Nationalism, good or bad ??

[jfuh]

Having Bush in office is proably way much better than having Kerry in office

Who advocated Kerry? Did I anywhere in past posts in this thread mention kerry? My statement I believe was: " Funny you'd bring up globalism, because you're boyo Bush loves it." Try answering to the statement as opposed to bringing up red-herrings.

The minutement are not racist and they are patriots doing a job the government has refused to do.

Did I say they were? I said they too with the KKK, Neo-nazi's and so on all hide under the cloak of nationalism.
The minutmen are nothing more then xenophobic vigilantes.

So when it comes to certian rights you think there should be restrictions even though the constitution says
"the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

Again, that's not my statment now is it? Answer the question, are you with the opinion that banning AK-47's is unpatriotic when it keeps such weapons out of the hands of violent criminals?

If it was a strict adherence to the constitution.Nationalism is synonymous with patriotism,therefore not adhering to the constitution would be a constridiction to US nationalism

constridiction? you're going to need to rephrase that.

I have no idea on that.

Why not, was it not your statment that conservative appointees would ban flag burning? Yet we have a conservative court stating that flag burning is constitutionally protected.

So by your logic communism,socialism all those progovernment things liberals love is also bad since Hitler,Stalin, and other vermon in recent history have been either socialist or communist?

Hitler was a socialist? Communist? It doesn't get as anti communist as facism dear boy. As for the matter of communism, socialism, they have nothing to do with the argument I've presented. Not to mention the fact that you'd have to prove I'm pro-communism/socialism.
Finally, if you'd any knowledge on the matter, you'd realize that Stalin was far from being a socialist or communist. Stalin had his own deal, Stalinsm - which was for the sole purpose of obtaining authoritarian rule. Oh and by the way, a hardcore supporter of nationalism - using such for more authoritarian control. So again, While you post around trumping you're a patriot/nationalists, it's more and more evident you've no idea what they are.

Finally I ask you the question again - with the obvious limitations placed on freedom that are inherent with nationalism, why are you trumping it around? Why, as you often say, are you bashing freedom?

First you libs mock patriotism now you pretend that you believe it is seperate from nationalism and now you try to alter the definitions of patriotism and nationalism.Did you ride the short bus to school and went to one of those classes that let make up your own words and meanings for those words?

And now the classic attack on liberalism again. It's like crushing an ant.:roll:

 

[jfuh]

Patriotism also means not letting some schmuck not totally contridict the values your country was founded upon.So if a Hitler person took over the US and disreguarded our founding documents I would do everything I can to remove this individual from office.

I hope you are not using this anology for some anti-bush nonsense.

Very interesting

 

[jamesrage]

Did I say they were? I said they too with the KKK, Neo-nazi's and so on all hide under the cloak of nationalism.
The minutmen are nothing more then xenophobic vigilantes.

So wanting your borders secure makes one a xenophobic vigilante.Btw how are they vigilantes?Are you a vigilanter if you call the cops to report a crime that is happening?The only thing the minute men are doing is reporting to the border patroll where individuals are illegally entering the united states.

Again, that's not my statment now is it? Answer the question, are you with the opinion that banning AK-47's is unpatriotic when it keeps such weapons out of the hands of violent criminals?

Limiting a law abiding citizens a right to bear arms is in infringment on his rights which is unpatriotic.

constridiction? you're going to need to rephrase that.

I ment contridiction.

Why not, was it not your statment that conservative appointees would ban flag burning? Yet we have a conservative court stating that flag burning is constitutionally protected.

Flag burning is not constitionally protected becuase there is no such thing as freedom to burn flags and there is no such thing as freedom of all expressions.Speech is a form of expression not all expressions.Speech is a very specific form of expression involving speaking or writting.So therefore there is no such thing as freedom of expression as you liberals claim.

Hitler was a socialist? Communist? It doesn't get as anti communist as facism dear boy. As for the matter of communism, socialism, they have nothing to do with the argument I've presented. Not to mention the fact that you'd have to prove I'm pro-communism/socialism.

The fact that you are trying to demonize nationalism while ignoring the fact that many dictators/facist are either socialist or communist proves your anti-patriot agenda.

