The Connection Between Nationalism and Intolerance

NATIONALISM AND INTOLERANCE Morelli 1
The Connection between Nationalism and Intolerance:
With a focus on the Psychology of Political Ambition
Scott W. Morelli Jr.
Mr. Gregory Falls
GSWLA Global Connections
Global Studies and World Languages Academy
Tallwood High School
Author’s Note
Ō tempore! Ō mōrēs! -- Cicero against Catiline (Translation: Oh the times! Oh the
morals!)
A special thanks to Ms. Clouser and Mr. Falls for helping the author through this
process; as well as his family and friends, he gives thanks for the support he receives.
Abstract
This paper will explore the connection between thumotic and nationalist ideas
which may influence a leader’s decision on policy decisions and state actions. Not only
are thumotic and nationalist ideas connected, but the existence of such can lead to
intolerance in a country. This intolerance can be aggravated by state policies and actions
which are a result of a state’s leader. Two of the main themes of this paper include
nationalism and intolerance. This paper proves that nationalism and intolerance are, in
fact, connected through the mannerisms and idiosyncrasies of state leaders and policy
decisions made by those leaders under the influence of thumotic and nationalistic ideas.
Table of Contents
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………...2
Introduction………………………………………………………………………..4
Limitations………………………………………………………………………….5
Literature Review………………………………………………………………..6
Discussion…………………………………………………………………………..9
………………………………………………………………..9
Hungary…
South Africa……………………………………………………………..13
…………………………………………………..17
The United States…
……………….22
The Psychology of Political Ambition……..…
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………...23
References………………………………………………………………………...25
Appendix A………………………………………………………………………..31
Appendix B………………………………………………………………………..32
Appendix C………………………………………………………………………..33
Appendix D………………………………………………………………………..34
Appendix E………………………………………………………………………..35
Appendix F………………………………………………………………………..37
Introduction
Waves crashed against the leaky hull of the fishing boat. Saltwater mixed with the
scent of sweat and the air became oppressive as the crowd surged with the pitch of the
boat. A shining light in the distance represents a new future; behind that light, lies an
alien world. Upon arrival, papers are demanded, questions shouted, foreign languages
spoken and understood; however, not by the crowd from the boat. A new word emerges:
“immigrant”. Many immigrants face this journey across the world, whether they come
from the continent of Africa or even South-East Asia, risking their lives to gain a hopeful
future. Arrival in foreign lands, at a glance, seems to be kind, friendly even; soon, the
differences set in. Brown skin shades blend together and form a singular group,
“foreign”. White skin shades blend together and form a singular group, “native”. Within
these native groups, a unifying force starts to gain a following, what is now known as
“nationalism”. Often times the terms, “foreign” and “native”switch sides when displayed
with certain countries. Soon, a distinct divide grows between the two groups and a new
word emerges, “intolerance”.
An example of intolerance is the presence of cleavages or divisions in a society
defined by socioeconomic class, religion, political beliefs, etc. The most destabilizing
cleavages are called coinciding cleavages which can include a socioeconomic disparity
between foreign and native groups. These cuts in society further define already
established lines on which a society may be divided. Furthermore exacerbating the
effects of said divides.

Thumos is the want of a person to be recognized and remembered. Many leaders
of the world emphasize thumotic ideals by passing landmark legislation or publicly
disapprove of an event or group. This idea along with nationalism can create major
problems within a state.
Ideas such as nationalism, patriotism, and statism exist on a spectrum with
positive effects on one end and toxic effects on the latter. When the citizenry--and
government--of a state starts to think on the more toxic end of this spectrum,
intolerance and bigotry start to become a major factor in the decisions and actions of the
state; influenced by the groups in question.
Intolerance in Hungary, South Africa, and the United States is a result of the
presence of thumotic ideas and nationalism, conflicting at a state level. In addition,
distinct social cleavages have the opportunity to surface and cause more problems in
states.
Limitations
Political Challenges: Each administration in the focus countries have different
policies regarding immigration and asylum in those countries. With administration
changes, these policies may become obsolete and therefore this research may follow suit.
Geographical Limits: Many modern countries have surges of intolerance against
foreign groups; however they are not as severe as those in the focus countries. This
paper will only focus on the connection between nationalism and intolerance in
Hungary, South Africa, and the United States.

