THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)
Fun Stuff => CHATTER => Topic started by: fatty on 24 Jul 2008, 06:07
-
I think I made a thread along these lines before, but I think this one follows a slightly different track, and hopefully leads to different discussions.
I was in the countryside and wondering how I should feel about it. I've heard about the Man from Snowy River and all the kind of cultural reference and signifcance this place has, but I have only really encountered it a few times as a teenager. This let me think about all the other australian landscapes and natural wonders that I've always known but never seen.
Basically, being born in Australia and raised here, I am wondering how I should feel about my homeland. Am I attached to it? Am I attached to it because it's Australian and it's part of my national pride? And how far does it extend. Do I feel a sense of kinship with all Australians, and attachment to all Australian landscapes. I'm not really one for patriotism, I think it's lost some of it's shine for a lot of people now. I won't deny that I love Australia as a country, I love the people and the culture, I love sydney as a city and my home.
What do you think is nationalism, how do you feel about it?
Is nationalism outdated?
Are you attached to the place you were brought up/homeland?
My dad spent his first 18 years in Vietnam, but the last 30 years here. Some would say he'd probably consider vietnam his homeland, and feel a sense of national affiliation to it. But to be fair, the Vietnam he was brought up in before the war was not the one that existed after. And by ethnicity, he is chinese, and ethnic Vietnamese always regarded him as a different type to them. But he's lived in Australia longer than he's lived there, would support Australia over Vietnam in sport etc. How is it for people who have lived in multiple countries or have citizenship in more than one country?
*Sorry if it feels like I'm thread flooding, I start uni next week, might as well get my thoughts out now while I have time! I am just writing about what interests me and things I want to hear about from other perspectives.
-
I live in New Zealand, I feel very mehh about this. Like you I love my country, but I wouldn't say I'm batshit insane for it.
-
I wouldn't even go that far. I don't love Australia, or the place I was born (which is still Australia). I like it. I'm happy that there aren't any wars here and that the chances of me being shot are significantly lower here than other places but I honestly feel no sense of pride or loyalty to the country. It could have something to do with the fact that while, yes, I was born here both my mother and my father are refugees from Sri Lanka and Hungary respectively which means that at the schools I went to I wasn't seen as Australian but because my family has tried very hard to fit in (to the point of changing the family name so that morons can pronounce it properly, though they still can't) I don't have much of those cultures either. As such I see patriotism/nationalism as really pretty dumb as it seems mostly reserved for either stupid or horrendously uneducated and openly anti-intellectual people. I especially don't see why people get so worked up over where their ancestors are from when they were born somewhere else and have, most of the time, not even been to the place in question; they just mimic their parents over and over again until they fool themselves into believing that they actually care about a place they have never been and wouldn't be accepted into were they to go (that's probably not the case a lot of the time but I know people who have gone to where there parents are from and they were treated as total outsiders because they are not actually from there).
-
Personally, I believe that nationalism is a reason for quite a lot of bad things that happened throughout history and continue to happen even today. I think that it is necessary for us, as mankind, to take what i believe to be an important step inthe development of civilisation, and finally leave nationalism behind.
Other than that, I probably won't say anything here. I also think that this is a pretty dangerous topic.
-
I like the UK, I'm proud to be British and proud of her achievements, and if there was a major war, I'd probably fight for my country. But I'm not blindingly patriotic, I don't believe in "My country right and wrong", am aware of problems and mistakes made by the UK, have no xenophobia and recognise the value of other countries. I have dual nationality with America as well, but feel nothing for it, no loyalty, exactly the same as I feel about Canada, or Denmark, or Latvia.
That said, patriotism can be quite amusing, especially in the case of some Americans who have such a blinkered view of the rest of the world, and feel no need to see or learn anything about other countries.
-
Well I see an important distinction between patriotism and nationalism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotism
The difference is rather subtle. Basically, nationalism is a sort of indoctrinated territorial behavior. In it's milder forms (ie. nations have a right to exist) I think nationalism is a good thing really, but in it's more extreme forms nationalism often amounts to bigotry (eg. thinly veiled racism.) In all cases, the exclusionary aspects of nationalism don't sit well with me. For example, for all of it's justifications and the very real need to manage the flow of immigrants, the border fence is about cementing the distinction between "us" and "them." How ironic when the United States itself only exists because of land grabs that had nothing to do with any nationalist claims.
Patriotism however doesn't necessarily go along with ownership over territory. Patriotism is about cultural pride, and loving the ideals of your country. Patriotism is an attachment to people and ideas, whereas nationalism is about who owns what. To really understand the distinction, think about the Revolutionary War; George Washington was about as patriotic as you can get, and yet he was patriotic toward a country that didn't even exist yet.