Finally, if you'd any knowledge on the matter, you'd realize that Stalin was far from being a socialist or communist. Stalin had his own deal, Stalinsm - which was for the sole purpose of obtaining authoritarian rule. Oh and by the way, a hardcore supporter of nationalism - using such for more authoritarian control. So again, While you post around trumping you're a patriot/nationalists, it's more and more evident you've no idea what they are.

JUst like a liberal to claim a communist is not a communist.

Finally I ask you the question again - with the obvious limitations placed on freedom that are inherent with nationalism, why are you trumping it around?

The only limits are things that are not rights.Freedom of all expression is not a right,freedom of abortion is not a right,marriage is not a right.

Why, as you often say, are you bashing freedom?

What are your views on the second amendment?

And now the classic attack on liberalism again. It's like crushing an ant.:roll:

It is nice that you realize that liberalism is like a ant.

 

[Kandahar]

Patriotism also means not letting some schmuck not totally contridict the values your country was founded upon.

I totally agree. Which is why I question your patriotism, as you advocate censorship, protectionism, xenophobia, sectarianism, theocracy, unequal rights, and driving fuel-laden trucks into legal medical facilities.

 

[jamesrage]

I totally agree. Which is why I question your patriotism, as you advocate censorship,

So your telling me that George Washington would want a picture of some guy's penis on a big bill board outside his house?

protectionism,

Protectionism has been around since around the founding of our country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism
Famous early protectionists in the United States included Alexander Hamilton (who set the country's financing on the tariff), Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt.

xenophobia,

I do not support xenophobia.Unless xenophobia is liberal codeword or anti-illegals.

sectarianism,

sectariansm can be applied to anyone.You for example have a narrow-minded adherence to a particular sect,party or denomination..

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sectarianism
adj.

1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a sect.
2. Adhering or confined to the dogmatic limits of a sect or denomination; partisan.
3. Narrow-minded; parochial.


n.

1. A member of a sect.
2. One characterized by bigoted adherence to a factional viewpoint.

a narrow-minded adherence to a particular sect or party or denomination; "he condemned religious sectarianism" [syn: denominationalism]

unequal rights,

Equal means that the same thing that applies to me also applies to you.So if I am only allowed to marry one woman then so are you.

driving fuel-laden trucks into legal medical facilities.

Abortion clinics are not medical facilities,those are places where the worst scum of society masquerade as doctors to snuff out the lives on the innocent.Last time I check abortion is not a constitutional right.

 

[jfuh]

So wanting your borders secure makes one a xenophobic vigilante.Btw how are they vigilantes?Are you a vigilanter if you call the cops to report a crime that is happening?The only thing the minute men are doing is reporting to the border patroll where individuals are illegally entering the united states.

Lol, why don't you go ask your boyo Bush? He said that the minute men are vigilantes. I added the xenophobic part.

Limiting a law abiding citizens a right to bear arms is in infringment on his rights which is unpatriotic.

Again, not my statement now was it? I didn't know that violent criminals were law abiding citizens - but since that is your answer to my question I can only assume that you feel it perfectly fine to hand ak-47's to violent criminals whom you also see as law abiding citizens.

I ment contridiction.

In that case you do realize you're using a circular argument?
You're own words.

If it (nationalism) was in strict adherence to the constitution <snip> therefore not adhering to the constitution would be a contridiction to US nationalism

Summation:
If A were to B
therefor;
Not A is not B
Which is a completely invalid argument because B is not to A. Adherence to the constitution does not neccessitate nationalism.

Flag burning is not constitionally protected becuase there is no such thing as freedom to burn flags and there is no such thing as freedom of all expressions.Speech is a form of expression not all expressions.Speech is a very specific form of expression involving speaking or writting.So therefore there is no such thing as freedom of expression as you liberals claim.

That's not what the court said, and that wasn't your argument neither. You claimed that conservative judges would not make such rulings, yet the very rulings were made by a conservative court during the Regan administration. 1984 and 1989. The [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Federal Flag Protection Act of 1989[/SIZE][/FONT] was ruled by the court again as unconstitutional as it was an attempt to "ban unpopular speech".
Both instances the court ruled that flag burning is indeed speech as such is protected under the 1st amendment. Who were those judges that voted in favor? Wow lookie
Brennan, J., Marshall, Blackmun, Scalia, and Kennedy. All conservative judges.

