Nationalism = Looking out for my countrymen as if they were myself
Now, why simply extend this to:
Egalitarianism = looking out for ALL MEN as if they were myself
What the hell makes the former a superior moral system? What arguments can possibly be made for nationalism?
Egalitarianism is not the word you're looking for, it's cosmopolitism
Because countrymen are more likely to adhere to the same moral and philosophical principles that I adhere to
Consider the perspective of the Muslim in your picture.
The crusader unironically believes he is doing the right thing, but why should the Muslim look out for him? In the real world things are less extreme, but the same principle applies. I am sure many foreigners are good people, but the majority do not share my Anglo-Saxon values and will go right ahead and violate my rights and believe they are justified in doing so if they have the opportunity. Looking out for them beyond helping them recover from a Tsunami or whatever would not be utilitarian.
Is it xenophobia? Some immigrants want Shariah law but I haven't mentioned them until now. I am talking about the majority of moderates not a minority of whackos. Until the majority of immigrant groups vote for conservative/libertarian parties it is a fact.
hmm, I say "but" too much
have you considered that people might be moving to your country because they respect your national values to an extent that they consider moving to it?
Unfortunately thats not the case most of the time, and even so the latter generation of immigrants will flock to their respective ethnic groups anyway and even get radicalised due to victim complex
>Looking out for my countrymen as if they were myself
This is never what nationalism actually does in practice.
You are wrong
t. naturalized US citizen
If I wanted to live in a country with similar laws/culture as the old country, I would have stayed there, instead of liquidating our assets to turn into dollars, learning a new language, waiting 4 years for a visa, 7 years for a green card, and 5 years + $1000 for citizenship.
Neither are superior moral systems though, both are as shit as the other. Very rarely will someone think the same way you do, we're all alone in this shit, and there's always someone waiting you to turn your back and stab you. In capitalism, whoever steps on the most wins, and while everyone thinks the same way, any other kind of moral system will be obsolete.
Legal US immigrants aren't the problem.
It's economic migrants that make things worse, in both the US and EU.
"Economic" migrant to the US here, I invested in it by giving a burgerland uni half my dad's life savings. He doesn't want me to come back to shitholistan and I don't wanna go back.
Congrats, but I hope you have a H-1 lined up or you have to board a plane back 6 months after you graduate.
Do it ASAP before Trump changes the laws, because it's going to be hard for a fresh college graduate to get an offer high enough to be top 125k.
I already have been accepted for my masters. I did undergrad research with my professor and he wrote a pretty good recommendation for me. I gave the GRE and everything.
Burgerland from my view seems to be the sort of place where you can go very far based on your own merit and hardwork if you play your cards right. My GF took a media and mass communications degree so I don't know what's gonna happen to her.
Anecdotal evidence doesn't hold up when you're discussing an issue like immigration
>Nationalism = Looking out for my countrymen as if they were myself
>Looking out for my countrymen as if they were myself = sending them out into wars because I'm feeling pissy
>Sending them out into wars because I'm feeling pissy = Nationalism
Don't be a sucker . swf
no, people were talking about their perspectives.
the US seems to be a pretty good melting pot where everyone becomes part of a nice uniform culture with original sprinklings of ethnic flavouring
Well what's your non-anecdotal evidence that
> Unfortunately thats not the case most of the time, and even so the latter generation of immigrants will flock to their respective ethnic groups anyway and even get radicalized due to victim complex
See also: Chinatown
zero sum game, somebody has to be on top and somebody has to be on the bottom, you can only get something if you take it from someone else.
By forming groups you can become the guys on the top, if you try to go global then it will be too divided and whoever focuses on their group will be better. So basically, someone will always fill the void, "everyone agreeing to be globalists" is impossible because as soon as the guys on top step down for the sake of the many-assuming that ever happened- it wouldn't trickle down evenly but some other power centers would form and fill the void between them.
Basically it's musical chairs. Soon as you try to break the cycle and not go for a seat, you lose because somebody else took it.
