The Nationalist Revival: Trade, Immigration, and the Revolt Against Globalization

Columbia Global Reports

by John B. Judis, Adam Grupper (Narrator)

4 Hours and 52 Minutes

Why Has Nationalism Come Roaring Back?

Trump in America, Brexit in the U.K., anti-EU parties in Italy, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, and Hungary, and nativist or authoritarian leaders in Turkey, Russia, India, and China -- Why has nationalism suddenly returned with a vengeance? Is the world headed back to the fractious conflicts between nations that led to world wars and depression in the early 20th Century? Why are nationalists so angry about free trade and immigration? Why has globalization become a dirty word?

Based on travels in America, Europe, and Asia, veteran political analyst John B. Judis found that almost all people share nationalist sentiments that can be the basis of vibrant democracies as well as repressive dictatorships. Today's outbreak of toxic "us vs. them" nationalism is an extreme reaction to utopian cosmopolitanism, which advocates open borders, free trade, rampant outsourcing, and has branded nationalist sentiments as bigotry. Can a new international order be created that doesn't dismiss what is constructive about nationalism? As he did for populism in The Populist Explosion, a runaway success after the 2016 election, Judis looks at nationalism from its modern origins in the 1800s to today to find answers.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Economics, History, Political Science, Audiobook, International Affairs

Audiobook

First published October 9, 2018

About the author

John B. Judis is an American journalist. Born in Chicago he attended Amherst College and received B.A. and M.A. degrees in Philosophy from the University of California at Berkeley. He is a senior editor at The New Republic and a contributing editor to The American Prospect.

A founding editor of Socialist Revolution (now Socialist Review) in 1969 and of the East Bay Voice in the 1970s, Judis started reporting from Washington in 1982, when he became a founding editor and Washington correspondent for In These Times, a democratic-socialist weekly magazine.

He has also written for GQ, Foreign Affairs, Mother Jones, The New York Times Magazine, and The Washington Post.

In 2002, he published a book (co-written with political scientist Ruy Teixeira) arguing that Democrats would retake control of American politics, thanks in part to growing support from minorities and well-educated professionals. The title, The Emerging Democratic Majority, was a deliberate echo of Kevin Phillips' 1969 classic, The Emerging Republican Majority. The book was named one of the year's best by The Economist magazine.

Reviews

[Venky · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the lore of contemporary history, politics and even to a material extent, in literature, one of the most used and abused clichés is the one associated with the tenet of ‘nationalism’. Clothed in aggression, suggestive of a seething mode of activism and couched with anarchic undertones, the word nationalism is often succeeded by aggressive companions such as fervor, vigour, passion, pride and a whole horde of other similar sounding accoutrements.

What triggered this peculiar juxtaposition of nationalism with its attendant rigidities and notions? Is a new breed of nationalism unraveling its powerful roots and wielding its sweeping influence upon an unsuspecting new world seamlessly bound together by the forces of globalization and socio-political integration? These are exactly some of the questions which John B. Judis addresses in an unbiased and practical manner in his latest book, “The Nationalist Revival” (“the book”).
Although tracing the contours of the very concept of nationalism with a view to distinguish the word as it was espoused at its origin, from the morphed version that stares us in the eye today, the book can by no means be construed to be a treatise on the subject. It is more an informed dissection of the direction nationalism has taken and the divergent paths that it has traversed, than an academic bone dry dissection of the very term. This is the single most important element that makes the book so readable and thought provoking. Asserting that “national identity I not just a product of where a person is born or emigrated to, but of deeply held sentiments that are usually acquired during childhood”, Mr. Judis traces the psychology of nationalism that had the entire population chocked in a vice like grip resulting ultimately, in two World Wars of monumental and tragic proportions. It was to curb and contain this very breed of ‘fascist’ nationalism that the world came together post the World Wars to develop institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (“IMF”), the World Bank, NATO and such other likes. The vision of Spinelli and Monnet, universally regarded to be the founding fathers of the European Union had at its core this philosophy:
To avoid of “the recurrence of another world war, the European nations would have to cede their sovereignty to a supra national federation. Nationalism was inherently toxic”.

However, just when it seemed that this toxic genre of nationalism which was the very scourge of humanity was finally eradicated, it has resurrected and this time the revival is much deadlier and dangerous than what could have been envisaged by the prophets of doom. This mutant form of nationalism has found its métier in the Brexit of The United Kingdom Independent Party; the blatant racial prerogatives of Donald Trump in the USA; the exhortations of Marine Le Pen in France and the inclusive polices of Victor Orban in Hungary. So what is it that has manifested this unruly and vituperative shape of nationalism that has for a hear a narrow minded narrative and for a spine, repressive ideologies? What has happened so abruptly so as to leave the visions of Spinelli and Monnet in tatters? Citing various economic, social and geopolitical factors, Mr. Judis unearths the various trigger points and causes leading to the undesirable consequences that lay spread before us.

