wow it just got complicated af, its like I want to be conservative Republican, but its democrat

That was back when Democrats were undeniably the conservative party that represented agrarian interests and the Republicans represented more urban interests

It's just names really. There was a massive shift in the mid 20th century with all the Civil Rights stuff where the parties turned upside down on a lot of issues

well now I don't know rather to be conservative or liberal

Rofl, back at square 1

Got our asses backwards here

you know I don't really know what to say

guess I'm an old fashion Republican?

Or I could just call myself a Republican Libertarian

@Ben Garrison That fit?

Yeah, a lot of Republicans lean pretty heavily libertarian

still mean I could be a Civic Nationalist right

Yes

aight boi, Republican Libertarian Civic Nationalist that believes in multilateralism

bam bitch

settled

who cares about what the terms are

Just be a freethinker

Right Libertarian, damn right

The terms don't control my opinion, my opinion controls the term

That's some wise words you got there

There are also other brands of nationalism too. Such as cultural nationalism, which defines the nation on the basis of culture, religious nationalism, which does the same but in terms of religion, etc. I'd consider myself a cultural nationalist. I know there isn't one united American culture as of right now, but there should be. And I think that such a culture should favor duty, discipline, self-sacrifice, and traditional Christianity (as opposed to the new age hippie Christianity that modernists preach)

And I realize that once this new culture is established. It will be exclusively American as it should be, and foreigners will have a hard time comprehending it. This is alright though, since we're American and they're not. It would be like a British person trying to understand Chinese culture. Or vice versa.

Religion is often an important component of nationalist thought but I’d challenge that you could classify a nationalism based primarily on religion unless it’s a highly localized religious tradition practiced by only one or two peoples like Druze or today’s Zoroastrianism. The Christian “nation” would be an empire of a hundred languages.

In the United States? Or Christendom in general. If the former, I disagree but if the latter, I agree. I do not favor all Western christians to unite as one "nation" though. That wouldn't work and it would destroy the many aspects of western nations that make them what they are. I do favor all American christians to unite as a nation, though; centered around english as a common language, and the newfound American culture as a common culture.

Yes I meant Christendom in general since that would be the result of a primarily religious nationalism. American nationalism being heavily influenced by Christianity is what I meant when I said that religion is an important component

Yeah, that's why I'm not a religious nationalist. I'm also not an ethnonationalist, nor am I a civic nationalist. I'm a cultural nationalist, but I do acknowledge that certain people are more willing to embrace particular cultures than others. Therefore membership in the nation is not open to everyone, but only well integrated people born within our borders who accept the culture.

But it isnt plural, something youve been consistently unable to back up, and the only thing you've pulled from outside confirmed that it is singular

Why are you arguing an irrelevant point?

How is it irrelevant? You're defending s being at the end of math on the grounds that its plural

No. You are misrepresenting my argument. I said the s is there for consistency.
Whether or not it is meant to be there now is meaningless, it's purpose on the non-abbreviated word was false plurality, which is preserved on contraction.

"Why then would you smack an s at the end of an abbreviation like math?" This is a retarded question.
If a term is plural, you preserve it when shortening it. why would you not?

That's what you said, am I misrepresenting that?

Boi. You having fun here? Making an argument where there is none?
I was referring to the source.

I'm tired, it's 2AM, lemme make mistakes. The s has a purpose, not entirely valid, but Imma keep it there until I forget about it. OK?

dang

2AM?

Let's revisit this when you aren't tired then. The world shall be converted back to the holy light of MATH and cleansed of the Deceiver that is Maths

yuck

Lets have another argument when I'm awake. This one isn't fun

And yes I forgot the ' a zillion times