Nationalist cosmopolitanism: the psychology of cosmopolitanism, national identity, and going to war for the country

Abstract

A frequently expressed criticism of cosmopolitanism by liberal nationalist theorists is that its moral universalism is incompatible with national identity and patriotic obligations, defined as obligations to the nation and to fellow nationals. While some scholars of cosmopolitanism agree with this incompatibility argument, others contend that nationalism, cosmopolitanism, and patriotic duties are not rivals. However, few efforts have been made to examine the relationship between cosmopolitanism, nationalism, and patriotic obligations at the level of individual people. Drawing fresh insights from psychological approaches to social identity, I argue that cosmopolitan individuals have an integrated dual identity that embodies both nationalism and world citizenship, and this dual identity is compatible with patriotic obligations. Using data from the 2010–2014, round of the Word Values Survey, I show that cosmopolitans who identify as world citizens also identify with the nation and are willing to perform the ultimate patriotic sacrifice of going to war to defend their country. Upending certain convention wisdoms, this result indicates that cosmopolitan and national identities are compatible and cosmopolitan identity does not hinder patriotic obligations.

Identification with all humanity—A test of the factorial structure and measurement invariance of the scale in five countries

“…It is negatively connected to islamophobia and dehumanisation (McFarland et al, 2019). Moreover, contrary to the stereotypical view of global identification as in opposition to national identification, studies in Poland and the United States showed that people who feel more closely identified with all humanity also feel more closely identified with their nations and local communities (Bassett & Cleveland, 2019; Bayram, 2019; Hamer & Gutowski, 2009; McFarland et al, 2019). More globalised individuals do not reduce contributions to local groups while increasing contributions to global groups, but rather are overall more generous (Grimalda, Buchan, & Brewer, 2018).…”

The national nature of globalization and the global nature of nationalism: Historically and methodologically entangled

“…Even those whom the scale identifies as being cosmopolitan are using a form of banal nationalist language to demonstrate this cosmopolitanism. Bayram (2019), in a study of the psychology of cosmopolitanism and nationalism, comes close to some of the positions taken here. She does not try to separate cosmopolitans and nationalists into two very different classes of person, but she writes of "nationalist cosmopolitanism."…”

“…Bayram (2019), in a study of the psychology of cosmopolitanism and nationalism, comes close to some of the positions taken here. She does not try to separate cosmopolitans and nationalists into two very different classes of person, but she writes of “nationalist cosmopolitanism.” She uses data from the World Values Survey (WVS) to show that most people are both nationalist and cosmopolitan.…”

“…Some of Bayram’s (2019) comments about the importance of national identity in the modern world are in line with the theme that nationalism as an ideology makes the nation-state appear natural to its members. She writes that “national identity has high psychological centrality” and that most people are “born into a system of political organization that is based on the nation-state and nationality”; and in consequence, they “encounter national identity as a social fact, a ‘natural’ social identity” (p. 762).…”

National identity, cosmopolitanism, and attitudes toward immigrants

“…His study participants generally did not think much of national identity, as English or British, and that they were rather oblivious, indifferent, or even apathetic to national identity. Of the possible reasons discussed, the most relevant here is that some individuals reject their national identities because they would rather embrace broader, supranational categories viewed as more inclusive and less particularistic (Fenton, 2007: 333; see also Bayram, 2019). Self-identity such as citizen of the world may blur boundaries between national ingroup and immigrant outgroup.…”