Two liberty-oriented Nobel-Prize winners are suspicious.
Friedrich Hayek on nationalism as a halfway-house collectivism:
“… it is this nationalistic bias which frequently provides the bridge from conservatism to collectivism: to think in terms of ‘our’ industry or resource is only a short step away from demanding that these national assets be directed in the national interest.”
James Buchanan on nationalism as a religion-substitute:
“By the time of the Enlightenment, the secular nation-state had almost reached its maturity, and nationalism, the sense of nationhood, was a more or less natural repository for the sentiments of those persons for whom God had died. For many, the state, as the collectivity, moved into the gap left by the demise of the church’s parental role. … The death of God and the birth of the national state, and especially in its latter-day welfare state form, are two sides of the coin of history in this respect.”
Why do nations exist? Because:
* They evolve out of the mutual self-defense of individuals who make them up.
* They offer a beyond-the-self construct that gives one a sense of belonging.
* They enable some powerful individuals to harness the energy of others.
Other answers?
Sources:
James Buchanan, “Afraid to Be Free: Dependency ad Desideratum”, Public Choice, No. 124 (2005), p. 25.
Friedrich Hayek, “Why I Am Not a Conservative,” postcript to The Constitution of Liberty [1960] (Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1972), p. 405.
Powerful individuals harnessing the energy of others is not unique to a nation-state structure.
My understanding of the precipitating incident in settling ownership of the Oregon territory between Britain and the US was a land dispute that did not involve self defense. Maybe it is a corollary of self defense but the issue was more one of property rights. A person in the territory had accumulated a large amount of property. He passed away with no heirs or place for the property to go. It wasn’t right for the property to go to the Hudson Bay Company who managed and adjudicated the territory, so who should it go to?