Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Sinn Fein

Nationalism - a discussion

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

disagree

 

You don't think immigrants to the United States have assimilated well?  You don't think history has proven that immigrants can become assets to the country, love their country of origin and love America? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

see, that's love of family - love of family and putting them before everyone else. Same with your country - you're suppose to love it, cherish it, support it above all others. Why? Because its YOUR country, not someone elses but yours and your families.

It's not a wife or child, you aren't supposed to love, cherish or support the United States above all others unless you want to. It's more like a job- an obligation. I am obligated to stay informed, vote, be on a jury, pay taxes, mostly follow the rules, fight if I had been asked to, but I would prefer to never have to give the country a second thought. The country wasn't built to be worshipped or loved, but to allow individuals to live their lives as freely as possible. 

 

1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

again - do you sit around and worry about the other 7 billion people on this planet and the other 194 countries on this planet ? do you donate your money to all those in need? do you plan to donate your time and go help them? fight with them for injustices?

 

I would never expect anyone nit a citizen of the United States to put the United States above their home country. EVER. Would you ?

again - do you sit around and worry about the other 330 million people and the 19,000 cities in the country ? do you donate your money to all Americans in need? do you plan to donate your time and go help them? fight with them for injustices? 

when was the last time you donated to poor people in Telfair County, Georgia or Sierra County, New Mexico? when did you last think about the people in need in St.  Croix Virgin Islands? 

 

Would you put the United States over whatever State you live in? America isn't a unitary entity. Can we really trust any American to put America above their State? Should we? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sinn Fein said:

Help me understand the difference?  On one hand you cite that activity as love of country, but now its compassion.  I happen to agree that its compassion that drives people to act - help me see how its "nationalism" that drives people to act.

I'm not sure it drives people to act - but if you think any country helps other countries more than than their own I think you're mistaken.

World Wars might be the exception, where American's died for other nations. 

It was just examples I listed - they are long, they are many but nationalism is essential to a country IMO. To have bonds to your city, state and country is exceptionally important in many facets. I care what happens in this country because its my country - my fellow citizens, my nation. 

I didn't know so many people had no sense of being a US citizen I guess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ilov80s said:

You don't think immigrants to the United States have assimilated well?  You don't think history has proven that immigrants can become assets to the country, love their country of origin and love America? 

I think first generation immigrants still long for home, even though they've pledge US citizenship don't you ? I could move to Belize, I loved it there. I could learn to love the people, the area, even the country. I'd always long for my Ozark mtns though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

I think first generation immigrants still long for home, even though they've pledge US citizenship don't you ? I could move to Belize, I loved it there. I could learn to love the people, the area, even the country. I'd always long for my Ozark mtns though. 

Sure in some ways-most people "long for home" at certain points in life. The Iowa kid that went to Hollywood and made it in the movies still likely has some longing for what life was like in small town Iowa with mom and dad. That doesn't diminish Hollywood or California or mean they don't also love their new life. You've yet to explain why having an Italian immigrant living in America, working in America, raising their kids here, respecting the US but having a deep love and pride for Italy is bad for America. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ilov80s said:

You've yet to explain why having an Italian immigrant living in America, working in America, raising their kids here, respecting the US but having a deep love and pride for Italy is bad for America. 

did I ever say it was bad ? 

it would be conflicting no doubt, and 100% understandable too. I've done a lot of traveling and moving/living in different states, I kinda get it

I have a strong sense of southern pride, of my State and in the area I grew up. I love the western states, but I feel at home in my Ozarks. When I came back from Venezuela, it was emotional to be home in the States again, i can't imagine how it would be for soldiers etc. THAT is patriotism, nationalism, love of country, that feeling.

if in your example the US went to war with Italy .... where would your immigrant stand? With his born country and countrymen or the country he moved to and swore allegiance? I don't know, it would be a conflict for sure, with many variables etc. 

But in the ends, a country has to be proud, strong and dedicated to its self. A country split isn't a country and having a love of country is exceptionally important.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Stealthycat said:

But in the ends, a country has to be proud, strong and dedicated to its self.

Why is that so important?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

did I ever say it was bad ? 

it would be conflicting no doubt, and 100% understandable too. I've done a lot of traveling and moving/living in different states, I kinda get it

I have a strong sense of southern pride, of my State and in the area I grew up. I love the western states, but I feel at home in my Ozarks. When I came back from Venezuela, it was emotional to be home in the States again, i can't imagine how it would be for soldiers etc. THAT is patriotism, nationalism, love of country, that feeling.

if in your example the US went to war with Italy .... where would your immigrant stand? With his born country and countrymen or the country he moved to and swore allegiance? I don't know, it would be a conflict for sure, with many variables etc. 

