Introduction
White nationalism in the US is a significant problem in the US in the twenty-first century. According to Giroux (2017), the election of Donald Trump led to an increased focus on militarization and white supremacy, which were central principles of the politics of Nazi Germany. War culture became normalized in the US, which led to the emergence of neo-fascism (Giroux, 2017). This led to an increased number of wars abroad and at home, as the government set the mood to fight against Muslims, immigrants, women’s reproductive rights, and poor minorities (Giroux, 2017). Even though President Trump left the office, it is unclear if neo-fascism will remain the central idea of internal and external policy.
The problem of the emergence of White nationalism in the US is difficult to underestimate. The shift towards neo-fascism led to numerous acts of violence against minorities, such as the Christchurch shooting (Osborne et al., 2019). According to Criminal Justice Information Services Division (2019), the number of reported hate crimes in the US was above 7 thousand a year. In addition to increased violence inside the country, an external policy under Trump’s presidency was associated with aggression, lack of compromise, and populism (Osborne et al., 2019). The prevalence of nationalism leads to changes in the education system, as the government tries to justify the superiority of the country by altering the curriculum (Nikneshan et al., 2014). Therefore, the emergence of neo-fascism in the US must be stopped to avoid associated political, economic, and social issues.
There are several methods for addressing the problem of White nationalism in the US. For instance, Giroux (2017) suggests that the issue is to be addressed by changes in the curriculum to promote the idea of universal human rights and respect among all people and nations. In general, the strategies for addressing the problem of White nationalism should aim at addressing the reasons for this problem. Recently, Donald Trump stated that the problem of nationalism could be diminished by reducing poverty in the country (Robles, 2017). The present paper aims at exploring the relationships between poverty, inequality, and nationalism to understand if reducing poverty rates can help to decrease the impact of nationalism on US policy-making.
The central research question is:
RQ1: Do poverty and inequality lead to the rise of nationalist and more conservative governments?
The paper utilizes a narrative literature review to answer the research question. The purpose of the present paper is to provide a broad overview of literature exploring the relationships between poverty, inequality, and nationalism. The present paper claims that poverty and inequality lead to the rise of nationalist and more conservative governments globally.
Preliminary Literature Review
Nationalism is a widely discussed topic among scholars, as it is one of the rising ideas in the world. According to Bieber (2018), nationalism is a narrow ideology that values membership in a nation greater than memberships in other groups, such as political parties, socio-economic groups, and religious organizations. Two central types of nationalism were conventionally distinguished: civic and ethnic (Bieber, 2018). Nationalism can be measured in two axes, the level of inclusion or exclusion and the level of virulence (Bieber, 2018). There are also three central stages of nationalism, including latent nationalism (social and political exclusion), virulent nationalism (repressions and the emergence of strong nationalistic parties), and extremely virulent (ethnic war and state violence) (Bieber, 2018). While nationalism is a widespread ideology, the reasons for its emergence are poorly understood.
There are several causes of nationalism mentioned by scholars that should be understood. First, nationalism was explained using the “ancient hatred” idea, which explains current nationalistic trends as the result of historical processes (Snyder, 1993). This idea can explain the rise of nationalism in the post-Soviet period in the Balkans and Caucasian states (Snyder, 1993). The central idea is that these states were fighting against each other historically, which made people of different nationalities genuinely hate each other (Snyder, 1993). Partially, this theory can be applied to nationalism in the US, as Whites were historically exploiting Mexican and African Americans, which caused numerous conflicts and hatred (Amaya, 2018). However, the theory of “ancient hated” is largely condemned by the scholars due to its inability to explain the majority of nationalistic moods.
Another reason for the rise of nationalism mentioned by Snyder (1993) was economic instability. For instance, the rise of nationalism in Russia of the fall of the Soviet Union was explained by the fact that nationalists promised to protect people from the insecurities of the market (Snyder, 1993). The problem was that external shock led to the rise of economic and social inequality, which caused the rise of nationalism to protect the vulnerable population. Bieber (2018) also claimed that economic instability adds to the rise of nationalism as well as growing inequality. In particular, economic situation, rising inequality, external shock, and institutional resilience were mentioned as crucial factors that contributed to the transition from latent nationalism to virulent nationalism (Bieber, 2018). This scenario was also true in fascist Germany, as the country experienced significant problems after World War I (Snyder, 1993). In other words, poverty and increased economic stratification lead to the rise of nationalism.
