The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
My New Dispatch Article on Why Nationalism is a Bigger Menace than Wokeness
Both ideologies are bad. But one is a much greater danger than the other.

Today, The Dispatch published my article entitled "Wokeness is Awful. Nationalism is Far Worse." Many of my center-right and libertarian friends and acquaintances fear wokeness more than any other current ideological trend. I have long wanted to do a piece on why that prioritization is misguided. This is it. Here is an excerpt:
Many conservatives and libertarians today lament the rise of "wokeness," even to the point of believing it to be the greatest political danger facing America. Some of these fears are well-taken.
But concerns about wokeness have distracted many on the center-right from a more serious danger, one far more likely to gain widespread support and cause great harm: nationalism. Terrible woke ideas should be criticized. However, their impact is limited by the smaller numbers of their proponents. Nationalists are far more numerous. And if nationalists acquire the power they seek, they would implement an agenda that does great harm to the lives, freedom, and well-being of millions of people.
Wokeness should neither be neglected nor treated as harmless. But when comparing the two, the nationalist threat should take priority. It's long past time for right-leaning critics of both ideologies to treat nationalism for what it is: the greatest threat to liberal democratic institutions today….
For all their mutual hostility, right-wing nationalists and left-wing wokeists actually have much in common. Both groups treat racial and ethnic identity as fundamental and largely immutable. Both want the government to actively promote the interests of some ethnic or cultural groups relative to others. And most of all, both assume a zero-sum world where gains for one group can only come at the expense of others.
But though wokeists and nationalists engage in a similar identity politics, the latter are far more dangerous. Why? In large part, because an identity politics movement promoting the supposed interests of the ethnic majority has a much greater chance of political success in a democratic society than one focused on minority groups….
History also shows nationalist movements are a menace to liberal political institutions. Whether in 1930s Germany or present-day Russia, nationalist movements have subverted liberal democracy and installed brutal dictatorships in its place. By contrast, not a single wokeist egalitarian movement has achieved such a result….
The rest of the article substantiates these points in greater detail.
Worth noting, perhaps, that communists did, of course, install horrific dictatorships in many countries. But communism isn't a woke ideology focused on racial and ethnic grievances. It's a universalist ideology, one that routinely repressed ethnic minorities where it comes to power.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Wokeness is trashing society right now. Nationalism is a hypothetical danger right now. I know which one is more of a danger right now.
Nationalism is hardly hypothetical. We had a nationalist president from 2016 to 2020 who is running again now with a big following.
You may agree with the principles of nationalism, and if so it would understandably not be a danger at all to you. But whatever it is, it’s not hypothetical.
Ummmm ... you just said he is out of power. This is four years later. The wokies are in power.
No they aren't. Trump is the head of the nationalist snake. The wokes hate Biden. Biden tries to pander to woke, but he isn't woke himself, and they know it.
If you doubt that, think of it this way. Whose face is on the t-shirts, hats, bibles that every nationalist buys, wears and carries? Conversely, when's the last time you saw Biden's name or face on anything owned or worn by a wokester?
Somin hates America, so he is against making America great.
At a guess, Somin hates your America, not the real one.
“Both groups treat racial and ethnic identity as fundamental and largely immutable.”
This is certainly true of “wokism” as we see it on display. It’s only contingently true of nationalism, which is, after all, inherently focused on nationality, not race or ethnicity, and doesn’t actually have to care about race or ethnicity. A black or Asian-American native born American is still American by nationality.
I wonder if your determination to zero out the legal differences between citizens and aliens isn’t leading you astray here, by causing you to ignore the importance to nationalism of exactly the factor you are determined to render irrelevant?
Of course it is. Nationalists often want to control their nation’s borders. It’s why American nationalism (even the pejorative meaning) doesn’t align with non-American nationalists, where that is a proxy for ethnic makeup.
Aside from a tiny fringe supremacist element, almost all Americans believe in the melting pot, as you say. Which is why Somin’s opposition rings so hollow here. He’s trying to hang a Hungarian (or Yugoslav) style nationalism (opposition to foreigners) on a legitimate desire by many Americans to keep out economic refugees seeking our welfare state or easy entry level job market (versus their country of origin). Somin absolutely believes, as a matter of ideology, that any such economically motivated migrants should be able to enter any country, but especially the United States. Which is why his beliefs are corrosive to the rule of law, because our law specifically doesn’t allow for that. Unfortunately they are not being enforced sufficiently at present.
You are throwing strawmen at Ilya. He defines nationalism this way:
Nationalists believe the main purpose of government is to protect the interests of a particular ethnic, racial, or cultural group, usually the majority group within the nation.
That definition doesn't include
a legitimate desire by many Americans to keep out economic refugees seeking our welfare state or easy entry level job market.
