Hatin Since 87
Bacon Hater
Keep feeding the animals they’ll keep hanging around the porch.I don't have an ignore list and don't plan to start one.
Keep feeding the animals they’ll keep hanging around the porch.I don't have an ignore list and don't plan to start one.
And you don’t need to. If you engage me with common sense, I will reciprocate. Disagreeing with what I say, isn’t license to go off the deep end, unless I kick it off first.I don't have an ignore list and don't plan to start one.
I was simply responding to the words you wrote. The question is, are you here to learn and broaden your perspectives, change minds, Polish your debate skills, or simply to enjoy spooling people up?What is it, when someone else FIRST try to get under your skin, and ironically your response get under theirs?
Do me a favor, and look back a few pages, in this thread, and tell me if I was asking legitimate questions, and engaging in valid debate. Then tell me where you think things went sideways. You can send me a PM if you don’t want say so in open forum.I was simply responding to the words you wrote. The question is, are you here to learn and broaden your perspectives, change minds, Polish your debate skills, or simply to enjoy spooling people up?
There's nothing intrinsically or morally wrong with nationalism on a "country" level, any more than there's anything wrong with being selfish, concerned with your own interests, and looking out for #1 on a personal level. It doesn't grant a nation justification to do anything they want, any more than an individual's freedom to swing his arms extends past where another's nose begins.Both from the CED
patriotism
noun [ U ]
the feeling of loving your country more than any others and being proud of it
nationalism
noun [ U ]
a nation's wish and attempt to be politically independent
a great or too great love of your own country:
six o' one, half dozen of another
That post is just not very woke at all.There's nothing intrinsically or morally wrong with nationalism on a "country" level, any more than there's anything wrong with being selfish, concerned with your own interests, and looking out for #1 on a personal level. It doesn't grant a nation justification to do anything they want, any more than an individual's freedom to swing his arms extends past where another's nose begins.
Germany wasn't evil because it was nationalist. Germany was evil because it invaded other countries and marched people into gas chambers. China isn't evil because it's nationalist. It's evil because of what it does to its own people. I actually don't begrudge China being nationalist and looking out for its own interests. They have reasons for that. They do not owe us charity; it is up to us to "up our game" if we want to beat them. However, I see no reason for the U.S. to abide by rules that China won't abide by. That's just being a sucker. Expecting a level playing field, and treating them the way they treat us if they won't provide it, is just good sense.
People who get all sweaty about "nationalism" are just hysterical (meaning in the female uterus sense, not the funny sense). These sorts of moral histrionics are common in certain circles. It's akin to saying "Money is evil," because it leads to people doing evil things. No, money isn't "evil;" love of money to the exclusion of all else, encompassing a willingness to trample the rights of others, is evil. This type of over-the-top hysterical moralizing even makes its way into the gun debate. It's sorta like Raphael Warnock saying guns have no place in a "Charch Meetin'." Ok, well make sure you tell that to the folks at Emanuel AME church. (Best be putting up some magnetometers and some darn good security checkpoints while you're at it).
America is one example of a country with nationalist roots, that didn't lead to it being an evil, failed state. In fact, it has actually progressed the other direction. It's the only example which needs to be provided to bust the argument. If histrionic black social justice preachers and Harvard professors want to claim otherwise, let them. Nobody need waste any attention on them.
I've read the entire thread. I also didn't claim you were the only one trolling, but you were the one who essentially claimed you were doing so in so many words. I did notice you didn't answer my question. Was that an oversight or intentional?Do me a favor, and look back a few pages, in this thread, and tell me if I was asking legitimate questions, and engaging in valid debate. Then tell me where you think things went sideways. You can send me a PM if you don’t want say so in open forum.
I accept your graceful exit.
I am absolutely baffled that you (correctly) state “America is one example of a country with nationalist roots...” and yet fail to recognize the GLARING issue with that fact. Nationalists have a collective identity, if you aren’t part of that identity, you are excluded. Nationalism isn’t ever simply being a citizen of said nation. There ARE qualifiers. Cultural, religious, ideological, ethnic, or something else. There is always something else, outside of citizenship. You won’t find ONE country, today nor historically, that is considered Nationalist, where that doesn’t apply. If you can think of one, I’d like to know.There's nothing intrinsically or morally wrong with nationalism on a "country" level, any more than there's anything wrong with being selfish, concerned with your own interests, and looking out for #1 on a personal level. It doesn't grant a nation justification to do anything they want, any more than an individual's freedom to swing his arms extends past where another's nose begins.