But in the ends, a country has to be proud, strong and dedicated to its self. A country split isn't a country and having a love of country is exceptionally important.

 

 

 

I inferred you think it's bad since it's your line of reasoning why you are anti immigration. You just said a country has to be strong, dedicated to itself and have love for itself so I'm assuming you mean immigrants somehow interfere with this.

 

Even in the extreme cases of war, was America lessened during the World Wars because of all the immigrants we had from both sides of the conflict? Did Iraqi immigrants hamper our war efforts with Iraq either time? 

I am trying to understand your argument but I am struggling with it. You seem to give lots of reasons you don't like immigration but then you said it's not bad either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two kids are starving.....One is yours, the other is some kid you don't know......You have limited food....Who are you going to make sure gets fed first....That's my definition of Nationalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ditka Butkus said:

Two kids are starving.....One is yours, the other is some kid you don't know......You have limited food....Who are you going to make sure gets fed first....That's my definition of Nationalism.

That seems to be a better definition of neighborhoodism.  Even the smallest nations are big enough that I don't know everybody.  Hell, I work in an office with 250 people and maybe know 1/3 of them.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:

That seems to be a better definition of neighborhoodism.  Even the smallest nations are big enough that I don't know everybody.  Hell, I work in an office with 250 people and maybe know 1/3 of them.  

One kid is the citizens of The United States ...the other is any other country...The parent is our government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ditka Butkus said:

Two kids are starving.....One is yours, the other is some kid you don't know......You have limited food....Who are you going to make sure gets fed first....That's my definition of Nationalism.

I am going to give them each a chance at survival - probably at my own expense - depending on their ages.

If you turn this into a dystopian situation, where survival instincts take over, I think you have long gone past the idea of national borders play any role in decision-making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ditka Butkus said:

One kid is the citizens of The United States ...the other is any other country...The parent is our government.

Not only am I going to feed the kid, I am going to invite his family over too.  And, together, we will figure out how to find/create more food.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Not only am I going to feed the kid, I am going to invite his family over too.  And, together, we will figure out how to find/create more food.

And that my friend is why you are going to go broke and not be able to afford the bigger house you are going to need for the extra people you are caring for.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Ditka Butkus said:

One kid is the citizens of The United States ...the other is any other country...The parent is our government.

Yes. I understand metaphors.

You have identified a difference between two equally deserving children.  I just don't think the difference is rational.  We are hard-wired by evolution to tribalism.  We are suspicious of "others."  And that must have presented some type of advantage in the evolutionary environment.  But that doesn't make nationalism rational.  Because nations are big, artificial constructs.  I might share far more affinity with a Canadian than I do with someone from New Mexico.  I know neither.  They are both "other" to me.  

This is not to say that we never, as a matter of practicality and limited resources, treat citizens differently than non-citizens.  But it means, to me, that we should be suspicious of decisions to treat that difference as dispositive.  And we should really evaluate whether doing so makes our citizens safer and more prosperous.  Because in the long run, I believe it often doesn't.  

Which is the problem with your metaphor.  It assumes that we know so little about who we're choosing between that it bears no relevance to the actual decisions we have to make.  Maybe one kid will end up creating an innovation that allows us to feed 10 million more kids.  Maybe we can feed more kids 1800 calories instead of feeding fewer kids 2000 calories.  Maybe we even take kids we know, who are getting 4000 calories and restrict them to 3600 calories max because then more kids (even kids we don't know) will at least get subsistence level calories.  We might do this because we know those kids we don't know may now view as "other" too.  And maybe we think that in the long run, we're safer if they conclude that we're more alike than different.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

His logic fails for the same reason the logic on the other side fails, you can not blame every thing bad which happens on democracy and you can not credit the goodness to nationalism and vice versa.   It is silly to point to Hitler and solely blame democracy for electing him while ignoring the racial superiority and nationalism which he used to raise to power.   But I also think it is silly to solely blame nationalism when it was a socialistic democracy which gave him power.   Just because evil men will use things for evil purposes, does not make what they use evil.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dedfin said:

When did Hitler get elected?

