Franks, Saxons, Danes, Jutes, Goths, Turks, Assyrians, Persians, Greeks?
2007-04-03 04:08:08 · 17 answers · asked by mouthbreather77 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Your use of the word "blame" makes nonsense out of the rest of your question.
So that answer is a rousing
NO
.
2007-04-05 00:25:41 · answer #1 · answered by Ivri_Anokhi 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Surely nationalism needs a nationality? So from this list we can remove Mohammed, Vikings and Jews (mohammed never started from one country, niether did the Jewish people and the Franks, Saxons, Danes, Jutes and Vikings were not from a nation, but were from many different tribes).
As for the others, I couldnt give a rats ***.
2007-04-10 06:37:53 · answer #2 · answered by jademonkey 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I fail to see where the French are the ones most responsible for spreading, creating, or causing the idea of nationalism. While they were certainly quite nationalistic at times, if you were to blame someone, I'd have to say the Jews were the original nationalists. The majority of the tribes/cultures given in your list, while having a concrete cultural identity, were more interested in creating a multi-ethnic empire unified politically/economically rather than a "nation" of people with the same historical and cultural identity. The Jews have spent their entire existance, up to the mid 20th century, seeking to create their own national identity.
2007-04-03 10:46:42 · answer #3 · answered by just an inkling 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You are comparing individuals to societies?
What is the rationale in that?
What IS the point of laying blame?
What is wrong with a certain amount of nationalism?
(e.g., I find all these Kia buyers irritating because it just gives Kim Jong Il more money to buy nuclear fuel. Thus our world leaders can more easily prop up an economy of fear.)
2007-04-03 04:14:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The French
2007-04-03 04:13:51 · answer #5 · answered by Robert P 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
None of them.
It's hardwired into the human condition to get into groups. It's one of the ways we survive. Therefore, while it certainly has its downside, it's advantages are greater. If it was not for nationalism, people would all be happy to live under some world-empire for example.
2007-04-03 04:50:46 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nationalism is an idea, it cannot be blamed on a specific nationality. It's when people in a country have very strong feelings for their country. Every nation has its nationalists who are in favor of directives which benefit the nation as a whole.
2007-04-03 04:53:20 · answer #7 · answered by Alicia 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The French is right. The concept of modern nationalism did not arise until after the French revolution.
2007-04-03 04:15:17 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The French get my vote... although all of the colonial powers emerginig between 1750 and 1850 share the blame.
2007-04-03 04:53:17 · answer #9 · answered by Dan M 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Insightful question.
You might be better served by asking what culture invented the idea that people could live together in peace...
Hint: E pluribus unum.....
It is a philosophy that is absolutely unique in the history of the world. It is because we fail to understand that other cultures don't want to hold hands and sing, "kumbaya" that we won't succeed in the middle east.
2007-04-03 04:14:32 · answer #10 · answered by greengo 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