Comment by dgesang | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dgesang | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> plaster nationalist labels all over it and employ nationalist propaganda.

That's what you did. He just said '100%-USA product'.

> Those are just weak excuses for nationalism.

How so? Nationalism and producing a product within in a certain region/state/country is not the same, no matter how much you want it to be.

> Also, more often than not anti-globalization is just disguised nationalism.

Not where I live (Germany).

> Yes, globalization has serious downsides – but only because it happens with nations still existing.

No, there are many versatile reasons why globalization has downsides (and upsides), I'm sure you can come up with one or two more if you just wanted to. But it seems that all you care about is nationalism.

> Nationalism and producing a product within in a certain region/state/country is not the same, no matter how much you want it to be.

Not only is it the same, it is the definition of Nationalism. The company would choose a US manufacturer over a competitor in a foreign country, even if a foreign manufacturer made a better product at a better price and was a better employer. This is no different than choosing your supplier by race, religion or gender.

I agree however on the anti-globalization movement in Germany, it's not nationalism but economic ignorance with a sprinkling of Marxism.

Nationalism is an ideology that a person or group's loyalty to a nation surpasses other needs, goals, etc.

Nationalism is not simply building a product within a certain geographic region. Market differentiation, labor laws, environmental concerns, brand tradition, job stimulus (not as national loyalism but as local benevolence / civility), are all rational reasons to build a product in a certain area that have nothing to do with ideological loyalty.

There are good reasons to exclude certain business partners, none of which were raised by Fisher. The only criteria he stated was nationality.

What is the difference between "local benevolence" and Nationalism if the consequence is that nationals are treated in preference compared to other individuals?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com