We need to drop the colorization of 'Nationalist'.

[cnm]

Colloquially, jingoism is excessive bias in judging one's own country as superior to others – an extreme type of nationalism (cf. chauvinism and ultranationalism).. . . . "

Jingoism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

De rigeuer for MAGAts.

 

[cnm]

Nationalism to me IS Patriotism plus a defiant attitude toward other countries or entities (e.g. The Democratic Party) who are trying to undermine the US.

Right. White nationalism.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Nationalism is a good thing. It means that you strongly identify with your country and you strongly support your country's interests over the interest of other countries. So what is the problem with that? The term should not have a skin color associated with it. America has Nationalists of every race, color and creed. What do you think? Why can't we just say "Nationalist"?

Nationalism isn't that simple.
The problem is that Nationalism is often used to promote one ethnic group over others.

For example, the Ethnic Germans using it to push out the Jews and others.

They said Germany was their, and only theirs. No other ethnic group should be allowed.

To have Nationalism without skin color is kind of like taking the Nationalism out of Nationalism. So what are you left with? Nothingism?

 

[cnm]

Maybe we need to coin a new term AMERICAN NATIONALIST and tell the Democrats to stick their Race Baiting up their arse.

Of course you know a few posters on this site have rather uncompromising views as to who are Americans.

 

[Mac1958]

Seriously? You guys can’t even denounce straight up unapologetic racists because they couch it in faux America symbols? You all need help.

Well, they worship an orange buffoon who claimed he didn't know anything about David Duke, after previously calling him "a liar and a problem".

So, there are no standards.

 

[Mac1958]

As with pretty much everything else in America, our conversations about the term "nationalism" are based on binary thinking.

You're not either "a nationalist" or "not a nationalist". There are degrees of purity in a political philosophy, existing along a continuum.

I don't know why this fact needs to be so freaking elusive.

 

[MarathonMike]

Yet do not give a link to the definition. Another worthless quote.

I posted a definition earlier in the thread, it takes 5 seconds to look it up if you don't know what Nationalist means.

 

[MarathonMike]

Well, they worship an orange buffoon who claimed he didn't know anything about David Duke, after previously calling him "a liar and a problem".

So, there are no standards.

Meaningless attack post.

 

[MarathonMike]

As with pretty much everything else in America, our conversations about the term "nationalism" are based on binary thinking.

You're not either "a nationalist" or "not a nationalist". There are degrees of purity in a political philosophy, existing along a continuum.

I don't know why this fact needs to be so freaking elusive.

Look up Nationalist, there is no ambiguity in the term. And it is clear why Democrats toss around the White Nationalist term since they make everything Racial.

 

[MarathonMike]

Nationalism isn't that simple.
The problem is that Nationalism is often used to promote one ethnic group over others.

For example, the Ethnic Germans using it to push out the Jews and others.

They said Germany was their, and only theirs. No other ethnic group should be allowed.

To have Nationalism without skin color is kind of like taking the Nationalism out of Nationalism. So what are you left with? Nothingism?

That makes no sense. Look up the definition of Nationalism. There is no ethnic component to Nationalism, but like a lot of things it can be corrupted, especially when Democrats are involved.

 

[MarathonMike]

De rigeuer for MAGAts.

It is disgraceful to refer to Americans with different beliefs than you as flesh eating worms. It speaks poorly of you.

 

[surada]

Meaningless attack post.

Trump claims he's a nationalist. Do you understand that he doesn't know what that means? You have elevated a world class dummy to the status of statesman.

 

[MarathonMike]

Well, Hitler used the Democratic Socialist party to gain power. He broke from them in 1926. In 1933 he purged the German government of socialists, Communists, Jews and Democrats.

You're ignorant.

Oh look a Hitler reference, what a surprise.

 

[MarathonMike]

Trump claims he's a nationalist. Do you understand that he doesn't know what that means? You have elevated a world class dummy to the status of statesman.

Trump and I both understand PERFECTLY what "nationalist" means. You are a faithful minion of the Democrats and as such have been brainwashed into thinking that nationalist, white nationalist, white supremacist and MAGA are all the same thing. They are not. Go back and read my thread title. I am specifically addressing how the Democrats have Racialized nationalist the same way they have twisted MAGA.

 

[Flopper]

Trump and I both understand PERFECTLY what "nationalist" means. You are a faithful minion of the Democrats and as such have been brainwashed into thinking that nationalist, white nationalist, white supremacist and MAGA are all the same thing. They are not. Go back and read my thread title. I am specifically addressing how the Democrats have Racialized nationalist the same way they have twisted MAGA.

By definition, nationalism is identification with one's own nation and support for its interest. It is not a racist term. However many people use the term as guise for isolationism, white supremacy, xenophobia, and rejection of all things foreign. Although nationalism and globalism can and does coexist, over time globalism will prevail over nationalism in regard to international relations. The ever increasing flow of goods, services, people, and ideas across national borders makes it inevitable.

 

[MarathonMike]

By definition, nationalism is identification with one's own nation and support for its interest. It is not a racist term. However many people use the term as guise for isolationism, white supremacy, xenophobia, and rejection of all things foreign. Although nationalism and globalism can and dose coexist, over time globalism will prevail over nationalism in regard to international relations. The ever increasing flow of goods, services, people, and ideas makes it inevitable.

Thank you, finally someone who understands what nationalism is and is not. I will disagree with you on the inevitable loss of nationalism to globalism. But certainly that is the end game of Democrats as they do everything they can to smear traditional American values and paint the country and everything that happens with their racist paint brush.

