>Nationalism
Nationalism was a good and progressive idea for its time. Instead of, say, Bavarians and Prussians fighting each other or Franks and Saxons fighting each other, different Italian cities...
...these people eventually came together in a long and often painful process.
Unlike what many left-wingers and right-wingers say, "Globalism" and "internationalism" aren't really the opposite of nationalism but only its logical successors we should continue.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
globalism is the failed version of imperialism
>Guys, GUYS
>Lets take all these different people who have wildly different moral systems, ancestral backgrounds, cultural upbringings, and beliefs about religion - all of this, ALL OF THIS while they literally cannot even communicate with each other and, and GET THIS GUYS - FORCE THEM ALL TO LIVE AMONG EACH OTHER AND TREAT EACH OTHER AS EQUALS
>IT WORKED FOR YUGOSLAVIA DIDN'T IT??
These are different things.
The kind of people who support imperialist actions (like the US destroying Iraq, Lybia, Syria...) are the same kind of people who are opposed to globalism.
>>IT WORKED FOR YUGOSLAVIA DIDN'T IT??
Actually it DID work for Yugoslavia.
Yugoslavia under Tito was so much better than what has become of it.
t. half Croat half Serb
>wildly different moral systems, ancestral backgrounds, cultural upbringings, and beliefs about religion
Except even people who are historically and politically retarded know that Yugoslavia worked only, and I mean ONLY because of the strongman that was Tito keeping everything together.
Source: Everything that happened immediately after his death
>if I say it doesn't real then that means it doesn't real :^)
Not that guy, but they aren't particularly "real" in that they're just concepts. But the spookposter is an asshole for not understanding the cultural weight people put on those things.
What is proposed flippantly can be dismissed flippantly.
Imperialism would be the british empire under powel not your pol shit
>Implying people don't drop supposed cultural values at the drop of a hat in favour of material gain.
>Its another "dude abstract concepts don't real / are inherently meaningless and I'm going to try and convince you of this using the abstract concept of language LMAO" episode
Human language is incapable of conveying how much I hate Max Stirner and everyone who takes him seriously
top shit post lad, sounds like you need a trip to islamic state of syria and the levant
Where does ISIS bring "material gain" or anything better? All it brings is chaos and war.
Life was much better under city-states desu.
Nation states are why the 19th and 20th century are so fucked up.
Language isn't "real" in any tangible sense either. Abstract concepts being fictitious doesn't mean they can't be useful. Button up your vagina.
What if I told you that the concept of "real" doesn't actually real? :^)
Indeed. But real in this sense refers to whether or not these things will continue to have a presence if people stop recognizing them or not. The physical world will continue to exist whether we do so or not, but things like nations, morals, and indeed language, will not.
It was fucked up because of racism and technology. Before the nation-state, they too waged thousands of war against each other, they just didn't had the Wehrmacht back then.
lmao are you serious man "presence" isn't real
in fact you aren't real
I'm not even real
I think therefor I am not
So, why exactly are you so asshurt by this?
Also, are you that schmuck that keeps insisting that because the universe is capable of human life, that must be its purpose?
No
I'm just trying to point out how retarded Stirner and his ilk are because it is literally impossible to talk to you people without the conversation boiling down into "Dude literally nothing is real" like some kind of surreal anti-solipsism
Dude, you're confusing people who spam memes with people who have actually read Stirner. Stirner is not a solipsist, he just rejects concepts as things of substance, which they aren't. Anything that ceases to exist when people stop recognizing it to exist is not a thing of substance.
You're also doing a piss-poor job of arguing your point, coming off more as unreasonably asshurt than anything else.
Exactly.
The Nation-State, and nationalism by extension, encouraged racism. WE WUZ retards going to war over stupid reasons and exterminating/expelling anyone who isn't a real "insert nationality".
They gave birth to massive armies the likes the world had never seen. Massive surveillance states. Genocides. World wars.
Nation-States were a mistake.
Substance is a spook. Recognition is a spook. Rejection is a spook. Existence is a spook. Your entire argument is invalid.
Literally none of those are spooks. Spooks are only ideas you attempt to place ahead of yourself. Stirner never says that ideas are invalid things to value or believe in; he just argues they're not something to serve, since they don't actually exist.
The USA had millions of slaves long before it was united as a nation. And the Hutu and Tutsi managed to kill a million of each other just with machetes and without any concept of "nationalism" whatsoever.
Value is a spook, and so is the concept of the self. The "ego" doesn't actually exist and is just an illusion, it is the greatest spook of all.
Ironic shitposting is still shitposting
What would you propose would be a better alternative than the nation-state?
Keep in mind that almost all countries transform into nation-states as they establish a national identity through wars, significant events and a shared history.
You exist independent of any conscious recognition, even attempting to deny your own existence implies it; it would be like trying to disprove a microscope's existence by using that microscope to do it.
And again, none of those are spooks. Have you actually read the Ego and Its Own, or are you just butthurt?
Reminder that science has proven that the concept of the self doesn't actually exist. Stirnerfags absolutely BTFO
>Reminder that science has proven that the concept of the self doesn't actually exist.
That's a fascinating claim. Proofs?
Just google it fampai
>science disproved an abstract and inherently intelligent concept
That'll be the day
>there is no inner experience, you're just imagining it
Yeah, that's moronic.
No.
