/lit/ - Literature

I don't think it's bad. But whether or not it's bad, it certainly exists.

Also, I don't know why you have the US flag up there as if to say this discussion is somehow specific to the US or something, it's not like nationalism is worse in the US than anywhere else, for fuck's sake.

Suddenly, good nationalism!

...or is it?

Yes, it's bad. It begins a line of logic that, when followed to its natural conclusion, always ends the same way: By telling me that my brother is my enemy. My brother is not my enemy.

>it's not like nationalism is worse in the US than anywhere else, for fuck's sake.

Indeed, /int/ has taught me so much.

Yes and no.

At its ideal, a nationalistic society will be united and orderly as a whole, and less susceptible to anarchy and chaos. In times of turmoil everybody carries each other's weight and almost everyone will do their part to pull through the country out of difficult circumstances. Also, there will exist a sense of national identity and pride, and the feeling of responsibility to keep a good image on the world stage

Unfortunately we live in an imperfect world and almost all ideologies will fail if executed in plain vanilla due to the simple fact that the majority of people are selfish, greedy and blissfully ignorant, and nationalism is no different. Too much national pride breeds ignorance and intolerance. The handful of people on top who hold most of the power would find it easy to bend the attitudes of the population for their own agenda.

Yes, along with patriotism.

>>2009021
But your brother might well be your enemy. More to the point, if he insulted your grandmother, I sincerely hope he WOULD be your enemy.

I hope you aren't an American then, you fucking pussy. If you were a pitcher on a baseball team, and you didn't think your baseball team had the capability to win every game, do you think you'd start?

You wouldn't. There's a reason every country relies on nationalism to function. America isn't being as boss as its potential right now because of cunts like you who don't man up and love the country that has given you everything you've ever had. Look at China and Japan, nationalism is more ingrained than anywhere else, and they're running shit pretty well.

Depends on what you mean by 'nationalism'
>>My nation has positive attributes that we should increase while addressing its failings! We should all work together towards these two goals!
That's fine

>>my nation and its people are inherently better than any other nation or people and anyone who denies this is filthy scum
That's not fine

>>2009066
>Japan
>doing well

Pick one. That place has been on the decline for a few years now.

>>2009089
compare it to the USA chief

>>2009037
My brother is not my enemy by dint of the fact that he was born in some other place. It's possible for my brother to be my enemy, but it's not inherently so. Iran is the enemy of my government. I don't personally have any enemies in Iran.

US Nationalism doesn't exist in a legitimate sense, so stop acting like it does.

>>2009118
it exists but it's different from in other places and in fact it's different in different places in america

>>2008971
Why would nationalism be bad? Not every patriotic person holds rallies and spouts ignorantly defensive statements. You're conjuring up the wrong image when you think nationalism.

>>2009066

The very premise of nationalism is absurd. It's irrational to feel compelled to love the abstract notion of 'your country' for no reason other than you happened to be plopped on that particular area of land at birth. All the potential positives of a nationalistic society could stem from some flavour of collectivism, not in the Communist sense, mind you, but in the sense of people working to improve the society around them for the benefit of themselves and others within that society, similar to how a sporting team works--to borrow your analogy. Of course, people work within the idea of states and nations, but blind allegiance to these notions isn't constructive.

Doug Stanhope said it best
>Nationalism does nothing but teach you how to hate people that you never met. And all of a sudden you take pride in accomplishments you had no part in whatsoever, and you brag about- and the Americans'll go "Fuck the French! Fuck the French, if we hadn't had saved their ass in two World Wars, they'd be speakin' German right now!" And you go, "Oh, was that us?" Was that me and you, Tommy, we saved the French? Jesus! I know I blacked out a little bit after that fourth shot of Jägermeister last night, but I don't remember... I know we went through the Wendy's drive-thru to get one of them "Freschetta" sandwiches that looked so alluring on the commercial, but then we ordered it and realized we had no money, and we had to ditch out before the second window, and those douchebags in line behind us with the bass music probably got our order and we laughed about that. But I don't remember savin' the French. At all! I went through the last ten calls on my cell phone and there's nothin' incoming or outgoing to the French, lookin' for muscle on a project! I checked my pants, there's no mud stains on the knees from where we were garroting Krauts in the trenches at Verdun. I think "we" didn't do anything but watch sports bloopers while we got hammered. I think "we" should shut the fuck up!

The only country that thinks nationalism is bad is the US, and that's all based on weak, self-loathing liberals. Every other nation thinks their country is based as fuck, and they're better people for it.

>>2009190
Yes..but he's a moron.

>>2009206
Ya just like the nationalist japs who killed and raped civilians in manching or the Islamic nationalist who behead foreigners because they're different, or maybe the nazi party who killed millions of people for not being white.