You gotta watch out for those radical Chinese 3rd generation immigrants in Chinatown. It's a fucking no-go red zone. If you walk in there and don't speak Ching Chong, you gonna get killed by Karate fightan magic.
All those white people you see in the photos? They are dead men walking, they just don't know it yet.
>because they respect your national values to an extent that they consider moving to it?
Given that they often don't conform to the values, it seems more likely they enjoy the products of it than the practice of it.
everyone knows chinese martial arts is bullshit that doesn't actually work in a fight. I'd love a tiny chinaman to try to go all karate on me, I'd tackle him into the pavement and smash his head into the ground, this is the 21st century and we're not fighting on a matt or some grass
That's not egalitarianism, Clevus, no matter how much Fox News claims it.
Not all men are your friends, unless you believe shit like unprovoked murder and rape is completely fine. Protip: Many people do.
Fuck outta here, they live in their own ghettos, they raise mosques and then put their kids in religious private institutions, they do their absolute best to avoid the society they leech money off of. Perhaps not all, perhaps not even the majority, but many do, I see it myself.
The Chinese aren't radical of course, but they're still a disruptive culture. But that's not the point here is it? Molenbeek is one of the most blatantly Muslim areas in Europe and (shockingly) the origin of the perpetrators of one of the deadliest terror attacks in recent history.
>t. Anecdotal/Cherrypicked Evidence
not him but:
This is partly because of the vast cultural borders the U.S has, but many simply go simply to the attractiveness of living standards in the west. This applies to Europe as well.
If the U.S had the same economic situation as say, Kenya, do you think people would emigrate to it en-masse, even if it had a stable democracy?
Have you ever been to Richmond, or Surrey BC?
Conformity to values is a meme. That's never been how assimilation worked throughout history. It's conformity to politics and economy that has always mattered, and what has integrated immigrants no matter where they come from.
This pretty much. It's only natural for different cultures to have different values, and it seems pretty evident that people are naturally inclined to look out for those who think/act the same way as them.
not all men are the same, but still need to work together to live a quality life. You can cooperate with a certain number of people with a similar culture and background, but it is simply against the laws of nature to have an all encompassing body capable of sustaining it self forever. Proofs: look at history and how whenever an empire gets too large it breaks apart into smaller nations. This happens in nature to prevent an organism from going extinct. The diversity of nations puts a stop gap to the entire race of mankind from going instinct when one ideology leads to a catastrophe. The most efficient nations are ones that are unified , so it only makes sense to have similar kind in one area.
This whole thread is spooky as fuck
>You can cooperate with a certain number of people with a similar culture and background
You can also fight them, hate them, and cooperate with people of very different cultures and backgrounds against them.
Two different concepts, senpai and not exactely contradictory.
Did you meant something along the line of universalism x particularism?
>Nationalism = Looking out for my countrymen as if they were myself
Lol, Nationalism almost always boils down to
>M-MUH NATION HAS ALWAYS EXISTED AND IS BETTER IN EVERY WAY COMPARED TO YOURS.
Spoken like someone who is unable to feel any sense of pride or patriotism.
Either your country is shit or you need to go back to where you came from
...
How are you posting on a history board without recognizing historical relativism?
By that argument every fucking civilization in history is irrelevant due to the timescale of which modern humans have existed.
No, it simply means that regarding your nation as absolutely superior is retarded.
Then i'll repeat:
Spoken like someone who is unable to feel any sense of pride or patriotism.
Either your country is shit or you need to go back to where you came from
The United States is at each others' throat. Nationalism is a primitive response to outside threats.
That said, USA USA USA #1
Because all people are not equal to my people. Egalitarianism is rooted in the religious superstition that all human lives(except the unborn) are valuable and essentially equal.
Implementing a state policy based on this superstition at best is wasteful(see american inner city social welfare) and at worst kills civilizations(see, Europe).
Asians are different