The link between economy and nationalism was discussed by numerous studies. Fetzer (2020) claimed that governments that exploit the idea of nationalism have a distinct economic structure. In particular, governments with nationalism as the central discourse are often characterized to implement protective and conservative fiscal policies, which demonstrates a strong correlation between nationalism and the economy (Fetzer, 2020). Pagano (1995) stated that nationalism often defends the middle class, as nationalistic fiscal policies help governments to decrease economic stratification by redistributing wealth inside the country. This implies that nationalism is one of the ultimate answers to growing poverty and inequality.
Methods
The present paper aims at answering the question of poverty and inequality leading to the rise of nationalist and more conservative governments by analyzing the existing literature on the topic. Therefore, the most appropriate method for the paper is a literature review. There are two types of literature reviews: systematic and narrative. The systematic literature reviews analyze literature to answer a very specific research question using strict guidelines. While systematic reviews literature reviews provide valid and reliable results, the use of the method is inappropriate for the present paper, as the literature on the topic is scarce. Preliminary literature review revealed that it would be impossible to find studies to adhere to the article selection protocol.
Narrative literature reviews do not have a strict protocol and the requirements for paper organization and analysis. In other words, narrative literature reviews are useful works that synthesize information on a particular subject at the shortest possible time with some possibility of methodological errors. Thus, the most appropriate method for answering the research questions is to provide a narrative review of existing literature.
Results and Discussion
Reasons for Poverty and Inequality
It is crucial to review the reasons for poverty and inequality to understand their link with nationalism. Addae-Korankye (2014) explored the reasons of poverty in African countries. An extensive literature review revealed that corruption, poor governance, insufficient employment rates, poor infrastructure, inadequate resource usage, inappropriate World Bank and IMF policies, and external conflicts were among the central reasons for poverty in Africa (Addae-Korankye, 2014). Moreover, poor people in these countries cannot influence politics, which is a sign of inequality (Addae-Korankye, 2014). Mehta and Shah (2003) mention that the reasons for poverty in India were similar. In particular, India appears to struggle from low education levels, increased centralization of governance, and inefficient social structure (Mehta & Shah, 2003). In Russia, poverty was caused by the inadequate distribution of wealth gained from oil sales due to an increasingly centralized economy and power (Round & Kosterina, 2005). Moreover, corruption also contributed to the problem of inequality and poverty. All the programs to fight poverty in the countries mentioned above resulted in failures, as the money was taken by the corrupt individuals (Addae-Korankye, 2014; Mehta & Shah, 2003; Round & Kosterina, 2005).
Effects of Nationalism
Nationalism appears as a defensive reaction towards growing inequality and poverty. According to Kecmanovic (1996), nationalism meets a large number of people’s needs. Nationalism helps to satisfy the need for determining identity, defense, aggression, obeying authority, and making sacrifices for a greater cause (Kecmanovic, 1996). Thus, the rise and spread of nationalism are natural in countries with problems of inequality and poverty (Kecmanovic, 1996). For instance, in India, nationalism helps to fulfill the needs described by Kecmanovic (1996) despite the problems with poverty. According to Sarkar (2008), nationalism helps to see India as a prosperous country with rich history and culture regardless of its economic problems. As a result, poverty and inequality are seen as the effects of outside interventions from other countries (Sarkar, 2008). Similarly, in post-Soviet Russia, rising nationalism was associated with the idea that the economic and social problems inside the country were associated with external interventions from Western Countries (Snyder, 1993). Since nationalism views poverty as the result of external interactions, nationalistic governments implement conservative economic policies that restrict international trade (Bieber, 2018). As a result, nationalism helps to solve the problem of inequality and poverty without disrupting the integrity of the country.
