Today, as the global landscape continues to change, the interaction between nationalism and globalism has become an issue worthy of in-depth study.

Britain's exit from the European Union and Trump's "America First" policy have revealed the conflict between nationalism and globalization. However, the connection behind this phenomenon is actually much more complex than we imagine.

Recently, with the UK's Brexit referendum and Trump's "America First" concept, nationalism seems to have become the main force against globalization.

Amid the Brexit turmoil, many people are looking forward to leaving the EU due to concerns about national affairs.

The situation in the United States is particularly prominent. President Trump emphasizes the supremacy of his country's interests and shows his resistance to globalization in trade and other policies.

This connection is only superficial. Globalization does not simply lead to simple changes in the overall interests and losses of nation-states.

Even if some EU member states no longer directly benefit from globalization in the field of trade, they can still benefit from other aspects. However, it is not entirely reasonable to choose to withdraw solely from a nationalist standpoint.

Nationalism is seen as an anti-globalization force and also plays a role in political behavior.

Some political groups incite national sentiments to achieve their own interests and disguise them as opposition to globalization. However, this is not the case in reality.

At a logical level, "class" consciousness is more closely linked to the idea of ​​resistance to globalization than to national consciousness.

Judging from the actual social structure, it is often the middle- and low-income classes that are harmed by globalization.

Workers in traditional industries in some developed countries are facing the threat of losing their jobs to developing countries.

The distribution of interests among these classes is closely linked to the country's participation in the process of globalization. Therefore, they appear more reasonable in resisting the concept of globalization.

In the process of globalization in some countries, the gap between rich and poor has widened, which has mainly affected the economic rights and interests of the people at the bottom.

The demands of this group of people mainly focus on changes in the distribution of wealth among the classes they belong to, and are not just ethnic issues.

There is a reason why nationalism can be "borrowed" as a force against globalization.

In Western society, there is a complex layout of social interests.

Creating an image of “the people” that denies diversity and uniqueness, making it a vehicle for speaking out on behalf of an entire nation.

In order to win the support of voters, certain politicians often claim that they are on the side of the majority of the people and oppose the forces of globalization that oppress the space for national development.

This requires a political strategy.

Through such strategies, public opinion is guided by linking nationalism and anti-globalization.

Although there are many people in Western countries who support globalization, such as those who control large multinational companies or work in international finance, they have benefited from globalization and do not agree with the immigration and security risks mentioned in the anti-globalization trend. However, such rational views are often drowned out by the hype of nationalistic sentiments.

From a cultural perspective, nationalist identity has strong appeal.

Many people believe that the most real and stable sense of national belonging is especially in those places where traditional tribal culture prevails and they have always adhered to strong national traditions.

Relatively speaking, globalism or cosmopolitanism appears to be more ethereal and difficult to give people a sense of belonging like national identity.

Constructivists hold a different view. They believe that whether it is nationalism or globalism, in the process of identity formation, they do not exist naturally, but are artificially constructed.

Looking at human history, in the beginning people lived in tribes. As society progresses, national concepts gradually take shape. In many areas where nation-states have not yet fully matured, tribal membership has a stronger sense of identity than national identity.

Globalism can also be talked about now because globalization has been integrated into daily life.

Taking online communication as a reference, people from various countries communicate frequently on the Internet, and business transactions are also becoming more international, which gradually provides a basis for the identification of globalist identities.

In European and American countries, different groups have different identifications with nationalism and globalism.

Young people with higher education levels and living in big cities are more likely to identify with globalism.

Because they are exposed to more diverse information and have a broader perspective.

Big cities have a large number of international companies and foreign exchange opportunities.

For many people, internal affairs within the country still affect their perception of themselves, and they are more inclined to believe in nationalist ideas.

Some small town residents, especially those whose mainstay is agriculture or traditional industry, are more concerned about domestic employment opportunities and the continuation of local culture.

This distribution is gradually changing. For example, some rural areas have also begun to get involved in online trade. Opportunities for communication with the outside world are increasing, and people's identities are also showing an increasingly diversified trend.

We need to grasp the relationship between nationalism and globalism from a realist perspective.

Morgenthau's analysis of the prototype of transnational polity inspires us.

He feels that the American model has certain reference value. Before the establishment of the government, the United States had already formed a relatively stable social consensus.

In examining the connections between the two isms, we should explore the commonalities that exist within the American model.

People's identities are diversified and are no longer limited to national or global identity choices.

The relationship between the two doctrines is not irreconcilable.

Whether we can learn from some elements of the American model to achieve better integration or coordination between nationalism and globalism on issues such as identity is worth exploring in depth.

I would like to know, in your life experience, have you noticed the difference between nationalism and globalism in terms of identity?