From following disparate and discriminating economic policies in the Eurozone whose consequences as brilliantly described by economic sociologist Wolfgang Streek, is that, “qualitative horizontal diversity is transformed into a quantitative vertical inequality”, this fuels nationalism of an aggressive albeit logical vein in the demand starved countries such as Greece, Spain and Italy. Merciless imposition of austerity leads to a manifold increase in the sentiments of nationality.
Similarly, divergent and uninformed beliefs regarding the policies of immigration stoke passions that are communal and polarize extreme advocates right down the middle. As Mr.Judis points out, post the publication of the controversial book titled “Germany Abolishes Itself” by a banking official and member of the Social Democrats in Germany, Thilo Sarrazin, the outlook on Germany’s benevolent policy of opening the gates to refugees flocking towards Europe from the Middle East and Asia, underwent a volte face. The ultra-nationalist party Alternative fur Deutschland, which was formed in 2013 became the official opposition party in Parliament, possessing the entitlement to chair the powerful Budget Committee, following the September 2017 National Elections.
Similar is the case with the rabid immigration and tariff outlook that is the inimitable prerogative of the irascible Donald Trump. Taking advantage of a disenchanted blue collared segment, hung out to fry following a massive loss of unemployment and a savage Recession the likes of which was last seen in the Great Depression of 1929, Trump evoked a sense of rampant nationalism in the “Rust Belts” which saw him sweep to power in a ludicrous 2016 Presidential election that was marred by controversies and tarnished by seedy campaigns. These alarming signs that have materialized uniformly across the globe are, as per Mr. Judis, representative of what the great psychologist Sigmund Freud called “the return of the repressed”. Mr. Judis, paraphrasing Freud states, “this occurs when instinctual impulses – or in this case very ordinary nationalist sentiments – are completely blocked from expression because of their association with aberrant, ugly desires, only to return in their most primitive, brutal form”.
The advocates of nationalism justify their belief in the concept with an element of pride and prejudice, with a sense of delight and disenchantment and in the anticipation of both delight and dread. This paradoxical tug and pull of nationalism treads a very delicate tightrope. Even a tiny slip up is sufficient to bring about a catastrophe whose unintended consequences may well be unimaginable. And it is this very consequence that Mr. Judis warns us about in his illuminating book.

Meanwhile, after successfully provoking a vitriolic form of nationalism following his public appearance in the company of Turkish Prime Minister, Raycip Erdogan, World Cup winning German midfielder Mesut Ozil has announced his retirement from international football, citing disbelief and expressing outrage at allegations of misplaced patriotism and misconstrued intentions!

[Joey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Judis's measured tone and non-partisan, sensical takes on hot-button issues like trade, immigration, globalism, etc clearly rankle some readers who perhaps seek scholarly backing for their biases. In my view, it would be hard though for a thoughtful reader to take issue with much of the content of "The Nationalist Revival."

Judis contends that nationalism is neither salvation nor destroyer, but rather a force that should be recognized (but commonly is not) by policy makers. To cite just one example, Western policymakers that pushed for eastern European inclusion in NATO, backtracking on verbal commitments to Russia that they would not do so, failed to take Russian nationalism into their calculus. This failure arguably fed Putin's arguments to his Russian subjects that the West intends to hogtie Russia and run roughshod over it.

Committed liberals, as well as conservatives, will probably not find Judis's prescriptions for America's immigration and trade ills to their liking. He acknowledges the interaction between unfettered immigration and ugly nativist nationalism, suggesting limits on immigration but, mostly, putting the onus on U.S. businesses to hire only documented immigrants, while simultaneously levying consequences on employers that fail to do so. In the realm of trade, tariffs are not anathema so long as they're smart and targeted at key industries like steel and other manufacturing sectors that undergird national security.

A healthy portion of this book surveys European nationalism as well, which some readers may find boring. Europe's wrestle with nationalism, however, is deeply instructive to the wise readers

Read together with Judis's other recent volumes -- 2016's "The Populist Explosion" and 2023's "Where Have All the Democrats Gone?" -- this book will underline core problems facing the Western world and recommend thoughtful routes forward.

[Alan · Rating 2 out of 5]

This extended essay sets out to explain the current resurgence of Nationalism. Well, 'set out' is not quite the right term, as an exploration of possible hypotheses is not what this polemic does. The blame is placed squarely on what the self-described Socialist author labels as "Cosmopolitans" and "Anywheres" who have promulgated open borders and free trade at the expense of the rest of us, who are apparently mostly "Somewheres". For examples of the new Nationalism, the author points to ex-American President Donald Trump and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, whom he then explicitly rejects in no uncertain terms. His quick tour of the origins and history of Nationalism is less certain, where he uses a broad brush to conflate various forms of ethnic, religious, and civic identity with Nationalism. This understanding of Nationalism escapes coherence or consistency. Whatever Nationalists are, the author faults them equally with the Cosmopolitans in bringing misery to the world. This equivalence reminds me of Trump saying that both sides of the Charlottesville protests had good people, an equivalence that is morally false and intellectually dishonest. To this reader, stepping back a little, the author is in effect using his discussion of Nationalism as an excuse to condemn the Liberal ideology that underpins the historical fact of our increasingly globalized society and humanity. It is a valid (and not novel) critique of the Liberal purists' pursuit of open borders (whether to immigration or trade) that it has had malign effects on the very societies which foster that same Liberalism. It is not valid to conclude that since Liberal progress is provoking a Nationalist backlash, we should respond by regressing on that progress.

