Jun 2020
1:34pm, 12 Jun 2020
8,691 posts
|
simbil
Read an American article once that differentiated between patriotism and nationalism. Patriotism being a celebration of good things a country does whilst nationalism is blind faith that everything your country does is unquestionably right. Patriotism allows us to tear down statues that are now offensive and it also allows us to leave some standing if the on balance they are positive reminders. Nationalism says questioning / attacking of statues is treasonous terrorism. I don't mind a bit of Patriotism, but Nationalism can do one. |
Jun 2020
1:40pm, 12 Jun 2020
344 posts
|
deslauriers
Chrisull On my facebook feed, I have tonnes of people of certain persuasions having hissy fits about Churchill's statue being vandalised seemingly fine with the geronticide in care homes that has occurred to the generation the same people (rightly) laud. Anyway, this amused me today: ft.com Sorry, it's behind a pay-wall, but the headline says it all, really. |
Jun 2020
2:20pm, 12 Jun 2020
16,208 posts
|
Chrisull
I must admit as someone who spans nationalities (English/ethnic German Czech/Sudeten - although the latter part of my father's nationality was revoked by the Czech Government for those who didn't return after the war - effectively making my father German, which he then gave up to become English - but given the massacre of ethnic Germans in his home town after the war of even those who fought with the ethnic Czechs - as some of my family did - against the fascists, you can't blame my father for not returning), I am dubious about even patriotism. My nationality is an accident of my birth and geography and something I had not say in and throughout my life if I even raise my dual calling with people it can elicit hostile reactions (and lets remember I am white, I can't imagine the abuse/consternation someone with dual England/Jamaica or England/India, the right get very touchy about that kind of thing). Here in Cornwall I see the stronger links some have with the Bretons across the channel than they do with London. I tend to see things through a more local prism and conversely an international one. And patriotism plays little part. 10,000 years ago when some of my ancestors walked across the channel that joined England to France, they had no idea what countries and borders were, and I'd like to think it won't take 10,000 years in the future, to become similarly irrelevant. People, not places, are what I'm connected to. |
Jun 2020
2:38pm, 12 Jun 2020
16,046 posts
|
Gooner
"10,000 years ago when some of my ancestors walked across the channel that joined England to France, they had no idea what countries and borders were, and I'd like to think it won't take 10,000 years in the future, to become similarly irrelevant. People, not places, are what I'm connected to." This. |
Jun 2020
2:49pm, 12 Jun 2020
19,371 posts
|
DeeGee
In general, countries, especially historic ones, came into existence because rich families had support of slightly less rich families, who basically forced their serfs (who were effectively owned by the barons with no rights to the land and little reward other than the right to be allowed to not die) to fight to the death with other serfs owned by other barons hoping to curry favour with other kings. Unless we're descended from royalty or nobility, we owe nothing to the concept of the nation, and to continue to do doff our cap in deference to these archaic constructs besmirches the millennia-long fight our forebears have had to give themselves some semblance of freedom. |
Jun 2020
3:04pm, 12 Jun 2020
5,500 posts
|
Raemond
I agree with the last two posts in principle,but while I suspect the Westphalian understanding of the nation state is becoming outdated I'm not sure we've yet figured out to fulfil the necessary functions of the state* without it (possibly because of some sort of Stockholm syndrome or super sub conscious conditioning I've yet to deconstruct). Some issues could be handled on the purely local level, but the globalisation genie isn't going back in the bottle, even in the face of the current crisis, and some things will always need to be addressed at a bigger than local level. *things like social security, a functioning justice (or at least dispute resolution) system, public health measures. I'm sure we'd all agree that the current system isn't delivering particularly well in these areas I don't think anyone would argue they're not essential. |
|
Jun 2020
3:05pm, 12 Jun 2020
5,501 posts
|
Raemond
*last three posts. Can't count.
|
Jun 2020
3:13pm, 12 Jun 2020
2,372 posts
|
Canute
About a million years ago it was sensible to foster allegiance to one’s own family group, to the exclusion of outsiders. As we have developed as a species, we our social horizons expanded and the group within which it is sensible to foster allegiance has grown. In the 19th century, nations because the ‘top level’ grouping. Nationalism was a dubious virtue, but patriotism was the manifestation of what was good in our sense of belonging to a country or nation. By the mid 20th century it became clear that the most important level of allegiance was to the human species as a whole. However we struggled to nurture a genuine sense of belonging that level. UN has never quite got its act together; ASEAN and EU were tentative localised step in the right direction but are now on the back foot. Perhaps in the 21st century, the most important ‘top level’ allegiance that we must nurture is to the entire planet. However, in day to day life, the unit that matters to us is the group that we interact with daily. As families have spread, physical locality matters less. A Zoom meeting with family members scattered across the globe matters to me as much as a casual chat with the neighbours in my village. I also enjoy a sense of belonging to the scientific community, mediated by MS Teams meetings with my work colleagues, currently scattered across the British Isles, and with professional colleagues scattered across the globe. Similarly I enjoy a sense belonging to a community of runners, largely mediated via Fetch but I also communicate with bloggers worldwide. Today we have three crises that are forcing us to re-appraise our affiliations: climate change, Covid-19 and racial divisions. The essential challenge is preserving our need for identification with an intimate group with whom we feel kinship, while simultaneously recognising that we share allegiance to the whole human race and indeed with the whole of planet earth. Going to war with our fellow human beings or with the natural world is now utterly counter-productive. |
Jun 2020
3:24pm, 12 Jun 2020
35,177 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
I think modern political and national tribalism is like the school yard "cliques" - it's not about who you identify with it's about who you all agree to hate. Yes, I'm channelling People's Front of Judea parody from 1960s. Unfortunately still true, imho. No easier way to hang onto power than to agree who is "in" your group and who you all agree to hate. Sad, but true. Pandering to the lowest human values from early tribal safety, that anyone with half a brain should have risen above. Grrr. |
|
Jun 2020
3:37pm, 12 Jun 2020
2,373 posts
|
Canute
Yes we do find it easy to affirm our affiliation with our own group by spurning outsiders. Fetch devotees are inclined to be dismissive of RW or 
|
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
Dec 2024
-
Economics
Aug 2023
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018