Nationalism vs. Patriotism

mysteryman wrote:

FYI, up until Hitler was APPOINTED Chancellor of Germany (he was never elected to any office in the German govt), the Nazi party never had a majority of seats in the German govt.

But,they had become such a strong minority that to appease them Hitler was made Chancellor.

So,the Nazi party was never elected to be the majority in Germany, at least not until AFTER Hitler became dictator.

Just thought I would point that out to you.

Ehem, you don't have a lot of knowledge about different election systems and constitutions, it seems. Especially not about those in Germany.

In the (second) March 1933 elections, with the communists eliminated, the Nazis were the strongest party in parliament with 43.9%, and with their Nationalist (DNVP) allies, achieved a parliamentary majority (51.8%).

The German chancellor was appointed by the Emeror, later by the Reichspresident. Today, she/he is elected by parliament.

0 Replies

The Nazis were the strongest party in 33 out of the 35 election districts in Germany.

And the strongest party in the elections, more than a double of votes ('Stimmen') and seats ('Sitze') than the Socialdemocrats on second.

0 Replies

Guten Tag Herr Hinteler!

Thank you for your research and clarification. I had THOUGHT I had read something once or twice in the past contrary to the post you corrected, I was simply too lazy to look it up. Too many things....... too little time. Laughing

Halfback

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

tinygiraffe wrote:
einstein wasn't very patriotic, he completely betrayed the party that was ruling germany, and he betrayed the spirit of the nation at that time.

not to mention that party was democratically elected. but i think we can agree he did the right thing.

Wasn't Einstein Jewish? I thought he needed to leave Germany at that point in history, since he sensed what was coming.

he was a secular jew, yes- but hitler didn't care what you thought of your own heritage, he thought eugenics was scientific.

it's a peculiar thing that you can grasp why einstein didn't support his country, but you can't grasp why anyone else would fail to- as if the nazi party is the only sufficiently negative thing that ever happened to a country's leadership. of course, i support einstein's decision to leave and not support the party-in-government.

0 Replies

"What is patriotism? Is it love of one's birthplace, the place of childhood's recollections and hopes, dreams and aspirations ? Is it the place where, in childlike naively, we would watch the fleeting clouds, and wonder why we, too, could not run so swiftly? The place where we would count the milliard glittering stars, terror-stricken lest each one "an eye should be," piercing the very depths of our little souls? Is it the place where we would listen to the music of the birds, and long to have wings to fly, even as they, to distant lands? Or the place where we would sit at mother's knee, enraptured by wonderful tales of great deeds and conquests? In short, is it love for the spot, every inch representing dear and precious recollections of a happy, joyous, and playful childhood?
If that were patriotism, few American men of today could be called upon to be patriotic, since the place of play has been turned into factory, mill, and mine, while deafening sounds of machinery have replaced the music of the birds. Nor can we longer hear the tales of great deeds, for the stories our mothers tell today are but those of sorrow, tears, and grief.
What, then, is patriotism? "Patriotism, sir, is the last resort of scoundrels," said Dr. Johnson. Leo Tolstoy, the greatest anti-patriot of our times, defines patriotism as the principle that will justify the training of wholesale murderers; a trade that requires better equipment for the exercise of man-killing than the making of such necessities of life as shoes, clothing, and houses; a trade that guarantees better returns and greater glory than that of the average workingman
Indeed, conceit, arrogance, and egotism are the essentials of patriotism. Let me illustrate. Patriotism assumes that our globe is divided into little spots each one surrounded by an iron gate. Those who have had the fortune of being born on some particular spot, consider themselves better, nobler, grander, more intelligent than the living beings inhabiting any other spot. It is, therefore, the duty of everyone living on that chosen spot to fight, kill, and die in the attempt to impose his superiority on all the others.
The inhabitants of the other spots reason in like manner, of course, with the result that, from early infancy, the mind of the child is poisoned with bloodcurdling stories about the Germans, the French, the I Italians, Russians, etc. When the child has reached manhood, he is thoroughly saturated with the belief that he is chosen by the Lord himself to defend his country against the attack or invasion of any foreigner It is for that purpose that we are clamoring for a greater army and navy, more battleships and ammunition. It is for that purpose that America has within a short time spent four hundred million dollars. Just think of it-four hundred million dollars taken from the produce of the people. For surely it is not the rich who contribute to patriotism. They are cosmopolitans, perfectly at home in every land. We in America know well the truth of this. Are not our rich Americans Frenchmen in France, Germans in Germany, or Englishmen in England? And do they not squander with cosmopolitan grace fortunes earned by American factory children and cotton slaves? Yes, theirs is the patriotism that will make it possible to send messages of condolence to a despot like the Russia'` Tsar, when any mishap befalls him, as President Roosevelt did in the name of his people, when Sergius was punished by the Russian revolutionists.
It is a patriotism that will assist the arch-murderer, Diaz, in destroying thousands of lives in Mexico, or that will even aid in arresting Mexican revolutionists on American soil and keep them incarcerated in American prisons, without the slightest cause or reason." Emma Goldman

