| Summary: | After briefly sketching the history of liberal nationalism, the chapter distinguishes the weaker thesis that liberalism and nationalism are compatible from the stronger thesis that liberalism needs national identification in order to survive. The weaker thesis can be attacked on the grounds that liberals must be cosmopolitans, but a stronger challenge points to the discriminatory effects that national identities may have for minority groups. There will be some matters over which a collective decision must be reached, and here the majority’s view must prevail. Taking the case of religion, the chapter points out that the state cannot avoid engaging with religious questions, since it has to legislate on religious matters and it is compatible with liberal principles to give some degree of precedence to the established religion, provided civil and political rights are equally protected, and other religions are accorded respect. Because national identities are not monolithic, the liberal nationalist conception of a shared identity that is accessible to everyone, including immigrants and other minorities, remains coherent.
|
|---|