I’m rather resistant to such binary thinking. In fact, binary ideas seem extremely self limiting to me … however I may well have a couple of cousins in my family tree who intermarried. Ancient parish records can be educational in this respect.

For me the most interesting aspect of Mangan’s meanderings is the idea that other countries are unlikely to develop our European brand of nationalism. Following his sterling advice I’m thinking of Iraq – and finding that it may indeed display some nationalistic traits.

Consider, for example, the way Iraqi Kurds are seen as somehow racially and culturally inferior to other groups. Or, perhaps more pertinent to this question, Saddam Hussein’s murderously nationalistic Ba’athist regime.

One would hardly call this ‘clannish'; a rather quaint epithet suggesting be-kilted Highlanders wielding claymores; belting off to battle while intoning pentatonic harmonies.

I am unable to see nationalism as a force for good, though I feel this is what Mangan expects from me. Rather, it is the overt expression of social and economic exclusion from fringe communities, and a desperate last ditch attempt to gain power and influence where none existed before.

Either that or it betrays a kind of group-based inferiority complex. People who retreat into nationalistic ranting have already abandoned their wills to that of the herd. Perhaps they can be forgiven for this given the exigencies of historical dice-throwing.

A timely blog post from Mangan, however. Especially while the prospect of Scottish independence dangles above we Brits in a state of Damoclean uncertainty. If the blade drops sharply from on high, shall we be split in twain forever? Binary comments about this are most welcome.

Agree. Solution to many problems is UP. Which can mean up or United Provinces, a good idea considering situation. War like Dutch war against Spain may last decades, they went to sea and conquered a commercial Empire and became the 1st modern maritime power as America currently is. It also would draw in everyone who actually wants to build anything or be say an actual capitalist as opposed to a mere functionary in the Ministry of Markets. It gives an outlet to the surplus of tall young poppies as opposed to the traditional solution that Progress will find it’s way to when it needs to, there’s no reason for video games, porn and Soma forever.

Then again so does survival of the human species.

Nationalism is about what we’ve got left along with Atavism.

And America’s Valiant if they do the right thing at the critical moment – which is indeed their instincts and practice. They must be shocked from their conditioning of OBEY into DUTY to LIVE.

Pertaining to the discussion at hand, explaining nationalism as empathy extended outwards sounds plausible if one accept the heriditary premise of such traits – but making the leap from nationalism to universal mankind seems to need more explaining than hereditary kinship empathy among northwestern europeans. Especially as there is a gap between professed ideals (universal mankind) and practice: the outbred NWEs continue to live as an ethnically segregated entity. They mainly live among and breed with each other – and despite the ethno-nationalistic fear of racial demise thru interbreeding, the statistics shows such fears to largely lack grounding in empirical reality, as these are exceptions that does not in any way threaten the major trend of continued ethnic-kin preference.

The pathological universalist Northwestern Europe is illustrative: despite their professed belief in universal mankind, resulting in mass immigration and institutionalized PC-policing, the liberal elite of these countries practice a de facto ethno-racial apartheid. They segregate themselves from the broad spectrum effects of their “vibrant” policies, and interact with it only through urban-cosmopolitan pick n choose.

Outbreeding has become too extensive for nationalism to persist, because there is no segregation of those of common family.

In order to re-establish nationalism – should that be desired – a common heritage must be established with limitations on admixture outside that heritage.

In the same way that the 6 or 7 fold minimum separation was dictated, a minimum commonality would serve the same function.

Effectively you are reforming a more clannish structure. I have an unexplored suspicion that periods of clannishness interleaved with nationhood may actually produce greater advantages than a fixed level of breeding.