The fact that you are trying to demonize nationalism while ignoring the fact that many dictators/facist are either socialist or communist proves your anti-patriot agenda.

How ironic, because these same dictators as noted many times over previously all call for nationalism, it's what keeps them in power - ie Kim Jun-Ill, Franco, Musolini - all hardcore nationalists; all supress freedom for thier own authoritarian rule. Why are you in such support of authoritarianism?

JUst like a liberal to claim a communist is not a communist.

Read up on Stalin, and you will see he was no communist, at least not in the Marxim sence of a communist. I suppose you think that the communist party in China are also communist?

The only limits are things that are not rights.Freedom of all expression is not a right,freedom of abortion is not a right,marriage is not a right.

IS not free speech a right? Yet nationalism obviously suppresses any free speech - try voicing calling Kim Jun-Ill a short fat prick, you'd be thrown in jail, tortured, then shot for revealing state secrets.

What are your views on the second amendment?

What about it? We have the right to bear arms.
But answer my question? Why are you bashing freedom?

It is nice that you realize that liberalism is like a ant.

:lamo you're funny when you're hopelessly begging like this.

 

[Kandahar]

So your telling me that George Washington would want a picture of some guy's penis on a big bill board outside his house?

If the Founding Fathers had a problem with it, the First Amendment would read "Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech, except in cases of pictures of some guy's penis on a billboard in front of our houses." But it doesn't.

Protectionism has been around since around the founding of our country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism
Famous early protectionists in the United States included Alexander Hamilton (who set the country's financing on the tariff), Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt.

You overlook the fact that Hamilton did this to FINANCE the government, as there weren't any other taxes at the time. Protectionism is quite different from having a small revenue-based tariff in place.

I do not support xenophobia.Unless xenophobia is liberal codeword or anti-illegals.

It is. Like I said, you support xenophobia.

sectariansm can be applied to anyone.You for example have a narrow-minded adherence to a particular sect,party or denomination.

Oh do I? What sect, party, or denomination would that be?

Sectarianism does NOT apply to everyone, at least not in the context that I was clearly using the term (not that you'd know, since you just whip out the trusty dictionary for those big words you don't know, completely ignoring context).

You support sectarianism in that you can't get through a single post without calling someone or some group of people anti-American, traitors, or some other reviled name. There's no room for political disagreement with you; if anyone disagrees with you on any issue at all, it's obviously because they hate America.

Equal means that the same thing that applies to me also applies to you.So if I am only allowed to marry one woman then so are you.

You think that men should have special rights (the right to marry women) that women do not have.

Abortion clinics are not medical facilities,those are places where the worst scum of society masquerade as doctors to snuff out the lives on the innocent.Last time I check abortion is not a constitutional right.

Eating pizza is not a constitutional right either; that doesn't mean you have the right to walk into a pizza parlor and kill people.

Whether abortion is a constitutional right or not is irrelevant. It is LEGAL, and you are supporting TERRORISM...which is about as anti-American as you can possibly get.

 

[jamesrage]

Lol, why don't you go ask your boyo Bush? He said that the minute men are vigilantes. I added the xenophobic part.

Bush is a proillegals/globalist trying to suck on Mexico's and big business's balls with that statement.A vigilante is someone who takes the law into their own hands.The minute men are not taking the law into their own hands

Again, not my statement now was it? I didn't know that violent criminals were law abiding citizens - but since that is your answer to my question I can only assume that you feel it perfectly fine to hand ak-47's to violent criminals whom you also see as law abiding citizens.

I do not see criminals as law abiding citizens.Law abiding citizens should be entitled to the right to purchase AK-47s.

In that case you do realize you're using a circular argument?
You're own words.

Summation:
If A were to B
therefor;
Not A is not B
Which is a completely invalid argument because B is not to A. Adherence to the constitution does not neccessitate nationalism.

Nationalism is synonymous with patriotism,therefore strict adherance to the constitution is required.

