentiment. It is molded by the culture and the state that is part of the culture. For example – except in a legal sense a Frenchman and an Italian are not at birth Frenchman or Italian. They become Frenchman or Italian – a) because of the influence and power of their political state and its laws b) because of their immersion in the culture into which they born and within which they mature c) because of the training and education they receive from parents and schools in the traditions and values of their groups and d) because of their interests and goals, reflecting or flowing out of their culture, seem to be subsumed in those of their nation and nation-state.
Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget has shown through psychological experimentation that patriotism is learned by children about the ages of six to ten from parents, older children, and adults with whom they come in contact, and from the training they receive in school. Nationalism, therefore, is a modern, learned response to an individual’s internal needs for security and social acceptance and to external stimuli for conformity and public service.
The idea of democratic nation depends upon the very sublime presumption that the citizens of a nation have the commitment to the preservation and advancement of the social entity known as nation which takes priority over the commitment to all other values and beliefs. However, immigration, globalization and open border policy defies the very definition of nation and undermines the basic purpose of formation of state.
Globalization theory has a basic flaw – it considers only the transactional relationship of human nature and considers national cultures and traditional values as dispensable. These ideals may truly intellectually appealing; but the do not alter the very human nature for both native population and immigrants.
France from 1978, has prohibited collection of data on race , except under special circumstances. Even the academic researchers are not allowed to collect data for social issues concerning racial distinctions in French Society. Forget about nationalism or statehood, in absence of such data and with its open border immigration policy in place, government has no clue what demography they are dealing with. In reality, the continued presence of large number of illegal immigrants has changed the society from its very cultural core. Emphasizing these differences within the domestic polity was perceived as a form of ‘cultural separatism’, an effort to break away from the inclusive nation-building. Thus, the dichotomy continued with a highly enlightened principle being upheld in the statute books, ignoring the reality at the ground level.
‘The Great Replacement Theory’ of French Author Renaud Camus anticipated the non-white migrants will encroach the political and cultural life of Europeans to an extent that leads to marginalization of Europeans within their homeland. It appears that his anticipation has come true.
De Gaulle as a president of France made an statement in 1959 during Algerian Separation war , which currently has become the advertising message for the Far-Right Political parties – “ It is very good that there are yellow Frenchmen, black Frenchmen, brown Frenchmen. They prove that France is open to all races and that she has a universal mission. But [it is good] on condition that they remain a small minority. Otherwise, France would no longer be France. We are, after all, primarily a European people of the white race, Greek and Latin culture, and the Christian religion.”
Therefore, given France’s large-scale immigration and open-border policies, President Emmanuel Macron’s reported question—“How can French people do this to France?”—in response to widespread riots, looting, and arson in Paris and other major cities appears politically ironic. Respectfully, Mr President, the argument is that the rioters may not identify with French national culture in the same way as the native population, and that attachment to one’s (immigrant) adopted homeland cannot simply be assumed across differing cultural traditions and values. Dante’s poetry about Italy likewise reveals a profound attachment to his native land –
“ Is not this my own nest
Where I was nourished and was given life ?
Is not this the dear land in which we trust,
Mother loving and kind
Who shelters parents, brothers, sister, wife ?”
