Nothing is wrong with nationalism, because it creates cultures, languages, and ethnic groups, and a sense of identity of protection of rights of ethnic groups.
That in itself could borderlines xenophobia and racism.
Define nations!
There is a nation in this earth that...
Robs its land from other people/culture/ethnic groups and call it theirs, and arrogantly believes that way.
Spans across many lands and unite many different people, cultures, languages, races, religions, and ethnic groups.
Historically belongs to other places, but claimed a land of theirs somewhere that belong to other people.
I've been indoctrinated with nationalism, far stronger than most Western country ever faced in modern times (except WW2 Germany perhaps). It is the work of our previous 32-year regime. I still see that there is a lot of wrong thoughts there.
Nationalism is wrong, because many cannot define what their nation is. Let's say Chinese nations. These people integrate a lot of different people altogether, from the ancient Yellow River valley (original Chinese culture) population, to the ancient Southern barbarians (most of modern day Chinese), then came Turkic people during Tang Dynasty, even the emperor itself is half Turkish. Then came the Uyguhr people and then Hui people during Muslim development, and then Manchu people (which defines Western perception of China).
Your Land?
When the west occupy coastal China, they emigrate a lot of Chinese population to Singapore, Indonesia and the rest of South East Asia. They use them as manual labours. Creating majority Chinese population there, like modern nation of Singapore, which 70% of its population are Chinese of various descend. The United States imported a lot of Chinese workers for building railroads along the Western Pacific coast, creating significant population of Chinese people there. The west coast Chinese were going to be repatriated at first, but then they were naturalized as US citizens.
Your culture?
I am at odds here. What is your true culture? How you are going to define "your own culture"? What is considered not your culture?
We as well may not have our cherished cuisines like Soto soup, Cap Cay (our vegetable chop suey), beef meatballs, or Chicken noodle if we made it "original Indonesia." They were originally Chinese, integrated into our culture, then become our traditional dishes, since it was already there far before our nation was born. We might as well reject democracy, because our culture here, as still reflected very much in Central Java, is kingdomship. Many still regard traditional rulers highly there, as such, Yogyakarta province is given special administrative region status, ruled by their own Sultanate (Keraton). We never elect our leader!
I've seen a lot of European history. it is full of conquests, displacements, and so on. The modern day France and Northern Italy are like descendants of Norman people (Northern, e.g. Vikings, Danes) and Germans. So how is Asterix doing, being replaced by the northern people? Britain was originally settled by Celtic people, then came Romans, then Germans, and lastly Normans as well, even your current Queen is from a German house. Can we call all of you Italo-German people? Since it was Roman and Goth people that settled most of your lands before? Or Swedish-Dane people? Heck, even the late Greek empire (Byzantine) called themselves Roman!
So which part of history would you like to close, as you settle in for your definition?
Your people?
North America belongs to Amerindians and Inuits, obviously. But would you settle by that fact only? Or would you move to the development of the continent? When the European settlers turned the land into one of the most modern country in the world?
Indonesia, China, India, and most Asian nations are kind of mixed bag. In India there are Bengali, Ladakhi, Kannada, Gujaratti, Tamil, and so on. Each have their own culture and languages, still you call them Indians. Indonesia is more diverse and different to each other: we have Batak (predominantly Christian), Javanese (Indonesian diaspora), Sundanese, Betawi (mix of Sundanese, Indians, Portuguese, Arabs, and Chinese), Padang, Bugis, Manadoese (also Christian), Mollucas, Papuans (closer to Australian Aborigines) each speaking different languages, have different cultures, and some looks different.
Nationalism in our part, is derived from our experience of experiencing the same fate: being occupied by Dutch. Thus it unites our country of many different people and cultures. But that's 1928, we became independent in 1945. The inclusion is still far more modern than US' 1776 ideology about their nation. But we do still include that "God thing" in our statement though. At that time, Ben Franklin or John Hancock, or whoever is in the commission wouldn't have guessed that many foreign bankers and industries would grow their business in the land, even Thomas Jefferson envisioned US to be an agricultural nation. So would you level NYC or LA and turn them into farmlands?
Nothing wrong with putting your country above all others because it's your native country and people are born with that sense of love of country. I want to place my country above others
It's not the same as Fascism.
How do you achieve that? (Putting your country above others)
For example, you can't say Greece is better in terms of aerospace technology compared to United States of America.
My country has diverted a lot of money just to pursue this pride of conquering the pinnacle of human achievement in technology: aerospace. In the process, we sacrificed many more important things, infrastructure development and the general welfare of people in Eastern Indonesia.
Let the Americans do their job, let us do our job, let the Greeks do their job best: be it shipping, engineering, farming, etc... that's why we trade and respect each other.