Time Limit: Some of the issues surrounding intolerance, in the focus countries, stretch
back to even the formation of said countries. However, this paper will only cover the
beginning of the Cold War to the Present Day.
Personal Bias: The author of this research paper has a personal bias against the types
of nationalism present in the focus countries. The research present has been analyzed,
and revised, for the reduction of bias within the paper.
Word choice: I n this paper, “immigrant” and “migrant” are used interchangeably.
This paper will also not use the word “illegal” but “undocumented”; the author believes
that “illegal” perpetuates stereotypes.
Literature Review
When topics such as ethnicity, race, intolerance, and nationalism are casually
discussed, the average person becomes timid and nervous to explore and discuss such
ideas. In the 21st century, there has been an increase in international tensions among
ethnicities and races. Furthermore, an increase in domestic tensions among said groups
has been observed as well. Both the United States and Hungary are pushing against the
flow of Immigrants entering their countries. In South Africa, there have been multiple
xenophobic attacks against foreign immigrants from other African countries. All the
countries mentioned have seen multiple surges of Nationalism since their conception as
a nation; the present situation in the 21st century is nothing new.
An article from The National Interest titled “The Hungary Model: Resurgent
Nationalism”, written by Jason Pack, analyzes the different factors which have led to the
modern ideologies held by the Hungarian administration. Victor Orbán, the current
Hungarian prime minister, has pushed anti-immigration policies within the state’s
borders. This article lays out a brief overview of the perspectives of the Hungarian state
and can be used to compare amongst the other two countries.
“Migrants, Moral Panic, and Intolerance in Hungarian Politics”, by Vivian S.
Walker and Lorant Gyori, cover specifically the treatment of immigrants in the
Hungarian state. In Hungary, immigrant discrimination has taken the form of “migrant
spotting” which remains a government-sanctioned activity. This means that a citizen of
the state can voluntarily turn names into the government who they believe to be an
immigrant. This article will be helpful to argue about how the other mentioned countries
use “public ostracization” against immigrants and foreign nationals.
In South Africa, according to “What research tells us is driving xenophobic
attacks on African migrants in South Africa,” written by Steven Gordon and the Human
Sciences Research Council from QuartzAfrica, attacks against foreign nationals have
increased due to a growing anti-immigrant ideology. The Promotion of Equality and
Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act in South Africa specifically prohibits
discrimination based on broad factors such as race and gender, along with more minute
factors such as marital status and disability. There is no distinction between citizens and
non-citizens for protection under the law. Both of these sources have great insight into
the South African Crisis and laws regarding discrimination in South Africa.
The growing anti-immigrant ideology in South Africa has led many South
Africans to blame the current socio-economic problems of the state on foreign nationals.
An article from QuartzAfrica titled “These charts show migrants aren’t South Africa’s
biggest problem”, written by Abdi Latif Dahir, discusses the rising economic concerns of
the country including the weak economic growth and high unemployment levels.
Focusing on more than one aspect of South African society could help to narrow down
particular aspects of said society, which leads to intolerance in the state.
In a speech by Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) titled “Immigration in the National
Interest”, he argues that there is a decisive difference between becoming a citizen of the
United States, through the process of naturalization, and being an American citizen by
birth. This distinction highlights the present issue of a rise in white supremacist and
nationalistic ideals in the United States. While this speech is heavily anti-immigrant and
pro-nationalist, these ideas would be able to qualify an argument that the toxicity of
Nationalism exists and is, therefore, a problem.
Jamin Hubner’s “The Anatomy of Nationalism: A Fresh Appraisal Based on
Recent Case Studies” takes a non-partisan opinion as he goes on to define nationalism,
specifically in the United States. Hubner argues that nationalism is based on a nation,
not a state; however, he does go on to say that these ideas exist on a spectrum. When
discussed on a spectrum, there are limitations to what the idea can be defined as.
Specifically, there is no black and white, but a gray area that would be helpful in defining
what type of nationalism researchers could focus or concentrate on.
After the 2016 Presidential Election, a sharp rise in nationalism occurred within
the United States. In “Choosing Patriotism over Nationalism” Harvard Political Review’s
Colton Carpenter differentiates between nationalism and patriotism in the U.S. In
conjunction with Hubner’s essay, this would be helpful in defining the line between
nationalism, patriotism and statism within the mentioned countries, especially the
United States.
When a mostly, centripetal and unifying force, turns into a centrifugal and
destabilizing disease that starts to ostracize foreign groups, there lies a problem. When
citizens of the mentioned countries form an apathy, or dislike, towards other
ethnic/racial groups within those countries, there lies a problem. Apathy and dislike are
gateways into intolerance where groups are divided and the general society could
become unstable. Nationalism as a unifying ideal can heal nations torn by war or
disaster. However, nationalism, as a destabilizing and toxic force, can tear a state apart
and leave a gaping hole in statutory norms.
Discussion
Hungary
Background
The Hungarian state operates under a semi-presidential system, meaning that a
prime minister (PM) and president co-exist. The Fundamental Law is the constitution of
the state, in which the guidelines and framework of the country are set. Currently, the
PM of Hungary is Viktor Orbán, a prominent member of the Fidesz Party.
Immigration Policies within Hungary
With the passage of the European Agenda on Migration by the European Union
(EU) in 2015, which outlined immediate actions that must be taken to curb the global
immigration crisis, Hungary viewed this act as a deplorable and “soft” action taken by
the supranational organization. Not long after Hungary set up multiple anti-immigrant