While I don't experience much nationalism, I do consider myself fairly patriotic. I cherish the values of this country, feel pride in the achievements of my countrymen, and consider myself an American; I love to travel around the country and see the beauty of it, but I feel no ownership over any of these places. I think incidentally these distinctions are where all the "if you hate this country then move" kinda stuff misses the mark. I love my country, I just don't feel much attachment to any particular piece of dirt.
Whether or not these attitudes are because I was born in another country and lived overseas for most of my childhood is an open question, but obviously any person's upbringing has a massive effect on their outlook.
At that, I suppose it is interesting to consider the notion of nationalism in the context of my birthplace of Korea, a country artificially divided by extreme differences in political ideology. I mean, how much respect can you have for the idea of national borders when your own borders were drawn up within the last 60 years? And whatever your feelings about national borders, aren't you still a patriot if you feel pride in your country?
This also brings up a territorial dispute currently going on between South Korea and Japan. Both nations claim ownership of the tiny island of Dokto:
http://son-of-gadfly-on-the-wall.blogspot.com/2008/07/my-response-to-south-korean-perspective.html
I'm not sure what exactly this dispute suggests, but it is certainly relevant.
-
I talk about leaving the country fairly regularly, if that gives you any idea of how patriotic I am. Blind patriotism also makes me want to vomit.
-
Personally, I believe that nationalism is a reason for quite a lot of bad things that happened throughout history and continue to happen even today. I think that it is necessary for us, as mankind, to take what i believe to be an important step inthe development of civilisation, and finally leave nationalism behind.
Other than that, I probably won't say anything here. I also think that this is a pretty dangerous topic.
Negative creep stole my words. Just to add a slight bit more, i have started a bit of a game wrapped around this topic. Whenever someone ask me where i live, where i'm from, or from which country i am a citizen of, my first answer is now always "I'm a citizen of the world, i live wherever i want to". Usually, the standard reaction to that is nervous laughter, followed by a very tense silence. And the silence continues when they realize i am not even joking about it.
But yeah, usually i would try to avoid the subject, people tend to dislike what i have to say this matter.
-
I like to lead people on a wild goose chase when they ask where I'm from. I suppose it's a little anti-social, but I get a kick out of how I can answer with a different place each time they attempt to clarify the question.
Where were you born? South Korea.
Where did you grow up? Connecticut.
Where do you live? Chicago.
-
There are very few things that I find good about nationalism/patriotism and those few things all happened through the arts. But that's it, really
I am not very patriotic and I'm not nationalistic at all. I like living in America most of the time, but I'm rather upset with how this country goes about doing things and how it's obsessed with being #1. I don't really have much to say on this subject, because I'm just too apathetic about it. The only thing I really like about my country is traveling to places I haven't been.
(Edit because I got the two backwards.)
-
What do you say when people say 'Where are you from?'. I don't get that one...
RE Patriotism vs Nationalism: See, I'd say that I'm attached to Australia, or at least Sydney. I am attached to Australian culture, and don't like to see it wronged or mis-interpreted/represented. But yeah as far as nationalism, I don't think it's as clear.
What I think is, that nationalism is very much the cause of a lot of wars and discrimination, but I sometimes feel like it is something ingrained in humans. The idea of their identity and ownership of their shared 'homeland'. I guess that falls more in patriotism, I definitely feel that it is natural for people to feel connected to a community, land or culture. But as much as I want nationalism in a formal sense to be a thing of the past, I feel like ownership is something that people never really want to let go of.
Realistically, I do see groups like the EU taking a stronger connecting role in diminishing the idea of individual nations at least in politics and immigration. I think nations are more and more becoming mixed and politically more closely tied with international connections and relations. People are also becoming much more diverse, having lived in or having family background in a number of countries. The above situation for Joe will be taken for granted, instead of simply mildly unusual and confusing.
-
What do you say when people say 'Where are you from?'
"Well it depends what you mean by 'from.' I've moved around a lot."
Incidentally, my tendency to answer "well it's relative" is one of the three main things people find annoying about conversing with me.
-
I just don't like how Nationalism is used to define people. Being an American overseas, and military to boot, i catch a lot of flack because i'm immediately filed into "Dumb Soldier Spreading Dumb Americanism In OUR Country". It's really frustrating trying to talk to people over here when you can tell that they're holding every one of my country's shortcomings against me. I joined the military because it would get me working in the medical field right away, and i love my job, helping people. It's amazing seeing some of the work we do, but it's also sad that what gets highlighted is the invasion and all the turmoil surrounding it.