[Hannah Wilson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a good briefing on the recent history regarding the rise of nationalism in the US and Europe, as well as the relevance of nationalist roots in Russia and China that influences international relations today. I did not feel the book was much more than a good briefing. There was an argument made that nationalism is a social psychology, which is interesting, and I wish it was expanded on more. Similarly, there was an argument about nationalism being relevant to both the political left and right that wasn't expanded on much, as most of the book was about right-wing and white nationalism. There didn't feel to be much in the way of argument for pros/cons of nationalism, just proof it's existence and relevancy in politics today.

[Victoria Le · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’m never gonna excuse bigotry but woahh this book helped me understand the rationale behind right-wing voters and trump supporters. I really liked how Judis talked about historical events that shaped nationalist views throughout different countries in the world, and how each countries’ views differ.

Rippp Poland bruh3

Definitely gotta skim through this book again and take notes cause danggg it’s so informative!!!

[Sylvester Snowshoe · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Nationalism provides us with a way.. to feel moral, right, and just. It gives us a way to join with others in a heroic struggle. It gives a sense of purpose and meaning to our lives, and even to our deaths."

“Anthony Smith describes the modern nation as 'a sacred communion of citizens.' He writes, 'Investing out homeland with special qualities, and regarding it with reverence and awe, as the birthplace of the nation or the resting place of its heroes and ancestors, is to continue in secular form the pre-modern practice of hallowing historic places and marking off sacred ancestral territories.'”

"Two complementary processes were at work fueling the age of nationalism: mass society and popular sovereignty greatly enhanced national cohesion and the people's stake in the nation”

“Modern capitalism's divorce of production from the family as described in Eli Zaretsky's Capitalism, the Family, and Personal Life and the challenge to the traditional family from new sexual norms weakened a key institution that allowed individuals to transcend their isolation. Science's conflict with religion dealt another blow to an important source of group identity. The emergence of globalization in the 1970s has undermined the labor union and the locally owned factory and business and the community they sustained. Finding themselves at the mercy of currency flows, footloose multinational corporations, and migrant flows, and afflicted by anomie and a sense of powerlessness, the individual has little recourse except the nation.”

“Nationalist sentiment underlies the acceptance or rejection of the welfare state. The modern welfare state has been built upon shared nationalist sentiments.”

“By ceding their individuality to a larger group that defines itself as the nation, the members of a movement or party or of citizens in war relinquish their moral judgment and intelligence to the group, and most often to the group's charismatic leader. They become susceptible to suggestion and can come to believe things that they would ordinarily reject. They become capable of great courage and sacrifice on behalf of ends both noble and ignoble. They can display exceptional generosity and kindness or wanton cruelty and vindictiveness.”

“Economic decline is often accompanied by a decline in the social network of unions, bars, and social clubs.”

“These citizens, like those in North Carolina towns that until very recently were centers of furniture manufacturing, or in northern French towns decimated by the loss of manufacturing and mining jobs, have felt left behind by post-industrial capitalism and by the libertarian, secular, and cosmopolitan culture of New York, San Francisco, London, Copenhagen, and Paris. They became prime candidates for an explicit nationalist appeal that would reaffirm their social identity and combat their own feelings of social isolation and political powerlessness.”

“The anywheres or cosmopolitans will have to exhibit greater understanding of what is driving many of their compatriots to support people like Trump and Orban.”

“The American defeat in Vietnam raised questions not only about America's military prowess, but about its mission in the world. In 1971, facing renewed competition from Japan and Western Europe, the U.S. suffered its first trade deficit in the twentieth century. That was followed by the energy crisis, which revealed America's dependence on Middle Eastern oil despots.”

“Instead of creating solidarity between the middle and bottom rungs of the economic ladder, as happened during the Great Depression, the Great Recession heightened the resentment that many in the Euro-American core felt toward African-Americans and toward Latino immigrants, whom they believed to be benefiting from government programs without paying taxes to support them.”

“The Tea Party replicated the original framework of American nationalism to the point of parody.”

“The relevant polarity is not really between nationalists and liberals, but between nationalists and cosmopolitans. When Trump supporters blame America's ills on liberals, they are generally talking about cosmopolitans.”

“Social, economic, and geographical differences, along with the exaggerated views they produce, have contributed to America's failure to confront its underlying problems.”

“The nationalist backlash has been in response to real failures in the American economy and society. America's middle class has been hollowed out. Imports from China (some of which come from American firms that have outsourced their production) have decimated many smaller and midsized towns and cities outside the great metro areas. Enormous numbers of unskilled immigrants have competed for jobs with Americans who also lack higher education and have led to the downgrading of occupations that were once middle-class; many of these immigrants, resembling those that entered the United States before the 1920s, have congregated in closed communities that have slowed assimilation.”