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Tribalism is, obviously, a very effective survival mechanism. It is unlikely to disappear through the natural process of evolution...at least not in any time soon. It is also not going to be overcome by righteous thinking and education. Even if one could, through education, convert an entire populace to a collection of pacifists with universal love for all mankind, the result would be similar to that of convincing the lamb to lie down with the lion, but leaving the lion as is.

Scotland had clans (aka tribes), ancient Israel had tribes, Ireland had clans. Today there are Scots, Jews, Irish living all over the world, and not subscribing to clans/tribes. Some might be a bit ethnocentric, but so are a lot of ethnic groups. I think tribalism just dies out when modern living takes the place of the tribal life. Change is slow naturally.

As Halfback notes, tribalism doesn't disappear with the dissolution of former clearly defined tribes. It simply manifests itself through new allied identities; new perceived enemies.

Tribalism is alive and well on A2K, and it certainly is alive and well within all civilized communities.

0 Replies

Are there anyone here
to uphold patriotism.?
I am a communist without patriotic pathetism

0 Replies

If tribalism is so pervasive, why are there no more tribes in Israel? It exists again as a nation of Hebrews? I suspect they are too busy to be involved with tribal matters. If anything, secular Jews today have divisions that run along the lines of what level of education one has. Naturally, the Phd "tribe" has the most stature.

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

If tribalism is so pervasive, why are there no more tribes in Israel? It exists again as a nation of Hebrews? I suspect they are too busy to be involved with tribal matters. If anything, secular Jews today have divisions that run along the lines of what level of education one has. Naturally, the Phd "tribe" has the most stature.

Because you have a parochial notion of tribalism.

Tribalism does not require specified tribal units.

Liberals hating Conservatives: Tribalism

Yankee fans hating the Red Sox: Tribalism

People with money dissing people without: Tribalism

Us vs Them has been very good to our species.

I have three children. When they were young and impressionable, I asked each of them:

Which is a better place in which to live:

A world where those who work hardest get the greatest rewards

OR

A world where everyone gets the same share of reward. Those who can work hard do so and those who cannot do not, but all get the same.

All three of them opted for the latter.

Now that they are young adults, they appreciate that the fantasy world of Communism is an absurd notion.

There are many among us who will conclude that because (innocent) children opt for a particular world view such a view must be vindicated.

Nonsense. These are children. Innocent? Yes. Experienced? Hardly.

There has never been and never will be a world of Innocence.

The world is as God has made it - harsh, beautiful, cruel, exhilarating, challenging, daunting etc etc etc.

You should not only get used to it, you should embrace it.

Does light exist without darkness?

0 Replies

Ramafuchs wrote:

"Nationalism is perhaps the most interesting delusion of modern times.
Its power is illustrated by the fact that lots of otherwise sensible people are unapologetic nationalists, even though nationalism requires its adherents to subscribe to various bizarre beliefs.

For example, the nationalist believes that while other nations act invariably on the basis of self-interest, his country is historically unique, in that it makes great sacrifices for the good of others.

The American nationalist believes that America is "inherently good," and that therefore our imperialist adventures have nothing in common with those of other great powers.

Try this thought experiment:
Imagine Nicolas Sarkozy defending French foreign policy by pointing out that France is "inherently good," or
Vladimir Putin claiming the right to imprison suspected terrorists for life without trial, because the Russian security forces can be trusted not to make mistakes

In short, when a political leader claims he is the head of a unique nation, anointed by history or even God himself to be a light unto the world, we tend to consider him either an amusing crank or a dangerous lunatic

Paul Campos professor of law at the University of Colorado

Prof Campos is so dully wrong in so many ways.

1) Nationalism is hardly a delusion. Those who abhor it may wish to peg it as such, but to do so is just silly. No matter what one feels about Nationalism, it is hardly a delusion. The contention of Campos that it is sets the stage for an unfounded argument. In this regard he does not disappoint.

2) Nationalism does not require the belief that all other nations are insipid and corrupt.

3) Nationalism can easily recognize that there are other worthy nations in the world.

4) Anyone with any sense will not have any difficulty with the contrived "thought experiments" of Prof Campos. Righteous is as righteous does. Notwithstanding the propaganda of any particular world leader their particular Nationalism is not the equivalent of others.

