Nationalism. Is there an up side?

[charlou]

I'm wondering if that fundamentalist christian and extreme right wing notion of the "evil" New World Order might in some way influence the opinion of some people who grew up immersed within or tangentally with that culture ..

[Gallstones]

Nationalism =/= diversity.

Yes it does. There are many different nations.

[Gallstones]

In your dreams.

I have it on good authority that it will be my way--no highway either.
Think about that.

Right, so the fifty US states are the same throughout then? Nashville sounds the same as New Orleans?
Chicago blues is just exactly the same as Bluegrass?

I just love that Alaskan Hula, the tradition goes back years.
Yep, fifty identical states, just one big mush.

Oh yeh, mush. That's what the apaches shout at their sled dogs ennit?

Differences within differences and bonds within bonds--membership and non-membership.

Humans will always form memberships and designate out groups.
Competition (for resources) is and always shall be.
Some will be more successful than others--it is natural.
Winners and loser are groups--and that leads to nations.

The American Indians referred to themselves--many still do--as "Nations" not tribes.

It is geography and climate and demand.

[Cormac]

Jesus, this is fucking tiresome.

Any chance we can have a moratorium on the whole Scottish independence issue for a while?

Hello hellooooooo, what's all this shouting?
We'll have no trouble here !!

This is a local thread, for local people. There's nothing for you here !

[Audley Strange]

I'm wondering if that fundamentalist christian and extreme right wing notion of the "evil" New World Order might in some way influence the opinion of some people who grew up immersed within or tangentally with that culture ..

I think there is a long and interesting discussion to be had about that RiverF. Certainly there are those (not just in the Jesus Sect) within the Jehovah cult, but not exclusive to that branch of loons who consider national identity, God Given.

[JimC]

Little by little in relatively recent times, Homo sapiens has altered its own zeitgeist by gradually increasing the scope given to tribal loyalty. Many fits and starts, much angst and violence, much idiotic racism... (listening, Ty?)

For many, it has stuck on the concept of the nation, temporarily halting its application at a species level...

We better hope we've made the jump by the time a predatory alien species casts a measuring eye (or three...) over the earth...

[Thinking Aloud]

We better hope we've made the jump by the time a predatory alien species casts a measuring eye (or three...) over the earth...

It's life, Jim, but not as we know it.

[JimC]

We better hope we've made the jump by the time a predatory alien species casts a measuring eye (or three...) over the earth...

It's life, Jim, but not as we know it.

...and it wants to eat our spleens...

[ronmcd]

Those who want all to be one, are you assuming it will be your idea of the one?
What if it is my version of one? Do you want to live in my version of one?

/thread, question answered.

[ronmcd]

Little by little in relatively recent times, Homo sapiens has altered its own zeitgeist by gradually increasing the scope given to tribal loyalty. Many fits and starts, much angst and violence, much idiotic racism... (listening, Ty?)

For many, it has stuck on the concept of the nation, temporarily halting its application at a species level...

We better hope we've made the jump by the time a predatory alien species casts a measuring eye (or three...) over the earth...

We are back into Star Trek fantasy though, surely. If we as a species can agree on getting rid of money, eradicate poverty, etc, then you may be correct, we can look to abandoning our local tribal loyalties (you assume people should want to, I'm not sure). But while we have an imperfect society, which relies on capitalism and conflicting demands on finite resources, we will have nation states.

And if we still have nation states, the people in those states must be able to choose their form of government and the scope at which they wish to be governed. That is self determination, but it's also legitimate to call it nationalism.

[JimC]

Little by little in relatively recent times, Homo sapiens has altered its own zeitgeist by gradually increasing the scope given to tribal loyalty. Many fits and starts, much angst and violence, much idiotic racism... (listening, Ty?)

For many, it has stuck on the concept of the nation, temporarily halting its application at a species level...

We better hope we've made the jump by the time a predatory alien species casts a measuring eye (or three...) over the earth...

We are back into Star Trek fantasy though, surely. If we as a species can agree on getting rid of money, eradicate poverty, etc, then you may be correct, we can look to abandoning our local tribal loyalties (you assume people should want to, I'm not sure). But while we have an imperfect society, which relies on capitalism and conflicting demands on finite resources, we will have nation states.

And if we still have nation states, the people in those states must be able to choose their form of government and the scope at which they wish to be governed. That is self determination, but it's also legitimate to call it nationalism.

Definitely a long-term view from me...

But one that can allow some local traditions and pride to exist, as well as the equivalent of local council elections for every-day stuff, while leaving the heavy-weight decision making processes to a United Earth Government...

[ronmcd]

Definitely a long-term view from me...

But one that can allow some local traditions and pride to exist, as well as the equivalent of local council elections for every-day stuff, while leaving the heavy-weight decision making processes to a United Earth Government...

A United Earth Government ... I admit I have no rational explanation for why that sounds such a really really bad idea. And I like Star Trek! I just suspect it will be more Blake's 7 than StarFleet.

(joking aside, united government with the eradication of poverty and hunger, I agree. I just think humanity will have been wiped out long before such a thing could happen. That huge asteroid gets more and more overdue ....)

[Jesus_of_Nazareth]

Methinks some folks beleive that Nationalism requires uniforms, goose stepping and following a fella with a funny moustache!

One world order sounds a bit fascist to me.......as well as simply deluded fantasy that ignores the reality of human nature (as the Communists discovered, for all the original good intentions).

Nationalism is simply folks banding together to act for their collective benefit (and that also includes not arguing with the Neighbours - unless they start it!).....and for that you need some common goals and attitudes and good old fashioned geographic location will always be important.......the Jews found out the hard way that spreading a tribe around don't go well!

Within Europe folks can easily move between Nation States - a bit harder but not impossible to do the same between most places in the West (plus of course pretty much anywhere else in the 3rd world)........whether that ever expands to be reciprocal with the whole world remains to be seen (you could fit the population of China into the UK - and half of them would likely come! - and they would be better off, the folks already here would not be, is it "wrong" for the locals to want to avoid giving away what they and their forebears have worked for?).....so plenty of choice for folks to choose a tribe / nation that suits them.

Plus of course the option of trying to change an existing nation.....as Alex Salmond is demonstrating .

[Red Celt]

There are different levels of "World Government". I'm very happy for individual countries to exist, as they can best serve the interests of their own people. But one thing in particular would make a big difference for the betterment of all of us: World Peace.

[mistermack]

What a load of crap, that nations are a necessity and will always be.

The world population is about 7 billion. 1.2 billion live in China. 1 billion in India.
There's no reason, other than historical borders, that nations are necessary or even particularly good.
If China and India combined, that would be a third the world living in one country. So saying that it could never happen is clearly wrong. There's nothing in human nature stopping it. Only the relics of history, and the economic and political differences that history has dumped on the present.

If Hitler had won the war, and got the bomb long before anyone else, you could have had all of Europe and the USSR as one country by now. It was quite close at times. And he probably wouldn't have stopped there.

We all live in countries that are the end result of various wars. Nice.