policies in the state, the EU brought the Hungarian government to court. One of the
most important issues was the infringement upon Article 7 of the treaty which set the
basic governing guidelines of the EU. This article outlined the values to which all EU
member nations should respect in regard to legislation. In terms of defining human
rights, Hungary does not view immigration as one of them. Additionally, the actions of
PM Viktor Orbán, regarding state decisions, were brought up in the case against the
Hungarian state on several charges including the implementation of harsh,
anti-immigration policies, media manipulation, interfering in the judicial system, and
ignoring corruption within the domestic borders of the country (Jazeera, 2018).
On the 62nd Anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution and the war of
independence against communist rule in Hungary, Orbán gave a speech, in which he not
only proclaimed the greatness of the Hungarian state but also the threat of immigrants,
to commemorate the celebration. In his speech, Orbán was quoted saying “‘We don’t see
these people as Muslim refugees. We see them as Muslim invaders’” (Barry, 2019)
referring to the migrants in Hungary. The government also “approved a package [last
June] of legislation called the ‘Stop Soros’ law…” (Barry 2019), which stopped granting
aid to undocumented migrants and refugees. In essence, with the harsh policies set by
the state’s government, the acts of aiding immigrants and seeking asylum in the state
have been criminalized by the current administration.
Currently, only about two asylum-seekers are granted entrance to the “safe” state
each day. In terms of migration and movement from one state to another, a “safe” state
is one that has an economy, and society, fit to foster migrants who are either seeking
asylum or refugee status. Safe for those living within the borders, but not for migrants.
Once hopeful foreign nationals enter the borders, they are subjected to severe and
inhumane discrimination from the governmental administration and the public. A
government-sanctioned activity that the public is encouraged to participate in, “migrant
spotting”, allows for citizens to submit names or lists of names of people who they
believe to be undocumented migrants to the government. Thus, bleeding the state of any
unwanted groups which may have wanted to seek asylum in the borders.
A government spokesperson, Zoltán Kovács, was quoted saying that “‘Migration
is not a human right’” (Barry, 2019), in relation to the growing migrant population of
Hungary. Opinions like Kovács’, show the apologeticness of the current national
administration of Hungary under the rule of Viktor Orbán; qualifying that the state
seeks only the preservation of internal stability, not of international stability.
Nationalism and Hungary: The Cold War and Beyond
During the 20th century, Hungary experienced the rise and fall of multiple fascist
and communist regimes within the borders of the country; many of which were under
the domain of the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Under Nikita Krushchev, and
incited by the criticism of Stalinist rule, the Hungarian state experienced a rise in
discontent and domestic tensions during 1956. The presence of such ultimately led to
fighting among rebel groups and the existing Soviet presence within the country. At the
end of the first half of the revolution, the rebels gained a victory over the Soviets in
Hungary. However, this victory was short-lived as the Soviet Union invaded the country
on November 4th, 1956, to stop the revolution. This ultimately led to the death of Imre
Nagy, the premier in 1958, and a blockage of the flow of Stalinist ideas into the country.
Over time, Hungary has slowly moved toward self-autonomy (The Editors of the
Encyclopedia Britannica, 2018). From this revolution, the country celebrated in its
new-found independence.
As the years progressed, Hungary became more and more isolationist and
protective of its borders. Viktor Orbán, first elected in 1998, has pushed for the country
to institute harsh policies regarding immigration as well as fanning the flames of a
growing nationalism within the country. In a speech given on March 15th, 2018, on the
commemoration of a failed 1848 uprising, Orbán was quoted saying that “it is forbidden
to speak the truth” and that immigration into Hungary “endangers our way of life, our
culture, our customs and our Christian traditions”(The Economist Explains, 2018).
Under the leadership of Orbán, Hungary has seen a rise in nationalistic ideals as well as
intolerance against immigrants in the past decade. This is largely due to the fact that the
government has sanctioned activities and policies that have led to increased tensions
between citizens of the state.
As mentioned before, “migrant spotting” is a government-sanctioned activity.
The Hungarian government does not differentiate between legal and undocumented
migrants. Any person within the borders of Hungary, who isn’t ethnically or nationally
Hungarian, are enemies to the State. The reason that Mr. Orbán’s nationalist party has
risen so easily, is because of the “...timidity of the opposition” (The Economist Explains,
2018). Fear is an essential tool used by Orbán’s party to coerce the other parties to back
off. While the country may operate under Orbán as a “substantive” democracy, the
tactics used by the ruling party twist the very roots of democracy to crack and become
procedural.
Social Intolerance and “Moral Panic”
In the Hungarian state, there exists a large amount of social and moral panic
regarding immigrants and non-Hungarian citizens. This is due largely to the policies of
Orbán and the Hungarian administration pushing anti-immigrant idiosyncrasies. The
seizure of the independent media within Hungary, by Orbán’s party, ensured that his
ideas and the status quo would remain fixed within the citizenry of the state. With the
acquisition of nearly all regional daily newspapers, Orbán was able to take control of the
media and use moral panic, a wide-spread acceptance that a foreign entity is a threat to
society, to push his ideas. Of course, the foreign entity in question is the migrant
population. This included the seizure of jobs by migrants, the downfall of the Hungarian
economy, and the destruction of Hungarian life. According to Steven Cohen, a
sociologist, “the first phase of moral Panic begins with a perception of imminent danger
to social or political ‘tranquility’”(Vivian S. Walker and Lorant Gyori, 2018). The only
“moral panic” that is of any importance, is the threat of total rule under the leadership of
Viktor Orbán, and the destruction of the free Hungarian state.

