Why Nationalism?

[Deleted]

Nationalism is perfectly natural and is born from a human need to be part of a group, we are herd animals.

It's only when taken to the extreme that it is harmful, examples are patriotism(America being the prime example), chauvinism(a reason quite a few Europeans, including myself, dislike the French) and protectionism(banned by the UN afaik)

[Tinytwink]

A matter of perspective, I'm sure. To me, it happened like this: The US government finally came to their senses, and deemed slavery immoral. The South, largely economically dependent on slave labour, went: WHUT? NOOO! And started a war.
Anything else is really unimportant at this point, from where I am standing. Bloodlust is easily confused for bravery, and nastiness is easily confused for brilliance. And, of course, vice versa for both.
Me: I'm Dutch, and a libertarian socialist. I wás a nationalist, as in: Proud of the country I come from. But... Not any more. Ever since the government started privatizing public services like mail, health-care and public transport, this country has been in a downward spiral. Right now, fascism and self-serving politics, as well as political corruption have marked this country, for me, to be rotten. It's not the United States yét, but it's getting there.

The dutch healthcare system was the best in Europe in 2008 and in 2009. (http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/file...with-cover.pdf)
The dutch railway system is 2nd most punctuated. Right after Switzerland. (http://www.treinreiziger.nl/kennisne...aal_vergeleken)
Our mail is just fine. The privatization created thousands of new jobs in the new companies. The reason it looks like it's going bad is because mail is a dieing thing from the middle ages.

Your just believing our left wing governement payed media. Privatizing those services was the best thing that happenend.

[TTerminator999]

I have no idea. Being proud of have been born in a specific place makes no sense.

People in my state celebrate every year a war against the government (in XIX century) to defend slavery (?!?!?!) just because "We fought the government! Gauchos have balls!". Not to mention that we lose that war! (thank god...)
- this is not exactly nationalism, they're proud of their state, not their country -

As someone said once: people suck.

I assume you're talking about the civil war?

In which case, you're poorly misinformed.

[Hraklea]

Its about freedom from an unwanted government, bravery in battle, and some of the most brilliant generals that mankind has ever known!

It's about freedom to slave black people and have the right to sell your products for a higher price. Yeah, it makes a lot of sense and it's definitely a good reason to be proud.
And about "brillant generals", I doubt germans celebrate Hitler...

And be aware that I'm brazilian, I'm not talking about the american civil war. Anyway, I will never be proud of a war to support slavery.

I assume you're talking about the civil war?
In which case, you're poorly misinformed.

I never said I'm american. Actually, I already said I'm brazilian in a few threads here, in MMO-Champion.
Gauchos are people born in Rio Grande do Sul, the southern state in Brazil. I'm talking about the War of the Farrapos.

[Deleted]

It's not that it's a bad thing for everyone to be united, it's just not possible, the EU is one of the most corrupt organisations there is, the reason countries are nervous is for purely economical reasons, which I won't pretend that I know anything about, but it's not as simple as 'i prefer to be the odd one out therefore I'm not joining your club'.

If the countries in the EU thought their country would do better from leaving, they'd be gone, it's not whether that opinion is right or wrong, its about who's opinio it is, and how much power they have.

It's your opinion that it is corrupt, it's less corrupt than national governments.

The thing is there's no pros for leaving the Eu that isn't seriously countered by the cons of leaving the EU

[Torian101]

Heres some food for thought: we now have the internet which allows us to exchange cultural information to anyone in the world. This has already led to widely differing cultures becoming mixed with eachother. In a few decades this trend will have continued so far that the difference between cultures will be minimal. If so many people have so many cultural traits in common on so many levels, what would even be the point of nationalism?

Closing your country or group off from the rest of the world has never been a good idea. Just look at North Korea right now. The living standards there are so extremely low, it's almost a miracle the country hasn't become a ghost town.

---------- Post added 2011-02-01 at 03:30 PM ----------

The dutch healthcare system was the best in Europe in 2008 and in 2009. (http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/file...with-cover.pdf)
The dutch railway system is 2nd most punctuated. Right after Switzerland. (http://www.treinreiziger.nl/kennisne...aal_vergeleken)
Our mail is just fine. The privatization created thousands of new jobs in the new companies. The reason it looks like it's going bad is because mail is a dieing thing from the middle ages.