That's not what the court said, and that wasn't your argument neither. You claimed that conservative judges would not make such rulings, yet the very rulings were made by a conservative court during the Regan administration. 1984 and 1989. The [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Federal Flag Protection Act of 1989[/SIZE][/FONT] was ruled by the court again as unconstitutional as it was an attempt to "ban unpopular speech".
Both instances the court ruled that flag burning is indeed speech as such is protected under the 1st amendment. Who were those judges that voted in favor? Wow lookie
Brennan, J., Marshall, Blackmun, Scalia, and Kennedy. All conservative judges.

I do not care that they bought some rat liberal's argument.

H

ow ironic, because these same dictators as noted many times over previously all call for nationalism, it's what keeps them in power - ie Kim Jun-Ill, Franco, Musolini - all hardcore nationalists; all supress freedom for thier own authoritarian rule. Why are you in such support of authoritarianism?

Read up on Stalin, and you will see he was no communist, at least not in the Marxim sence of a communist. I suppose you think that the communist party in China are also communist?

You keep ignoring the fact most of these dictators were commies while trying demonize nationalism/patriotism.

IS not free speech a right? Yet nationalism obviously suppresses any free speech -

Free speech is a right,as I said before nationalism is synonymous with patriotism,therefore strict adherance to the constitution is required.American nationalism does not suppress free speech.

Nationalism in my view depends on the country,if a country does not have free speech,then nationalism in that country could suppress free speech while in this country that has free speech since it is a constitutional right in this country nationalism does not supress free speech.

What about it? We have the right to bear arms.

What are your views on the right to bear arms,are the in line with what is literally said in the constituion or do you side with the ACLU's twisting of it?

But answer my question? Why are you bashing freedom?

I am not bashing freedom.

Why are you a anti-american/unpatriotic/disloyal to this country?

:lamo you're funny when you're hopelessly begging like this.

How is acknowledging that you realize that liberalism is a like a ant that can be easily crushed a form of begging?

 

[jamesrage]

If the Founding Fathers had a problem with it, the First Amendment would read "Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech, except in cases of pictures of some guy's penis on a billboard in front of our houses." But it doesn't.

Do you honestly think you would have been able to do something like that back then?

You overlook the fact that this was done to FINANCE the government, as there weren't any other taxes at the time. Protectionism is quite different from having a small revenue-based tariff in place.

The online encyclopedia did not say these men were trying to fund the government,it said these men were protectionist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism
Famous early protectionists in the United States included Alexander Hamilton (who set the country's financing on the tariff), Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt.

It is. Like I said, you support xenophobia.

So you view wanting to have our laws respected instead of shitted on somehow xenophobia?

Oh do I? What sect, party, or denomination would that be?

liberalism.

Sectarianism does NOT apply to everyone, at least not in the context that I was clearly using the term (not that you'd know, since you just whip out the trusty dictionary for those big words you don't know, completely ignoring context).

Context is defined as

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/context

1. The part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage and determines its meaning.
2. The circumstances in which an event occurs; a setting.


Therefore it is correct to use a word's definition.

You support sectarianism in that you can't get through a single post without calling someone or some group of people anti-American, traitors, or some other reviled name. There's no room for political disagreement with you; if anyone disagrees with you on any issue at all, it's obviously because they hate America.

You mock nationalism/patriotism you have no room to say anyone hates america.

You think that men should have special rights (the right to marry women) that women do not have.

Women have a right to marry men.

Eating pizza is not a constitutional right either; that doesn't mean you have the right to walk into a pizza parlor and kill people.

Whether abortion is a constitutional right or not is irrelevant. It is LEGAL, and you are supporting TERRORISM...which is about as anti-American as you can possibly get.

Weren't you the same person trying to use some anti-american moral relativism crap trying to call our founding forefathers terrorist?

 

[Kandahar]

Do you honestly think you would have been able to do something like that back then?

Find me a federal law from the 1790s banning this, or some other form of "indecency." The federal government didn't get around to raping the Constitution until the mid-1800s, and didn't REALLY get into it until the early 1900s.

The online encyclopedia did not say these men were trying to fund the government,it said these men were protectionist.