South Africa
Background
The South African state operates under a presidential system. The combination of
the National Assembly (NA) and the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) form the
Parliament of South Africa which is responsible for upholding the state’s constitution
while creating laws. The current President of South Africa is Cyril Ramaphosa, who
replaced Jacob Zuma in 2018.
Apartheid in South Africa
Under apartheid, South Africa experienced an “oppressive economic system
[that] was socialism with a racist face” (Thomas W. Hazlett, n.d.). The white minority of
the country sought to create a “white” South Africa and enacted legislation which
allowed for the systematic racism against the black majority. This was done through the
apprehension of the economic sectors of the state by the white minority and the
enactment of regulation to ensure the elevation of the white minority over the black
majority(Hazlett, n.d.).
The African National Congress and the South African Constitution
The African National Congress (ANC) was created to help the unification of the
South African state after the policies of apartheid. In 1996, the Constitution of South
Africa was ratified and laid out specific guidelines on the basis of discrimination in the
country, especially on race. In chapter 2, section 3: Equality, of the South African
Constitution, it is stated that “No person may unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly
against anyone on one or more grounds in terms of subsection (3)” (The Constitution of
the Republic of South Africa, 1996). Codified in the constitution, the state prohibits any
form of discrimination, on any basis, in the country. However, the constitution goes on
to say that “Discrimination on one or more of the grounds in subsection (3) is unfair
unless it is established that the discrimination is fair” (The Constitution of the Republic
of South Africa, 1996). Meaning that the state or any citizen of the state may
discriminate on the grounds of Subsection 3 if there is legitimate proof that the
discrimination is fair.
Economic struggles of the South African State
South Africa remains Africa’s second-largest economy to the present day. In
2019, the economy rose sharply in the first quarter. However, the economy narrowly
avoided a recession by a 3.1% rise (Found in Appendix A) The President, Cyril
Ramaphosa, has faced massive pressure from the citizens of the state to fix the problem;
however, this problem is not something that can easily be fixed (Dahir, 2019).
Unemployment levels are on the rise as well, as indicated by Appendix B (Refer to
Appendix C and D as well). Many citizens blame this rise on migrants taking all
available jobs; the real reason is much more serious. The unemployment level is at 29%,
affecting about 6.7 million people across the country. Jobs have become increasingly
rare over the past century as access to education has decreased, as well as the
accessibility of technology and weak labor laws and policies (Dahir, 2019).
Xenophobia in South Africa
In 2019, there has been a rise in xenophobia and attacks against migrants in the
South African state. This is largely due to the presence of such groups as the Economic
Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the Black First Land First (BFLF) running off of the
“appeal to narratives of nativism and indigeneity as the indispensable basis for certain
entitlements” (Siphokazi Mbolo and Ashley Nyiko Mabasa, 2019) such as rights to land
and economic opportunities. Much of this new thought process is the effect of centuries
of European colonization, slavery, and oppression by foreign powers. Especially in
South Africa, who is still in recovery from the policies of apartheid and the effects of its
systematic racism.
The nationalist movement in South Africa is largely based on the eradication of
the white colonizer and purification of the country. However, a counter-movement,
headed by white South Africans, Afrikaners, has arisen as well within the state.
Afriforum, an Afrikaner group, seeks to protect the interests of all white South Africans,
at the expense of the majority of South Africa (Mbolo and Mabasa, 2019).
Not only are the main groups focused on the eradication of the white minority,
but of foreigners as well. Many of the native groups blame foreigners for the
socio-economic problems that have befallen the state. However, there is little empirical
data to suggest that migrants and foreigners are to blame (Steven Gordon, 2019). Most
of the sentiments held by the public are exacerbated by government officials pushing
anti-migrant idiosyncrasies. In the South African Social Attitudes Survey, researchers
concluded that anti-migrant hate crimes, and hate crimes in general, were a more
widespread problem than initially thought (Gordon, 2019). Not only did researchers
find proof to support the existence of hate crimes in the country, but they also noticed a
fluctuation in data from 2015-2018 (Gordon, 2019). From this survey, researchers have
drawn conclusions that non-violent anti-migrant activities are a starting point for
violent anti-migrant activity in the future (Gordon, 2019).
One of the most notable things about Nationalism in South Africa is the flexibility
of public officials in the control of Nationalist ideals. There is almost no involvement of
the government in anti-migrant activities with the majority of activities being conducted
by the citizens. While the government does not participate in the anti-migrant activity,
they do, however, push anti-migrant idiosyncrasies and ideas onto the public; which
would ultimately lead to the public performance of the aforementioned activities.
The United States
Background
The United States operates under a presidential system. The legislative branch of
the government is divided into two chambers: the House of Representatives and the
Senate. Both of which are popularly elected by the people. The current President of the
United States is Donald Trump.
Immigration and Nativism
Much like many first world countries, the United States seeks to implement an
immigration policy that helps to keep the traditional “American” values alive. This
includes the “reunification of families, admitting immigrants with skills that are
valuable to the U.S. economy, protecting refugees, and promoting diversity” (American
Immigration Council, 2019). However, there are limits to the number of migrants that
are allowed into the country.
During the 2015 global immigration crisis, policy in the United States
surrounding immigration became a popular topic, especially as the 2016 presidential
election was drawing nearer with an unlikely candidate: Donald Trump. The defining
phrase for his campaign: Make America Great Again; referring to the extensive amount
of migrants within the state. Another recurring theme in his campaign was the promise
to build a wall along the border between Mexico and the United States and to have
Mexico pay for it. Trump gained a large following within the United States and
ultimately won the 2016 election. Much of this was due to statements such as these,
which highlighted Trump’s dislike for the current condition of the United States: “The
U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems. Thank you. It’s true,
and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending
their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people
that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re
bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good
people” (Trump, 2015).
Nationalism within the United States
Inherently, nationalism is not necessarily an evil idea. Jamin Hubner explains in
“The Anatomy of Nationalism: A Fresh Appraisal Based on Recent Case Studies” that
while nationalism does have benefits, there are some downsides. One of his most
prominent arguments is that ideas such as patriotism, nationalism, and statism exist on
a spectrum. Thus, the degrees to which “This political form of ‘nationalism’...exists on a
spectrum” (Hubner, 2018) leads to the amount of toxicity within such nationalism.
After the election of Trump in 2016, the United States saw a rise in nationalist
ideals. For instance, on August 12, 2017 a “Unite The Right” rally was held in
Charlottesville, Virginia. One person was killed and several others were injured as white
nationalists were met with protests against them and their march (Katz, 2017) In a
speech by Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR), he explains that while the Constitution dictates
that a non-American may become an American citizen through naturalization it
“...doesn’t mean you are an American” (Cotton, 2017). This thinking perpetuates the
existence of nationalist ideals within the state, by secluding the definition of “American”
to those only natural born. Cotton goes on to say that the United States has a “unique
brand of nationalism, which connects our people through our ideas…” (Cotton, 2017);
there is no definition as to what those people are. However, there is evidence to suggest
that migrants are not incorporated in that definition.
A majority of the U.S. population agreed with Trump in 2016: every immigrant is
a problem for the U.S. Specifically, this type of nationalism is “white nationalism” as
argued by Colton Carpenter in a Harvard Political Review article titled “Choosing
Patriotism over Nationalism”. Carpenter explains that while nationalism isn’t inherently
wrong, the brand of nationalism being promoted in the United States has lead to toxic
effects within the state. This includes an echoing of President Trump’s remarks about
recent migrants to the state “bringing drugs [and] bringing crime” (Carpenter, 2019)
and the subsequent reverberation of this rhetoric throughout the state and the world.
This feeds into existing xenophobia and racism which then leads to more problems for
the state.
White nationalism has not only become increasingly prominent in the United
States, but the political narrative of the country has changed drastically due to this
introduction. The inability of white nationalist groups to work with other groups has
drastic societal and economic impacts on the entirety of the state. Economically
speaking, the presence of white nationalism within the United States leads to the
inability to form a multicultural market which would then expand and include multiple
groups and benefit the state in the long run. For example, many of the small businesses
in the country are run by regular citizens. Carpenter argues that “People of color may
not feel comfortable eating in an establishment run by a white nationalist” (Carpenter,
2019). Socially speaking, there would be tension among migrant populations and the
white, American population as everyone would be branded as either one side or the
other (Carpenter, 2019).
The Alt-Right Movement in the State
January 2017 marked a crucial point in Donald Trump’s presidency as he took
office and started to form his administration. One man, in particular, Stephen Miller,
became the Senior Policy Advisor for the president. In 2015, as an aide to then-Senator
Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Miller was reported as having recommended “The Camp of
the Saints” by Jean Raspail to Breitbart News as a Hatewatch investigation revealed

