Thoughts on Mazzini,
Nationalism, & the Republican Cause
Concerning the old Republican Cause as a global idea and over-arching Philosophical and Utopian Vision for the advancement of Civilization and Nationalism—nationalism we are all told in our introductory classes to political science is a modern “idea” that comes about in the 18th century.
Mazzini reveals to us, the incredible falseness in our modern notions and perceptions of nationalism, both negative and positive.
In the republican idea, nationalism is closely related to cosmopolitanism. It is not separated from it. The White Nationalists and Identitarians, in their hysteria, are therefore correct as to the fact Globalism comes from Nationalism. Mazzini’s ideas therefore, aren’t limited to nationalism in the sense the Identitarians profess to hold, at all. The European federalists are knowledgeable of this aspect of Mazzini’s conception of the nation, and perhaps we’ve misunderstood the European Union. So we established that Nationalism does not exclude cosmopolitanism, but both depend on each other.
The republican ideal is not, and could never be, despite our political history, a separation from what the democrat is and was. Both are dependent upon one another, absolutely. Lastly, 1) republicanism is not anti-liberal as Fascism and Conservatism; and 2) the socialist and Marxist critique of capitalism and capital greed is not anti-republican. At any rate, it cannot be excluded. Like the term liberal, a republican is a liberal and a classicist in small or great measure according to their learning, as equally as he or she is democratic. The Fascist intellectuals argued, that the enlightenment republican and liberal did not faithfully embody, or present the classical studies, and instead busied themselves in pagan revivalism. These flaws can be fixed.
It is not anti-democratic. A democrat describes a man of the peasants, of the poor, etc. They are revolutionaries, and they are Republicans. All these ideas were a unified cause — one unified political idea, one body of bodies in political action, and Mazzini’s conception is one among many such thinkers of the time, that embodied that cause.
To be a liberal of our day, is to be a “progressive,” and the progressive tradition acknowledges this, but not further outside of the American context, where REPUBLICANISM is and was an international revolutionary phenomena, throughout France, Spain, China, England, Ireland, Latin America, etc., and is a philosophical tradition in and of itself, just as much as Communism, Fascism, and Monarchism. Yet,here I am in our present-day, advocating for an American national unification.
Revolution, a term denoting destruction of the old world, and the revolving of celestial bodies in its return to its initial position, was principle to the Republican ideal; and the latter was aimed at the regeneration and liberation of man and nations. Also, the premises of the Republican nationalists like cosmopolitan-nationalist Giuseppe Mazzini, were not the same as Karl Marx, which saw the Nation and the historical duties of its people as based in reality. The Nation is a voice of the Divine (Deity in Motion, God evolving, “process theology”) in history and nature, and thus is the voice of the People. This thinking manifested into revolutionary philosophies, particularly Mazzini’s, who aimed after a democratic world Republic. The ‘cosmopolitanism of nations’ serves the People, with the People helping each other in association, to liberate the People, and incorporate the People — a proto-fascist ideal. In those times, the alliance of these romantic progressive movements were to be against Imperial Russia, the Latin Church, the Ottoman Empire, and Austro-Hungarian Empire. The issue is reversing, where there are persons trying to subvert and destabilize Western democracy. These liberals, movements, and clandestine organizations were nationalist. The aim of this association and ‘liberation of peoples’ was toward a Federation of United Europe, which is today a vilified project, and was ridiculed by Friedrich Engels.
The ‘particularistic attachment or form of solidarity, be it national, linguistic, religious, territorial, or ethnic,’ in the republican vision was not anti-liberal, anti-nationalist, anti-classical, nor anti-cosmopolitan (therefore neither anti-globalist). The change may be attributed to the progressive intellectual tradition, which was being touted around the New Deal period as a “new liberalism” for a new century, to face the challenges of an American society no longer reliant on the agrarian economy of its founding era. Damon Linker argued, but “now liberals have undergone a complete reversal, treating something once considered a given as something that must be extricated root and branch” (Liberals keep denigrating the new nationalism as racist. This is nonsense).