Ethnonationalism Has More Biblical Support Than Most Christians Think
Despite the modern church's general distaste for nationalism, however, I still think there are serious theological arguments to be made in its defense. I'll try to summarize them in a few aphorisms:
"Ethnonationalism is the only political system specifically endorsed in the Bible. If Christians are forbidden to advocate ethnonationalism we are forbidden to advocate any political system whatsoever."The ancient Nation of Israel is the only state we know of that God personally organized, and the socio-political model he used there was ethnonationalism. I've encountered two common objections to this logic.
"Restated: If ethnonationalism is un-Christian then so are all other political organizations because God has never presented any other program."
"Restated: God never advanced a political program contrary to his Old Testament establishment of ethnonationalism."
"Restated: If Christians are barred from advocating ethnonationalism we are barred from all political advocacy whatsoever. The only political ideology God ever encouraged was ethnonationalism."
Firstly, I've had people argue that the Nation of Israel wasn't ethnonationalist because resident foreigners were supposed to be treated with equal dignity. I think this objection misunderstands the meaning of ethnonationalism. An ethnonational state will inevitably have foreigners living in it, but the state isn't directed towards their interests or culture. The foreigners living in ancient Israel had to honor the mores of the dominant ethnic group, they had no right to assert themselves, and they weren't allowed to wield political power (Deuteronomy 17:15). The Nation of Israel literally means the "ethnicity that arose from Israel (Jacob)" which means its identity was specifically tied to an ancestral heritage. The foreigners who lived inside Israel weren't part of the nation, they were outsiders residing there.
The second common objection I hear is that God changed everything in the New Testament and thus Christians should ignore national and ethnic identity. The problem with this objection is that God never advocated any new political system in the New Testament. Christians would thus have to renounce all political involvement because we lack any new revelation on the topic (the Amish position). Another problem is that this objection essentially accuses God of establishing an oppressive racist state in the Old Testament just so he could make a point by abolishing it in the New Testament. This doesn't seem logical to me. If the Old Testament was given to us for "teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness" then it seems unreasonable for Christians to believe God inspired an evil political order in scripture. Additionally, the New Testament never claims that ethnonationalism became evil after Jesus' death.
I do not, however, believe that the church should be nationalistic. God has called people from all nations into one church. We can't project this attitude into politics, however, unless we advocate one world government. I don't want to dismiss that idea, though, because it was the political position taken by ancient Christians who believed the Roman Empire had become the political manifestation of the universal church. Those Christians were rudely awakened when Rome fell, and Augustine wrote a book clarifying the distinction between the City of God and the City of Man, and thus I tend to disagree with the early Christians' imperial political theology.
My primary problem with my Christian peers' passionate rejection of ethnonationalism is that it's usually coupled with an endorsement of pluralistic democracy. Why is ethnonationalism, which God specifically endorsed, too evil to be entertained while pluralistic democracy, which scripture never mentions, is regarded as being worthy of nearly unqualified advocacy?
Furthermore, why do most American Christians support the modern state of Israel, which is a specifically ethnonationalist state built for the benefit of Jews, and yet passionately reject the idea that the Germans or Italians have the right to build a similar state? Why is ethnonationlism celebrated in Israel and denounced in Italy? There's no consistency of thought or theology.
I also want to say that I'm not writing from a position of power and privilege. I write this as a foreigner living in China. China is basically an ethno-state built around the interests and mores of the Han Chinese. I'm fully aware of the downsides of living in a political state built to sustain the privilege of a majority group, and yet I still believe this system has been unduly rejected by most modern Christians.