(Michael Edison Hayden, 2019). This book was unknown outside of White Nationalist
groups, which led to the questioning of Miller over his knowledge of the book.
“The Camp of the Saints” depicts a dystopian future in which a massive wave of
migrants from underdeveloped countries flows into France, causing an apocalyptic
period to ensue. Miller had written to Katie McHugh, an editor at Breitbart, drawing
parallels from the book and a speech by the Pope in which he said “...you see the Pope
saying [the] west must, in effect, get rid of borders. Someone should point out the
parallels to Camp of the Saints” (Hayden, 2019). His emails were leaked before “public
references to the book that White House officials such as Trump’s former chief strategist
Steve Bannon later made” (Hayden, 2019). This then led to mass speculation by the
media in the United States about policies written by the Trump Administration.
Ideas displayed by the current presidential administration are further supported
by groups such as the New Century Foundation, which seeks to foster the growth of
pro-white ideology and support for majority racial groups. In the introduction to the
agazine of 1990, the group avoids blatant discrimination,

American Renaissance m
while still discriminating against minority groups: “In fact, blacks and Hispanics are,
compared to whites, far more likely to be poor, illiterate, on welfare, or in jail; they are
far more likely to have illegitimate children, be addicted to drugs, or have AIDS. By no
definition of international competitiveness can the presence of these populations be
anything but a disadvantage” (American Renaissance, 1990). These ideas are toxic and
can lead to a physicalization of the white nationalist groups’ ideologies and feelings
towards minority groups, especially migrants.

