I have noticed when I travel a lot of people have a bad view of nationalism, and I just wanted to know what people think? The basic definition of nationalism is patriotic feeling, principles, and or efforts. On the downside of that, the second definition is "an extreme form of this, especially marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries." I personally think nationalism is a good thing when it is not extreme. The reason why Nationalism for Koreans is so high is that we lost our country twice.
The extreme form is typically promoted by those who are less educated—and not only in an academic regard. As long as we don't have the education problem solved (worldwide issue), we'll have to deal with all forms of nationalism.
In the context of Korea it makes since. But the extreme form that's being promoted in the U.S and Europe is definitely bad. There is nothing wrong with being proud of your country. I'm proud to be an American. Our political system is screwed right now but it won't fall. That can't be said of other countries. But if I were to say that makes those other countries bad and we need to keep the people from those countries out because we are inherently better that's not ok. And in America and Europe although not all nationalist are racist many are. The extreme form and racism, xenophobia and intolerance are linked. That to me is the big issue. That and the concept that for us to be great others have to be less than.
Like anything else, nationalism is good in moderation. Its not wrong to love your country. It is wrong however, to hate other countries or think of their people as inferior.
Like many things in life that are supposed to be simple (being patriotic), some folks over-think or some don't think at all and disregard the fact we are all human living on one planet Earth.
No. Nationalism is natural. The majority of the world is never going to be anything else except for nationalist. All those who adopt a globalist model will not be able to compete against those who retain their patriotism. We have had two generations now of institutions telling us that a borderless multicultural world is the future. It isn't. It's the past. Ancient Greece,Ancient Rome,and Ancient Egypt all tried it. Now those areas are populated by groups of people with no connection whatsoever to the glory of the civilizations that came before them and no hope whatsoever of ever reclaiming those glories. If anti-nationalism was the way to go then why is Egypt a cultural backwater (no offense,Egyptians) rather than the center of world culture today? Why doesn't Italy command a world-spanning Empire? 3,000 years later,Greece is not a sci-fi futuristic utopia full of flying cars and teleportation machines,it is bankrupt and like a quarter of the people living there don't have jobs. How long is it supposed to take for the blessings of globalism and multiculturalism to take effect? It took an extremely nationalist USA 200 years to become one of the strongest and wealthiest countries in the world. Thousands of years later,still no glorious utopia in Egypt,Rome,or Greece.
Is anyone a true Rwandan or a true Tibetan,in your estimation? If a billion Chinese people moved to Africa and had 10 kids each and you found out that in 50 or 100 years there would be no more black people left on the planet,would you say "Well,movement of peoples has changed all of our DNA,no one is a true African"? Just curious.
You are picking and choosing your benefits. Nationalism and isolationism left us unprepared for Ww1 and although it shouldn't have Ww2. Had we been more involved with the world we would have realized our entry into both wars was inevitable. Our ignoring of Europe at the begging of Ww2 didn't help us. In the end it hurt us. You also ignore the far right and anti niceguy facets of American nationalism. People can believe what they want but harassment and violence are not ok. And you can try to deny those things but the alt right has aligned themselves with the nationalist movement. And that movement has accepted them. So for them nationalism equals white. Anyone else is inferior. They want plenty of white Europeans to come here but not anyone of color , or that practices a religion other than Christianity. Being proud of were you are from in fine but when it's combined with racist and intolerance it's not. And all the countries you mentioned have issues not because of immigration but their political systems. As a matter of fact nationalism in the form of facism destroyed Italy's economy for years after the war. Also those empires fell hundreds of years before the immigration wave.
Listen, Nationalism is a necessity for growth, in a decent capacity. Too much of it, and you become arrogant, start wars, and all that tauros shit. Too little of it, and alot of things that are important, such as alot of medicines, vaccines, and space travel would have taken us decades longer to obtain. The point is, Nationalism is a strong motivator, and can be both a good and bad thing. Nothing in this world is black or white, its all grey.
