Well, this thread has gone in a weird direction that I did not expect.
Let's consult the
Oxford definition of the word "nationalism":
Or, since this is America,
Merriam-Webster:
Or if we want something more highbrow, written by a political theorist rather than a lexicographer, the entry from the
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
So, yes, I use the term like that.
The idea that "nationalism" refers to a coherent abstract ideology consistent with the idea that its advocates might not think their own nation is better or more worthy of attachment than any other, but just holding that nations should just stick to their own business, not trade with each other, not make war with each other (wtf), is incredibly internet and detached from social and historical reality. It is like the use of "populist" for the non-libertarian "quadrant".