I did not say that he did.  But the Nazi party though did win about 43 percent of the vote, making them the largest and most powerful party which eventually garnered enough power and popularity to over take the government.  Hitler lost the election, but the Nazi won the most power.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

That's pretty awful but I think it unlikely that Crazy Pat represents the views of more than a handful of Americans. You can't legislate the return of Christian privilege, for example, with barely 15% of Americans even attending church these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, roadkill1292 said:

That's pretty awful but I think it unlikely that Crazy Pat represents the views of more than a handful of Americans. You can't legislate the return of Christian privilege, for example, with barely 15% of Americans even attending church these days.

I think there’s a distinction between those who view themselves as Christian and those who want a sort of theocracy. The former are very much driving things even though the man they are following and the program he offers are not doctrinally Christian. I think it’s the identifiers who get wrapped into nationalism. The Christian doctrine in government can only happen if enough power is gotten, then that substantial minority can do quite a lot in any system. That is actually the history of radical movements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jon_mx said:

His logic fails for the same reason the logic on the other side fails, you can not blame every thing bad which happens on democracy and you can not credit the goodness to nationalism and vice versa.   It is silly to point to Hitler and solely blame democracy for electing him while ignoring the racial superiority and nationalism which he used to raise to power.   But I also think it is silly to solely blame nationalism when it was a socialistic democracy which gave him power.   Just because evil men will use things for evil purposes, does not make what they use evil.  

I was with you until your last two sentences. I believe nationalism is evil. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>>A fortnight ago, Viktor Orban and his Fidesz Party won enough seats in the Hungarian parliament to rewrite his country’s constitution.

To progressives across the West, this was disturbing news.<<

It’s not about Hitler. I see Jon’s point and it is *the classic example of how democracies go bad, but right now there are real nationalist movements which have  taken power - and radically changed Constitutions - in Turkey and now Hungary.

Poland has fought this off somewhat, but not entirely, and movements have been brewing in Czech Rep. & Austria. This is happening right now. In Hungary the government just closed the last private newspaper.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I was with you until your last two sentences. I believe nationalism is evil. 

That’s now how I took Jon’s point, ie as defending nationalism. I took it to mean that people drive events, not ideas. But I don’t know, having tried to say that it’s tough to thread that needle.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

>>A fortnight ago, Viktor Orban and his Fidesz Party won enough seats in the Hungarian parliament to rewrite his country’s constitution.

To progressives across the West, this was disturbing news.<<

Its not about Hitler. I see Jon’s point and it is *the classic example of how democracies go bad, but right now there are real nationalist movements which have  taken power - and radically changed Constitutions - in Turkey and now Hungary.

Poland has fought this off somewhat, but not entirely, and movements have been brewing in Czech Rep. & Austria. This is happening right now. In Hungary the government just closed the last private newspaper.

Europe, left to its own devices, has always been nationalist. Especially it’s most central and eastern parts. And they’ve always been ####ed. 

That’s why the majority of people living in the USA are descended from those who fled Europe. Because we don’t want nationalism. That’s why we’re the “new world”. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Europe, left to its own devices, has always been nationalist. Especially it’s most central and eastern parts. And they’ve always been ####ed. 

That’s why the majority of people living in the USA are descended from those who fled Europe. Because we don’t want nationalism. That’s why we’re the “new world”. 

Yes, and the end of the Cold War has presented challenges because the old East/West rubric kept a lid on all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

That’s not how I took Jon’s point, ie as defending nationalism. I took it to mean that people drive events, not ideas. But I don’t know, having tried to say that it’s tough to thread that needle.

I think I understood him. He said ideas aren’t evil. But some ideas certainly are: fascism, communism, nationalism. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dedfin said:

When did Hitler get elected?

To be clear Buchanan says Hitler ‘rose to power through a democratic election’, not that he was elected. It was the Enabling Act that vaulted him into the role of dictator, but the Reichstag did that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

I think I understood him. He said ideas aren’t evil. But some ideas certainly are: fascism, communism, nationalism. 

I personally agree with that. Ideology matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pat wants us to surrender to our own worst instincts of tribalism based on race. That's not making things better and it's probably an ideal that separates progressives from the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Yes, and the end of the Cold War has presented challenges because the old East/West rubric kept a lid on all that.