So what? How do I know you didn't write that yourself? Wikipedia is hardly an infallible source of information, and in this case they're wrong, at least about Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton favored liberal trade practices; the tariff was simply the government's only source of revenue at the time.

So you view wanting to have our laws respected instead of shitted on somehow xenophobia?

In this case? Yes.

liberalism.

Yawn. Notice no one on this board of any intelligence seems to think I'm firmly in the "liberal" camp.

You mock nationalism/patriotism you have no room to say anyone hates america.

Well since I usually DON'T say people hate America (except as tongue-in-cheek criticism of your OWN sectarianism), this point is moot.

Women have a right to marry men.

Two special rights do not make an equal right.

Weren't you the same person trying to use some anti-american moral relativism crap trying to call our founding forefathers terrorist?

I didn't say they were terrorists, I said that if the British won the war they'd be considered traitors. A point which you did not refute, I might add.

 

[jamesrage]

Find me a federal law from the 1790s banning this, or some other form of "indecency." The federal government didn't get around to raping the Constitution until the mid-1800s, and didn't REALLY get into it until the early 1900s.

Laws against doing certian things are usually created when someone does a certian thing.

So what? How do I know you didn't write that yourself? Wikipedia is hardly an infallible source of information, and in this case they're wrong, at least about Alexander Hamilton.

Thats a new one,accuse someone of writing the article himself.

In this case? Yes.

Even though I do not mind people legally comming over here and staying here legally,but because of the fact I oppose illegal immigration that makes me xenophobic?Where are you getting your nonsense from?

Yawn. Notice no one on this board of any intelligence seems to think I'm firmly in the "liberal" camp.

Proably because you make liberals look even worse.Most liberals do not claim Ward Churchill as a liberal,it is because they fear being seen for what they are.

Well since I usually DON'T say people hate America (except as tongue-in-cheek criticism of your OWN sectarianism), this point is moot.

You seem to think the idea of loyalty to your country a joke,it is real easy to see someone such as yourself being a self-hating american.

Two special rights do not make an equal right.

You can marry someone of the opposite sex, I can marry someone of the opposite,and any women can marry somoene of the opposite sex,therefore it is not a special right.BTW marriage is not a right.

I didn't say they were terrorists, I said that if the British won the war they'd be considered traitors. A point which you did not refute, I might add.

THis anti-american moral releativism crap usually winds up in the direction of calling our forefathers terrorist.

 

[jfuh]

Bush is a proillegals/globalist trying to suck on Mexico's and big business's balls with that statement.A vigilante is someone who takes the law into their own hands.The minute men are not taking the law into their own hands

IT's what your boyo said. Perhaps then Bush is a moron?
As for the minutmen, they're nothing but racist xenophobes.

I do not see criminals as law abiding citizens.Law abiding citizens should be entitled to the right to purchase AK-47s.

Again, that's not my statement. Keeping ak-47's off the street is simply that. Ask any law enforcement as to what they think of keeping such assault weaponry off the streets.

Nationalism is synonymous with patriotism,therefore strict adherance to the constitution is required.

Only, nationalism limits free speech, which is against the constitution.

I do not care that they bought some rat liberal's argument.

You should, because that was your argument all together. You stated that conservative judges would never rule in favor of flag burning. Yet it was the conservative judges that did just that.

You keep ignoring the fact most of these dictators were commies while trying demonize nationalism/patriotism.

I do? What does a select few being commies have anything to do with them being nationalists. Franco, Musolini, and hitler, none of them were commies, yet all were nationalists. It's note worthy that you are not denying this.

Free speech is a right,as I said before nationalism is synonymous with patriotism,therefore strict adherance to the constitution is required.American nationalism does not suppress free speech.

American nationalism? Lol, so now it's making up isms?

Nationalism in my view depends on the country,if a country does not have free speech,then nationalism in that country could suppress free speech while in this country that has free speech since it is a constitutional right in this country nationalism does not supress free speech.

Natioalism is brainwashing with propaganda. Nothing more, it quells decent through a call to arms for the state. The state does no wrong. Perhaps you need to reexamine what it is you are preaching.