Germany wasn't evil because it was nationalist. Germany was evil because it invaded other countries and marched people into gas chambers. China isn't evil because it's nationalist. It's evil because of what it does to its own people. I actually don't begrudge China being nationalist and looking out for its own interests. They have reasons for that. They do not owe us charity; it is up to us to "up our game" if we want to beat them. However, I see no reason for the U.S. to abide by rules that China won't abide by. That's just being a sucker. Expecting a level playing field, and treating them the way they treat us if they won't provide it, is just good sense.
People who get all sweaty about "nationalism" are just hysterical (meaning in the female uterus sense, not the funny sense). These sorts of moral histrionics are common in certain circles. It's akin to saying "Money is evil," because it leads to people doing evil things. No, money isn't "evil;" love of money to the exclusion of all else, encompassing a willingness to trample the rights of others, is evil. This type of over-the-top hysterical moralizing even makes its way into the gun debate. It's sorta like Raphael Warnock saying guns have no place in a "Charch Meetin'." Ok, well make sure you tell that to the folks at Emanuel AME church. (Best be putting up some magnetometers and some darn good security checkpoints while you're at it).
America is one example of a country with nationalist roots, that didn't lead to it being an evil, failed state. In fact, it has actually progressed the other direction. It's the only example which needs to be provided to bust the argument. If histrionic black social justice preachers and Harvard professors want to claim otherwise, let them. Nobody need waste any attention on them.
Honestly, I vaguely remember seeing that question. Which post was it again?I've read the entire thread. I also didn't claim you were the only one trolling, but you were the one who essentially claimed you were doing so in so many words. I did notice you didn't answer my question. Was that an oversight or intentional?
You don’t get “best suited”. You get potential outcomes.A vote cast for a candidate that you believe is best suited for the job is never wasted. Continuing to elect the same parties that got us here is what is keeping us here. I have no regrets.
Ctrl+HThere's nothing intrinsically or morally wrong with nationalism on a "country" level, any more than there's anything wrong with being selfish, concerned with your own interests, and looking out for #1 on a personal level. It doesn't grant a nation justification to do anything they want, any more than an individual's freedom to swing his arms extends past where another's nose begins.
Germany wasn't evil because it was nationalist. Germany was evil because it invaded other countries and marched people into gas chambers. China isn't evil because it's nationalist. It's evil because of what it does to its own people. I actually don't begrudge China being nationalist and looking out for its own interests. They have reasons for that. They do not owe us charity; it is up to us to "up our game" if we want to beat them. However, I see no reason for the U.S. to abide by rules that China won't abide by. That's just being a sucker. Expecting a level playing field, and treating them the way they treat us if they won't provide it, is just good sense.
People who get all sweaty about "nationalism" are just hysterical (meaning in the female uterus sense, not the funny sense). These sorts of moral histrionics are common in certain circles. It's akin to saying "Money is evil," because it leads to people doing evil things. No, money isn't "evil;" love of money to the exclusion of all else, encompassing a willingness to trample the rights of others, is evil. This type of over-the-top hysterical moralizing even makes its way into the gun debate. It's sorta like Raphael Warnock saying guns have no place in a "Charch Meetin'." Ok, well make sure you tell that to the folks at Emanuel AME church. (Best be putting up some magnetometers and some darn good security checkpoints while you're at it).
America is one example of a country with nationalist roots, that didn't lead to it being an evil, failed state. In fact, it has actually progressed the other direction. It's the only example which needs to be provided to bust the argument. If histrionic black social justice preachers and Harvard professors want to claim otherwise, let them. Nobody need waste any attention on them.
I was simply responding to the words you wrote. The question is, are you here to learn and broaden your perspectives, change minds, Polish your debate skills, or simply to enjoy spooling people up?
Do me a favor, and look back a few pages, in this thread, and tell me if I was asking legitimate questions, and engaging in valid debate. Then tell me where you think things went sideways. You can send me a PM if you don’t want say so in open forum.
I've read the entire thread. I also didn't claim you were the only one trolling, but you were the one who essentially claimed you were doing so in so many words. I did notice you didn't answer my question. Was that an oversight or intentional?
Honestly, I vaguely remember seeing that question. Which post was it again?
