[jj_frap]

I don't necessarily like your associating nationalism with conservatism:

I'm a civil libertarian and a social democrat, and I'm extremely nationalistic in that I don't want Washington or Beijing to lay so much as a finger on our policies, on our economy, or on our natural resources. To be fair, I also favour fair free trade with like-minded nations and I favour restricting non-refugee immigration only based on the level of covert operations and spying that their country's government undertakes (which would make life miserable for a Russian, Chinese, or American seeking Canadian citizenship) and on the prominence of anti-secular religious fundamentalism in their country of origin (which means that I'd favour being strict on immigrants from the U.S., the Middle East, the Indian Subcontinent, a few African Nations, and North Korea (Yes, Juche counts as a religion...Although the possbility of North Korean immigrants is so slim as to make the issue irrelevant.).

Similarly, the Tibetan-Government-In-Exile is run by the extremely nationalistic National Democratic Party (not to be confused with a neo-Nazi German party of the same name), whose views are textbook civil libertarian and democratic socialist. Nationalism, in India, meanwhile, is common among everyone from Hindu fundamentalists (religious nationalism) to Gandhi-loving Congress supporters (secular nationalism) to Stalinists (again, secular). Finally, nationalists in China tend to hold very authoritarian political view points ranging from Maoism (common among nationalists on the Mainland) to ultra-conservatism (Oddly, conservatives and capitalists in Hong Kong are Beijing's biggest allies there, while liberals, socialists, and civil libertarians favour centrist and leftist parties andorganisations dedicated to universal suffrage, the protection of civil liberties and human rights, a welfare state, and full democracy) while Taiwan features Taiwanese nationalists who are slightly left-leaning centrists and more socially liberal than conservatives and pan-Chinese nationalists with extremely right-wing and authoritarian views, as the original anti-communists in the Kuomintang and its fascist allies are now in bed with Beijing (as both sides have become less about ideology and more about authoritarianism and Chinese natonalism), who would give these crooks more power, more money, and more status than an independent Taiwan would give them. As an aside, it is my opinion that Taiwanese nationalists are making a huge mistake in trusting Washington: The KMT vs. CCP reality ended the day Lee Teng-hui started running the show (I do not feel like delving into Lee Teng-hui's politics and the fracturing of the Kuomintang that resulted thereby), and corporate America and its lobbyists control both political parties in the U.S. These greedy chumos want a China where socialism exists in name only (Maoism was as bad for them as it was for the Chinese people), where labour rights are non-existent, and where people serve only as a cheap labour for wealthy Western parasites: The corrupt thugs in the C"C"P are more than willing to accomodate them, as they have moved from the evil of Stalinism to the evil of crony capitalism with vaguely socialist trappings.

Holy crap! I just ranted about Chinese politics as interpreted by Hong Kong's far-left. :-P

On topic:

Republicans: Bigoted lunatics
Democrats: Spineless girly-men