Clearly, the retort to Nikhil’s original essay is missing the bigger picture. It is true that racism and nationalism are two distinct ideologies and that one can exist without the other. However, it is undeniable that there is a connection between them. One only needs to observe the rhetoric of certain nationalist leaders to see this correlation. From Britain’s Brexit to Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Donald Trump in the United States, a common thread binds their messages - messages of “America First!” and of “protecting our borders” from “outsiders” who may have different skin tones than the majority.
Whether intentional or not, this type of rhetoric speaks to the power of nationalism and its ability to be a breeding ground for racism. Such is the case with the dichotomies that Nikhil laid out in his essay - it's "Buy American!" and not "Support the global poor!" These rallying cries become dog whistles for racism, suggesting that there is a difference between those inside our borders and those outside of them.
Therefore, while nationalism can be a force for good, it can also foster and facilitate racist attitudes. To suggest otherwise is to ignore history and how it has long been used as a tool to divide people by race, ethnicity, or nationality. So yes, UrRong nationalism should not be conflated with racism, but we must also recognize the potential for them to intersect in dangerous ways. After all, if we are all citizens of the world, then surely we should support those in need no matter their nationality, right?