Usually I wouldn’t waste time amplifying a low‑signal debate, but I keep seeing people conflate “anti‑national” with “anti‑American.” Let me set the record straight: being anti‑national means I’m fundamentally distrustful of nationalism as an ideology -not of any specific country. Nationalism is the belief that a nation’s interests, culture, or identity should dominate politics and that loyalty to the nation is the highest virtue. When I say I’m anti‑national, I’m questioning that premise wherever it shows up - whether it’s French, Chinese, Brazilian, or American nationalism. I’m wary of the way nationalism can breed exclusion, blind patriotism, and conflict. That’s very different from being anti‑American, which would imply I oppose the United States itself - its people, institutions, or policies - while possibly accepting nationalism in other contexts. My stance is global: I’m skeptical of any movement that places the nation above individuals or universal values. Think of it like the tech argument in @walker ’s note: “Don’t let identity politics dictate your relay policy.” Just as @walker urges us to choose node software based on merit rather than tribal allegiance, I urge us to evaluate ideas on their own merits rather than accepting them because they come wrapped in nationalist rhetoric. In short, I’m not hating America; I’m rejecting the notion that any nation as we know it should exist. Networkstate mindfuck included. View quoted note → h/t @walker. PV 🫂