Arguments against globalism are always so empty. "people can't possibly get along with each other" except they obviously can if they choose to, you just choose not to and then pretend that your decision is inevitable human nature. No actual rational argument is being made, it's just the catch-22 "it can't happen because I won't let it happen, and I won't let it happen because it can't happen"
>you cant use the human nature argument because human nature renders it invalid
Take a good long look at what the european union has turned into, look at all the infighting, and distrust between member states and then say that again.
Tribalism is part and parcel of who and what we are as a species, which makes a global government in our current circumstances a complete non-starter of an idea.
Globalism is an individualist's nightmare. All authority being directed unto a single political elite and the will of the single person ultimately matters less and less as the pool of citizenry becomes bigger and bigger.
I almost responded but I noticed your picture
You almost had me for a second
Nobody said "nothing is real" you stupid faggot. The guy is trying to point out that ideas are immaterial and are only as relevant as people make them. i.e. spooks
Your mom's feet are real, how tasty they look covered in syrup is just an idea that varies person to person
There is literally no infighting between any EU states. Do you mean like, verbal bickering? Are you just unaware of what a relatively peaceful world you live in? Please learn the history of the EU's countries and try to find a more peaceful time than the last 50 years.
>FORCE THEM ALL TO LIVE AMONG EACH OTHER
Nobody does this. Emigration is voluntary.
Furtheremore economic incentives for movement in a hypothetically global government would eventually stabilize. [i.e. once everyone moves from Africa to the UK, the UK will have such a labour surplus and Africa such a labour crisis that people will move in the other direction.]
I say this as someone with a strong loathing for globalism due to the constraints it puts on national government policymaking.
"I want state interference in economic policy without international markets destroying my democratically elected government"
It's not human nature. It's a political choice.
>ancestral backgrounds,
Literally doesn't matter
Empires > nation-states
Lord 1: Well feudalism is over, matey. How do we get the plebs to fight for us now that we can't force them to fight wars to protect our property?
Lord 2: Oh! I got it! Let's create some shitty ideology where we say all these individuals some how have this connection with each other because they speak the some language or their dead and gone ancestors were born in the same area a thousand years ago!
Lord 1: Oh! Genius! And the best part is we won't even have to force them to protect all of our interests, they'll sign up out of their own free will because they're protecting this concept of a "nation" that we invented!
We already have a situation where Germany and Sweden are being told go piss up a rope regarding the sheltering of refugees. Combine that with building resentment between the "piigs" and the northern euro states and we have a recipe for political instability and the possible break-up of the EU withing the coming decades.
Selling the left wing on globalism without an economic revolution was the biggest coup the wealthy ever staged.
Now the domestic factory worker must compete with a foreigner who'll work for 1/10th his wage, but if you're against the inevitable unemployment of your domestic workers then you're just a nasty racist. :^)
Globalism will completely demolish the middle class. Name me one country that has accepted waves of impoverished migrants in the past 50 years and whose citizenry became richer as a result.
Then you just can't compete with the rest of the world. Get your shit together instead of chimping out on minorities
Monarchs fought heavily against the concept of nation states
They aren't the minority. They're the plurality.
Furthermore the competitive advantage of the other state is often along the lines of poor worker's rights and safety legislation. This is not a competitive advantage worth protecting, especially from a left-wing perspective
Why the fuck would a feudal lord support an idea which concludes that the state is connected to its citizens and not just his personal plaything?
Who in their right mind would want to kill of the diversity of culture through globalism? That shit sounds awful. I like being able to choose between listening to metal inspired by ancestral paganism, neofolk, or just regular american thrash. I like being able to choose between dumb western nerd culture or the eccentric otaku shit coming from japan. I love the idea of going abroad and seeing differently developed cultures, cusine, architecture, and general attitudes. Anyone who would choose to destyroy all this by forcing the entire world through some commercialised globalist meatgrinder is insane.
>The real value of your work is whatever your corporate overlords can drive it down to via outsourcing or mass immigration
Nationalism is shit, it has brought us to the point where we form our identity around completely meaningless divides. Real conflicts are about cultural values and religion. I live in eastern europe where you get a prime view of people hating each other in the name of essentially the same irrelevant states.
Europe needs to be federalized completely.
The problem is that those exotic cultures are shit to live in, idiot. Obviously it's easy to enjoy the plurality of media as a western outsider fascinated by them, but millions of people have to endure life without access to enlightening western liberalism.
And because for a short time,the South Slavic were truly willing to forget their minor differences and work together for a better future.
>This is what germans believe
I can bet you 5$ that this thread was made by an american, or by an american thinking european.
Tell that to the Jews and Muslims
European culture is western culture, you fucking idiot, and it is being eroded just the same by the globalist culture industry.
>western culture is the only thing preventing people from starving and suffering
What kind of fucking mental wank am I reading here. Kill yourself my dude brotherino.
Kae s imenom
>What is direct democracy
Nationalism brings pointless conflict. "National" interests should be ignored in favor of cultural interests.
Nationalism is so inflexible but it's hard to define who is really part of your nation whereas culture is flexible and easy to define.
Voluntary for the person migrating. Not voluntary for those who remained in their ancestral home and have to deal with foreign faces all of a sudden.
>Not voluntary for those who remained in their ancestral home and have to deal with foreign faces all of a sudden.
So move. You aren't being forced to stay.
>b-but I really want to, muh heritage.
This does not constitute forcing.
Reiterating: I'm not pro-globalism in the slightest. I'm making what amounts to a pedantic semantic argument.
Yes, but these factors soft-impose a migration of my own. Do you see where this leads?
Into most people deciding it's not worth the bother because financial constraints [which muh negative liberty muh libertarianism says are oaky] make your emigration unviable.