The Psychology of Political Ambition
The battle between thumos, the human need for recognition, and eros, a lust for
something--which in this case is power--can physicalize itself into a state-wide problem.
In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán seeks to control the Hungarian state as an
attempt to implement his nationalist ideals and idiosyncrasies within the European
Union. In the United States, President Donald Trump is attempting to prove that he is
the best leader in the world by showcasing his “unlimited” power as president. Both of
these leaders have an “...erotic but non-philosophic motive…”(Newell, 2013) when faced
with decisions. This means that there is a lust for control of power, but no real reason
for such. Not only are the reasons for the seizure of power illegitimate and potentially
harmful, but the “...ruler’s motivation is [also] a hedonism higher and nobler than the
witless excesses of the Wastrel tyrant of Book 9 of the Republic…” (Newell, 2013). This
goes to prove that the leaders of a country could potentially harm their state through
lust for power within the state.
The leaders of the mentioned countries allow space for nationalist ideas to
manifest and grow in size. In an interview with Mrs. Elena Baum on the subject of
leaders and nationalism, Mrs. Baum asserted that “Countries can’t do that, but leaders
and policies certainly can” (Baum, 2019) in response to the question: Can countries
exacerbate, or aggravate, already existing divides within a society? Meaning that when
placed in certain situations, leaders such as Trump and Orbán can inadvertently worsen
the already existing divisions within a society. Especially when these charismatic leaders
start to force their ideas onto their citizens, problems can arise and political legitimacy
can be questioned. Politics is a game of compromises (Fleming, 2019) and when one
side does not get their ultimate prize, they will not agree to negotiate again. It only takes
one time for an actor or leader to mess up an alliance, a treaty, or a simple meeting and
the entire relationship is tainted.
The inability of leaders to keep their egos in check and their insatiable desire for
power under control presents a difficult challenge. This is the entire reason for countries
to fall apart and become a thing of the past. Great empires of the world have come and
gone due to the greediness and destructive thoughts of past leaders. It is only a matter of
time before one tiny slip-up causes the end to a country.
Conclusion
In essence, the presence of thumotic ideas mixing and clashing with nationalist
ideas forms a state-level problem. This problem can have ramifications that spread out
from the leader to policies and state decisions.
Hungarian immigration policies have increased tensions and have led to a decline
of European acceptance of the Hungarian state. Also under the rule of Viktor Orbán,
nationalism has been reported to be at an all-time high in the state which has led to
increased moral panic and social intolerance against migrants.
In South Africa, constitutional laws dictate that discrimination against race
should be criminally punished but the current president, Cyril Ramaphosa, has done
nothing to suppress the continuing violence in his state. The economic situation in
South Africa has spurred public ideas about migrants and their impact on the economy,
which has turned into public displays of xenophobia and violence.

In addition, the United States has similar immigration policies to those of
Hungary, making immigration to the country an almost social taboo topic. Under the
presidency of Donald Trump, the United States has seen a rise in white-nationalist
groups and hate crimes against migrants.
Not only has there been major evidence to support the idea that state leaders are
aggravating the already existing divides within societies, but there is also substantial
support that the presence of thumotic ideas can increase a leader’s chance of doing so.
nationalism and intolerance, when examined separately, are not even connected
through correlation. This paper proves that nationalism and intolerance are, in fact,
connected through the mannerisms and idiosyncrasies of state leaders and policy
decisions made by those leaders under the influence of thumotic and nationalistic ideas.
References
Al Jazeera. (2018, October 6). Immigration 'not a human right': Hungary FM on EU
criticism. Retrieved from
https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/talktojazeera/2018/10/immigration-hu
man-hungary-fm-eu-criticism-181005163335153.html.
American Immigration Council. (2019, October 10). How the United States
Immigration System Works. Retrieved from
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/how-united-states-immi
gration-system-works.
Berry , O. (2019, February 11). In Orbán's Hungary, refugees are unwelcome - so are
those who try to help. Retrieved from
https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-02-11/orban-s-hungary-refugees-are-unwelco
me-so-are-those-who-try-help.
Carpenter, C. (2019, April 1). Choosing Patriotism over Nationalism. Retrieved from
http://harvardpolitics.com/columns-old/patriotism-over-nationalism/.
Constitutional Assembly of South Africa. (1996). The Constitution of the Republic of
South Africa, 1996. Retrieved from
https://justice.gov.za/legislation/constitution/SAConstitution-web-eng.pdf.
Cotton, T. (2017, October 10). Immigration in the National Interest. Retrieved from
https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/immigration-national-interest/.
Dahir, A. L. (2019, September 13). These charts show migrants aren't South Africa's
biggest problem. Retrieved from
https://qz.com/africa/1708814/what-is-behind-south-africas-xenophobic-attacks
-on-foreigners/.
Drüner, M. S. (2019, May). Immigration policy: Fact Sheets on the European Union:
European Parliament. Retrieved from
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/152/immigration-policy.
Gordon, S., & Human Sciences Research Council. (2019, September 14). What
research tells us is driving xenophobic attacks on African migrants in South Africa.
Retrieved from
https://qz.com/africa/1705349/how-south-africa-xenophobia-attacks-on-africans
-is-driven/.
Hayden, M. E. (2019, November 12). Miller Pushed Racist 'Camp of the Saints'
Beloved by Far Right. Retrieved from
https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/11/12/miller-pushed-racist-camp-sai
nts-beloved-far-right.
Hazlett, T. W., Nye, J. V. C., Heilbroner, R., Smiley, G., & Bordo, M. D. (n.d.).
Apartheid. Retrieved from https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Apartheid.html.
Hubner, J. (2018). The Anatomy Of Nationalism: A Fresh Appraisal Based On
Recent Case Studies (dissertation). Retrieved from
http://libertarianpapers.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/post/2018/09/lp-10-
2-1.pdf
Katz, A. (2017, August). Charlottesville: 'Unite the Right' Rally, State of Emergency.
Retrieved from https://time.com/charlottesville-white-nationalist-rally-clashes/.
Lex Access to European Union law. (2016, October 6). Retrieved from
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:l33500.
Mbolo, S., Mabasa, A. N., Webb, C., Weitzberg, K., Pailey, R. N., Mbembe, A., &
Msimang, S. (2019, June 9). Nativism and narrow nationalism in South African
politics. Retrieved from
https://africasacountry.com/2019/09/nativism-and-narrow-nationalism-in-south
-african-politics.
Morelli, S. (2019, 11, 12). Email with E, Baum.
Morelli, S. (2019, 11, 23). Personal Interview with Dr. L, Fleming.