Your just believing our left wing governement payed media. Privatizing those services was the best thing that happenend.

Right wing will always say the left is manipulating the media, while the left wing will always say the same about the right wing. Who's telling the truth?

Anyway, if you wanna look at the negative impact of privatised health care, just look at the US. Sure, more job opportunities are opening up if you privatize it, but privatization inevitably leads to competition, (because a company thrives on making profit, not on making people healthier) which leads to people with pre existing conditions getting their health care declined because the company is too afraid of losing money to people that are guaranteed to need more medical care then healthy people.
Result is that the people who need it the most, don't get health care, which kinda defeats the purpose.

[Cadi]

Heres some food for thought: we now have the internet which allows us to exchange cultural information to anyone in the world. This has already led to widely differing cultures becoming mixed with eachother. In a few decades this trend will have continued so far that the difference between cultures will be minimal. If so many people have so many cultural traits in common on so many levels, what would even be the point of nationalism?

I don't think that would happen so evenly for all cultures. It's like how things get Americanised or Anglicised, the smaller cultures kinda get lost a bit. Not that I think closing off is a good idea, just this lovely merging of cultures you describe isn't going to be so lovely for folks who like the (nice aspects of the) culture of their small country (or whatever). I'd hate it if in a few decades time I couldn't for the life of me find a bakestone

[Deleted]

It's only when taken to the extreme that it is harmful, examples are patriotism(America being the prime example),)

Patriotism in-of-itself is not an extreme, or harmful.

[Twoflower]

Lack of education or sheer stupidity. Can't think of other reasons for nationalism.

[Deleted]

It's your opinion that it is corrupt, it's less corrupt than national governments.

The thing is there's no pros for leaving the Eu that isn't seriously countered by the cons of leaving the EU

Both of those statements work the other way around, which is exactly my point, I'd very much like to see the whole world united, but currently, with current leaders of countries, it wouldn't even slightly work. As with all political issues there's strong and valid opinions on both sides, there will never be a point where everyone decides 'you know what, I agree with the beliefs of every other person on the planet'. That's not how humans work.

[koodledrum]

I don't believe a mass society in terms of one massive country would work, there have been attempts in the past to do it (namely, and with no disrespect intended here, USSR & other communist states) and ultimately it broke down. Nationalism & nationalist pride are things which in sensible ways are to be celebrated, there's no harm in it so long as you are mindfull that ALL countries have histories which are littered with things to be proud of - but also things which are not to be celebrated!

Myself i'm a proud Scot, that's no slight against being a Brit, but i consider myself to be Scottish primarily - and by definition that makes me British. I have no problem with being British, i openly support the Union but when it comes to it i chose to support my Scottish roots as i'm proud of the country, our position in the world & our history.

[Deleted]

The dutch healthcare system was the best in Europe in 2008 and in 2009. (http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/file...with-cover.pdf)
The dutch railway system is 2nd most punctuated. Right after Switzerland. (http://www.treinreiziger.nl/kennisne...aal_vergeleken)

I would definitely disagree; the numbers don't exactly say anything with regards to human well-being. Health care is now much more dependent on personal financial backing, something a lot of chronically indisposed people lack. Health care as well as public transportation, but especially health care, now weigh much heavier on the financial situations of the ones who need it most.
Privatized mail has actually cóst lots of jobs. People who used to have a full job in the mail service get replaced by part-timers who are less expensive. Of course; mail is dying out due to technological advance, which does cost jobs. But I'm not really talking about that.
Public transportation: Yes; it runs a much tighter schedule, now. It's also become much more expensive (not talking about inflation), and winter 'hazards' now have much more influence on our train schedules than they had before, due to allowances.

I'll grant that, overall, in numbers, things are 'better,' now. However, on a personal level, things have gotten much, much worse for those who couldn't afford much to begin with. You might say I have been influenced by left-wing 'media,' but I could argue the same point about right wing media to you, and we wouldn't get much further. A matter of perspective, again.

Patriotism in-of-itself is not an extreme, or harmful.

