The Corner

Politics & Policy

Nationalism vs. Statism, Part II

American flag display at the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, Utah, 2002 (Photo: Americanspirit/Dreamstime)

I am constantly hearing how conservatism needs to embrace nationalism. But so far, only Ramesh Ponnuru, has been able to give me a single example of what a non-statist “nationalist” policy might be. Pulling out of the Paris accord on climate was nationalist, he argued, because it asserted American sovereignty and freed up American energy producers (in principle, of course: The actual accord wasn’t particularly binding in any meaningful way). I think this points to an important distinction. As I discussed in my G-File last week, the international realm is far closer to a state of nature than domestic politics, and, therefore, I can see how asserting national sovereignty can hold at bay attempts by international institutions to constrain American liberty, collectively and individually. This doesn’t mean that all international agreements are bad — I’m just conceding that they can be.

But what does a “nationalist” domestic policy look like that doesn’t involve using state power? I’m all in favor of enforcing the border, but that does require the use of state force (it’s even in the word “enforce”). This points to how I favor some policies that can be called “nationalist” but I don’t see the benefit in calling the basic functions of the state “nationalist.” When the government — in the name of nationalism, or progress, or social justice — exceeds those basic functions laid out in the Constitution, it’s still statism.

Conservatives used to consider “statist” a fighting word. Well, what exactly is the difference between statism and nationalism when translated into a domestic agenda? A peacetime draft would certainly be nationalist; it would also be statist. The public schools were birthed in a riot of nationalism. Indeed, the progressives who constructed the administrative state were not Bolsheviks looking to unite the world under global Communism; they were nationalists trained in the German historicist tradition. But it seems for different reasons that both the Right and the Left have forgotten that part of the story.

Most Popular

White House

The Trivialization of Impeachment

We have a serious governance problem. Our system is based on separation of powers, because liberty depends on preventing any component of the state from accumulating too much authority -- that’s how tyrants are born. For the system to work, the components have to be able to check each other: The federal and ... Read More

‘Texodus’ Bodes Badly for Republicans

‘I am a classically trained engineer," says Representative Will Hurd, a Texas Republican, "and I firmly believe in regression to the mean." Applying a concept from statistics to the randomness of today's politics is problematic. In any case, Hurd, 42, is not waiting for the regression of our politics from the ... Read More

Feminists Have Turned on Pornography

Since the sexual revolution of the 1960s, the feminist movement has sought to condemn traditional sexual ethics as repressive, misogynistic, and intolerant. As the 2010s come to a close, it might be fair to say that mainstream culture has reached the logical endpoint of this philosophy. Whereas older Americans ... Read More

Put Up or Shut Up on These Accusations, Hillary

Look, one 2016 candidate being prone to wild and baseless accusations is enough. Appearing on Obama campaign manager David Plouffe’s podcast, Hillary Clinton suggested that 2016 Green Party candidate Jill Stein was a “Russian asset,” that Republicans and Russians were promoting the Green Party, and ... Read More
PC Culture

Defiant Dave Chappelle

When Dave Chappelle’s Netflix special Sticks & Stones came out in August, the overwhelming response from critics was that it was offensive, unacceptable garbage. Inkoo Kang of Slate declared that Chappelle’s “jokes make you wince.” Garrett Martin, in the online magazine Paste, maintained that the ... Read More