Murse, T. (2019, July 3). 10 Most Outrageous Donald Trump Quotes of the 2016
Presidential Race. Retrieved from
https://www.thoughtco.com/most-outrageous-trump-quotes-3367569.
Newell, W. R. (2013). Tyranny: a new interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Pack, J. (2015, October 7). The Hungary Model: Resurgent Nationalism. Retrieved
from
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-hungary-model-resurgent-nationalism-1
4025.
Reuters. (2019, January 24). EU steps up legal procedure against Hungary for
criminalising support for migrants. Retrieved from
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hungary-orban-immigration-eu/eu-steps-up-
legal-procedure-against-hungary-for-criminalising-support-for-migrants-idUSKC
N1PI1FP.
Shattuck, J. (2019, January 14). Viktor Orbán's Rise and the Power of Nationalist
Politics. Retrieved from
https://psmag.com/social-justice/orbans-rise-to-power-is-a-product-of-nationali
sm.
Southern Poverty Law Center. (n.d.). American Renaissance. Retrieved from
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/american-renaiss
ance.
The Economist Explains . (2018, April 5). Why is Hungary turning to nationalism?
Retrieved from
https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2018/04/05/why-is-hungar
y-turning-to-nationalism.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2018, April 22). Hungarian Revolution.
Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/event/Hungarian-Revolution-1956.
Walker, V. S., & Gyori, L. (2018, July 24). Migrants, Moral Panic, and Intolerance in
Hungarian Politics. Retrieved from
https://warontherocks.com/2018/07/migrants-moral-panic-and-intolerance-in-h
ungarian-politics/.
Walker , V. S., & Gyori, L. (2018, August 23). Intolerance in Hungary: Spotting
Migrants. Retrieved from
https://www.uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/intolerance-hungary-spotting-migrant
s.
Williamson, K. D. (2019, March 31). The Nationalism Show. Retrieved from
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/03/american-nationalism-public-policy-a
esthetics-donald-trump/.
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Scott Morelli (SM) and Mrs. Elena Baum (EB). November 15, 2019. E-mail
SM: What can lead to a rise in nationalism in countries? Intolerance?
EB: Often in difficult times for a country, it is a charismatic leader that bases his power
on appealing to the inner pride of his (these leaders are most often men) country’s
citizens. Often the leader paints a picture of the situation by using an over-flattering
version of the country’s history, its “glory days” if you will, and stirs emotions of people
to try to bring his nation back to its former heyday. This can turn to identifying those
not supporting the leader as “unpatriotic” or worse, leading to intolerance of those with
different beliefs. This often leads to violence.
SM: Is there a connection between the two (nationalism and intolerance)?
EB: See above
SM: Do ideas such as nationalism and patriotism, exist on a spectrum? What are the
limits of the said spectrum?
EB: I think Nationalism is Patriotism turned inward. Patriots are proud of their country
and what it stands for. Nationalists believe their country is always right, almost divinely
chosen to lead others, and typically follow a charismatic leaders. The limits are that
people are entitled to their own opinions, and nationalism does not allow for dissent
from the “party line” very easily.

SM: Can countries exacerbate, or aggravate, already existing divides within a society?
EB: Countries can’t do that, but leaders and policies certainly can.
SM: What can be done to limit the movement from one idea to another (i.e. Patriotism
to Nationalism)? Or is there no solution?
EB: There has to be respect for those who believe differently than you. There can be no
competence or even conversation where there is intolerance.
SM: Is there anything else that you believe is important and could help me in my paper?
EB: Note that I am not an authority on Nationalism by any means. My lens is Holocaust
history and Holocaust education, as it is used to teach lessons of tolerance, justice and
y Timothy Snyder, as it is a short

