Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nationalism has been the norm for the entire world throughout most of the past few thousand years. So I'm not sure why only white people who are pro nationalism in 2017 are racist and the billions of other pro nationalism people throughout history aren't. Perhaps pro globalism people are using using their go to argument again?
While I don't cite this source to back up every assertion I made in PART 1 I do provide it as a source of information on the discussion of what constitutes a "nation."
You can then contrast nationalism to patriotism. Traditionally, nationalism has been viewed as a vice in Catholicism and patriotism a virtue. Not exactly sure why. Perhaps it is rooted in traditional Catholicism seeing its self as a nation and that Christ wanted everyone on earth converted and baptized into that nation. Therefore, multitudes of states would exist but only one nation on earth. Maybe that is the reason, but that is only speculation on my part.
The Catholic Church today is not a nation. It is too internally divided with no commonly shared values. You could be an athiest or Satanist and be a Catholic today.
First published Thu Nov 29, 2001; substantive revision Mon Dec 15, 2014
The term “nationalism” is generally used to describe two phenomena: (1) the attitude that the members of a nation have when they care about their national identity, and (2) the actions that the members of a nation take when seeking to achieve (or sustain) self-determination. (1) raises questions about the concept of a nation (or national identity), which is often defined in terms of common origin, ethnicity, or cultural ties, and specifically about whether an individual's membership in a nation should be regarded as non-voluntary or voluntary.
First published Mon Jun 1, 2009; substantive revision Wed May 8, 2013
Patriotism raises questions of the sort philosophers characteristically discuss: How is patriotism to be defined? How is it related to similar attitudes, such as nationalism? What is its moral standing: is it morally valuable or perhaps even mandatory, or is it rather a stance we should avoid? Yet until a few decades ago, philosophers used to show next to no interest in the subject. The article on patriotism in the Historical Dictionary of Philosophy, reviewing the use of the term from the 16th century to our own times, gives numerous references, but they are mostly to authors who were not philosophers. Moreover, of the few well known philosophers cited, only one, J. G. Fichte, gave the subject more than a passing reference – and most of what Fichte had to say actually pertains to nationalism, rather than patriotism (see Busch and Dierse 1989).
Last edited by Ibginnie; 02-09-2017 at 02:49 PM..
Reason: copyright violation
The key is to link the words "white" and "nationalist" together. "Nationalist" by itself isn't necesarilly the issue. It's the message that is sent by people that are calling for a "whiter" country, or a return to the way things "used to be" (i.e. when minorities had less rights or were less empowered in society). Or often, people don't directly call out for these things, but are implicitly implying that's what they want. This isn't everyone by any means - but it is definitely there, lurking beneath the surface.
And yes, a black person calling for their "own" country is an equally racist message.
I think the slippery slope with nationalism comes when people make it about the culture or people that make America great. What makes us great is that we're melting pot of people from all over the world. Don't feel ashamed to be proud to be an American - our values are strong and unique. It is OK to want to protect the country and those values. However, we should remember who we are as a people (mostly a nation of immigrants, built by immigrants, and built for immigrants).
Like why if someone is white the word nationalist is synonymous with racist or supramcist? I've looked up the term nationalist. I'm definitely a nationalist and don't see how a black person couldnt or would have the same beliefs? I also don't see why some equate the name to racist?
I think it has to do with history, you have to remember that blacks were considered 2nd class citizens up until the mid 1960s as far as the law goes. After 1965, they were now protected by the law, but a law doesn't change generations of thoughts so racism continued in many forms. Blacks and other minority movements fight for equality today, considering white people have all the power and are the majority it makes little sense for them to have their own movement. Perhaps in 50 years when they become the minority it would make sense for them to have a movement if they see they are being treated unfairly. Though I imagine in 50 years race will not be as important, discrimination will come in other forms (though that discussion is better left for the science thread).
Like why if someone is white the word nationalist is synonymous with racist or supramcist? I've looked up the term nationalist. I'm definitely a nationalist and don't see how a black person couldnt or would have the same beliefs? I also don't see why some equate the name to racist?
I think you're confused; they are not synonymous. Not all nationalists are racists, nor are all racists nationalistic.
It's just that Trump happens to be both.
I think you're confused; they are not synonymous. Not all nationalists are racists, nor are all racists nationalistic.
It's just that Trump happens to be both.
Oh well what's confusing to me is when someone says white nationalist or black nationalist it is the same term as someone who is really a nationalist. And happens to be black or white.
I never considered President Donald Trump racist. Bigoted against Muslims but that's not a race. As a black person ive never been offended by him. Was much more offending by Hillary Clinton calling black men dogs during the general election.
This. Obama was never a real American either....neither are muslim American doctors. Remember, you're only American if you're white.
I never considered Barack Obama either lol. Just because he's brown doesn't mean he has the same history as black Americans. He had a Kenyan father and lived abroad in his early life. There's a good reason to wonder if hes american. But there's obvious evidence that hes an american citizen.
And Muslims are different depending on case by case situation. And I think the whole muslim doctor not being american has to do with that muslim. Like Shaquille O'Neal would fit that description. He is obviously American. But someone who has dual citizenship doesn't really have allegiance just to this country most obviously.
Like why if someone is white the word nationalist is synonymous with racist or supramcist? I've looked up the term nationalist. I'm definitely a nationalist and don't see how a black person couldnt or would have the same beliefs? I also don't see why some equate the name to racist?
I've wondered the same thing. I am white and love the gold ol USA. I stand for the national anthem and the pledge of allegiance. I have visited, and lived in other countrys and, though I love the places I've been, I am still proud to be a pure American citizen with a US passport. But on this board and other places all that makes me a racist. Can't figure it out.
But Mexicans can come here, fly their flag, chant viva Mehico, make the Us flag be removed in schools, communities and buildings, not try to assimilate in any way and continue to proud Mexicans but they are just poor Mexicans looking for a better life and miss the country they are from.
Us Americans go to another country and have an American flag on display or when asked where we're from and we state the USA or America, we are suddenly known as ugly Americans.
And we're the racist ones.
Many of these people throwing the term racist around at anything a white American says and does needs to get a passport and visit some assorted other country's. They will then see true racists. And pure nationalism which is OK. But it'll be allright because it is not in the US, where nationalism isn't allowed any more!
I think it has to do with history, you have to remember that blacks were considered 2nd class citizens up until the mid 1960s as far as the law goes. After 1965, they were now protected by the law, but a law doesn't change generations of thoughts so racism continued in many forms. Blacks and other minority movements fight for equality today, considering white people have all the power and are the majority it makes little sense for them to have their own movement. Perhaps in 50 years when they become the minority it would make sense for them to have a movement if they see they are being treated unfairly. Though I imagine in 50 years race will not be as important, discrimination will come in other forms (though that discussion is better left for the science thread).
I'm confused what this has to do with nationalism? Nationalism benefits all Americans.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