“The second thing to do is to reduce the annual number of immigrants, and to narrow the conditions for family reunification, while giving priority to skilled immigrants. That will reverse the growth of immigrant ghettos, which slow assimilation, and allow those immigrants already here to move up the economic and social ladder.”

“During the Civil War, the power of the national state won out over the existence of a competing regional culture and economic system.”

“Europe's nations didn't really have to develop policies on immigration until the economic boom that hit after World War II and that attracted workers to the industries of Northern Europe. At that time, Europe's policies were focused primarily on guest workers.”

“Europe's history simply did not prepare it to deal with the questions of assimilation raised by these decades of migration.”

“French Socialist Gaston Defferre warned that 'the rules of Islam... are contrary to all the rules of French law the custody of children... and they are contrary to [French rules on] the rights of women.'”

"It [immigration] was very hard for the left to even discuss because it is considered racist or xenophobic to discuss it."

“The AfD, like some of the smaller openly pro-fascist groups in Italy or the dissenting wing of the Front National, appears to be symptomatic of what Freud called the return of the repressed. This occurs when instinctual impulses, or in this case very ordinary nationalist sentiments are completely blocked from expression because of their association with aberrant, ugly desires, only to return in their most primitive, brutal form.”

“With Poland, as with Hungary, EU officials underestimated the historical undertow that prevents countries from moving easily and smoothly from authoritarian pasts in which their own nationhood was constantly in question, but also in which nationalism was a weapon against cultural extinction — to a liberal democratic present in which questions of ethnicity and religion are put aside.”

“[The US] hoped that Yeltsin's adoption of an American plan to subject the Russian economy to 'shock therapy' by selling off its assets and removing government regulations would lead to a capitalist recovery. Yeltsin's policies led to a massive Russian depression, the Russian economy contracted 40 percent between 1991, when Yeltsin took power, and 1998. Then in 1998, Russia endured a financial crash that almost took down Western economies. Yeltsin's privatization of assets led to the creation of a new class of Russian oligarchs and to deepening corruption.”

“Washington policymakers expected that China's state-run industries would be unable to compete on a global stage, forcing China to adopt a privatized free market system that would integrate it into the American-led global economy. But instead, China and its state-run firms blossomed under the WTO. China figured out how to game the system by subsidizing export industries, holding down their own labor costs, and using currency manipulation to keep the prices of exports down and imports up. China also demanded that firms that wanted to set up shop in China share ownership and technology.”

“Trump's key experiences were America's loss of absolute economic supremacy, evidenced in the growing trade deficit to Japan and Germany and later China, which he blamed on American trade deals and wily foreigners; and the failure in Iraq, which he blamed on neo-conservative efforts at nation-building. He viewed the Cold War's end not as an opportunity to create a new world order, but as a chance to withdraw from expensive and increasingly ill-defined alliances and overseas commitments that had drained the American treasury and led to the neglect of problems at home.”

“The dollars shipped back to the United States from foreign trade surpluses were usually not invested in productive enterprises or in infrastructure, but in stocks, bonds, and real estate. They contributed to the bubbles that precipitated the financial crash that led to the Great Recession.”

“In his own brutal way, Trump asked some of the right questions. Are Americans really committed to going to war over Estonia, as NATO's Article Five would require? Have countries like Germany taken advantage of the United States by failing to meet their defense obligations, allowing them to spend their savings on social needs, while the United States has had to spend its tax dollars on arms and armies? Has the WTO restrained, or acted as a cover for, China's mercantile trade policies?”

“Trump's own answers to these questions were often partially or even entirely unsatisfactory. He elevated the elimination of the trade deficit to a be-all and end-all. He attempted to keep American companies at home with huge tax breaks to them and to the wealthy that could fuel new speculative bubbles rather than funding productive investment.”

“Hegel used the term 'Aufhebung' to refer to a process of historical transcendence by which a new stage of development is reached. Reaching that stage required negating what was obsolete or counterproductive while preserving what remained useful and constructive in order to create a new synthesis that transcended the old policies or ways of life.”

“Another result of globalization has been a rise in inequality and uneven economic development in the United States and other countries that have followed the global deregulatory playbook described as the 'Washington consensus.'”

“Harvard economist Dani Rodrik warned in 1997 that the ability of corporations to move (or threaten to move) wherever they wanted would give them inordinate power over their domestic workers, who could not easily pick up from Detroit and move to El Bajio. Capital mobility would exert downward pressure on wages and contribute to the destruction of the labor movement. It would also create a race to the bottom over corporate tax rates, evidenced recently in the 2017 Republican tax bill-that would undermine the ability of governments to finance generous safety nets for the workers who were displaced by globalization.”

“In the United States and Western Europe, the threat that capital mobility posed to workers' standards of living was reinforced by the massive influx of unskilled workers whom employers could use to transform mid-wage into low-wage occupations and to cripple the ability of unions to organize. The combination of capital mobility and unskilled immigration also deterred companies from lowering their costs through increasing productivity and is probably a factor in the slowdown in productivity over the last decade. And the combination helped transform politics by curbing the ability of Democrats in the United States and Social Democratic and Labour parties in Europe to deliver the goods to their working class voters, while enhancing the appeal of right wing populist parties, who could combine economic attacks against globalization with cultural and nativist screeds.”

