For Americans, this is identical to when Sen. Joseph McCarthy was branding people "Unamerican". The BJP have succeeded in establishing their brand of hatred and stupidity as the only valid form of patriotism.
Patriotism is love for one’s country. Nationalism is the belief that one’s country (and often ethnic subset) is supreme (and more deserving of prosperity), speaking generally.
Would the formation of Israel be an expression of nationalism? Can it in that light be seen as the belief that one's country or ethnic group is just as deserving as others'? Or to take a more recent example of Kurdish nationalism.
I’m not especially familiar with those groups but I would think not. Semantics are subjective but I would tend to assume that there’s a pre-requisite that they already be in power, and yet be pushing for tripling down on those power structures.
Trump’s campaign rhetoric is emblematic of nationalist themes. Anti immigrant. Playing up cultural mythos. Bragging about military capabilities. Blaming foreign nations for most problems. Implying that a return to core values will bring greatness. Lots of fear and anger.
Tends to be very effective for groups of people that used to be powerful but are no longer.
You've been breaking the site guidelines repeatedly in multiple threads on divisive topics by snarking, getting personal, posting flamebait, and so on. That's not cool. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules from now on? Note this one: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."
Since when was India a nation? It's got dozens of languages, two major religions (one of which is more of an ecumenical blending of ancient practices), and many ethnic groups and cultural norms. A nation is by definition homogeneous or nearly so across these variations.
By my estimation India is an empire, and nationalism makes no sense in its context. Patriotism maybe, or political loyalty.
Just seems like a weird choice of political propaganda. I do understand there's a strong anti-Muslim attitude in India, which might be what they're calling nationalism. But it doesn't seem right.
Hinduism is not "an ecumenical blending of ancient practices". It has well defined rituals, rites and codes. They were simply allowed to be modified as necessary by anyone since the ancients essentially believed in freedom to appease your god as you wanted.
The core of Hinduism remains the vedas, gita, the puranas and the upanishads. They lay out a very deep philosophy that theologians much more educated than I am have been investigating for centuries. It is a highly rigid system at its core (contrary to the freewheeling morass image Indians themselves have projected to appear non religious).
This is why India is a nation. From the tip of Jammu till the edge of Kanyakumari, people thought of the vedas as the progenitor scripture of all civilisation. They heard the exact same stories of the Mahabharatha and Ramayana for millennia. The fact that they were free to adapt it and retell or embellish it does not mean they broke away from the system itself or that the system emerged later than the stories did.
I expect Parent either meant nation as a synonym for "country".
nation is defined as:
na•tion
n.
A relatively large group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.
n.
The territory occupied by such a group of people.
Worth noting that many of those ethnic groups still suffer disenfranchisement under the caste system. Indian/Narendra Modi nationalism is Hindu nationalism.