Right. I think some of our leaders thought that the fall of the Iron Curtain would bring about western style democracies in Eastern Europe, and they certainly tried. But in my estimation, rather than little Swedens (stable democracies), what they ended up with is new versions of the Weimar Republic (unstable democracies with both nationalism and class struggle brewing underneath the surface, ready to erupt at any time.) Which is exactly what they were about BEFORE the Iron Curtain. Why should we have expected any different? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2018 at 11:26 AM, Stealthycat said:

also, nationalism is a sense of national pride as well, citizenship ........ and all the millions of illegals here destroys that. 

If this is true, it says more about the person allowing "millions of illegals" to taint their sense of national pride way more than it does about the "millions of illegals".  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Right. I think some of our leaders thought that the fall of the Iron Curtain would bring about western style democracies in Eastern Europe, and they certainly tried. But in my estimation, rather than little Swedens (stable democracies), what they ended up with is new versions of the Weimar Republic (unstable democracies with both nationalism and class struggle brewing underneath the surface, ready to erupt at any time.) Which is exactly what they were about BEFORE the Iron Curtain. Why should we have expected any different? 

The presence of institutions - the EU, IMF, NATO, OSCE, etc. - And also the experience of having lived under fascism/communism for decades. The people are not as pliant or naive as they were in pre war Europe. Just as an example look at what’s going on in Budapest.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Commish said:

If this is true, it says more about the person allowing "millions of illegals" to taint their sense of national pride way more than it does about the "millions of illegals".  

Many of the same people argued that gay marriage would destroy straight marriage, remember? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2018 at 7:42 AM, Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
On 1/10/2018 at 7:37 AM, Ditka Butkus said:

Two kids are starving.....One is yours, the other is some kid you don't know......You have limited food....Who are you going to make sure gets fed first....That's my definition of Nationalism.

That seems to be a better definition of neighborhoodism.  Even the smallest nations are big enough that I don't know everybody.  Hell, I work in an office with 250 people and maybe know 1/3 of them.  

I think the phenomenon Ditka Butkus describes makes sense, though I wouldn't call it nationalism. There are practical reasons why we should spend more per person on domestic poverty-relief programs than on foreign aid. I don't want to spend any time arguing for that point; I just want to acknowledge that I agree with it.

What nationalism seems to be in practice, though, is opposition to international trade, opposition to immigration (both legal and illegal), and scapegoating people of foreign origin for problems not of their making.

Instead of "I want to help Americans more than I want to help Mexicans," in practice (though perhaps not in intention), nationalism seems to be more "I want to harm foreigners even if I have to harm Americans at the same time."

It incorrectly tends to view things like trade and immigration as zero-sum instead of positive-sum transactions.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should include 3 subjects :Patriotism, Nationalism,and Trumpism. It is hard to separate our current form of Nationalism from Trumpism where it plagued with accepting an inept President who thinks he can control all aspects of governing with little insight and guidance from Cabinet Secretaries and simple aggressive plans and tactics. This Trumpism demands loyalty and constant praise willingness to destroy institutions such as the DOJ and FBI with fake conspiracy theories.Trump has conned his base into believing it's about Nationalism when for this narcissistic President it is about Trumpism.

Edited by lazyike
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lazyike said:

We should include 3 subjects :Patriotism, Nationalism,and Trumpism. It is hard to separate our current form of Nationalism from Trumpism where it plagued with accepting an inept President who thinks he can control all aspects of governing with little insight and guidance from Cabinet Secretaries and simple aggressive plans and tactics. This Trumpism demands loyalty and constant praise willingness to destroy institutions such as the DOJ and FBI with fake conspiracy theories.

Patriotism is acting out American ideals. A recent example of American patriotism was Colin Kaepernick kneeling during the anthem. By doing so he not only invoked the 1st Amendment, he expressed his public dissent against the policies of our government, specifically their failure to do anything about the systemic mistreatment of minorities by law enfocrement. This is the sort of peaceful, public protest that our founding fathers envisioned, and Kaepernick behaved in the most patriotic way imaginable, IMO. Dead serious about this. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

I think I understood him. He said ideas aren’t evil. But some ideas certainly are: fascism, communism, nationalism. 

 

Out of those, only fascism is pure evil.  Communism in theory could work, except it goes against human nature and inevitably turns into a failing tyrannical state.  Nationalism while demonized heavily by the left gets way too much blame for causing WWII and not enough credit for ending it.   Nationalism like religion can be used for good or evil depending on the cause (and what the values of the country or religion stands for).   I would argue that America rising up and helping defeat the Nazis was as much driven by nationalism as anything.  Was nationalism evil in that case? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Communism in theory could work, except it goes against human nature and inevitably turns into a failing tyrannical state. 

