While nationalisms are against nationalisms…

That the stories of rising nationalism so often point not to the rise of a state or nation but to deeper debates, even splits and conflicts, within it is one of nationalism's sociological handicaps. Behind the stories of rising nationalism, rather than a serious national consciousness, a narrative that would embrace the whole of society and from which a new subject could emerge, it is the usual situation for there to arise a racism, bigotry or reactions that go no further than xenophobia, which will disturb society's peace further and erode social integration. We can attribute this to nationalist movements' lack of a consciousness, conscience, understanding and vision that would ensure the integrity of a country and strengthen the organic integrity and functioning of a political body.

For that reason, rising nationalisms very rarely show in any society a maturity that would serve social peace, that would serve to carry society further toward unity and solidarity. It is much more common for them to play the role of a brake that, with the imaginations of internal enemies they create, blocks society's further transformations and further rise. This thesis can easily be verified not only from the example of Türkiye but through all the examples in other countries.

The ideal level of national unity is for it to include all the citizens of the country. A society that has been able to capture such a feeling of unity, that loves one another, that has developed a high sense of responsibility toward one another, has secured the highest social capital. But the problem is this: in no period in which nationalism operated as a dominant discourse has it been at this maturity of consciousness. The internal enemy, the internal enemies whose root is outside, which it almost always needs in order to consolidate itself, has been the greatest, most insurmountable obstacle to its realization. The internal enemy, as the very enemy within, while making its own narrative impossible, itself begins to perform a divisive function.

Nationalism, of course, as the usual ideology of nation-states, always has the chance of rising. Perhaps, as a result of the more rational policies of states, it can happen in a quite positive, unifying, body-integrity-establishing way. But the rises that confront us now draw their strength not from state control or incentives but from being a subject of populist competition in an environment of democratic political competition.

What rises in this populist race of discourse is not nationalism but as lumpen a racism and xenophobia as possible. In the economic difficulties that have recently arisen in Türkiye from internal or external causes, the first cause that always comes to mind is the "foreigner," who has no connection at all with the event. In this respect the rule does not work differently from Europe. Sociologically, in fact, the "foreigner" here is in no way the cause of the troubles being experienced. But the anger and opposition generated by economic troubles see him as the most direct target among the concrete addresses it will turn to. Even so, for this target to be seen, to be seen as the perpetrator of events, an organized structure or politicians who will point a finger at him are needed.

Here fascistic racist political actors see the opportunity in the political marketplace and step in. The product they offer is seductive, appeals to below-average intelligence, more to mass psychology, and finds buyers. But they advance only to the extent that they make many things about the race or nation they rely on unspeakable. Thus, even if we say that what rises is racism, not nationalism, since there is in fact no provable race, the claims can be maintained only by not speaking, by never descending into detail, by staying on the surface.

Today the most tragic side of French racism in France is that it is not specified in the name of which French race a racism is being practiced. When the historical and economic relationship of France with the people now regarded as foreigners is examined a little, it is seen that it is in fact one of the main sources that fed the French race. Let us go into a bit more detail in the coming pages.

It can easily be said that today, across the world, one of the most important feeding conditions of a rising nationalism is elections. That the idea of nationalism has become the most attractive field of political competition in democracy stems somewhat from the perception that nationalism is rising having been accepted in advance as a superstition by all politicians. That is, the premium politicians give to this perception, their surrender to the workings of this dominant perception, drives them into a race to grab a share of this field. This race in turn has an effect that reinforces this perception even more.

But when the real problems of society make themselves felt with all their heat and weight, it becomes clear that what is rising is not nationalism but some discontents projected onto it. The clearest indicator of this is that when matters touch certain interests, in the face of the country's national problems, a social solidarity or national stance on the scale of the voice coming out of nationalism does not emerge. For example, in an environment in which the country's currency is steadily losing value and becoming dependent on the outside, nationalist feelings do not awaken a reflex to protect the national currency. Curbing the consumption of foreign products, perhaps a very forties discourse, does not strengthen a preference for domestic goods.

In an atmosphere in which nationalism rises as xenophobia and racism, the desire of those under the influence of this very movement to live in other countries, finding Türkiye unlivable, rises to the same extent. Perhaps it can be said that nationalism is always and everywhere such a tangle of contradictions. But even if it is a tangle of contradictions, there is a world of meaning, a political reality, a field of conflicts that it expresses, corresponds to, reflects. One must try to understand this by way of a deeper political hermeneutics.

The latest issue of Tezkire Dergisi, titled "Where is nationalism rising, and from whom to whom?", attempts a way of understanding this with the articles it contains. It tries to understand why a social rancor that almost inevitably rises with the rise of nationalism appears as nationalism, or to probe what it is that is actually rising, and in the end arrives at the unavoidable question of all these themes: When nationalisms are against nationalisms, what kind of future does rising nationalism herald?