The essay is basically about the effect of globalization on the world we live in and its effect on nationalism. Because of the increasing global state of our world community, we live in a primarily post national world; our new creative expression exists in a place that does not even exist in our old conceptions of how the world works. Now, it seems as if the prevailing mindset among the global citizens is not one of hostility and separation, but instead one of singularity. This singularity is defined by four central human values: interests, universality, freedom, and deep meaning. While nationalism may claim to provide for these values, growing globalization has caused for the increasing fragmentation of these values and a reformation under new social networks formed on the basis of these values alone.
I found the article interesting, especially the historical background given, with the explanation of European society from the post WWII until now. It seems as if the world wars were such an extreme form of nationalism there was no path except for a post-nationalist state. Now the European Union has joined Europe together in a way that no one saw possible in the 1940s.
The only question I have about the article is about its ending. It ended quite abruptly, and although it brings up new points right before its end, it goes ends quickly after that, without addressing any of them. What exactly do you mean by some of the phrases you introduce at the end, like “life emancipator solidarities”?