Some things are black and white. Xenophobia , racism , religious intolerance are not grey areas. They are wrong period. And as I stated before not all nationalist are those things but they so accept those elements in their movement. So as far as I'm concerned guilt by association definitely applies to them. I'll give you a personal example. I am firmly against the current administration and the Republicans in control of Congress. I oppose the majority of what they claim they stand for. I have been to a few protests in the Nations Capital. But I do not condone violence or property damage. I do not support or agree with the anarchists who sometimes show up at these protests. Im fine with civil disobedience. But violence no. I draw my red line there. But not all nationalist have that red line. They are ok with negative elements within their movement as long as they vote the way they want. So the whole movement is tainted as far as I'm concerned.
In my own opinion, even those things can bring good. Just because they are absolutely terrible doesn't mean the person who has those traits wont do the right thing for the wrong reasons. Its the times of conflict that we grow as a species, as its rare that peace is motivational enough to do important things. Good, Evil, Right, Wrong, its all perspective. For instance, just because someone believes, say, war is bad, doesn't make it so for everyone else. Its not about similarities, its the differences that make us able to gain intelligence, and opinions in the first place as a species.
I can not agree those things are vile and have no place in a modern society. And what they want to do are not good things. Segregation is bad it's not a matter of perspective. Attacking Muslims is bad it's not a matter of perspective. Hating anyone for the color of their skin, ethnic origin or religion is wrong and not a matter of perspective. By your reasoning it's just a matter of perspective when some terrorist decides to blow up a building or attack someone. Or a Nazi decides it's time to kill some blacks or Jews. Your rational is weak and silly. And part of the reason these people have had such a resurgence in the U.S. if nothing is wrong and only a matter of perspective then you don't have a functioning society at all.
That's why there are things like laws. I agree that those things are absolutely horrible and have no place in MODERN society, but by your logic, people who believed it in the past should not have either. Its the mistakes of others that we can learn from, and therefore grow as a result. As such, things such as Racism and Nazism had positive impacts on the future, whether or not they were "Right" or "Wrong". You have to see more than one perspective, and accept them all, no matter what you believe is right or wrong. Think of it this way: Who is a better source of information, someone biased in any way (Whether it be towards your own beliefs, or something opposite), or someone who looks at it objectively, ignoring all perspectives and only stating the facts? Obviously, the correct answer is the latter. Of course, actual objectiveness is a lie. There is no way possible for a human being to be objective. The only way we come anywhere near close is by looking at everything, and accepting it, no matter how bad we think it is. Why did the nazis kill Jews? Because they were afraid of them. We attack what we fear, and that is only human. I never once said that I condone those actions, but we would not be where we are as a species had it not happened. Things would most likely be worse, because the mistake would not have been made for us to learn from. Im not saying you should change your beliefs, and Im not saying they are wrong, Im saying that it is incorrect to discount the beliefs of others due to your own. Only by combining our beliefs can we achieve more than we could ever do alone. There is no single version of the truth, that's just how life works.
You have just backtracked on your statement. What you said is there is no black and white and everything is gray areas . Now you say something slightly different. You actually do not have a coherant opinion. Figure out what you actually mean until then bye for now.
Perhaps my syntax is throwing you off, or maybe you just didn't read carefully. I never said anything different. I said I thought those things to be bad, but that good does in fact come from them. Therefore, it is neither black nor white. It all balances out in a mixed shade of grey. Let me ask you a question, one that should help illustrate what Im trying to say, whether or not my words throw you off. Its a very common question, and your answer should be easy for you to decide upon. Hypothetically, a very poor woman steals bread to feed her children. Is she in the right or in the wrong?
she is 100 percent wrong for this. But then again any variation of the ethical thought experiment that is the trolley problem is just plain silly since there are too many variables.
My point exactly. There are a number of variables that could possibly affect said situation, and therefore the person answering's perspective, therefore possibly altering their response. As I said, there is no true black or white in this world, just opinions on what they should be, therefore making it a gray. The only way to be able to 100% definitely say that it is right or wrong is if you could truly objectively say that it was one or the other, and since no living thing in the entire universe can do that, do to bias and opinion, it classifies as neither black nor white, and is therefore grey.
It's absolutely right to be a nationalist! I salute America and all her conservative American-born natives! I'm proud to be an American. "If a country were not worth protecting, it was not worth claiming." George Rogers Clarke It was definitely worth claiming. The people who aren't nationalists should go back to where they came from and stop complaining about America. Leaving > complaining.
