Why nationalism won't go away | Alain de Botton, Alex O'Connor, Tommy Curry, Seyla Benhabib

Episode Overview

• This discussion features a debate between philosophers Alain de Botton, Tommy J. Curry, and Seyla Benhabib on the tension between moral universalism (equal dignity for all) and the rising tide of nationalism and partiality.
• The conversation centers around a "taxi driver" analogy introduced by de Botton, representing the common person who theoretically agrees with universal human rights but feels overwhelmed by cultural change and migration, leading to a preference for their "in-group."
• Tommy J. Curry challenges the panel by arguing that Western philosophy and "moral universalism" have historically been tools of exclusion and violence against non-white populations, suggesting that the "failure" of universalism isn't an accident but a feature of its design.
• The dialogue moves from abstract philosophical concepts to urgent real-world issues, including the refugee crisis, the legitimacy of national borders, and whether the concept of a "nation" is compatible with ethical universalism.

Key Concepts

• The Fragility of Moral Universalism: Alain de Botton argues that while many people aspire to be "Kantian" (believing in equal dignity for all), the practical reality of rapid cultural change and migration makes this difficult. He suggests that people often retreat to "in-group" preferences (nationalism) not necessarily out of malice, but out of a feeling of being overwhelmed, leading to a disconnect between their ideals and their actions.
• The "Taxicab" Dilemma: This metaphor illustrates the modern political divide. It represents the tension between the intellectual ideal of a borderless, equal world and the "common sense" feeling of many citizens that they are entitled to prefer their own neighbors, culture, and "cooking smells" over strangers. The panel debates whether this preference is a moral failure or a natural human trait.
• Systemic vs. Individual Failure: Tommy J. Curry reframes the discussion by arguing that the failure of moral universalism isn't just about individuals falling short of an ideal (the "sinner" model). Instead, he posits that Western philosophy and political systems were constructed specifically to exclude certain groups (Black people, colonized populations) from the category of "human." Therefore, the "failure" to apply human rights universally is actually the system working as intended for its creators.
• The Necessity of the "Nation": The moderator and de Botton explore whether the concept of a "nation" can exist without some form of preferential treatment for those inside it. They question if a government can function or if a national identity can survive if it treats a citizen exactly the same as a non-citizen, suggesting that some level of partiality might be constitutive of the nation-state itself.
• Economic and Geopolitical Root Causes: Seyla Benhabib shifts the focus from abstract morality to material conditions. She argues that the crisis of migration and the backlash against it are driven by concrete factors: neoliberal globalization, resource extraction, climate change, and wars. She suggests that focusing solely on abstract moral obligations ignores the structural causes of displacement that nations are currently failing to address.

Quotes

• At 8:29 - "If we want to be honest about moral universalism, sure, it's a great idea... But then why is it so easy for the people that authored those ideas to violate it? Why is it so easy for certain states to erase whole groups of people that exist? Moral universalism does nothing for us but play into our affectivity about rhetorical tropes that make us feel like we're good human beings." - Tommy J. Curry challenges the efficacy and sincerity of Western moral philosophy.
• At 9:21 - "Because you are a sinner and you fail does not mean that the whole thing is nonsense. You are always on a path upwards... We should expect distinguished philosophers to have skeletons in the closet, to fail... That's not a sign that they must be forever discounted." - Alain de Botton defends the value of philosophical ideals despite the personal failings of the thinkers who proposed them.
• At 10:49 - "The problem is that we don't know how to arrest the violence that our rights and our values said shouldn't be happening in the first place. And I think that as thinkers and philosophers, we have to kind of take stock of that failure rather than trying to necessarily reinvent systems that are ineffective." - Tommy J. Curry argues for a realistic assessment of philosophy's inability to stop historical and current atrocities.

Takeaways

• Scrutinize the historical foundations of your ideals: When advocating for universal values, investigate who was historically excluded from those definitions to ensure you aren't perpetuating a system designed for exclusion.
• Address material conditions, not just moral sentiments: When confronting political polarization or anti-immigrant sentiment, look beyond the "moral failings" of individuals and examine the economic and geopolitical systems (like globalization or war) that drive these crises.
• Distinguish between aspirational failure and systemic design: When analyzing why a system or philosophy isn't working, determine if it is a good system being executed poorly (individual failure) or a system that is functioning exactly as it was built to function (exclusionary design).