From my point of view, Yoram Hazony employs three unjustifiable tactics in his video.
First off, he defines the term “nationalism” in an aberrant way:
This definition is at odds with the more convention usage. For example, Merriam Webster’s definition of nationalism has a somewhat darker connotation:
Hazony is employing a definist fallacy: happy nationalism is unassailable by definition. It allows him to make the bizarre claim that “Hitler was no nationalist.”
His second tactic is his treatment of globalism:
Hazony essentially equates globalism with imperialism.
And, third, he asserts a false dichotomy between nationalism and globalism/imperialism.
Of course when he says this in the video, he’s referring to his personal interpretations of nationalism and globalism/imperialism, which is very much his way of comparing a world of sovereign nations to a world government. The way he presents it, he makes it seem as though there’s only two choices and no spectrum of in-between options, which is simply false.
Many forms of international cooperation are possible. For example, the EU could very well be considered a mix between Hazony’s nationalism and his imperialism, as individual nations in the EU still have a significant level of autonomy and some say over what happens in the EU government, despite each member state being distinct separate entities. He creates a false binary by presenting the options as if there’s no in-between hybrids of his nationalism and his globalism/imperialism.
A longer version of this review is available here.