-- Friedrich Nietzsche
Of course, Nietzsche wrote this before companies with "no I in team" and whatnot :P
> What's wrong with having an independent sovereign government
Nothing, but "nationalism" to me implies some sort identification with a symbol, rather than interacting with reality. Sufficiently developed individuals don't "belong to" groups, it's the other way around. Tribalism is a great method to stop that development dead in its tracks.
http://orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat
> The emotional urges which are inescapable, and are perhaps even necessary to political action, should be able to exist side by side with an acceptance of reality.
In so far that is the case for what you would consider nationalism, carry on. To me, a sense of responsibility towards the place where you live and towards the people that live there is just that, while nationalism adds more and only bad things to it. I generally see it used as crutch or excuse.
EDIT: Oh my that was a fast downvote, < 10 seconds. I wonder if a clever HN member has set a "thought police" style bot upon me. Sorry, I shall try harder to stick to the narrative.
What's evil about me wanting to live with people with whom I share cultural heritage, language, ethics and peculiarities of perception of life? What's wrong with having an independent sovereign government, with having laws and rules tailored specifically to this large tribe I belong to?
I have no desire for my nation to invade other countries or to impose our rules and ways of life on other people. That said, I also will not tolerate foreign interference in my nation's affairs, come it from a single country or international gang, such as UN.
Nations and nationalism are not evil, they are manifestations of different, unique ways of human development, manifestations of the very diversity Western leftists crave for.