Evolutionary biologists say that being generous, selfless, altruistic, etc. to other people is not very smart. Such a person is at a disadvantage to the selfish and aggressive. But that selflessness becomes a huge advantage if one can skillfully distinguish who to behave that way towards and who not to behave that way towards.
For millennia, this has led to the formation of clans. This brings many advantages to the members of the clans, but for the state as a whole, the division into clans is a disadvantage, and if the whole collapses, it will be bad for the individual clans as well. One of the few alternatives was to cultivate solidarity within religious groups, but this eventually led to Europeans almost murdering each other.
Until the Western Enlightenment invention came along – a political nation. There is an awful lot of work behind the creation of political nations, where someone had to bring different groups (albeit ethnically very similar) to see themselves as a whole, united by language, history and culture. A national history had to be created. Some events had to be highlighted, others forgotten. The states that failed to form a political nation in the 19th century disappeared.
Since then, we have not discovered anything else that allows for the expression of solidarity (without being destructive to the individual), that works. Which is the answer to the question of whether the future of the West is the future of nations. For now, we know of no other possibility. It is no coincidence that those social classes that consider nations to be outdated show incredible recklessness. Nation or war of all against all.
That is why I am also skeptical of oppositional currents that have lost the awareness that even when we are having political disputes with each other, those on the other side are “my blood.”