Correct. But the one you were responding to did put the word in the context of what might me considered extreme nationalism/nationalist arrogance.

On the other hand, one might wonder what patriotism is, and what function it holds. After all; borders are something we invented. The earth is round, and who's to say who can live where? The whole idea of being able to own land is, in itself, rediculous when you come to think of it. Owning a piece of universe, or even the planet we all inhabit by birth rather than right... It makes no sense whatsoever.
In that light, why would one be proud of a slab of land which a people who calls themselves something be something to be proud of? This would make just about as little sense.
We could, and I think we should, be proud of our species, and our achievements as a species, yes. We should be proud of the vast amounts of cultures, and the beauty they hold. But we should also be weary of ostracising others who do not belong to our own niche, and that is often one effect of patriotism.

[Tinytwink]

Anyway, if you wanna look at the negative impact of privatised health care, just look at the US. Sure, more job opportunities are opening up if you privatize it, but privatization inevitably leads to competition, (because a company thrives on making profit, not on making people healthier) which leads to people with pre existing conditions getting their health care declined because the company is too afraid of losing money to people that are guaranteed to need more medical care then healthy people.
Result is that the people who need it the most, don't get health care, which kinda defeats the purpose.

Regulated free market is what we have. Not absolute free market.

[moff]

nothing has killed more people than nationalism.
well, religion maybe.
both are just invented tools of the powerful to make people do what they want, bad and cruel things mostly.

I'm not a nationalist and i dont see anything good that could come from it

[Hraklea]

...which leads to people with pre existing conditions getting their health care declined because the company is too afraid of losing money to people that are guaranteed to need more medical care then healthy people.
Result is that the people who need it the most, don't get health care, which kinda defeats the purpose.

So... competition makes companies worst than monopoly? You lost me.

[Deleted]

It's not that it's a bad thing for everyone to be united, it's just not possible, the EU is one of the most corrupt organisations there is, the reason countries are nervous is for purely economical reasons, which I won't pretend that I know anything about, but it's not as simple as 'i prefer to be the odd one out therefore I'm not joining your club'.

I'm not so sure any governing body in charge of a country or group thereof can claim absolute purity.

If the countries in the EU thought their country would do better from leaving, they'd be gone, it's not whether that opinion is right or wrong, its about who's opinio it is, and how much power they have.

I have no idea of figures, majority or minority, but I believe there is a sizeable potion of the UK public would like your assistance in leaving this corrupt EU you speak of.

[Torian101]

So... competition makes companies worst than monopoly? You lost me.

Monopoly is different then a government regulated service. If a service is monopolized, that means its being controlled by a commercial organisation that has only one goal: to make profit. This leads to the organisation raising prices of its product to whatever heights it wants, because its product does not need to compete with any other product. The prices can then become unreasonably high. Look at Microsoft making it very hard for other internet browsers to be run on windows in an attempt to make Internet Explorer the only product of that kind on the market.

A government regulated service however, is not driven by profit. It is (to put it very simply) driven to make its product a success. In the case of health care, this means ensuring that as many people as possible get a good health care plan.

Competition is ofcourse preferrable to a monopoly, but government regulated services are not the same as a monopoly.

[Thorold]

private healthcare: Wants to make as much money as possible, people with possibly chronic illnesses are more likely to come back, which means more money because of that, then you get offered expensive medicine to relieve you of the pains associated with your illness, so they don't cure you, just help you get through it, while draining your money.

Public healthcare: Wants to make money off you by you being fit to work, so they want to try and cure you as fast as possible to limit costs. When your sick, you can't really make money ( state taxes ) and spend money ( funneling money through society ) when you aren't able to spend money, the money you have will just sit in the bank, draining the state of money.

that's why state controlled monopoly is usually better than privatized, atleast when it comes to health...

[Fuzzzie]

There have been a few "What does the world think of country X" threads on the offtopic forum lately. From reading them, and other threads about international politics, I've noticed that some people seem dissapointed that their country isn't nationalist enough.

I'm personally happy to see those threads closed and I hope we don't have any more open again. I closed one yesterday and said no more along those lines, but people kept posting them anyways.

[Catta]

Patriotism is thinking your country is great because you were born in it