Comment by tovej
9 hours ago
They are extreme by any sensible use of the term. If your nationalist beliefs make you ignore human rights such as asylum, or if you specifically limit the rights of one ethnic group of people (such as India has done, e.g.) while you otherwise pretend to support liberal democracy, that is an extreme position.
And ethnonationalism is _not_ the rule of the world. It is in Israel, where there is an apartheid rule. Ethnonationalism means you believe in one ethnicity being the only rightful cirizens of your state, superior to other ethnicities that live there. Every country on earth has more than one ethnicity loving there, and given that ethnocity is a fuzzy concept itself, any ethnonationalist project is a social construction of an in-group made to exclude some out-group. That is irrational and radical.
> It is in Israel, where there is an apartheid rule
Are you thick? Israel literally has Arab politicians and political parties, and 2 million Arabs living in Israel proper.
> Ethnonationalism means you believe in one ethnicity being the only rightful cirizens of your state, superior to other ethnicities that live there.
No, you're making up your own definition. Here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_nationalism
While occasionally it means other ethnicities are second class citizens (if you want to use Jews as an example they were kicked out of a ton of Arab countries where they had lived for centuries) that's far from the rule.
> Every country on earth has more than one ethnicity loving there
I mean, if a single person from another ethnicity lives there than this is true I guess.
An absolute ton of countries are named after and defined by the majority ethnic group. Literally most in Asia, a bunch in Africa (and in the rest you have ethnic strife), most in Europe. Again, the places this isn't true is mainly places that were defined by colonialism. Name a country, either they're an ethnostate or a colonial remnant.