“Workers and small businesspeople who feel left behind by global capitalism, they have formed the shock troops for the right wing nationalism that has swept the United States and Europe. They are the products of the failure of globalization as a politics and political economy.”

“The revival of nationalism is essential to moving the United States and Europe away from the illusions and excesses of globalization. Globalization is incompatible with social democracy in Europe or with New Deal liberalism in the United States.”

“There is a distinction to be made between globalism, which subordinates nations and national governments to market forces or to the priorities of multinational corporations, and inter-nationalism, in which nations cede part of their sovereignty to international or regional bodies to address problems they could not adequately address on their own.”

[Lawrence Roth · Rating 5 out of 5]

After finishing this very short audiobook, I may take a glance at previous books on global economics to shore up my knowledge on the subject. Ian Bremmer's GZero and When Globalization Fails by James Macdonald are two prescient books, written before 2016, that called out the impending political upheaval that globalist economic policies since the 90's would eventually lead to (and were starting to become apparent around 2013). Macdonald's book in particular was a spectacular look at the role that economics held in military conflict, so much so that I would actually somewhat classify it as an econo-military history rather than a straightforward history of global economic systems.

John B. Judis here has written the 2018 version of what Macdonald and Bremmer tackled earlier, but now shored up with more relevant contemporary events on the global stage, but this isn't just a book on trade policy and capitalism. Judis outlines the history of nationalism as a political force, why it is returning across the entire world today, and what we could be in store for in the future. Within this narrative, he presents fascinating and very relevant looks into the reasons why conservative nationalist political movements are succeeding across the West, examining Trump's 2016 electoral support in detail and many other European nationalist movements, including Poland and Hungary in particular.

He tackles not just the political side but the economic side, diving into the development of global finance and multi-national corporations, the international groups like the IMF and EU that were to usher in a golden age of free trade, and the utter failure of liberal cosmopolitans and neoconservatives in power (from the 90s to the 2010s) to address the growing problems of hollowed out industries, limited national sovereignty, and lax immigration policy within the liberal democracies of the world. Within those liberal democracies grew staunchly nativist, nationalist, anti-immigrant, anti-rules based movements.

The reason I'm giving this book a five stars is because it is poking at a question I have been pondering for a while ever since I've started thinking deeply about the role nationalism and national sentiment plays in domestic politics in the U.S. Is there a way for nationalism as an ideology to be used constructively in the modern day and age? As expertly outlined by Judis, nationalism does not attach itself to any left-right axis on any political spectrum. National identity and the consolidation of that identity into sovereign power is technically something that exists in every country and a majority of people across the world. For example, I could be described as an American nationalist merely because I believe that the United States has the right to exist as a defined political entity. Besides the most extremes of the right, left, anarchist, and libertarian, this is a sentiment shared by a vast majority of Americans. Everyone from Donald Trump to Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton to Elon Musk to Alexandria Ocasio Cortez believes that the United States is and should be a country, a nation-state, a legitimate political entity.

The trick of course is how to engage that sentiment in a constructive and non-toxic way, which, to this day, seems to have eluded a vast majority of nationalist movements, I suspect because most nationalist movements are right-wing in nature. And this of course, owes to the fascist movements of Mussolini and Hitler. But nationalism has examples that shine throughout history, such as the Union during the American Civil War. How then, do we get back to a time where nationalism can be used as a force for good? Is that even possible ever since Mussolini and Hitler tainted it?

Theoretically it should be. I would argue, despite the high polarization of the American population, that most American citizens want the project of the United States of America to succeed, for the US to be able to tackle its problems efficiently, and to be a driving force for good in the world. Functionally, this should indicate that Americans want a healthy nationalism. They want a country that they can be proud of. What this book is making me realize is that the current political and economic alignment of the country is making that nigh impossible.

Judis mentions a the phenomenon of "somewheres vs anywheres", a dichotomy coined by a British sociologist examining the Brexit vote. Somewheres are people who have a rooted identity in their home (be it a town, region, state, business, social group, etc) and who thrive on that particular identity. They are hurt when change arrives. Anywheres have multiple identities (multiethnic, multilingual, educated, well-traveled, etc) and are comfortable engaging with different peoples, cultures, and ideas. They do not need to stay in one place or root themselves in one culture to be satisfied. Geography strikes again I see.

People's hometowns and the identities that come with those homes have been decimated by the changes in politics and capitalism that globalization policies have wrought. These places are full of "somewheres". With no outlet to turn to, they turn to nationalist movements. But of course, those who would take advantage of nationalist sentiments love to turn them toxic, thus the "anywheres" have no choice but to be repulsed by ethno-centric ideology and anti-immigrant sentiment. The Republican Party, whether or not Trump remains a political presence past 2028, has clearly become the party of somewheres, and the Democratic Party has become the party of anywheres. Electorally, somewheres have proven their staying power. And because of these political successes, the somewheres constantly overstep their mandates. The anywhere's do as well when they win. The entire system, when seen through this framework, is stuck.

