I believe there are man forms of nationalism, everything can go bad or good.
Just look how totalitarian democracy is turning out to be.

But is it wrong to love your country and putting it as nr1?
But there also those that love their country just because its their country, even tho its completely shit. Just look at sweden as an example.

Its a good question, its all to those in the political chain and there will always be bad apples.

Voss님이 먼저 게시:

I believe there are man forms of nationalism, everything can go bad or good.
Just look how totalitarian democracy is turning out to be.

But is it wrong to love your country and putting it as nr1?
But there also those that love their country just because its their country, even tho its completely shit. Just look at sweden as an example.

Its a good question, its all to those in the political chain and there will always be bad apples.

I totally agree with you @Voss
I think nationalism/patriotism/protectionism is a good thing as long as you have competent leaders : wise, smart, and visionary (you put your country before your little person interests).

By the way, of course there is absolutely nothing wrong about privileging, prioritizing your own country and your own people, as long as you fit with them. I like this quote : "birds of a feather flock together" ; it explains everything about it.
If you take a look about animals, we don't say such-and-such specy is racist or xenophobic because it hunts or protects itself from other species, it's just about natural instinct : perpetuating the specy is the number one priority, and the day it will no more be, the specy will extinct, it just makes sense.
Same thing apply with humans, and nowadays you can see the disasters caused by ideologies such as progressism and wokism...
I do believe that every country should be protectionnist, because if you don't protect your interests and your goods, then no one else will do ; and if you agree with this situation, then either you are crazy/dumb/suicidal, either you are a traitor to your country.

In a decent nationalist State, the country is ruled by the people, for the people, and there is multiple benefits : stronger nation because more united, protecting his way of living , culture, religion, language, civilization (opposite of Western Europe nowadays).
So basically it's easier to apply nationalism in "Nation-State" (well defined by this scheme : https://www.insightsonindia.com/world-history/nation-state-system/) like Japan, South Korea, Bangladesh, Algeria, etc... if you try to apply this policy in a multi-ethnic/cultural country, you will face a "Balkanization" process (aka secessionism).

I don't consider Russia as a Nation-State, because of its different "way of living" through the country (even if very located) and even if the power is held by the "White Russian", who represent around 80% of the global population.
Russian leaders understood that, and that's why the country is federal, with autonomous republics for the ethnic minorities. Basically same thing about China, and that's why they encounter that much difficulties in their "sinification" process, who can be assimilated as chinese nationalism.
So, to finally answer the subquestion of the topic, I would say that nationalism could fit in Russia, but mainly in the territories filled by White Russian. And that's what is happening nowadays, so this questioning is a bit "wrong".