I haven't seen a word "respect others" in your post about nationalism.
I read a post on the internet nationalism vs. Communism that says that nationalism is not supremacist. Communism is supremacist.
That is twisted.
Communism promotes equality, but the system puts it into the hands of few ruling elites (called Communist party), who thinks they know it all (which is impossible).
Nationalism doesn't necessarily means supremacy, but it certainly borderlines that belief, especially when it lacks the definition of respect for other nations.
Nationalists do have respect for other nations. Communism is NOT equality because in Communism, the people that are in power screw over the masses in their countries and the Soviet Union
Serbian nationalists respect Greeks for example, many nationalists in other countries, thanks to the Internet
are now respecting other nations. They do not respect nations that wish to harm them, like Serbia is threatened by Croatia. Nationalism is my culture, my language above others, because I come first.
It's not xenophobia or racism, because having a will to be a nation with defined borders and protecting members of your group as well as encouraging others to unite with you. I'm against Anschluss and stuff like Hitler did.
Hitler may have been German nationalist, but he sure as hell respected England and wanted to not go to invade them. Hitler was an Anglophile. France did not like Germany because of Alsace Lorraine that was stolen from them. Nationalists defined the borders. You Europeans have soccer games of nationalistic cheering with Italy vs. France and I guess nationalism is a thing for soccer games and nationalists wish to protect their nation from harm and are cautious with foreigners, but don't hate them. Japan depended on the West to build their infrastructure.
India has mane ethnic groups, but it's a Hindu nation where the Hindus rule. Hindustan -stan suffix nation of people, Uzbekistan, all defined by an ethnic group. I do not think all nationalism is fascism, only when they manipulate it for their own ends for propaganda like Nazis do.
Nationalism created Israel for example, where Jews from all over settled there and created an Israeli identity. Australia has many ethnic groups, but they're still Australian. If Vietnamese settle there, they're Vietnamese, but they're still Australian. Ethnic pride ain't wrong.
The nation comes first because you belong to that nation. I respect many nations, but I live in THAT country okay with a different culture, different mindset, etc, I live in that country, so of course, it's important. Many nationalists have brought in people from other nations to help them and Russians respect Ukraine and other Slavic nations.
You define respect. Creating cultures and having a defined identity is not racism or xenophobia because it creates an ethnic group that I identify with and gives me a voice.
Other nations are not a problem, until they mess with me. Nationalism is not all bad, you're referring to the Ustasha types in Croatia. Not all nationalists exclude others. People like to be around their own kind much of the time because it gives you kinship, he's a brother in a strange land. Nationalism unites people, nothing wrong with that. The nation is critical to me because I live there. Take care of your own house before caring for others. Your own house in order. Maintenance of my own house is more important and you want me to care about other houses?
I care about other nations. What's wrong with your own culture? UN recognized many nationalities and cultures, many identities gained through nationalism.
The Europeans never settled China, they just exploited the hell out of it for natural resources for their own gain, but Chinese nationalists fought them because nationalists want their nation to be free and to be independent and consider the
Communism does NOT promote equality because Communism considers the bourgeoisie to be eliminated by the proletarian masses and Communism believes the state is supreme because it puts industry in the hands of the state, so therefore it's supremacist. Communism believes the system is all powerful and creates a ruling class that oppresses the masses and believes that the masses are dangerous. It puts power in the hands of the party. It does not promote equality because it considers opposition to be dangerous and only the Communist Party is allowed to the exclusion of others. Communism excludes all others, too.
That equality stuff is just the rhetoric used to suck people into a revolution by the masses, (in reality, the people in the Party, ONLY) and create revolution. Communism places the party officials above the people.
Communist countries have sham elections with no real opposition. Communist countries are among the poorest in the world. Where's the equality there? Communists also use nationalism, aka Vietcong uniting Vietnam into a single state or Kim Jong Il uniting the Korean people into Communist state in the North into the south to liberate Koreans. North Korea uses nationalism and nationalist rhetoric to advance itself.
Party members have more privileges and the citizens have no voice to tell the govt there's something wrong, lest they tell a party official in their village to voice "concerns" about their problems, commies only "criticize" one another. The commies in charge are privileged and rarely interact with the poor and exclude themselves from everyone else. /like in Cuba or Soviet Union. Soviet propaganda promoted their nation above others. That promoting nation above others is propaganda the nationalists use. In reality, they only focus on the other needs pragmatically, like in diplomacy, and make propaganda about supremacy. Something like that. Can't exactly explain it. The Soviets were heavily pro-Russian. The Soviets gave people an illusion of "equality" for non Russian ethnic groups with their "republics" that were actually governed by Moscow and were in reality, state-like systems with small parliaments, that were ruled by the CPSU in Moscow and Moscow could not exactly rule over Tadzhik. They pretended to give these people a voice of a sort of pseudo-nationalism, as per Communism, but in reality were governed by Russia.