It is facile, at best, to argue that Nationalism is fundamentally "bad."

0 Replies

So, what's the opposite of tribalism? Cosmopolitanism?

0 Replies

American Nationalism is needed, since we are making Americans out of people whose families previously had allegiance to another nation. American Nationalism serves also as a blood transfusion of loyalty.

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

So, what's the opposite of tribalism? Cosmopolitanism?

Utter and complete isolationism

0 Replies

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Foofie wrote:
So, what's the opposite of tribalism? Cosmopolitanism?

Utter and complete isolationism

I can't agree. The opposite of tribalism is universalism. One big mass of humanity, and we're all supposed to get along. One worlders, I thought.

0 Replies

Which brings us the full circle.

The discussion has gone from the note that there has always been some sort of "segregation" into conflicting groups for all of mans history. Then we noted the expanding progression from tribes all the way to regions of the world. Lastly, we hit upon the concept of one world.

The one world concept is elegant. Everybody treating each other as equals, peace, love and prosperity for all. (Shucks, throw in "free love" and you have the "Hippy" Party Platform. Shocked

Now THERE'S some deva vu!)

All through this idea of "coalescing into one world", we forget that humans can't seem to get away from a tribal mentality. For probably the simplist example I offer fan behavior at College and Professional Sports events. (At times approaching open warfare, albiet aided by "demon rum"!)

I submit that even should we ever get to the point where we call ourselves citizens of the world, under the auspices of some form of world government. (and for an old "tribal mentality" curmugeon like me, "world government" sounds scarey!) there will STILL be someone or some group that will not "buy into" the program. Hence friction.......war.

Is there an answer? I don't know.

Halfback

0 Replies

How about
humanism?
Gandhiism?
Karl marxism?
or total
barbarisim?

0 Replies

Halfback wrote:

Which brings us the full circle.

The discussion has gone from the note that there has always been some sort of "segregation" into conflicting groups for all of mans history. Then we noted the expanding progression from tribes all the way to regions of the world. Lastly, we hit upon the concept of one world.

The one world concept is elegant. Everybody treating each other as equals, peace, love and prosperity for all. (Shucks, throw in "free love" and you have the "Hippy" Party Platform. Now THERE'S some deva vu!)

All through this idea of "coalescing into one world", we forget that humans can't seem to get away from a tribal mentality. For probably the simplist example I offer fan behavior at College and Professional Sports events. (At times approaching open warfare, albiet aided by "demon rum"!)

I submit that even should we ever get to the point where we call ourselves citizens of the world, under the auspices of some form of world government. (and for an old "tribal mentality" curmugeon like me, "world government" sounds scarey!) there will STILL be someone or some group that will not "buy into" the program. Hence friction.......war.

Is there an answer? I don't know.

Halfback

If women ever figure a way to make men expendable in the reproductive effort, women could likely live in peace, as long as they get to share recipes, and have the same clothes all other women have.

0 Replies

Quote:

If women ever figure a way to make men expendable

they will refute the idea that woman=humanitarian around the time they commit gendercide on all men.

"but it was for the good of humanity!" they will say of their final solution.

not that women don't seem to have a greater tendancy towards humanity and compassion than men, i'm sure they're more capable of empathy, sympathy, and pacifism than men (as an entire gender) are.

i'm just saying that if there were no men, that the most violent, psychotic, deadly and hateful dictator to ever rise among women might not be better than adolf hitler, that's all. that, and she will probably end up a guest on oprah.

0 Replies

Foofie wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Foofie wrote:
So, what's the opposite of tribalism? Cosmopolitanism?

Utter and complete isolationism

I can't agree. The opposite of tribalism is universalism. One big mass of humanity, and we're all supposed to get along. One worlders, I thought.

Perhaps, if we weren't hardwired to be tribal.

Since we are, a One World scenario is impossible (at least for a long long time to come) and the only remotely plausible "opposite" is one where everyone lives like a hermit.

0 Replies

Re: Nationalism vs. Patriotism

Shapeless wrote:

Is there a meaningful difference between the two? Is it "patriotism" when it happens at home and "nationalism" when it happens abroad?

Here's what the good ol' O.E.D. has to say:

nationalism: Advocacy of or support for the interests of one's own nation, esp. to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations. Also: advocacy of or support for national independence or self-determination.

The O.E.D. also adds this note: Whereas patriotism usually refers to a general sentiment, nationalism now usually refers to a specific ideology, esp. one expressed through political activism. In earlier use, however, the two appear to have been more or less interchangeable.

patriotism: The quality of being patriotic; love of or devotion to one's country.

That's how the distinction looks on paper. How has it worked out in practice?

Don't know.

