The internal conflict of nationalism

Here are two different versions of American citizenship:

Version 1: High tech is evil, part of an awakened conspiracy to torture America. We need to go back to the old muscular industries like coal and steel and automobiles, which employ a lot of blue-collar workers. We need to revitalize the Rust Belt. EVs are a fad. Brick and mortar stores are better than Amazon. Silicon Valley is full of immigrants from non-white countries. The Bay Area doesn’t look like America anymore.

Version 2: China is our biggest enemy. The war of the 21st century will be decided by who controls the AI, which will have an impact on the battle for military supremacy. We need to import highly skilled engineers from places like India and China. This will strengthen America and weaken China. Greater San Francisco is our most important city, by far. It has the smartest people and that’s where the future of AI will be decided.

I am certainly not an expert in artificial intelligence. But people smarter than me insist on that the size of the army in the 21st century it will be decided which country achieves AGI first.

It seems to me that there are two types of American citizenship. Another type might be called “nostalgic nationalism.” Longing to recreate 1950s America. Another type may be called “future-oriented nationalism”, and focuses on winning the race to control AI and thus dominate the world.

I am not at all sure that what I have called future-oriented nationalism is nationalism at all. If so, it might make sense to think of a single nationality with internal conflicts. Nostalgic nationalism is a real thing, but it is full of internal contradictions. Its proponents wish to return to the 1950s, but they also want to deal with the threat of a rising China. Can we do both?

PS. None of these versions of nationalism reflect my own opinion.


Source link