What is the solution? Judis provides some small policies on immigration and trade, but not enough to be convincing to me. I've heard talk around neoliberal reddit forums and political substacks that making liberal parties and movements that emphasize anti-immigration stances and a YIMBY housing policy could stanch the electoral bleeding (the supposed "Housing Theory of Everything" is decently backed up by data, as is typical of neoliberals). I've questioned this line of thought before but after Trump's election in 2024, perhaps its something that should be looked at seriously. Or perhaps the solution really is a third party "nationalist" agenda that rejects the proto-fascism of the right and rejects the failure of globalized capitalism and immigration policy on the center and left to provide a political home to the disaffected. Recall, if you will, that a plurality of voting aged Americans did not vote in the 2024 elections. Nihilism is rampant in the American population. Nothing will get better in this country. That can be reversed by the right movement and/or leader. I applaud Judis for trying to figure out a way out of this mess. I share his doubt about how things could improve in the current way.

Nationalism isn't going away. People want to be proud of their country, of their way of life, and of their lifestyle. Any movement that doesn't give them that change is doomed. It's why Trump's second administration, if it does go through with a Project 2025 style governing agenda, is also doomed to fail due to the backlash to the almost inevitable overreach and chaos.

A very high recommend for me for anyone looking to understand what is going on in the West currently.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Judis does a nice job contextualizing the recent explosion in nationalist sentiment by tracing its historical development back to the 18th and 19th centuries, as well as the more recent catalyst of globalization. While I disagree with some of his criticisms of the EU, which he seems to see as a fundamentally flawed idea, I think his insights into the ways internationalism has overlooked human tendencies toward group identity are worthwhile. It certainly isn't a book that leaves much hope for the international project, absent a World War II-scale calamity.

[Richard Derus · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rating: 4* of five

The Publisher Says: Why Has Nationalism Come Roaring Back?

Trump in America, Brexit in the U.K., anti-EU parties in Italy, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, and Hungary, and nativist or authoritarian leaders in Turkey, Russia, India, and China -- Why has nationalism suddenly returned with a vengeance? Is the world headed back to the fractious conflicts between nations that led to world wars and depression in the early 20th Century? Why are nationalists so angry about free trade and immigration? Why has globalization become a dirty word?

Based on travels in America, Europe, and Asia, veteran political analyst John B. Judis found that almost all people share nationalist sentiments that can be the basis of vibrant democracies as well as repressive dictatorships. Today's outbreak of toxic "us vs. them" nationalism is an extreme reaction to utopian cosmopolitanism, which advocates open borders, free trade, rampant outsourcing, and has branded nationalist sentiments as bigotry. Can a new international order be created that doesn't dismiss what is constructive about nationalism? As he did for populism in The Populist Explosion, a runaway success after the 2016 election, Judis looks at nationalism from its modern origins in the 1800s to today to find answers.

I RECEIVED A DRC FROM THE PUBLISHER VIA NETGALLEY. THANK YOU.

My Review: Much like The Populist Explosion, this 2018 book is a higher-level explainer to ground you in the essentials of nationalism's rise and development.

Post-WWII globalist institutions, created to combat the toxic fascist-infected nationalism running rampant today, have come a cropper in combating the nightmarish reality of resurgent and toxic nationalism—ironically because the institutions were using the weapons of the fascists, shame, Othering, and punishment, against them.

The force that is today's nationalist/fascist movement proves the weapons they themselves used ultimately hastened their own end in WWII.

The force of nationalism, like the force of populism, cannot be repressed forever, nor can it be reasoned out of people; it must be accounted for, if not exactly accommodated, in the politics of the twenty-first century. These are emotional responses to triggering events that make followers feel insecure. It cannot be stated enough that facts disproving emotive claims are ineffective in the face of passionately held feelings.

The points made in this book, that nationalists are not all wrong and the liberal elites are not listening to them could not be clearer in 2024. This US election was disastrously mishandled, manipulated by some very clear-sighted and goal-directed people, and need not have resulted in the the awful way that it did. Author Judis is very clear about how we fell into the trap we did; the job now is making the changes, personal, political, and societal, that need making to prevent the incoming administration from throwing US and by extension global society into far worse channels than we're already headed into.

An excellent companion read to The Populist Explosion and a worthy exploration of forces we as a society need to comprehend and harness to productive use.

[Joseph Stieb · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'd give this book a 3.5 for the argument but a 5 for its usefulness. It has a great discussion of what nationalism is and how it has evolved, and in a very short space it covers much of the nationalist revolt against globalization we have seen in the last few decades. Judis is very good on the economic side of the nationalist revolt, especially the huge imbalance of gains and losses that globalization and neoliberal policies have effected in the US and much of Europe. He shows how savvy, unscrupulous leaders, mostly but not exclusively on the right, have appealed to culture, tradition, and in some cases race and religion to foster a backlash against globalization, immigration, free trade, and the EU. A nice thing about this book is that you can't really tell what political perspective Judis is coming from; this is an analytical rather than an axe-grinding kind of book. Tt ends with a reasonable call for international/multilateral projects like the EU or the TPP to consider how nationalism can be accommodated or co-opted into these projects on the realistic assumption that it isn't going away anytime soon.