I just read an article in Dissent asking "What Good is Patriotism?"
It's mostly about the back and forth of Edmund Burke and a Richard Price. Reflections on the Revolution in France, was an address to him.
The article also mentions Orwell's Notes on Nationalism, and its "brave attempt" to differentiate patriotism and nationalism ( One mans ___ is another mans ___.) And then it goes on about the parable of The Good Samaritan.
Good stuff. Just thought I'd share.

To answer the OPs question. I am patriotic to nation of ideals, knowing full well there are enemies in our midst and allies around the world just as much as the other way around. I am cosmopolitan.

>>2009225
He's right in this instance. He's right for the same reasons I think Geneology and Sports make no sense.

>>2008971

Nationalism benefits Governments, not it's citizens.
That is why Governments espouse it.

>mfw americans have to recite their national anthem everyday as children just like Chinese and North Koreans

>>2009250

wow, you sound American.

>>2009279
>not it's citizens.

WRONG FUCKO. ITS CITIZENS. "ITS" MEANS POSSESSIVE. "IT'S" MEANS IT IS. IF YOU'RE CONFUSED REMEMBER THIS HELPFUL LITTLE MNEMONIC: IF YOU FUCK UP AGAIN, I'LL HAVE SEX WITH YOUR MOTHER.

>>2009285

yes, that is the critical issue in this thread.

>>2009285
Grammar patriot is MAAAAAHD

>>2009284
o_<
...uhh, thank you(?)

>>2009279
>mfw americans have to recite their national anthem everyday

Uhhh no...

>>2009279
Schoolchildren have to recite the Pledge of Allegiance everyday, not the Anthem. I refrained.

My thoughts on nationalism is that it's fine until the nation is formed. Then it becomes the deadliest sin.

>>2009324
I did but then I went to a lower-middle-class Catholic school

>>2009334
Oh shit I meant the Pledge too, I had to say the Pledge.

The anthem sucks, though. Seriously America's national anthem is just embarrassing.

Nationalism is bad. Patriotism isn't, in certain amounts. You cannot have blind patriotism and jingoism where you do not care about the rest of the world and only your country and your country's self interests. You should not blindly being patriotic and not understand anything about your country (e.g. most Americans). You still have to put humanity before patriotism.

Rooting/(rotting) for ones team; sweet ode to nationalism begets ignorance for (-)inter, no matter how sportsman-esque, which finds its excuse to exist upon its creation.
>The purpose of raising defenses in a time of peace causes insecurity to all parties involved.
Here I am being a Utopian hombre.

1000 years ago, the West had religion to believe in. Then around 1500, we developed this thing called nationalism in earnest, and we competed on a grand scale with one another for supremacy. The Renaissance happened because every European nation wanted to be the best, and to be the best you had to be the smartest, most cultured, and most powerful. The only way in which this "bestness" could be measured was through the nationstate.

Then we started this thing in the 1900s called globalization, and nationalism hasn't recovered since. Desire and performance has been minimized to the individual, and while that's a valid way of functioning, it ultimately hurts the poor and and benefits the wealthy exclusively. No longer are we all in it to sink or swim; the wealthy innovators can go wherever they want at the expense of those who can't. This is why countries in Africa and Latin America will never develop: globalization has made the world into a permanent brain drain away from undeveloped nations that might have otherwise thrived under a nationalistic policy.

Nationalism helps certain nations and not others. A "globalized society" helps certain people but not others. Which is better?

>>2009335

No one forced me to say the pledge during school.

let me draw this parallel
think of /lit/ as your country and think of the people who take pride in /lit/ and the people who depreciate /lit/ and think of the correlation of how each participant benefits /lit.

>>2009338
I think it's on a school by school basis, but all the (public) schools I attended forced us to, and all the other ones in my area required it as well.

>>2009339
I'm just curious. What do you think the Renaissance was? And when do you think it happened, roughly?

>>2009339
>Then around 1500, we developed this thing called nationalism in earnest, and we competed on a grand scale with one another for supremacy.
>Implying nationalism wasn't born when nations where born.

Before nations it was this tribe and that tribe. It's always been there.

>>2009341
Generally the people who denigrate lit the most tend to be the most helpful. They're tired of the shit that clogs up the board, because they want to have intelligent conversations.

>>2009343
None of them forced me too, it was voluntary..

>>2009343
I don't know if it was absolutely required, but no kid was going to question saying the pledge in my school. I suspect it was similar in most others. If a kid didn't want to say it, I imagine the instructor just assumed they were being unruly for no reason - which is very likely the case with elementary and middle school kids.

I stopped saying it in high school. I was never forced to, or even asked to, but sometimes teachers would make small speeches prefacing the pledge about how we should all support our country and they can't imagine why anyone would refuse to recite it. There was a mild stigma attached to abstaining, but nothing serious.

>>2009358
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2BfqDUPL1I

>>2009362
Yep.

I'd never argue with anyone about this IRL, though. It's just not worth it.

