Forum

Here's an observation, by the way. Practically all examples of nationalist movements I know of were based and developed not on "nationalist ideas", not on the idea of unification by blood, skin color, etc., but primarily on the premise of fighting an external enemy. That is, Ukrainian nationalists, Baltic ones, Russian ones — all fit perfectly into this pattern.

Well, naturally. I wrote about that above — when the size of the feeding trough shrinks, an external enemy appears. Where would it come from if there's enough food for everyone? And where there's an external enemy, there's a fight against it, for the feeding trough. And to fight crowd against crowd, each fighter needs to understand how to distinguish friend from foe. The easiest way to do this is by skin color, eye shape, accent. And historically, enemies have usually turned out to be people who differ precisely in these characteristics. So this mechanism is firmly hardwired into the human psyche. That's why nationalism is aggressive towards foreigners.

It's quite possible that without the presence of an external enemy, it's hard to impose such a perverted ideology on a sensible person.

Why is it perverted? It's actually the most natural — in the living world, all creatures live that way.

Isn't this the difference between nationalist ideas and national ones?

Please explain the difference.

It's obvious that they shouldn't be mixed. Here's an example of a national idea: "Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality."

Well, I suppose I understand what Orthodoxy is. Though there are many questions here; modern Orthodoxy reminds me more of a retired general on a pension than an active political force.

But what autocracy and nationality are — I have no idea. This needs to be explained much more clearly. Otherwise the masses will follow the authors of slogans like "beat the hachi".

That won't fly; you'll still have to come out from behind the mask of "scholarly detachment." It's not about Google or basic knowledge of history. I'm interested in the assessment of a "prosperous state" specifically from your point of view.

Let's start with the fact that you were the first to raise this question. So explain — what is a "prosperous state"?