Pants-of-dog wrote:She has defended white nationalists, so it is not a stretch to say she defends racism.
Edit: Now I am wondering if I am confusing her with Faith Goldy.
This got me thinking though.
My reluctance to be a civic nationalist myself has always been due to the fact that I think civic nationalism is a marginally stable ideology. Marginal stability is a control theory term (I'm an electrical engineer after all). Basically, a marginally stable system is one which is stable, but the slightest disturbance or change in the conditions that allow the stability quickly turn the system unstable. An easy example of this is resting a ball at the very top of a hill. The ball is at rest on the top of the hill (i.e. stable), but the slightest breeze will send the ball rolling off the hill (unstable). Where as if the ball was at the bottom of a valley, if a breeze were to push the ball, the slope of the valley would push the ball back down towards the bottom of the valley. This type of stability is better, there's a technical engineering term for it which I can't remember. I'm not a controls engineer....
I think civic nationalism is a lot like the ball on the top of the hill. Basically, it can start off guided by genuinely good/just/moral ideals that are non-racist. However, it can easily be high jack and corrupted to be more like non-civic nationalism. Ultimately, civic nationalism also requires discrimination of some type. Maybe it's not race based, but it could promote discrimination based on something else that could potentially be horrible.
In short, I don't think it works in the long term.
I really do like massive integration of the global economy and technology. It forces us all to play nice with each other.