Still, there were omissions in the argument I found strange. Judis repeatedly states that job loss in the US has resulted from offshoring, when we know that automation is as big if not the biggest factor. That means, as Obama tried to argue to the American people, many of those jobs ain't coming back. The US just isn't going to be a manufacturing powerhouse barring unforeseen events (or American willingness to pay way, way more for consumer goods) but Judis seems to entertain that fantasy. Some of Judis' language buys into the "anti-globalist" arguments that you see on the far right, and sometimes on the far right. What he describes as "cosmopolitans" are really just liberals who understand how harmful nationalism can be. Lastly, I still think Judis underestimates the significance of race in the nationalist revolt. The fear of replacement, massive demographic shifts, and the loss of status is huge in the rise of Trump and the Tea Party. Scholars like Ashley Jardina have shown that racial identification and resentment (or, you know, racism) are the best predictors of who will vote for Trump or back the Tea Party. Judis doesn't ignore race, but it is somewhat downplayed and not integrated enough into the economic/immigration side of this issue. Part of the problem here, as Carlos Lozada nicely put it, is that Trump voters and BRexiters will tell you openly about their economic plights, their feelings of national decline, etc., but they are rarely going to volunteer opinions like "Oh yeah, I voted for Brexit to stop the influx of brown people to my country" or "I voted for Trump because we need to put white people back on top." And yet, race is bubbling under the crust of all of the entire nationalist/populist revolt that Judis chronicles

Combined with his "Populist Explosion" book, Judis has put together two short, valuable book explaining key phenomena in the last few decades of history. They have some problems, but I will definitely draw on them for research and teaching.

[Jim Robles · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The argument of this book is that national identity is not just a product of where a person is born or immigrated to, but of deeply held sentiments that are usually acquired during childhood" (p. 15).

Five stars! This is a great history of how we got to our current "Trump moment." The glaring omission is the failure to recognize that things might have turned out very differently had those who benefited from technology and globalization ("anywheres," etc.) had been willing to share with those left behind ("somewheres," etc.). The p. 146 assertion that "Globalization is incompatible with social democracy in Europe or with New Deal liberalism in the United States" is incorrect. Nothing prevents elites from sharing: what is required is a "scare" analogous to the "Red Scare" of the 1950's to make the elites more socially responsible.

Judis also misses the insights, into the causes of the Great Recession, available in "Fragile by Design."

"When a team wins, the fans win" (p. 25).

"Writes David Miller, "Where the citizens of a state are also compatriots, the mutual trust that this engenders makes it more likely that they will be able to solve collective action problems, to support redistributive principles of justice, and practice deliberative forms of democracy"" (,p. 33-34).

". . . . "somewheres" and "anywheres"" (p. 44).

"These findings show an affinity between Trump's following and the Protestant roots of early American nationalism" (p. 68).

"Europe has not had this experience, and to date, does not appear to have the cultural basis for doing so" (p. 85).

""To be a true Pole," he said, "you have to be a Catholic"" (p. 111).

"George W. Bush and his war council made the decision to invade, but the seeds of it were sown in the debate in the 1990's about American intervention first in Somalia and then in the former Yugoslavia" (p. 119).

[Erik · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the age of Trump and Brexit, this volume offers a welcome perspective that rises above name-calling and partisanship. it's a mistake for people on the Left to equate all nationalist feeling -- support for one's own country that is -- with bigotry and hatred of immigrants. Yes, there are certainly racists and xenophobes who are loud and proud about being "America First" for all the wrong reasons. But there are many good reasons to support one's own country, America or any other, against forces of anti-democratic globalism. Nations give people a reason to support a welfare state for example. Why should you care more about someone from Mississippi than someone from Bolivia, enough to be willing to pay taxes to help them when they're out of a job? Our common nation helps us see people as our fellow citizens worthy of our assistance, rather than outsiders asking for "foreign aid."

People on the Left have made the big mistake of ceding the territory of the nation-state to leaders on the Right. That hasn't made nationalism disappear. It's just left it open to being coopted by nasty people. Judis argues that the nation will be with us for the foreseeable future and that we should learn to use the nation as a tool to protect ourselves against multinational corporations that are loyal to no country.

"If this book has an underlying political agenda, it is to identify and reclaim what is valid in nationalism -- and of the liberal internationalism of the post-World War II generation -- from both the cosmopolitan liberals who believe in a borderless world and from the right wing populists who have coupled a concern for their nation's workers with nativist screeds against outgroups and immigrants."

A worthy goal and one worth strongly considering.

[Ann · Rating 4 out of 5]

**I was given this book via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review**

Veteran journalist John B. Judis examines the forces of nationalism -- where it came from, where it is today, where it might be going, and the pros and cons of it.

