Nationalism = Apartheid?

I have long being a supporter of Nationalism, and have just recently started to question it more. So when my sister-in-law said at breakfast this morning that Nationalism is no different from Apartheid, my initial reaction was not agreement...

But... though my facial expression made her think I disagreed, the cogs in my mind went into overtime and before I had said anything I agreed. This is the advantage of being a member of a family where you have to confidently interupt if you want to be heard. If you aren't confident enough in your opinion, and hesitate for a second... you are forced to think it over.

I think she is right. Apartheid simply means Seperateness... forced seperation of people, while allowing some people who can contribute economically in and out. Isn't that exactly what the creation of nation states is?

Some are more explicitly created along racial lines such as modern day Israel... but any nation state by defining what it means to be South African, American, British etc. by default creates a seperate class of people who are not welcome.

This is a problem.

Another problem is our obsession with historical significance of land. Go far enough back and no one had an intrinsic right to land. Go far enough back and every single one of us is descended from someone who forcibly removed someone else from their land, killed the men, and raped the women. We need to get over it.

If people are really so concerned about a Tibetan State, why doesn't everyone chip in and buy land in America where all the Tibetans can go live happily. All people of all nationalities moved from somewhere at some time... why can't they do it again?

I am mixing ideas here, but perhaps the sooner we realise that skin colour, eye colour, hair texture, language and religion are not sufficient reason to kill each other, and we can all live anywhere as long as we obey certain ground rules... the better.