What are your views on the right to bear arms,are the in line with what is literally said in the constituion or do you side with the ACLU's twisting of it?

I think I made it quite clear of my opinion - the right to bear arms, is the right to bear arms.

I am not bashing freedom.

Why are you a anti-american/unpatriotic/disloyal to this country?

If you're not bashing freedom then why is it that you are in support of nationalism? Something that is clearly used to establish authoritarian rule? Not only are you bashing freedom, you're "treasonous" to the principles of this country.

How is acknowledging that you realize that liberalism is a like a ant that can be easily crushed a form of begging?

Reading helps, you should try it sometime.

 

[earthworm]

Jfuh writes, and I quote > Only, nationalism limits free speech, which is against the constitution.

Nationalism has nothing to do with speech, free or not. My idea of American nationalism should not be confused with that of extremists..
Man has a tendency of not knowing when to stop, and where...
Maybe I am an extremest when it comes to our flag - flag burning is an insult to our nation , and has nothing to do with speech..
Respect of our flag is part of American Nationalism (AN), as is having English as the sole official language.....
I am asking for little,IMO.....

BTW, "free speech" must be limited and controlled. Maybe one of these days were will have a quality of people who will not abuse their rights..

 

[jamesrage]

IT's what your boyo said. Perhaps then Bush is a moron?
As for the minutmen, they're nothing but racist xenophobes.

Do you have any actual proof the minutemen are racist xenophobes or are you just regurgitating the proillegals keep spewing?

Again, that's not my statement. Keeping ak-47's off the street is simply that. Ask any law enforcement as to what they think of keeping such assault weaponry off the streets.

Criminals do not obey laws,which is why they are called criminals in the first place.What makes you think they care about anti-american anti-gun laws?

Only, nationalism limits free speech, which is against the constitution.

American nationalism does not limit free speech.Nationalism is synonymous with patriotism,therefore strict adherance to the constitution is required.

You should, because that was your argument all together. You stated that conservative judges would never rule in favor of flag burning. Yet it was the conservative judges that did just that.

JUst because someone was put into a position by a republican does not make them conservative.

I do? What does a select few being commies have anything to do with them being nationalists. Franco, Musolini, and hitler, none of them were commies, yet all were nationalists. It's note worthy that you are not denying this.

So how do you know it wasn't their socialism or communism that caused them to be able to institute facist society?

American nationalism? Lol, so now it's making up isms?

Your the one who seems to think nationalism and patriotism are not synonymous.Since they are synonymous that means there is a difference between American nationalism and Brazil nationalism.

Natioalism is brainwashing with propaganda. Nothing more, it quells decent through a call to arms for the state. The state does no wrong. Perhaps you need to reexamine what it is you are preaching.

Amazing how you libs mock nationalism/patriotism.Only a brainwashed idiot could love his country,is that what you are saying?

I think I made it quite clear of my opinion - the right to bear arms, is the right to bear arms.

How do you define that right to bear arms?Is is the ACLU's verison of the right to bear arms?
http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14523res20020304.html
that the individual's right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected.

If you're not bashing freedom then why is it that you are in support of nationalism? Something that is clearly used to establish authoritarian rule? Not only are you bashing freedom, you're "treasonous" to the principles of this country.

Look in the mirror liberal and you will see a traitor and a disloyal/unpatriotic self-hating american.

Reading helps, you should try it sometime.

IF you practiced what you preached then you would not argue that nationalism is not synonymous with patriotism.





If I went by your logic then I could say that since democrats were the party of the KKK during the reconstruction period in this country and afterwards then that also makes you a racist.So therefore by your logic all democrats are racist.

 

[BigDog]

Nationalism is without question bad. It blinds reasonable people to the truth. It is good to care about your country and to want what is best for it, and Patriots do this. But to accept a government blindly, to back it no matter what it does, is simply wrong. And that is what most nationalists do.

One definition of the word: "excessive devotion to nation: excessive or fanatical devotion to a nation and its interests, often associated with a belief that one country is superior to all others."