At the same time, nationalism leads to external and internal problems. First, nationalism leads to an increased number of outside conflicts due to a feeling of superiority and the fear of external interventions (Snyder, 1993). These conflicts are usually based on hatred of other nations and blame for all the internal problems (Osborne et al., 2019). Second, nationalism infringes the rights of other nationalities inside the country (Osborne et al., 2019). Finally, the development of xenophobia makes it easy to control public opinion (Osborne et al., 2019). Politicians may use populistic nationalism to promote inadequate policies and hide the imperfection of the internal systems.
Synthesis and Analysis
The literature review on poverty, inequality, and nationalism revealed several inter-relationships between the matters. First, the growth of poverty and inequality often occurs simultaneously, as the reasons for both notions are similar. In particular, poverty and inequality occur due to poor fiscal policies, corruption, and inadequate social structures. These problems are difficult to address, as the governments that face these problems are often weak. Second, nationalism helps to address the problems of poverty and inequality without disrupting national pride and integrity. Nationalistic and conservative governments redistribute wealth inside the country to support the middle class. This results in a reduction of poverty and inequality in nationalistic countries. Third, the rise of nationalism is usually associated with external shocks, such as the fall of the Soviet Union or an economic crisis. This external shock helps to explain internal problems with external events. However, nationalism is associated with significant negative consequences that often negate the positive changes.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The analysis of the literature revealed that there are close relationships between poverty, inequality, and nationalism. This implies that there is significant evidence that poverty and inequality lead to the rise of nationalist and more conservative governments around the globe. While nationalism helps to deal with certain internal problems without significant investments and changes, nationalism does not solve the problems entirely. Instead, it masks the reasons between inequality and poverty using the idea of external threat and superiority of one nation. Thus, the rise of White nationalism is a concerning matter, as it may lead to the emergence of inadequate policies and dysfunctional decision-making. Therefore, it is recommended that the US government addresses the problem of growing inequality and poverty using other methods. For instance, the problem can be addressed by increasing access to education, fighting corruption, and implementing national and state programs that can help to reduce poverty on the local levels.
References
Addae-Korankye, A. (2014). Causes of poverty in Africa: A review of literature. American International Journal of Social Science, 3(7), 147-153.
Amaya, H. (2018). White nationalism and publicness in the United States. Javnost-The Public, 25(4), 365-378.
Bieber, F. (2018). Is nationalism on the rise? Assessing global trends. Ethnopolitics, 17(5), 519-540.
Criminal Justice Information Services Division. (2019). About hate crime statistics, 2018. Web.
Fetzer, Thomas (2020). Nationalism and economy. Nationalities Papers, 2020, 1–11. Web.
Giroux, H. A. (2017). White nationalism, armed culture and state violence in the age of Donald Trump. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 43(9), 887-910.
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101–117.
Kecmanovic, D. (1996). Causes and mechanisms of the spread of nationalism. Springer.
Mehta, A. K., & Shah, A. (2003). Chronic poverty in India: Incidence, causes and policies. World Development, 31(3), 491-511.
Nikneshan, S., Liaghatdar, M. J., & Pakseresht, M. J. (2014). Notes on the effects of nationalism in the history of curriculum with an emphasis on Iran. Notes, 5(27), 95-102.
Osborne, D., Satherley, N., Yogeeswaran, K., Hawi, D., & Sibley, C. G. (2019). White nationalism and multiculturalism support: Investigating the interactive effects of white identity and national attachment on support for multiculturalism. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 48(1), 65-74.
Pagano, U. (1995). Can economics explain nationalism? SSRN. Web.
Robles, A. (2017). Poor excuses: The relationship between poverty and White nationalism. The Humanist. Web.
Round, J., & Kosterina, E. (2005). The construction of ‘poverty’ in post‐Soviet Russia. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 6(3), 403-434.
Snyder, J. (1993). Nationalism and the crisis of the post‐Soviet state. Survival, 35(1), 5–26. Web.
Sarkar, S. (2008). Nationalism and poverty: Discourses of development and culture in 20th century India.Third World Quarterly, 29(3), 429-445. Web.