Maybe what you're trying to say is that there aren't really all that many American nationalists in the end, and Ilya is confusing anti-immigration advocates for nationalists. But that's not what you said:
American nationalism (even the pejorative meaning) doesn’t align with non-American nationalists....
Yes, it does. There are plenty of American nationalists who want to keep immigrants out for reasons other than economic ones, or who otherwise want America to favor... whites, Christians, anyone-but-Muslims, Europeans, or wherever their cultural preferences lie. That's what Ilya is talking about, and they're certainly out there. They're even in here! Lots of VC commenters are of the nationalist ilk.
No, Randal, Ilya is the one dealing in strawmen. He's excluded from the definition of "nationalism" it's defining trait: A concern about nationality. He wants to make it about everything but the central thing it is unavoidably about.
Do you know what the difference is between a nation and a country, Brett?
As a practical matter, as the words are used by anybody but a political "scientist"?
None. People use the words interchangeably.
Well, that’s why you’re confused. For example, there’s a Navajo Nation, but not a Navajo country.
The idea of a nation begins with a set of people. Take, for example, the French. The French have a country, France. A French Nationalist would be against extending French citizenship to non-French people. (There are a lot of non-French citizens of France, if you’re a French Nationalist like Le Pen.)
The same is true of nationalists in this country. They have some conceptualization of what makes a True American other than simple citizenship. Maybe its race, maybe it’s religion, maybe it’s national origin, maybe it’s more of an intangible cultural thing. And a nationalist believes that only True Americans should be citizens.
If you want to put your country first, which is to say the sovereign entity and its citizens, then you’re a patriot, not a nationalist.
There's a huge difference between nation and country. You not understanding this concept or the fact that others are just as ignorant as yourself doesn't have any bearing on the difference between the two.
He gets one thing correct; there are not very many who subscribe to the "woke" ideology, relatively speaking. However, it does not translate to less power. Wokists control most of the educational system, much of the media, and the White House. Not a single decision is made by the current executive branch without first consulting the "Wokist Guide to Best Practices."
Wokists military leadership tried to find and weed out the White Nationalists in the military and came up with zilch.
So white nationalists aren't a thing? And there isn't a long history of nationalist movements also having big problems with people of other races and ethnicities?
There might be some theoretical nationalism that doesn't care about race or ethnicity, but it's not the kind that shows up in the real world.
In practice, nationalists care not just about the nation, but a very specific view of the nation. And to maintain that vision you need to keep out and get rid of people who don't meet that criteria. In other words, an ethno-state with a particular ideology.
Just look at Trump, the original Muslim ban also blocked people with green cards, and his rhetoric around illegal immigration is based heavily around race.
Of course white nationalists are a thing. The point is, Ilya is treating them as though they were the only thing. As though all nationalist movements, everywhere, were categorically united in being obsessed with race and ethnicity.
Of course, Ilya needs it to be this way. He is the absolute opposite of a nationalist, he places ZERO weight on nationality, he wants it to become legally irrelevant. Any movement, however innocent, that wants citizenship to matter, is his enemy.
And it's always nice if you can convince people that your enemies are necessarily bad people, isn't it?
So, he needs nationalists to necessarily be racists. Whether or not the concept of "nationalism" has any logical relationship to racism.
That's not what nationalism means. You're confusing the concepts of 'nation' and 'country.'
No surprise coming from you, Professor Somin. For you, nationalism means strictly controlling who crosses borders, which is an anathema to you. So you’re wrong. Authoritarian wokeness, controlling and punishing others for beliefs or speech based on group identity, is far more corrosive and illiberal than controlling immigration.
Did you expect this white, male blog's target audience -- half-educated racists, superstitious gay-bashers, cheerleaders for censorship, chanting antisemites, right-wing misogynists, obsolete xenophobes, backwater Islamophobes, faux libertarian Heritage Foundation fans, faux libertarian Federalist Societeers -- would be interested in your observations, Prof. Somin?
You need to invent some new insults, Artie. Those are getting stale and over-used.
I guess "Nationalism" is the only thing leftists can come up with for people who dare disagree with unbridled illegal, or even legal, immigration that threatens their way of life.
Imagine wanting to preserve your culture. How racist!
Wokeness is insanity posing as reasoned thought that tells the average person that men can be women, importing the 3rd world is actually good, social justice means not prosecuting criminals, and white people are racist. There are changes coming to Europe because the left has pushed this message and it only resonates as pure, unadulterated bullshit with the citizens. Same for the states.
Imagine wanting to preserve your culture.
Can you describe this culture?
It's easy to make any case you want, so long as you alone get to define all the key terms. In Somin's example, he redefines nationalism to remove any connection to "nation," and replaces "nation" with "ethnic majority," which is a totally different concept. When Somin uses a word, it means just what he chooses it to mean - neither more nor less.
He's not "redefining" it. That's what it means.
And if nationalists acquire the power they seek, they would implement an agenda that does great harm to the lives, freedom, and well-being of millions of people.
