As our perspective on the world broadens, we often witness familiar words wearing completely unfamiliar clothes. This is exactly the case with the second major barrier we encounter when studying fascism.
"Aren’t nationalism and chauvinism supposed to be left-wing values? On the contrary, in Korea, it feels like the progressive or left-wing camp has emphasized nationalism more, crying out ‘among our own nation.’ So why does world history label the nationalism of fascism as a core value of the far-right?"
The question is sharp, and the confusion is entirely justified. This confusion arises from the gap between the unique history we experienced growing up as Koreans and the universal landscape traversed by Western world history. To cut straight to the chase, nationalism is like two sides of a coin; it wears entirely different colors depending on the context of West versus East, and global powers versus weaker nations.
Why the Western Right Closes Its Borders
By the standards of world history—such as in Europe and the United States—one of the most fundamental criteria dividing the Left and the Right is how they view national borders.
The Western Left (socialists and liberals) fundamentally aims for "humanitarianism," believing that all humanity is equal, and "internationalism," believing that workers have no borders. Thus, they are generous in accepting refugees and supportive of multiculturalism.
Conversely, the Western Right (conservatives and fascists) aims for "nationalism," putting the interests of their own country and people first, and "anti-immigrationism," believing that borders must be tightly closed. Donald Trump’s cry of "America First" in the United States and the native-first policies of far-right European parties sit precisely in this spot.
In other words, within the context of world history, the argument to "protect the lineage and purity of our nation and exclude other races or immigrants" is the textbook logic of the far-right. This is precisely why Hitler’s fascism, which claimed the superiority of the Aryan race and massacred Jews, is classified as "far-right." An aggressive nationalism that tramples and excludes others—namely, chauvinism—was the Right’s sharpest weapon.
A Unique Reflection Created by the Mirror of Korea
Then why does nationalism feel like the exclusive property of the Left (progressives) in Korea? It is because our painful history of "colonial rule" and "national division" reshaped the political landscape.
During the Japanese colonial period, nationalism for us was not a supremacy meant to invade other nations. It was the ideology of an "independence movement" aimed at defending our country and our identity against a massive imperialist oppression. In this process, left-wing independence activists heavily absorbed nationalism.
This structure continued through the post-liberation era of national division. Under the massive framework of the Cold War, the Korean Right (conservatives) placed "anti-communism" and the "ROK-U.S. alliance" as their top priorities. Meanwhile, the Left (progressives) resisted the authoritarianism of military regimes and emphasized national homogeneity, arguing that we must "exclude foreign powers and join hands among our own nation to achieve unification."
Consequently, Korea uniquely developed a distinct political landscape that runs completely counter to the standards of world history: [Progressive/Left = Emphasizing Nationalism], [Conservative/Right = Emphasizing National Security and Alliances].
How to Distinguish the Two Faces of Nationalism
Ultimately, the word nationalism itself is not guilty. It is a two-faced Janus that manifests in completely opposite ways depending on the situation in which it is used.
One is a "resistant nationalism," where a weaker nation unites to survive against the invasion of a global power. Such was the case with Joseon during the Japanese colonial period, and such is the case with Ukraine today, fighting against the Russian invasion. This nationalism radiates the energy of solidarity and liberation.
The other is an "exclusive and aggressive nationalism (chauvinism)," pulled out by a global power or a majority ethnic group to persecute internal minorities and invade external territories. Nazi Germany did this, and militarist Japan did this. This nationalism radiates the energy of madness and massacre, and fascism was a monster that magnified this second face to its absolute extreme.
If we remain trapped solely within the framework of Korean political grammar, we will only read world history superficially. We must not be fooled by the outward appearance of a word, but clearly see toward whom its blade is currently pointed. We must remain vigilant that the warm phrase "our nation" can at any time transform into the cold weapon of fascism that says "let us exclude them." This is the real reason we must read history in a three-dimensional way.
Leave a Reply