Coming in at 128 pages (according to Amazon’s print stats), there’s a lot packed into this tiny book. Part historical, part psychological, part political, part economic, Judis’ multifaceted examination of his topic is written in a comfortable-to-read voice, bringing together what seems like a hodgepodge of ideas, a diverse range of historical occurrences, and a sprawling international canvas to create a broad-ranging discussion. Though there is considerable focus on the US, he also explores nationalism in the UK, Europe, Western Europe, and Asia. At times the book seems rambling, almost scattered, as the author moves from one facet of his exploration to another, from one country to another, but as a whole the book is both illuminating and informative.

Pleasantly, given that so many political books these days are so polarized, Judis focuses on the circumstances and facts he conveys instead of using his book to make an argument for or against the nationalist movements in the world today, though he does have some recommendations and thoughts he shares with the reader. I enjoyed reading the book quite and bit, and do feel I learned a lot from it. I’d definitely recommend the book to anyone who wants to understand nationalism and the various nationalist movements more fully.

[Baglan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A nice sequel to Judis' 2016 book "The Populist Explosion: How the Great Recession Transformed American and European Politics". I would recommend any prospective readers to read the books in the order of publication date. Although the 2016 book is more ambitious in my opinion, this small book on the rise of nationalism throughout the Western world is also enjoyable to read, which owes much to Judis' engaging style of writing.

Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for providing me an e-ARC in exchange for an honest review.

[Josiah Parry · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think this was a very well grounded piece. It seems many think he has made claims about the EU and Trump and other subject. But it is just a discussion of the way it is perceived. As he notes very early on, he takes no stance but attempted to discuss.

If you have read about the origins of nationalism I very much recommend this. It could just as well be titled “Nationalism, a brief modern history”. This provides a great economic and sociological framework for understanding. Contemporary politics.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just as he did in "The Populist Explosion" in 2016, Judis does an excellent job providing the history of political and economical forces and how they are shaping the ongoing events of today. He presents it all in through a pragmatic view and in a non-biased way that helps one understand where these ideas are coming from and why people embrace them. You will end up with a better understanding of your own held beliefs and, more importantly, the beliefs others hold. I eagerly await "the Socialist Awakening" coming soon!

[Ward Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great, concise explanation of the legitimate grievances of nationalists worldwide

Great, concise explanation of the legitimate grievances of nationalists worldwide. You'll understand more about the challenges facing the losers of globalization, and what might be done about it through a more constructive kind of nationalism combined with international collaboration (but without ceding important national rights on immigration or the economy.)

[Leon Markham · Rating 4 out of 5]

Is this the start of a welcome trend? A book about modern politics which is only as long as it needs to be.

A good and thoughtful exploration of the topic. It raises perhaps more questions than it answers - especially around what an appropriate response is for those who feel themselves to be progressive or of the left.

Highly recommend Lasch’s “Revolt of the Elites” for a discussion of how we got into this mess.

[Tom · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good guide to the factors leading to the return of nationalism, both European and American, the issues the left and right ignore or exaggerate in their own claims and the claims of their opponents. The results are ugly—often murderously so. Eventually (years, decades) wiser heads will prevail, but after what damage to humanity?

[Kathy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Logical assimilation of historical facts that helped bring nationalism to the forefront of American politics again. JJ attempts to explain the rise of conservative politics through nationalistic concepts and link American political movement with that in Europe in the EU and now the divisiveness of Brexit.

[sarah]

dnf (raincheck? i dont know yet) at 32%

this has been in my currently reading for almost two years now bc i couldn’t get myself to stop reading something so short but i have to be honest with myself just the sight of it makes me sigh

maybe when im in a more usa politics mood or if i start seeing trump more in the news (god forbid), i’ll pick this up again

[Carlos · Rating 3 out of 5]

A basic enough review of nationalism in a historical and modern context. It seems meant more for people who don't know anything about the concept or probably get all their understanding about what is going on from cable TV (don't do this).

[Andrew Careaga · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this short book on a flight to Denver last weekend. Good overview of the roots of nationalism on both the left and the right, the reasons behind populist nationalism in recent years, and thoughts on the backlash to globalism. Thought-provoking.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting and researched look into current nationalism and it's history from the late 1800s to late 1900s, but is too short to do a full deep dive into American nationalism and define its differences with other nations' forms of nationalism.

[Geoffrey Kelley · Rating 4 out of 5]

A succinct overview of the revival of nationalism in Europe and the United States, and the consequences for political life and immigration policy. A useful summary of the challenges facing western democracies today.

[Tayler Smith · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a very comprehensive discussion of nationalism. However, I feel like the book could have been organized much better for greater clarity and flow. That being said, his analysis and clarification of the rise of nationalism in the United States of America and Europe was illuminating.

[Joe Scott · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very informative, nonpartisan description of how history truly does shape nations over time.

[Antonio · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ok but definitely not as good as his book on populism

[Streator Johnson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quick interesting read on the return to nationalism around the world. Gives some pretty straight forward reasons for this bend toward right wing nationalism. I recommend it.

[Ben · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good summary of how we got to where we are, but a bit too skeptical about the role of international institutions for where we need to go.