The Russian language was the lingua franca of the Soviet Union and to an extent in the former Soviet republics, it still is. Many people do commerce in Russian because Russia is the only powerhouse in the region and the republics are their sphere of influence, as per the Commonwealth of Independent States.
Latin America is the USA's sphere of influence. The big brother rules the little ones. The US equips the militaries of Latin America with hand-me-down equipment, Russia does the same with their friends the former Soviet republics.
The Russians to this day consider the former USSR as their backyard. Sorry I repeat myself. I do not like to.
I just wanna sum up my previous point, which is why I do it.
The Russian nationalists care about others. Look other nations exist and they do their thing, but I do not believe in interfering in the affairs of other nations, unless they pose a threat. Nothing wrong with keeping to yourself. Nationalists keep to themselves.
Helping other nations is nice, but others like to be independent of other people. People like to breathe and want room to be themselves, hence nationalism. Not all nationalists exclude others.
Many Irish nationalists lived in America and love and respect America because of the many Irish there. The Irish in America created ethnic heritage and identity and identified themselves as Irish and were proud of something. Nationalism makes you proud of something, your own heritage and identity. Nationalism makes you somebody. Irish people are Irish, but they're still Americans. Bengalis still live in India, but they're governed by a Hindu nation.
Irish people live in America. Ethnic pride is not wrong. Not all nationalism is bad, the chest-beating Ustasha types are the ones I worry about, but these nationalists do not think about others because they're focused on themselves and dedicating themselves full-time to an independent nation, but the Ustasha was helped along by Germany, and nationalists think about others when the thought crosses their mind.
Nationalists are useful in times of crisis when nations and ethnic groups are being threatened. Sometimes, nationalism is useful. Nationalist supremacy is
A nation is a country with defined borders, governed by a people with an identity, like European nations like Serbia, where Serbs rule their own nation or Russia or Poland, with a defined ethnic group, Czechs govern a nation of their own, with a single people ruling a single nation, what's wrong with an ethnic group asserting to govern a nation, but not discriminate against others. Someone has to be in charge. With a defined state with people of the same ethnicity or blood governing that nation. Only America has different ethnic groups with an American identity. Xenophobia excludes others, but not all nationalists are xenophobes.
Their nation comes first, because it's THEIR country and others come next because they have their own problems and their own identity and they have their own life. I have my life and you have yours. I do not want others to tell me how to live. Nothing wrong with that.
Russia cannot care about what goes on in Japan all the time.
Nationalists that discriminate against others I have a problem with. True nationalism respects others, but personal rights and freedoms were a staple of early nationalist movements and a defined set of principles and rights. Slavic nationalists unite all Slavic peoples in all other nations. Nationalists do not necessarily exclude others, they sometimes incorporate others of their own kind into their own.
Other ethnic groups live their Bengalis in India, these are ethnic groups, not nations. Nations are sovereign entities respected by international law and recognized by the UN that have territorial rights and a defined
The care about their own nation before others, but this is not racism because I'm not a chest-beating dick about it and because they are idiots who abuse their own power and their own sense of pride, and toot their own horn. Those people are dicks and bullies who misuse it to gain power over others through propaganda.
Sad as it may seem. Nationalists do not necessarily exclude others, nor all of them dickheads, nor do they all hate others, they only hate those that threaten them.
They believe that other nations exist and all that, but they cannot interfere with their business and they believe that their nation comes first because it's their country and Europeans all live close to each other and all that.
Native Americans unfortunately, are of different tribes and are classified as a single ethnic groups. Ku Klux Klan type groups that discriminate against others and advocate discriminating against blacks, Jews, Catholics, and all them and violently repressing them and terrorizing them and murdering non-whites and policies of discrimination. That's not nationalism.
The discrimination part only comes from a manifestation of something else, that when people let things get to their head, like the Klan does, or openly hate others and only care about their group and advocating discrimination against others, and killing others because of their race. Nationalism gives people a voice in case one group discriminates against another because it gives them a right to complain because they're being threatened and discriminated against as a whole people, and can complain about human rights being discriminated against, and can have a voice to the international community to the UN accorded full rights and all that stuff.
Nationalism still has an impact in today's world. It's is not just 1870. The UN recognizes ethnic groups and languages all because nationalists fought hard to give these people something to have: an identity.
It's not all bad.
People believing one is supreme is not bad, until it becomes violent like the KKK does or the La Raza does or the Louis Farrakhan types.
Show Posts