But I will say I am writing a post called:

'America...a Democratic, Communist Nation Under God.'

I think that will be our future.

And maybe I am using the wrong word with communism?

Maybe it should be Nationalism? Socialism? I don't know since I have little interest in politics.

As far for what I means, it could be compared somewhat to Plato's Republic. Where the republic came first and people came second. But with the US, the injection of Democratic values as well as a spiritual foundation that supports our country would 'hopefully' separate us from the atheist based communists that have been run as dictatorships.

Am I as Christian zealot?

No, I am an agnostic freethinker.

See:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=4.0

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=470.0

But we also need spiritual values to be at peace. (or a semblance of peace.)

See:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=509.0

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=543.0

As for why I have come up with such a bold statement as 'America...a Democratic, Communist Nation Under God?'

Until I can write that post:

See this DVD

1940's House PBS (albeit our enemy is not Germany...it is energy) And witness something along the lines of a 'Democratic, Communist Nation Under God.'

http://www.amazon.com/1940s-House-Marguerite-Patten/dp/B0000AYL47

See this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Out-Gas-End-Age-Oil/dp/0393058573

See my 2 posts

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=105221

(See OP)

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/4d264dd867e7be11/cd41e13d1ef7f1ed?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=should+the+us#cd41e13d1ef7f1ed

Add it all together and you have 'America...a Democratic, Communist Nation Under God.' as the 'best fit ' equation.

And for dessert add 'politics as usual' and we can see nothing substantive will be done in the US to fix our energy woes until it is too late. (Really it can't be fixed, we can only slowed down the inevitable at this point.)

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F

BTW, do I like communism?

No, I like things EXACTLY as they are.

But what I like doesn't matter...neither does what you like matter.

That's the point, for the US to survive, we must put 'what matters to our country' on the front burner.

And as our country survives so do we survive.

Alan Watts used to say, it doesn't matter what you think, it doesn't matter what you like, it doesn't matter what you hope for...all that really matters is what IS.

Sure we keep our treasured paper money, our guns, and what have you. The atheists can still be atheists and the Christians, Muslims and Jews can still worship as they like...that is why we would be a free democracy...of sorts.

But the difference is, instead of the ego based decisions that politicians and the titans of business get sucked into, they will put the long term viability as top priority over personal profit. We must all pull together and stop pulling in counterproductive directions.

The gov needs to cut the fat and stop all this foolish sickness that they are addicted to in Washington. Hire yourself some truth based philosophers as Socrates suggested in the Republic as an oversight committee to keep you guys on track. And if you want someone that 'stinks of truth' get my verdict on the subject. Does that mean I am perfect and live a perfect life? No, but the contemplative life finds it joy in discovering truth and I do the best I can.

One important thing would be to add an addendum to the constitution or bill oof rights or whatever other documents that outlines what we are 'now' all about...something that is clear advice that we can all look to and not the 1000 page BS that politician use to hide their sickness. Yes,...hiding behavior is a signpost of die-ease. And put it right upfront in the addendum as to why things changed...we were energy whores and had no other choice.

But realize this, throughout history many great nations that once were are not around any longer. Hopefully the US will understand this and start accepting the truth that something has to give and it can't be business as usual. it doesn't matter what you like, it doesn't matter what you hope for...all that really matters is what is.

Post script;

I have been accused of spamming 'Jesus Never Existed' website in my posts as a link source.

Not true.

Why do I use them so much?

Very simple.

I've been at over 300 forums in the last 10 years. I have been banned form 90% of those forums. The Christians banned me after 1 or 2 posts, the Buddhists banned me after a few weeks or months, the atheist banned me just like the Christens did and all the other forums banned me within hours of weeks.

JNE forum never bans me or hassles me about what I say, so I use them as my archive link for my posts...it is that simple...nothing roe nothing less...a symbiotic relationship.

Did Jesus exist?

I don't know....you figure it out? As I've said I am an agnostic freethinker. And if you can't fugue it out, that may shed some light on agnostics for you.

And why do I get banned so much from online forums?

For nothing more that writing posts like this that rub sick ego based man the wrong way.

They look not at what is said but at who says what.

And I guess that is why politicians have to lie to us...for the mass of our country cannot accept truth and discuss a subject rationally and without injecting their ego into the equation.

The Greek philosophers knew that when passion rules the mind, that the only job left for reason is that of the subservient task to find cleaver ways to satisfy the passions.

I'll leave you with one last tidbit that underscores this point.

'Throughout history, when were tyrants ever satisfied with just one death?'

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.philosophy/browse_thread/thread/f4006812a06f9ddf

Take care,

V (Male)

Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher

0 Replies

Nationalism vs. Patriotism

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know