Message from @Hagre
Discord ID: 524562227563593738
what did i say?
do you think they unified just because?
Nations themselves *emerged* as repudiation of earlier forms of separation
its built-in to the very concept of nation
i'm not talking about nations
*then why do you want their destruction for that one ethnos?*
Wait are you talking to me?
i'm talking about why do you think we're unifying
they unified due to material and technical conditions; there was incentive towards unification, threats from foreign lands and further internal prosperity
@ImATomato yes, but i'm talking to the finngolian
>they unified due to material and technical conditions; there was incentive towards unification,
Derived from what?
> threats from foreign lands and further internal prosperity
whay do we call this?
greed=
what happened here?
marxist clusterfuck
w e w
And the same exact pressures are present today, albeit in a different form, pushing towards ever greater unification of the various countries of the earth. There's immense incentive towards ever-closer association of nations. The ***only question*** is how this will look like, on what terms this is achieved.
we're talking about how nations are coming togetehr rather than spreading apart
you're not answering my questions
can't see that happening any time soon
you're using the idea of unification through force as your reasoning
and also as a means from struggle
these are terrible points to yoru argument
wouldn't unification through force only breed more resentment and hatred of communism?
the unification is happening fast without communism, and on real shit terms
i'm sorry but your argument for unification (and the examples you used are recent) are of forced unifications, imperialism and or struggle from enemies and then a solidified union but evercrumbling
>the unification is happening fast without communism, and on real shit terms
oh but this isn't because of capitalism or liberalism or le bourgeoisie?
that aforementioned union ain't gonna last long before it experiences some Yugoslav-esque collapse except much more bloody
it's nature?
how is such a unification occurring now?
Four i dont think i've answered your question, I dont wish to destroy ethnos I only wish to subvert the elements of nationhood in order to unite people into functional societies.
the examples he used were through force
Japan looks pretty consolidated, as does Germany and Finland. So I say that the unification that happened in these countries was quite irreversible. I don't know why the future unifications that follow same incentive trajectory wouldn't be also.
@ImATomato I don't mind, I'm guessing you mean trying to mix the cultures together to make one or something, idk
that's the thing - we shouldn't compare these countries with radically different histories and cultures to one another's unification
The cultures of the fiefdoms that unified in these countries had also radically different histories
we're also not taking into account the time periods in which this occurred and how it occurred
often antagonistic ones too
>Japan looks pretty consolidated, as does Germany and Finland.
Ignoring Japan since it's an island (same for Taiwan) you can't genuinely use Germany as your example considering it's separation for so damn long and how new the country is, and even with how new it is, the fact that many cultures inside germany are treated ass their own thing (Bavaria) and with the case of Finland, your problems with Russia outweigh any sense of sovereignty
i actually despise the mixing of cultures if they're widely distinct. I'm not a globalist I'm a nationalist. I dont want to unify every nation or race, i just want to make them less dysfunctional
If you're mixing a Bavarian with a Frisian it's one thing, if you're mixing a Somali with a Sapmi its whole other story.