Given their commitment to breaking down the global trade system, making climate change worse, etc., I think the word you were looking for is "billions" of people.
Nationalism is a baseline requirement for being a politician. If you are not there to serve your nation, you serve others against your nation.
You're confusing nationalism with patriotism.
This assumes the acceptance of Somin’s rather tendentious definition of nationalism, which would be an “ism” never embraced by either Trump or the vast majority of his supporters.
No, I am not.
Patriotism is based on geography and serves the Ruling Class; nationalism is based on the people and serves the people.
The dirt is not magical.
The dirt is not magical.
It is to a politician. The geographic boundaries of one's power are in fact quite magical. The constituents whom the politician serves are defined that way.
Nationalist politicians, those who define their constituents in other ways (racially, religiously, culturally), are divisive and dangerous.
Nation or country? Those are two different concepts.
"Both want the government to actively promote the interests of some ethnic or cultural groups relative to others."
What absolute rubbish.
Is he conflating "Americans" with "cultural group"
What ethnic or cultural group are nationalists attempting to promote above others?
What ethnic or cultural group are nationalists attempting to promote above others?
Christians, is a common one these days. Just look at what's going on in Louisiana and Oklahoma.
I mean, fair, that's a legitimate example. Albeit, a fairly isolated one. But in what way is it anywhere near the level of indoctrination we see with, for example, gay/transgender lifestyles and activism?
I would caution against sweeping generalities. One can be somewhat woke, in the sense of believing things like police, teachers, and others are continuing to treat black people more harshly than white people, that black people continue to be burdened by a history of institutional racism, and there has been a tendency to “whitewash” and not speak frankly about American history, without being particularly “dangerous.” Similarly, one can be somewhat nationalist, both in the sense of thinking immigration needs to be controlled better and also that the US has spent too much attention and treasure on foreign adventures and commitments and neglected things at home, without being particularly dangerous.
Professor Somin has tended to think in absolutes, so that even relatively moderate expressions of ideas he abhors become dangerous by being placed in the same category as much more extreme expressions.
Why is "nationalism" always classed as "right-wing"? For the last century the American Left has advocated centralized government and laws on the claim they will address "national" problems, whether those problems are "national" or not. How is centralization not "nationalism"?
Because one of the theoretical differences between Communists and Nazis is that Nazis are National Socialists while Communists are international socialists. It's a pretty pointless distinction when both want to control the world, whether directly through conquest or indirectly through conquest.
It's as meaningful a distinction as Nazis controlling the means of production while socialists own them outright.
Correct! Finally someone who gets it.
In US history, the term “nationalism” typically meant something different from whatever Somin is talking about. It meant what you are suggesting here.
Anyway, to me the matter can be summarized simply.
“Nationalism” from an inward facing perspective generally means centralization and aggrandizement of government power. “Nationalism” from an outward facing perspective, on the other hand, generally stands for decentralization, and is more limiting of government, since in that context you are favoring the more localized individual political unit.
The USA is a nation, with a national identity, but that identity of not based on race or ethnicity, but broadly shared political and cultural principles.
Nationalism for Americans is about the common welfare of its citizens and protecting and passing on those principles.
When Somin was crying about nationalists hurting millions, he was talking about the foreigners in other countries who will no longer be prioritized from free gibs from Uncle Sugar.
Which is Somin's biggest issue.
If you don't want Nazi Germany, don't be the Weimar Republic.
Zionism, not nationalism?
Of course it is. Did OP imply it wasn't?
(I didn't actually read OP. Prof. Somin is rather longwinded, and there's never enough of a payoff from reading his posts. But the comments are interesting sometimes.)
Nationalism, the one act between consenting adults that libertarians reject.
Heh.
I wouldn't ascribe anything Prof. Somin says to libertarians in general. His "libertarianism" is ... rather idiosyncratic.
Wokeness is a ridiculous concern.
A bad hair day is a bigger menace than wokeness.
Burnt toast is a bigger menace than wokeness.
Dennis the Menace is a bigger menance than wokeness.
Fully disagree.
Wokeness is:
- going easy on criminals
- racial preferences / racial discrimination
- You know that old phrase: "To my friends, everything; to my enemies, the law"? Wokeness is that principle, with "favored / disfavored groups" in place of "friends / enemies." As in: "microaggressions" against favored groups must be harshly punished, while actual physical attacks (every really horrific ones) against disfavored groups are no big deal:
source: https://www.thefp.com/p/the-day-the-delusions-died-konstantin-kisin
Huh? These are all things that Trump is
trump
eting. Are you saying he's woke?More "nonsense with definitions" games. Anyway...
Auron MacIntyre
@AuronMacintyre
I have no patience for those concern trolling about the theoretically dangerous excesses of the right while the government is currently arresting doctors for opposing child mutilation
https://x.com/AuronMacintyre/status/1803185603862991275