I am against it, it's glorified racism in my eyes and I think it's terrible that people should act accordingly to the country they were born in. Your nationality is nothing to be proud of as it's not an achievement, it's something which happened to you by chance. You cannot be proud of something like your nationality IMO

I don't think there's anything wrong with nationalism in and of itself. But when people go overboard and use it as a "reason" to think they are better than other people, that's a bit lame.

FUQ DA ENGLISH. IRA FOREVER.

I hate people who are "proud" of stuff they have never really had a part of, like "proud to be an American" or even "proud to be LBGT" or what have you. Nationalism is just a silly way to be proud of something you have no reason to be proud of. I think it's pretty dumb.

 

I mean "What do you think of it" is a weird qustion to ask, nobody really thinks it's actually a force for good that I know of just because it's been at the root of so many wars and etc. :thinking:

I don't have a proper opinion, but I can't stand a lot of nationalistic occasions and events.

Obviously joking above.

I find it quite annoying D: there's people here in their twenties who are proud of fighting and events that happened in the early 20th century.

The hatred some people have towards the english is just silly. When the queen came to visit here some fool put up signs saying "NO NO QUEEN" around my town.

Unless it was double negative and it meant "YES QUEEN"

I hate people who are "proud" of stuff they have never really had a part of, like "proud to be an American" or even "proud to be LBGT" or what have you. Nationalism is just a silly way to be proud of something you have no reason to be proud of. I think it's pretty dumb.

 

I mean "What do you think of it" is a weird qustion to ask, nobody really thinks it's actually a force for good that I know of just because it's been at the root of so many wars and etc. :thinking:

 

 

Excellent answer. You can only be legitimately proud of something you do yourself!

 

Nationalism is mass Stockholm Syndrome. You are forced to pay into a collective against your will, and it's your brain's effort to square this unfortunate truth (that you are a slave) with a happy ideal (that it's voluntary and you are glad for it).

 

SEIG HEIL!

I don't understand nationalism. It also annoys me when people glorify their country's history and forget about the negative aspects.

 

Then again, I never liked the country I was born in so I'm probably not the best person to ask.

FUQ DA ENGLISH. IRA FOREVER.

 

lawl

 

Obviously joking above.

I find it quite annoying D: there's people here in their twenties who are proud of fighting and events that happened in the early 20th century.

The hatred some people have towards the english is just silly. When the queen came to visit here some fool put up signs saying "NO NO QUEEN" around my town.

Unless it was double negative and it meant "YES QUEEN"

 

More lawl.

are we talking about some nationalism in particular?

 

the problem is when some people use it on their benefit -politicians or similar- and mess it to end creating a 'fake' History involved with a particular ethnia (culture, language, tradition, religion..) to justify their acts, because at some point many nationalism end being racists and intolerant cause they want to place themselves prior to any other around that is different to them according to their standards.

 

another matter is the legality of being of a certain nationality cause to it it's associated some rights and laws may be applied diferently and everybody shall have a nationallity to cover the legal aspects of life.

 

for instance in my city there's a nationalist movement cause Historically we were independent for almost two years of the whole country -we had our own goverment via a canton, with laws, coins and so- around 2 centuries ago, still some people live on that myth and want it again, so at the end there are like 6 different parties to try to get that back, and they had spread through supporting local football team. :confused: which i find really bad, and it is so anacronic at this moment, same happen with many nationalist movements, they end being anacronic, holding on a certain historical event to the main benefit of their leaders and followers only and not to cover the real needs of the citizens of today.

 

just think instead if they would be holding on the map of the country many centuries ago when Carthaginense roman province took 1/3 of the whole country, one can't live from those so far away in time events, as it stops to face the present.

for instance in my city there's a nationalist movement cause Historically we were independent for almost two years of the whole country -we had our own goverment via a canton, with laws, coins and so- around 2 centuries ago, still some people live on that myth and want it again,

 

This isn't nationalism, it's secessionist, which is a good thing.

 

There's nothing wrong with a group of people wanting to govern themselves, or be independent. That's the opposite of nationalism.

This isn't nationalism, it's secessionist, which is a good thing.

 

There's nothing wrong with a group of people wanting to govern themselves, or be independent. That's the opposite of nationalism.

 

nationalism here end asking for secessionist endings of self-goverment.

 

i wouldn't have problem with that, it i'd have the right as they have to vote if i agree they have their own govern or not.

 

i mean if an area of the country won't pay taxes, investments will vary, rights will change, i think the rest of the country shall be asked too.... :thinking: cause rights shall be balanced on both sides imo, if not it feels the decitions is just form one side, and don't we have disagreed when kings did that, change a territory for other just on one's benefit?

 

 

as i said the bad i see is most them hang on a particular moment of history, i don't think that's so fair reason to go on self-goverment, specially a case as that city, cause it lasted so few time, if they could have had self-goverment before for 5 or 10 years, then ok, but less than 2 years...

i mean if an area of the country won't pay taxes, investments will vary, rights will change

 

Careful!

 

Taxes do not create a new system of ethics. If a country can tax people who want to independent, then it can tax anyone - even the Chinese.

 

Different groups of people have a right to live together and form their own government, even if it means the old government loses tax money.

 

And don't ignore history just because it was a long time ago. Remember: today is history for people living in the future. Things can change very fast. Peace won't last forever.

 

EDIT: This is particularly important to remember when thinking about the EU. The EU cannot last. Europe wasn't meant to be under one government.

Careful!

 

Taxes do not create a new system of ethics. If a country can tax people who want to independent, then it can tax anyone - even the Chinese.

 

Different groups of people have a right to live together and form their own government, even if it means the old government loses tax money.

 

And don't ignore history just because it was a long time ago. Remember: today is history for people living in the future. Things can change very fast. Peace won't last forever.

 

EDIT: This is particularly important to remember when thinking about the EU. The EU cannot last. Europe wasn't meant to be under one government.

true, as soon as i said it i thought about EU.

i dunno if that will last much longer seeing how it is going.

Darlene,

 

I think all big governments are unsustainable, like the EU, China, Russia, and the USA.

 

In the future, I think smaller governments will be more successful - Monaco, Denmark, Luxembourg, Switzerland... Humans aren't meant to be in such huge tribes of 100's of millions.

Darlene,

 

I think all big governments are unsustainable, like the EU, China, Russia, and the USA.

 

In the future, I think smaller governments will be more successful - Monaco, Denmark, Luxembourg, Switzerland... Humans aren't meant to be in such huge tribes of 100's of millions.

you may be true, but while big goverments will divide into smallers it'll will be a bit unbalanced period in my view.

 

plus i don't think it never happened that an area that got self-goverment asked to go into a big goverment some time later, has that never happen?

 

it's a tendendy when a country gets too big it divides, and when it is too divided it starts to add territories again.

I thought nationalism was a good thing, but after reading this thread I'm kinda confused x_x

I thought it was a good thing to unify people... D:

^not in and of itself *coughNaziscough*

lawl

 

 

 

More lawl.

Reilly understands!

I thought nationalism was a good thing, but after reading this thread I'm kinda confused x_x

I thought it was a good thing to unify people... D:

 

There's nothing wrong with people working and living together.

 

The problem comes when you force people to do things they don't want to do.

 

Politicians intentionally confuse these two so they can gain more power. They talk about how "we" should do "work together" to "achieve great things". But they conveniently ignore the fact that it's not voluntary - some people are being taxed to pay for something they don't agree with.

Nationalism in this country brings too many parallels to racism... which is why I dislike it a lot.