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861632464/nationalism.html

 

[BigDog]

A more accruate definition:

nationalism, political or social philosophy in which the welfare of the nation-state as an entity is considered paramount. Nationalism is basically a collective state of mind or consciousness in which people believe their primary duty and loyalty is to the nation-state. Often nationalism implies national superiority and glorifies various national virtues. Thus love of nation may be overemphasized; concern with national self-interest to the exclusion of the rights of other nations may lead to international conflict.

http://www.answers.com/nationalism&r=67

 

[Indy]

I'm sorry Jamesrage but I have to say this because I'm sick and tired of nuts like you throwing out this false argument. The Right to bear arms does NOT say Right to bear any type of gun you want. Even if every single type of gun was made illegal except for a hunting rifle, your rights would not be infringed upon. You still had the right to bear arms. Maybe not the arms that you want, but that's not what the constitution protects now is it. Am I wrong? I think not.

 

[Gibberish]

I'm sorry Jamesrage but I have to say this because I'm sick and tired of nuts like you throwing out this false argument. The Right to bear arms does NOT say Right to bear any type of gun you want. Even if every single type of gun was made illegal except for a hunting rifle, your rights would not be infringed upon. You still had the right to bear arms. Maybe not the arms that you want, but that's not what the constitution protects now is it. Am I wrong? I think not.

People forget that when bill of rights was written there was not but a few selections of "arms" to choose from and none had even close to the fire power today's "arms" have.

I see no problem with allowing someone the right to own a handgun but not allowing that same person the right to strap a 30mm machine gun to the top of their truck.

 

[jfuh]

Do you have any actual proof the minutemen are racist xenophobes or are you just regurgitating the proillegals keep spewing?

From the very fact that KKK, Neo-nazis are all joining the screams. The minute men claim that illegals are "invading" this country - that's very much xenophobia right there. Why don't they speak up against the illegals of eastern european origins? Only those from Mexico, that's very much racism. proof?
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=557
example of xeonophobia?

"It should be legal to kill illegals," said Carl, a 69-year old retired Special Forces veteran who fought in Vietnam and now lives out West. "Just shoot 'em on sight. That's my immigration policy recommendation. You break into my country, you die."

and also

"Well, this may sound a little weird, but I just have more respect for the lives of stray cats and dogs than I do illegal aliens."

example of racism

The other vigilantes assigned to Station Two included a pair of self-professed members of the National Alliance, a violent neo-Nazi organization. These men, who gave their names only as Johnny and Michael, were outfitted in full-body camouflage and strapped with semi-automatic pistols.

Earlier that day, Johnny and Michael had scouted sniper positions in the rolling, cactus-studded foothills north of Border Road, taking compass readings and drawing maps for future reference.

"I agree completely," Michael said. "You get up there with a rifle and start shooting four or five of them a week, the other four or five thousand behind them are going to think twice about crossing that line."

I'm pro-illegal? yawn

Criminals do not obey laws,which is why they are called criminals in the first place.What makes you think they care about anti-american anti-gun laws?

Again, that's not what I'm asking now is it? Why do you support keeping weapons such as Ak-47's on the streets making it easy for criminals to acquire? Did you go speak to any law enforcement officer about the matter?

American nationalism does not limit free speech.Nationalism is synonymous with patriotism,therefore strict adherance to the constitution is required.

More circular reasoning?

JUst because someone was put into a position by a republican does not make them conservative.

Scalia is not conservative? Interesting. Care to prove that?

So how do you know it wasn't their socialism or communism that caused them to be able to institute facist society?

Because Facism is as anti-communist as you can get. Hitler was extremely anti-communist. Now if you feel otherwise, how about backing up your claim with some reputable source that Hitler was communist/socialist.

Your the one who seems to think nationalism and patriotism are not synonymous.Since they are synonymous that means there is a difference between American nationalism and Brazil nationalism.

YOu still haven't shown how nationalism is not brainwashing.
Now on that note, have I said they weren't synonymous? I said that they are not equal.
Finally, plz show me how given the instance that patriotism and nationalism being synonymous dictates that there is a difference between american and brazillian nationalism? It's a self contradictory statement.
Also again it's noteworthy that you are not denying that you are making up isms.

Amazing how you libs mock nationalism/patriotism.Only a brainwashed idiot could love his country,is that what you are saying?

