Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 635477366893707265
The fact that one nation is isolationist and the other wants to invade it has nothing to do with nationalism, but rather the fact that that STATE wants to do that which is inherently anti nationalist (since by definition nationalism implies ethnic nationalism and isolationism)
also @everyone does anyone know Exiled's new discord account? he got banned again pls send me if you know it, or if u know a friend who has his new acc
How about requiring phone # to join?
I’m not confusing axiom with arbitrary I really do mean the word I use. With the language example there’s no characteristic of language that is better inherently better so my point is that nationalists that use it as a talking point are using arbitrary claims to superiority.
I really don’t understand what you’re getting at here. I gave some examples of things people use to define national groups when they’re poor descriptions when people can be culturally one group and speak the language of another and vice versa pointed out how ethnic groups are blurry. These aren’t the only things that define national identities but they’re the biggest so I pointed them out as bad descriptors among others. Your bit about anarchy has no connection to the conversation so whatever.
Nationalism is primarily used to say we are one people and not them, literally a divider. Saying your group is different than everyone else’s. Especially when dealing with previously mention blurry areas that don’t perfectly fall into one category as well as empowering/motivating some groups to attempt to assimilate others that don’t perfectly fit into a group.
Doesn’t have anything to do with what I was saying so whatever. Still ignores that hyper-nationalistic states often attempt to expand their borders to acquire resources.
“Nice try jew”
Okay
Fuck paradox
They banning deus vult now
we barely know anything about it yet chill
Based
oh boy
so we have: continuum fallacy, thinking that the arbitrariness of languages somehow invalidates distinction and valuation, ''the numbers of colours is arbitrary, purple doesnt exist!''
lmao
imagine if a white person said the first thing for white people is to protect white people like your brother....and we should!!goyim gets shot without warning just for looking at a synagogue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs9VgQY4TDU&feature=youtu.be
rabbi's insane response as to why this is justified to shoot goyim on sight
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVjEH0zM9AM
source:
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/california/articles/2019-02-15/security-guard-arrested-in-shooting-outside-la-synagogue
“Let me point out a fallacy and then ignore how it’s still arbitrary to draw lines based on language when people mix in border regions and have language continums.”
are you ok? @AlexTheLad217
i didnt say that it wasnt arbitrary, i said that the arbitrariness has no bearing on it
and youve just made the same logically fallacious statement again
@AlexTheLad217 wow good job you just literally ignored everything i said
"just because its not objective its arbitrary"
Everything stems from a subjective axiomatic preference. Nationalism stems from a subjective axiomatic preference, to someoen who rejects the validity of the essence of that subjective axiomatic preference, it SEEMS arbitrary
My language example is PERFECTLY descriptory to what I just said
If me and you were to agree that what constitutes superiority in culture lets say, is family values lets say, we can objectively deduce that one culture is superior to others
You can say the same thing about nationalism, since if we were to say that intelligence, constitutes superiority, we can say that one ethnic group is superior to others etc (just an example)
"Nationalism is primarily used to say we are one people and not them, literally a divider" No, just because we acknowledge the fact that our kind is seperate and different from their kind, does not mean that i am making a statement that OUR KIND is superior to their kind, that is entirely different, you are confusing seperate concepts here bucko
"Still ignores that hyper-nationalistic states often attempt to expand their borders to acquire resources"
Again that is not a hyper nationalistic at all, I already gave you the definition of nationalism, and have already explained to you how that is seperate, nationalism is caring for your own people, it is NOT fucking over other people.
Regardless though, EVERY SINGLE "contention" you have with nationalism is applicable to every other ideology lol
every ideology stems from a subjective axiom, so its funny seeing you cherry pick where you disregard which ideology
@Deleted User I recognized that I make the continuum fallacy but my point isn't that you can't make distinctions between two groups it's that there's no clean and agreeable method to make a divide between them like modern borders of nation states. A lack of method that has often made nationalists to resort to violence and oppression in history to make a clean border while depriving those along the border the right to choose to have elements of both groups. This doesn't just apply to just languages either.
vagueness does not = invalidity
this is still continuum fallacy, just a different form
that argument about violence also boomerangs back at you horribly because internationalists are responsible for equally if not more deaths than nationalists
I know but it doesn't invalidate that the modern nation state doesn't fit perfectly with reality and so in my opinion it shouldn't be an ideal to strive for
it should be reformed as an idea to fit reality instead of trying to alter it
i agree to an extent
we should have true nations that are racial
pointing out that internationalists cause deaths doen't justify nationalist killing either
my concept of a nation is that it is both blood and soil
i wasnt justifying it, i was saying that it isnt really an argument against nationalism
that doesn't work for me because humans are semi-migratory and are quick to move
the soil part falls apart in reality