Sorry how is this not evil? In theory it takes all private property, establishes a dictatorship and eliminates all individual rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Patriotism is acting out American ideals. A recent example of American patriotism was Colin Kaepernick kneeling during the anthem. By doing so he not only invoked the 1st Amendment, he expressed his public dissent against the policies of our government, specifically their failure to do anything about the systemic mistreatment of minorities by law enfocrement. This is the sort of peaceful, public protest that our founding fathers envisioned, and Kaepernick behaved in the most patriotic way imaginable, IMO. Dead serious about this. 

By that same logic, a traitor would be a Patriot for involking his fifth amendment rights.  

Edited by jon_mx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Nationalism while demonized heavily by the left gets way too much blame for causing WWII and not enough credit for ending it.   Nationalism like religion can be used for good or evil depending on the cause (and what the values of the country or religion stands for).   I would argue that America rising up and helping defeat the Nazis was as much driven by nationalism as anything.  Was nationalism evil in that case? 

I think you’re confusing nationalism and patriotism here. They’re not the same thing, though nationalism does lean on patriotism obviously. This is maybe an interesting claim if applied to WW1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Sorry how is this not evil? In theory it takes all private property, establishes a dictatorship and eliminates all individual rights.

It works for bees.  People on the other hand are more selfish and are driven by self interest more than community.  So the rights you mention are valued more.   I would not classify bees setup as evil.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nationalist strain the US pre WW2 and during and just after was about the US staying *out of the war. In fact that was Buchanan’s original foray into nationalist thought when he suggested that would have been the right course years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jon_mx said:

It works for bees.  People on the other hand are more selfish and are driven by self interest more than community.  So the rights you mention are valued more.   I would not classify bees setup as evil.  

No, but we’re talking politics here, not botany.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jon_mx said:

Out of those, only fascism is pure evil.  Communism in theory could work, except it goes against human nature and inevitably turns into a failing tyrannical state.  Nationalism while demonized heavily by the left gets way too much blame for causing WWII and not enough credit for ending it.   Nationalism like religion can be used for good or evil depending on the cause (and what the values of the country or religion stands for).   I would argue that America rising up and helping defeat the Nazis was as much driven by nationalism as anything.  Was nationalism evil in that case? 

I suppose you could argue that nationalism helped us defeat the Nazis. Of course you would be wrong, not a little wrong but 100% wrong. But you could argue it. 

We chose to fight Nazism well before the Third Reich declared war on us, in December of 1941, because we opposed their nationalism and favored a new globalism, which is precisely the reason we created the United Nations even before the end of the war. The UN was our creation, devised in the spirit of our Founding Fathers, and it would not have been established without us. We fought and won World War II on behalf of internationalism, and our soldiers fought and died out of a patriotic love of America- patriotism being very different from nationalism, as I pointed out before. 

As to your other argument, well, no. Communism is evil both in theory and in practice. And it doesn’t go against human nature; human nature, as history has shown, accepts evil over and over again. Free countries like ours are the ones that go against human nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SaintsInDome2006 said:

No, but we’re talking politics here, not botany.

And doing otherwise would mean defining and treating humans as mere insects. I would call that evil, yeah, if applied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

By that same logic, a traitor would be a Patriot for involking his fifth amendment rights.  

Not for the act of treachery itself. But the invocation of the Fifth can absolutely be an act of patriotism, under certain circumstances. It was for Dalton Trumbo and the Hollywood Ten. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

And doing otherwise would mean defining and treating humans as mere insects. I would call that evil, yeah, if applied.

Jon seems to be invoking his inner BF Skinner in this thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Not for the act of treachery itself. But the invocation of the Fifth can absolutely be an act of patriotism, under certain circumstances. It was for Dalton Trumbo and the Hollywood Ten. 

But you have to concede the point about the importance of patriotism existentially to a country. A tincture of nationalism is necessary for any country to survive, replete with flag waving & all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

But you have to concede the point about the importance of patriotism existentially to a country. A tincture of nationalism is necessary for any country to survive, replete with flag waving & all that.

Again I separate that from nationalism. No doubt it’s a subtle difference, and both have many of the same features (such as flag waving in certain instances) yet the differences are still there. I offered Kaepernick and Dalton Trumbo as examples of patriotism, but they could never be offered as examples of nationalism- that is the difference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.