Ha! I had read this blog post before you posted it here. (After you posted that LD sourcebook, I added your blog to my RSS reader.)
I'd love to learn more about historic and traditional definitions of both nationalism and globalism. I somehow get the feeling that both the far left and the far right misrepresent these ideologies. If you have resources to point me to, I'd love to read them.
I'm also greatly saddened by the reasoning ability expressed by so many who engage in political discussion, particularly political protests. (I believe that protests--by their very nature--encourage more physical displays of support for political candidates in place of rational discussion, but that's likely a discussion for another thread.) For instance, the boys you discuss who approach the woman saying "freedom of speech != freedom from criticism" nearly immediately jump to the "snowflake" defense instead of 1) knowing what the person they support actually thinks (I'm not sure I've heard Richard Spencer himself
actually argue in support of sterilization of non-white peoples, but then again I don't generally read what he says.
The few times I have read what he says, it's usually not quite as extreme as it seems to be portrayed, though.) or 2) taking any
approach other than "Trump isn't Hitler." (Gosh. Both sides of that debate are inane.)
I 100% agree that we need dialog between people of opposing views. I feel like most people who are of somewhat far-right persuasions may realize that "the end of Western dominance is not the end of the world," but I believe their actual fear is the extinction
of the West -- that it ceases to exist, not that it ceases to dominate. The places where Western thought has historically been preserved now seem to reject it; as a recent graduate of a liberal public college, I've seen first-hand where people have crossed the line from "let's present alternatives to Western thought" to "Western thought is bad and should die." ...and I'm not sure where I was going with this paragraph.
But I do think it's a little counter to your second point -- you say the far right misunderstands culture, but your support for this is tantamount to "it doesn't matter if the West dies."
In response to the questions you raise in the OP:
So I was wondering if anyone was up to discuss the Alt-Right's relationship to nationalism. Is it a logical conclusion of nationalism or is it a perversion of an otherwise harmless system of thought? Any other thoughts on the general subject of nationalism?
I don't understand the intricacies of the definition of nationalism enough to speak on it confidently.
However, going from a naive interpretation of "a strong national identity combined with the belief that actions benefiting one's own nation are intrinsically better than those benefiting another nation," I'd argue that the alt-right we're seeing is a perversion of a harmless (possibly preferable) system of thought. But I'll withhold further judgment until I hear more from the more knowledgeable persons here.
My apologies for the winding, disorganized nature of this post!
I'd try to make it better, but I fear I wouldn't ever post until the tread was dead from inactivity.
"The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits"
- G.K. Chesterton