moral courage. I would suggest you read On Tyranny b
book that has a lot of interesting observations and important insights that may help you.
Appendix F
Scott Morelli and Dr. Liana C. Fleming. November 23, 2019. Virginia Beach
Linguist “Keep your mouth shut when you have
American last name to”
Very difficult to assimilate “We have to present ourselves, it’s an
Citizen rank in Europe for NATO important part”
Racism - Alive in the US Harmony + Integrity; Ethics
Intercultural relations program in Behavior Modification ￫ Not change
Germany Increase in Age, increase in Spirituality
“Global village” Politics is a compromise
Military is “fluid” “You control your life”
2 mottos: Carpe Diem + “Never give up” Natural Law = Every Action ￫ Reaction
When someone puts you down, pretend Never be a slave ￫ Free Thinking
to fix your shoelaces and look up again Never forget where you come from
Current US Administration ≠ Good “Never look back”
“No room for walls, but for bridges” [You are] Capable of anything
“Material and Spiritual path” “We are seekers”
“Not what we do, but how” “Trying to find”
125 Italian Companies in Richmond “Don’t impose beliefs on others”
“For greed = not a good thought” Nobody wins in a war (literal or
“Expiration date on life” metaphorical)

Changing of opinions can lead to a
respect/disdain for others’ opinions
Never ignore mistakes
Some states/leaders/people are quick to
“Turn the flag overnight”

The Connection Between Nationalism and Intolerance

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

The Connection Between Nationalism and Intolerance

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

NATIONALISM AND INTOLERANCE Morelli 1

The Connection between Nationalism and Intolerance:

With a focus on the Psychology of Political Ambition

Scott W. Morelli Jr.

Mr. Gregory Falls

GSWLA Global Connections

Global Studies and World Languages Academy

Tallwood High School

Ō tempore! Ō mōrēs! -- Cicero against Catiline (Translation: Oh the times! Oh the

word emerges, “intolerance”.

An example of intolerance is the presence of cleavages or divisions in a society

established lines on which a society may be divided. Furthermore exacerbating the

effects of said divides.

Thumos is the want of a person to be recognized and remembered. Many leaders

of the world emphasize thumotic ideals by passing landmark legislation or publicly

problems within a state.

Ideas such as nationalism, patriotism, and statism exist on a spectrum with

state; influenced by the groups in question.

presence of thumotic ideas and nationalism, conflicting at a state level. In addition,

Political Challenges:​ Each administration in the focus countries have different

policies regarding immigration and asylum in those countries. With administration

Geographical Limits:​ Many modern countries have surges of intolerance against

Hungary, South Africa, and the United States.

beginning of the Cold War to the Present Day.

and revised, for the reduction of bias within the paper.

that “illegal” perpetuates stereotypes.

a nation; the present situation in the 21st century is nothing new.

and can be used to compare amongst the other two countries.

“Migrants, Moral Panic, and Intolerance in Hungarian Politics”, by Vivian S.

spotting” which remains a government-sanctioned activity. This means that a citizen of

use “public ostracization” against immigrants and foreign nationals.

In South Africa, according to “What research tells us is driving xenophobic

increased due to a growing anti-immigrant ideology. The Promotion of Equality and

Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act in South Africa specifically prohibits

particular aspects of said society, which leads to intolerance in the state.

In a speech by Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) titled “Immigration in the National

Nationalism exists and is, therefore, a problem.

Jamin Hubner’s “The Anatomy of Nationalism: A Fresh Appraisal Based on

Recent Case Studies” takes a non-partisan opinion as he goes on to define nationalism,

what type of nationalism researchers could focus or concentrate on.

Colton Carpenter differentiates between nationalism and patriotism in the U.S. In

citizens of the mentioned countries form an apathy, or dislike, towards other

and leave a gaping hole in statutory norms.

The Hungarian state operates under a semi-presidential system, meaning that a

PM of Hungary is Viktor Orb​án, a prominent member of the Fidesz Party.

Immigration Policies within Hungary

Hungarian state on several charges including the implementation of harsh,

anti-immigration policies, media manipulation, interfering in the judicial system, and

On the 62nd Anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution and the war of

have been criminalized by the current administration.

inhumane discrimination from the governmental administration and the public. A

government-sanctioned activity that the public is encouraged to participate in, “migrant

A government spokesperson, Zoltán Kovács, was quoted saying that “‘Migration

seeks only the preservation of internal stability, not of international stability.

Nationalism and Hungary: The Cold War and Beyond

to institute harsh policies regarding immigration as well as fanning the flames of a

between citizens of the state.

As mentioned before, “migrant spotting” is a government-sanctioned activity.

Social Intolerance and “Moral Panic”

Orbán and the Hungarian administration pushing anti-immigrant idiosyncrasies. The

economy, and the destruction of Hungarian life. According to Steven Cohen, a

Viktor ​Orbán, and the destruction of the free Hungarian state.

replaced Jacob Zuma in 2018.

Political Challenges: Each administration in the focus countries have different

Geographical Limits: Many modern countries have surges of intolerance against

PM of Hungary is Viktor Orbán, a prominent member of the Fidesz Party.

Viktor Orbán, and the destruction of the free Hungarian state.

Under apartheid, South Africa experienced an “oppressive economic system

agazine of 1990, the group avoids blatant discrimination,

Hubner, J. (2018). The Anatomy Of Nationalism: A Fresh Appraisal Based On

Recent Case Studies (dissertation). Retrieved from

Newell, W. R. (2013). Tyranny: a new interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge