Conflict Between Narcissism And Aggression Essay

Nationalism, a political or social philosophy in which the prosperity of a nation-state as an existence is considered supreme or more important than anything else. The primary duty and loyalty should be toward the nation-state. The love for one's country often reflected dominance and power as people were able to unite toward common good. Furthermore, republic governments were reestablished a result of Nationalism.

Nationalism has been extremely important and influential in shaping the modern world we see today, causing revolutions, rebellions and the constant reshaping of world maps continuing even today. Its appeal is something that I don’t believe will diminish in the future. Many theologians and political commentators alike agree that Nationalism has perhaps been one of the most prominent political ideologies of the modern world “No single political doctrine has played a more prominent role in shaping the face of the modern world than nationalism” 1, and doesn’t look like ceasing to be as influential anytime

Nationalism inspires a pride within a group of people that ignites change and strengthens unity. It is what keeps heritages and cultures of nations alive. But what happens when the people advocating Nationalism are trapped within a nation in which they do not desire to be? The Pan-Slavic movement in Eastern Europe in the early 20th Century created a tension between Austria-Hungary and Serbia that culminated in

Nationalism was formed with the idea that a nation is made up of people who are joined together by common language, customs, cultures and history. It held the belief that one should be loyal to the people of their nation, not a king or empire. Nationalists believed that people of a single nationality should unite under a single government. The concept of Nationalism emerged in the French Revolution and was spread to the rest of Europe by Napoleon’s conquests.

The source presented depicts an army of men following a singular leader off the edge of a cliff, as well as the quote from Einstein that compares the ideas of nationalism to the childish disease of measles. The perspective clearly is that nationalism is the rooting cause of war and misfortunate events that have occurred throughout history. From the source it can be inferred that nationalistic beliefs are dangerous and promote blind obedience. The partial embracing of the source can benefit the reader and open minds to certain ideas. However, the complete embracement of the source can lead to extremely close minded and biased opinions; only one side of the source is revealed, inferably from a

Nationalism is a powerful force that can unite people working towards a common goal, but when it is taken to the extreme it can cause major disharmony in society, evident in the numerous genocides during the Age of Imperialism, the Fascist party's rise to power, and the Japanese’s unwillingness to surrender during World War II. Nationalism is dangerous, because it warps the minds of the individuals in the organization, creates prejudice and discrimination, and can be easily manipulated into a weapon against humanity.

Have you ever been around someone who seems arrogant? It may not be just arrogance, that individual may have a Narcissistic Personality Disorder or NPD. Narcissus, a Greek mythological character, fell in love with his reflection in the water and could never pull himself away, so he ended up dying right beside the water after a while (Marcovitz 1). Narcissism became known as being self-centered and was developed after this Greek myth (Marcovitz 1). This disorder affects less than 1% of the American population and it occurs more in men than women (Thomas 1). Later on in life most people with NPD will experience severe symptoms around the ages of forty or fifty years old (Psych 1). Many people who have this disorder either refuse to get help

Nationalism can be described as a deep devotion to one's country, and in this case, can be used as a device for propaganda. They used it to evoke loyalty in

Hobsbawm emphasizes that proto nationalism was the “mobilizing (of) certain variants of feelings of collective belonging which already existed and which could operate, as it were, potentially on the macro-political scale which could fit in with modern states and nations.” (Hobsbawm, 52) The consciousness, therefore, of belonging to a nation requires “the citizens of a country (to become) a sort of community, though an imagined one, and its members therefore found themselves seeking for and consequently finding, things in common, places, practices, personages, memories, signs and symbols.” (Hobsbawm, 90) This foundational development is essentially one of patriotism, in which the individual evokes a feeling of loyalty and pride in their nation through symbols, language and ethnicity. While these feelings of pro-nationalism may occur, if an individual is, for instance, to have thoughts of desire to burn the national flag or act in an anti-nationalist way, then they will have feelings of guilt. Freud explains that the “origins of the sense of guilt (are): one arising from fear of an authority, and the other, later on, arising from fear of the super-ego.” (Freud, 119) The state, therefore, is the super-ego that oppresses the Id of the individual who has these perverted thoughts. One can additionally apply this to the original ways in which

Nationalism has played a crucial role in world history over the past centuries. It continues to do so today. For many, nationalism is indelibly associated with some of the worst aspects of modern history, such as the destructive confidence of the Napoleon’s army and the murderous pride of Nazi Germany. Large numbers of people, descent in their hearts, have carried out unbelievable atrocities for no better reason than their nation required them to. Authoritarian and totalitarian regime have crushed dissent, eliminated opposition, and trampled on civil liberties in the name of the nation.

Today, the scourge of nationalism continues to infect humanity. Without doubt, in some circles, nationalism is hotly debated. For most people, however, the concept of nationalism is rarely questioned. In fact, it 's a foregone conclusion that people should love the nation in which they reside. Some people even take great pride in the fact that they were arbitrarily born in a specific geographical location. Unfortunately, like religion or capitalism, nationalism is alive and well in the 21st century.

Nationalism is a widely debated ideology that differs based on the historian’s definition. For example, Benedict Anderson attempts to define nationalism as "an imagined political community [that is] imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign"(Anderson, pg 6). Anderson also believes the main causes of nationalism can be

Nationalism has become one of the most powerful uniting-and occasionally separating-powers of the modern age. Throughout history, there were numerous countries that exemplified both sides of this classic European belief. However, as time has passed, this pride and promotion of one’s country has developed far beyond the scope of Europe. Nationalist feelings fester in all parts of the globe now, and with that comes more complicated expressions of the sentiment, as well as carefully crafted governments that exist for the sole support of nationalist fervor.

“Us and Them” by Jerry Muller discusses the pervasive, historical, and growing significance of ethnic nationalism in politics; “Is Ethnic Conflict Inevitable?” contains two responses to Muller’s article by James Habyarimana et. al. and Richard Rosecrance et. al. Muller and his critics reach radically different conclusions the role of ethnic nationalism. Such differences can be explained by their assumptions of ethnic identity formation. The three’s disparities on ethnic conflict result from different theories of identity, namely: Muller to primordialism, Habyarimana to constructivism, and Rosecrance to a rational instrumentalism.

Before a discourse of the specified topic can be laid out, definitions of a few terms must be distinguished. Firstly, nationalism and patriotism are two distinctly different concepts that are often used interchangeably to represent a similar school of thought. By no means, are they mutually exclusive or unrelated ideologies, but nationalism and patriotism differ in their approaches to expressing love for one’s country, respectively. These definitions can be best understood on the shoulders of essayist and drama critic, Sydney J. Harris, “The Difference Between patriotism and nationalism is that the patriot is proud of his country for what it does, and the nationalist is proud of his country no matter what it does; the first attitude creates a feeling of responsibility while the second a feeling of blind arrogance that leads to a war (Harris, 1953).” While the latter definition may be a bit extreme, the general impression is still applicable. An understanding of the dichotomy between nationalism and patriotism, and how