 

[frigidweirdo]

That makes no sense. Look up the definition of Nationalism. There is no ethnic component to Nationalism, but like a lot of things it can be corrupted, especially when Democrats are involved.

Yeah, I looked it up, I made sure I was careful in what I was saying.

Nationalism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Nationalism " further aims to build and maintain a single national identity, based on a combination of shared social characteristics such as culture, ethnicity, geographic location, language, politics (or the government), religion, traditions and belief in a shared singular history,[6][7] and to promote national unity or solidarity."

"There are various definitions of a "nation", which leads to different types of nationalism.[9] The two main divergent forms are ethnic nationalism and civic nationalism."

So, two types of nationalism. Ethnic and civic.
One is about an emotional identity based around people, like the Irish know who is Irish, a black person who was born in Ireland isn't Irish, they just happened to have been born there, that sort of thing.

The other is Civic Nationalism "also known as democratic nationalism and liberal nationalism"
"In theory, a civic nation or state does not aim to promote one culture over another."

Now, those people who are pushing for Nationalism aren't liberal, they're going to be the sort that even if they think they're pushing Civic Nationalism, they'll still try and make it Ethnic Nationalism.
They'll try and make the culture a white one, try and and keep white people one top.

It's like shouting "U-S-A, U-S-A" on the 4th July and flying the Confederate flags all year round. Some people find that these two things are compatible, when the former is more Civic and the latter more Ethnic.

 

[Coyote]

"Nationalism" stands on it's own. It means you love your country. Period. Democrats have usurped Nationalism and colorized it for their political purposes. It's a 2 fer. They create another Racist smear label that they can throw around. But more insidiously, Democrats HATE Nationalism. They want to tear down this country which is why they wrecked the border, why they attack and demonize law enforcement and do everything they can to divide the people.

Encyclopedia Britannia
….nationalism, ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests.

Fascism is an ideology marked by extreme nationalism.

White nationalism wants a white ethno-state that supports, promotes and privileges the White race to the exclusion of others (think Aryan). And now the you rightists are trying to normalize it?

Nationalism is not patriotism.

 

[Rocko]

Bingo!


I’ve always said that I am a nationalist. That means I support ALL self-sustaining cultures to have their own nation.

That means Italy for the Italians, Japan for the Japanese, Islamic nations for Muslims, Israel for Jews, Sub Saharan African nations for black Africans, and European countries for white Europeans.

Basically you would like for everyone to be segregated right?

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

“White nationalism” is not just white Americans who love their country. Not by a long shot.

“Black nationalism” is also not just African Americans who love their country. Both terms have special political significance. Neither whites nor African Americans are … “nations.”

Real “nationalism” is a force that binds people together into a common geographical, economic and usually cultural / linguistic entity — a “nation” capable of having a distinct government. Nations were usually built over long periods of time in bloody battles against other nations or groups who lived in the territory but were excluded from the nation or ultimately dissolved or merged into the conquering group’s nation.

At one time in Europe nationalism was a largely progressive, even revolutionary force, against monarchies, aristocracies and oppressive empires built along ruling elite blood lines. It was a force that opposed feudalism, and it was brought about by capitalist economic development, the printing press and modern linguistic consolidation, sometimes with or even against earlier religious loyalties.

But this “bourgeois nationalism” developed in different areas at different times. In Europe this kind of modern nationalism first consolidated in the West and over the course of a few centuries moved with modern economy into Eastern Europe. In Africa its development was long delayed for many reasons and even today government borders there often are not clearly consolidated along “national” lines.

In Ukraine we see a recent grown powerful Ukrainian nationalism fighting the remnants of a once-predominant “Soviet internationalism” — which was largely a mascarade for now obvious Great Russian nationalism. German and Japanese nationalism in WWII became fascist and violently imperialistic (as in Japan’s invasion and occupation of China). In short — NATIONALISM IS NOT ALWAYS GOOD!

The mostly milder nationalism we designate as “patriotism” has a better reputation, as it can express merely a nation’s collective pride in its roots, in its history and culture, but of course it can also at times simply mask a cruel nationalistic impulse.

In our modern era, new nationalisms can rarely grow and prosper without hitching themselves to powerful major international patrons. Anti-Russian Ukrainian nationalism has been around for a long time, but would be snuffed out without U.S. backing or a fundamental democratic transformation of Russian nationalism, in which case a successful multinational state might have evolved, as exists in places like Switzerland.

The U.S. financial empire is the leading force of world capitalism today. Even once powerful German and Japanese capitalist states with their once vicious late-to-the-party nationalisms (they lacked European-style overseas colonies and neo-colonies) had to finally come to terms with being junior partners of the U.S. financial empire. Chinese nationalism and reactionary Russian nationalism is different. They are trying to break the power of the unipolar capitalist world led by the U.S. — which happens still to be a “bourgeois democratic” state with many individual rights completely unavailable to, for example, the Chinese.

“Internationalism” is mostly not a powerful ideological force among people today, but nevertheless is bound up with powerful economic tendencies that are tying the world together closely in a great world economy.

One big danger today is that a new Cold War (and other disruptive developments) will lead the world into permanent decoupling and real war, hurting economic development so much that even in the U.S. and Europe ever more vicious “nationalist” demagogues emerge and come to power. This could lead the world into a WWI situation where no side, no “nationalism,” was clearly “better” than any other. All the big “developed country” nationalisms in WWI started off as both “patriotic” and popular, the U.S. just being the economically best off and distant from the actual fighting.

Some early intellectual or ideological tendencies resembling nationalism and internationalism (think “Christendom”) existed in the ancient world too, but they were not based on modern economy or modern communication systems, and should be analyzed very differently.