Nationalism is a philosophy that is opposed to globalism. According to Roosh, the individual and the national go hand in hand. The future of the world notes, "A nationalist is likely to believe in closed borders, patriarchy, protectionism, tradition, monotheism, decentralization, and gun rights."
Nationalism may be seen as the social equivalent of self-esteem in psychology. Self-esteem is that state of being for oneself—of being on your own side. Likewise, nationalism is the state of being for your people. In this sense the opposite of a nationalist is a cuck.
Arguments for nationalism
Edmund Ironside argues:
Instead of nationalism (including national loyalty and an assumption that leaders were obligated to their nations) there used to be elite wealthy powerful families, and peasants who didn't really care and assumed their lot would never improve no matter who ruled over them. In ancient times peasants supposedly didn't even care if a new ruler conquered the territory where they lived, since they were basically kept at a subsistence level and treated as chattel by all rulers. There was no "middle class". There was no nationalism. In the middle ages, great noble families ruled kingdoms, and could inherit an entire kingdom based on arranged marriages. Though the peasants might have some loyalty to one king or another, in the end they were mostly pawns.
I tend to think the end game of globalist elites is to get back to that type of world, where all real power is in their hands and there is no need to cater to any concerns of the peasants whatsoever. They want to break down nationalism, break down families, break down cultures, essentially put it all through a blender and destroy any center of power or support that isn't directly controlled by them.
- Ironside, Edmund (22 November 2016). "RE: The Globalist Deep State: A Datasheet on American Hegemony". The Globalist Deep State: A Datasheet on American Hegemony. Roosh V Forum.