>>2009349
then maybe nationalism es mismo de complacency and the only true patriots are the ones who are willing to point out the flaws and push the board/country to its full potential

the part where it gets grey is that some believe that not being content with the board/country automatically makes them patriotic without putting forth the will or effort to improve upon the situation

>>2009371
Yeah, but in my experience the only people to call themselves patriots are jingoistic mindless fucks. It's not a company I want to place myself in.

>>2009371
es mismo de = drawing a parallel to
sorry; I'm drunk and I've been reading Pablo Neruda all weekend

>>2009379
constantly imrpoving oneself does not require a lable
"patriot", "Christian", "liberal", "Anne Hathaway"
these are all terms used by people who would like you to know that they are constantly trying to better themselves and the world at the same time
the only problem is we should ALL try to better ourselves and the world. That's what nationalism is attempting to promote. It gets jumbled up, but at its core it is trying to promote constant improvement for everyone. That's what makes it a good thing. However, we don't need the lable of Nationalism to live it.

>>2009381

That would drive me to drink too

j/k kid you're alright

>>2009391

This isn't true. As some other posts intimated:
>>2009358
>>2009350

Nationalism is about promoting conformity, and about knowing your role within a government. It is not about each and every citizen striving for self-improvement, but about each and every citizen following the leadership of the government.

A lot of people seem to be understanding 'nationalism' as meaning 'thinking your own country is best'. Is that definition legitimate? Where does it come from?

I'm asking because in historical/sociological/political works, nationalism is a political ideology- the idea that humanity is divided into 'nations' and that these nations should each be represented by an independent sovereign government. It also generally implies that the nation should be the object of the individual's highest allegiance. But still... that doesn't necessarily make it 'best'.

>>2009402
I'm speaking of Nationalism, not in its convoluted connotation we know in 2011; but in its pristine definition; in the Realm of the Forms; it is good

of course it has a negative connotation now; but the theory behind it is good

do what you can for the community/country/message board you ascribe to and take pride in it as a group
give effort as a group; take pride as a group
it is a marriage of community

again, something that innocent and simple will be manipulated (and has been); but in its simplist form it is good

>>2009425
Problem is is that nationalism, by definition, is commitment to a particular kind of group, and is inherently political. If individual commitment to a group other than the nation (e.g. to the Catholic faith) is seen as a conflict of interests, then nationalism will demand priority/exclusivity.

>>2009425

Your idea of pride I find jarring. It seems that nationalism, as you state it, is a form of flattery and egotism gifted to citizens resulting in a share d delusion of strength.

>>2009425

Doesn't sound good to me. It sounds like tribe mentality. The unseen consequence of this is conflict with other tribes. The amount of hostility towards an outer group is directly proportional to the cohesion of the group you belong to. People are hardwired like that.

yes.

no if you are a monkey

>>2009128
>The very premise of nationalism is absurd. It's irrational to feel compelled to love the abstract notion of 'your country' for no reason other than you happened to be plopped on that particular area of land at birth.

Yes, but you could say similarly that it's absurd to love something as abstract as 'humanity' for no other reason than for no other reason that you happened to plop out human at birth.
People love these abstract things for reasons more than "that's where you happen to live", it's the romanticism of ideals, history, culture and glory that people identify with on an emotional level. You can invent sufficient reason to justify these feelings.

>>2009339
>Then around 1500, we developed this thing called nationalism in earnest, and we competed on a grand scale with one another for supremacy.

Ancient Rome was the pinnacle of nationalism. Nationalism is primordial when it comes to cultured civilization.

>>2009993
Why? If you don't dominate other countries then your country will be the one dominated.

What is the definition of nationalism anyway ?
In the 19th century nationalism was associated with liberal ideals, such as democracy an equal rights. It was the nationalists in Europe who demanded democracy and an end to feudalism.

>>2010036
Rome was not a nation state you buffoon, how could the Romans be ''nationalist''.

Define "bad".

Because of nationalism there's some pretty awesome pieces of classical music. That's all I feel like getting into about the topic though.

You tell me. How have all those wars ultimately benefited YOU the citizen. Feel free? Is life better now?

Yes. The time has come where it will be beneficial for us view ourselves as a global community without borders.ti

>>2010098
>Rome was not a nation state you buffoon

Rome is used a metonym for the Roman empire, you buffoon.

Nationalism is basically touting one's ethnic-culture as the bestest in the whole wide world and jacking off to obscure ethnic facial features.

In New Jersey, the guidos whine about "Italian Pride" while living out stereotypes that got their ancestors strung from lampposts in the eighteen-hundreds. People refuse to fucking learn.

>>2010153
The Roman Empire is not a nation state. The concept of a nation is the product of the 19th century.

It depends how you define the nation and what kind of nationalism you're talking about. I believe that nationalism is essential to the success of any country.