I don't have a problem with this paragraph. The key phrase is "on a country level."There's nothing intrinsically or morally wrong with nationalism on a "country" level, any more than there's anything wrong with being selfish, concerned with your own interests, and looking out for #1 on a personal level. It doesn't grant a nation justification to do anything they want, any more than an individual's freedom to swing his arms extends past where another's nose begins.
I do have a problem with this paragraph. Germany was also evil--ESPECIALLY EVIL--because it was not nationalist on a country level. It was nationalist on a racial/ethnic level. That's the kind of nationalism that's evil. A belief that a particular heritage is infirior to another or yours, espeically such that you oppress people of that heritage (race is nothing more than heritage) is evil.Germany wasn't evil because it was nationalist. Germany was evil because it invaded other countries and marched people into gas chambers. China isn't evil because it's nationalist. It's evil because of what it does to its own people. I actually don't begrudge China being nationalist and looking out for its own interests. They have reasons for that. They do not owe us charity; it is up to us to "up our game" if we want to beat them. However, I see no reason for the U.S. to abide by rules that China won't abide by. That's just being a sucker. Expecting a level playing field, and treating them the way they treat us if they won't provide it, is just good sense.
No problem with this paragraph either.People who get all sweaty about "nationalism" are just hysterical (meaning in the female uterus sense, not the funny sense). These sorts of moral histrionics are common in certain circles. It's akin to saying "Money is evil," because it leads to people doing evil things. No, money isn't "evil;" love of money to the exclusion of all else, encompassing a willingness to trample the rights of others, is evil. This type of over-the-top hysterical moralizing even makes its way into the gun debate. It's sorta like Raphael Warnock saying guns have no place in a "Charch Meetin'." Ok, well make sure you tell that to the folks at Emanuel AME church. (Best be putting up some magnetometers and some darn good security checkpoints while you're at it).
And I pretty much agree with this as well.America is one example of a country with nationalist roots, that didn't lead to it being an evil, failed state. In fact, it has actually progressed the other direction. It's the only example which needs to be provided to bust the argument. If histrionic black social justice preachers and Harvard professors want to claim otherwise, let them. Nobody need waste any attention on them.
That's not necessarily true. First, I'm not sure I would say that America was founded on nationalist roots. It kinda was in that colonists didn't really identify with England. They identified as Americans. But they didn't think of themselves as a nation. They identified with the place. So I wouldn't say that's "nationalist roots"I am absolutely baffled that you (correctly) state “America is one example of a country with nationalist roots...” and yet fail to recognize the GLARING issue with that fact. Nationalists have a collective identity, if you aren’t part of that identity, you are excluded.
Nationalism isn’t ever simply being a citizen of said nation. There ARE qualifiers. Cultural, religious, ideological, ethnic, or something else. There is always something else, outside of citizenship. You won’t find ONE country, today nor historically, that is considered Nationalist, where that doesn’t apply. If you can think of one, I’d like to know.
Nationalism hold that the nation in question, is superior. That the American, simply by virtue of being American, is better than any other nationality. As such that brings forth the entitlement of nationality. The idea that since your way is the best way, everyone else should recognize it. If something is beneficial to your nation, but is detrimental to another, the latter need not be considered, because the overall benefit is to your own nation. You guys really have never had it deconstructed to you before? The differences between patriotism and nationalism?
I have to wonder how much the Nuremberg Trials did to set it in the world's minds that Germany's decision to commit ethnic cleansing was the worst atrocity in history. But it wasn't really an exception; it was the norm.I do have a problem with this paragraph. Germany was also evil--ESPECIALLY EVIL--because it was not nationalist on a country level. It was nationalist on a racial/ethnic level. That's the kind of nationalism that's evil.
Nationalism isn't just self pride anyway. If it were, they'd just call it patriotism. Nationalism is a feeling of identity with one's own nation. I don't think it was the problem in any of the examples. I think the problem was/is human nature's interaction with the circumstance of social evolution progressing much faster than physical evolution.I have to wonder how much the Nuremberg Trials did to set it in the world's minds that Germany's decision to commit ethnic cleansing was the worst atrocity in history. But it wasn't really an exception; it was the norm.
The nations that carried out those trials (Britain, France, the US, and the USSR) don't exactly have shining histories with regards to ethnic cleansing. Colonies in Africa, India, Australia, and others. The American west (and before). After all, there's not a lot of difference between Hitler's Lebensraum and America's "Manifest Destiny."
I think nationalism has a history of being problematic. At the least, it hasn't often been contained to anything like a healthy self-pride.