I said that? Please show where I said that.
I can love my country and not be a nationalist. I can love my guy friends and not be gay. I know that's incredibly difficult for you to comprehend.

How do you define that right to bear arms?Is is the ACLU's verison of the right to bear arms?
http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14523res20020304.html
that the individual's right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected.

Wow, you keep pressing on this issue it seems, how can I make this clear to you. I support am for the right to bear arms.

Look in the mirror liberal and you will see a traitor and a disloyal/unpatriotic self-hating american.

I very much like what I see, I very much love myself thank you. If you say I'm a traitor, perhaps you'd like to elaborate on that and state just how of what action I've done that makes me a traitor?
Seeing as you call Bush a sell out, is he a traitor to this country too?
Again it is note worthy that you do not deny being a traitor in your support of nationalism which is used to establish authoritarian rule the anti to the principles of this country.

IF you practiced what you preached then you would not argue that nationalism is not synonymous with patriotism.

I don't argue that at all, I said they are not equal.

If I went by your logic then I could say that since democrats were the party of the KKK during the reconstruction period in this country and afterwards then that also makes you a racist.So therefore by your logic all democrats are racist.

The southern democrats/dixiecrats were very much racists pricks. Many of them have now shifted over to the GOP ironically.
I would be a hypocritical cheecky racists bastard in that sense, only problem is, I'm not a democrat.
Don't you realize by now that the argument of liberals/conservatives; gop/dems is only showing the side that is loosing the debate? Lame.

 

[StrawHat]

To put it simply:

Nationalism=
Patriotism=:smile:

Basically, people should be loyal to and proud of their country. It only seems right given that a country gives people a structured environment in which to live and provide for those that they love. However, should one bulldoze the rights and interests of other countries because of some piece of land or a government? No, of course not.

 

[RightOfCenter]

To put it simply:

Nationalism=
Patriotism=:smile:

Basically, people should be loyal to and proud of their country. It only seems right given that a country gives people a structured environment in which to live and provide for those that they love. However, should one bulldoze the rights and interests of other countries because of some piece of land or a government? No, of course not.

Did you know that drinking too much water too quickly could kill you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_poisoning

I find it amazing that something so good and pure as water could end up killing you. In many ways this is a lot like patriotism and nationalism. Respecting or nation's history, accomplisments, and ideologies is great, but taken too far it could destroy our country. Will nationalism be taken far enough along to harm the U.S.? Probably not. I can not see proponents of blind nationalism brainwashing every one in our country and taking us down the path of facism and totalitarionism. But it is a very real possibility that you should consider, jamesrage, before blindly following every conservative talking point thrown at you. As for everyone else (because it seems like he was all alone defending nationalism) should remember without any water you die.

 

[nogoodname]

how can anyone think nationlism is good?

 

[nogoodname]

Did you know that drinking too much water too quickly could kill you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_poisoning

I find it amazing that something so good and pure as water could end up killing you. In many ways this is a lot like patriotism and nationalism. Respecting or nation's history, accomplisments, and ideologies is great, but taken too far it could destroy our country. Will nationalism be taken far enough along to harm the U.S.? Probably not. I can not see proponents of blind nationalism brainwashing every one in our country and taking us down the path of facism and totalitarionism. But it is a very real possibility that you should consider, jamesrage, before blindly following every conservative talking point thrown at you. As for everyone else (because it seems like he was all alone defending nationalism) should remember without any water you die.

did your mom tell you "having to much of anything is bad"? Same with religion, conserative, liberal, or anything.

 

[Indy]

did your mom tell you "having to much of anything is bad"? Same with religion, conserative, liberal, or anything.

Well said. That's why I'm an independant. Take everything with a grain of salt I say. Listen to all talking points but decide wich ones hold merit on your own. BTW great avatar!

 

[nogoodname]

Well said. That's why I'm an independant. Take everything with a grain of salt I say. Listen to all talking points but decide wich ones hold merit on your own. BTW great avatar!

ty i love anime and i thought i found it and thought it was great for a avatar since it looks like the sculpture of the thinking man or w/e. but ya thanks again