-
This also brings up a territorial dispute currently going on between South Korea and Japan. Both nations claim ownership of the tiny island of Dokto
While looking up more about Dokto I found this old blog entry from a GI in Korea:
http://rokdrop.com/2005/05/27/gi-korea-does-dokto/
It makes for great reading, heh. I especially like his description of the ferry ride. Note that "ajumma" is Korean for "elder woman," and "ajushi" is "elder man."
-
Seeing as how i'm avoiding assignment to korea like the plague, but get the feeling i'll end up there anyway, i'll keep that little boat trip in mind. Partying with a bunch of overzealous senior citizens sounds like fun
-
Personally, I believe that nationalism is a reason for quite a lot of bad things that happened throughout history and continue to happen even today. I think that it is necessary for us, as mankind, to take what i believe to be an important step inthe development of civilisation, and finally leave nationalism behind.
I agree with this. The idea that I'm somehow different to one person and fundamentally the same as another because of which side of an imaginary line on a map drawn up by someone I would no doubt have detested and certainly have nothing in common with hundreds of years ago is utterly bizarre to me. I have an emotional connection to certain places I've lived in and think of as home but I definitely have no emotional connection to the political entity known as the UK, or England, or Yorkshire. I also particularly hate the idea that I have some kind of right to prevent people freely moving through and/or settling in this same place because of an accident of birth. I have no more right to be here than anyone else.
Neither do I have any emotional connection to being English as some sort of national grouping. English history and identity is no more my history than French or Spanish history. In fact, events like Paris '68 and the Spanish civil war seem much more part of some kind of personal history to me than many significant events in England. I'd fight my country, but I'd never fight for it.
-
I love my city of Chicago and I love America. I love the history and the culture, and I love what it stands for. I do NOT love the government, and I believe that that is a part of true American patriotism. We are meant to be distrustful of our government and that is why we have the constitutional right to impeach and imprison our presidents. I support nationalism as something people should embrace... to a point. People should invest themselves in the history of their country as much as possible, but that does not mean they should love their country for what it is. Rather, I think that people should love their country for its potential as much as anything, because while empires will rise and fall as long as you love your country for what it may become it is going to have a brighter future entirely because of that hope.
*edit*
Apologies for making that sound so... strange? I am terrible at articulating things.
-
i actually somehow feel more italian than american. i mean, even though i'm half-italian i grew up in the states and have only been living in italy for about 3 years. i don't even speak italian nearly as well as i speak english, and i have difficulty reading and writing it. i was talking to a few people who are similar to me (either half american but grew up in italy or half italian but gew up in the states). we all commented on how when we are in italy and people ask us where we're from we say "america", but when we're in the states we often refer to ourselves as italian. but honestly, despite all this, i feel very self consciously italian (in my mentality) in america, but i rarely, if ever, feel really "american" when i'm in italy.
with that being said, i really am not incredibly patriotic or nationalistic over either of these countries. sometimes i get super-patriotic over italy and its soccer team and how it's the best country ever, but i am mostly joking (except for the soccer part). i really appreciate the good things about both of them, and also quick to criticize their weaknesses. i don't feel any strong ties to my hometown (i could never imagine myself moving back and living there for the rest of my life), but i also find it difficult to imagine living in rome forever. i feel pretty homeless.
then there's that random bahraini chunk thrown in. i'm technically just as bahraini as i am italian, but i've been almost completely alienated from my mother's culture. but that's a whole other issue i'm not going to delve into!
basically: discussions like these just reinforce my sentiment that race, ethnicity & citizenship are pretty useless ways to define people. as the world becomes more globalized there are more and more people who are like me and who become such a random mix of things that no set label (in terms of their background or home country) can really apply.
-
I've always felt that nationalism was a bit of a silly, irrational concept, to be honest. I've lived my entire life thus far, but I don't love this country; hell, I don't even like it, given my intention to emigrate as soon as I'm done with university, and why would I? I didn't choose to be British. I don't understand why someone would feel proud of the fact that they happened to be born on one specific bit of land over another. You can certainly love your culture, which ties into your nation in some instances, but the notion that you should or you must is an outdated, irrational concept as far as I can tell, and it's been used to justify many great evils over the years. I'm a human being; anything else are just completely arbitrary distinctions that I want no part of.
-
I think they are both pretty irrational concepts, and I do not understand them.
-
I can't say as I'm particularly proud to be British, or proud of Britain at the moment. I do feel a small amount of pride in Europe and in being European, though.
-
Urgh, ok.
I never asked to be American, being born here was not special. But my ancestors did choose to come here--From Poland, Italy, Britain, and all over the fucking place. And I exist because of outrageously improbable occurrences spread out over hundreds of years that slowly developed the relationships and culture that made me possible. I should take pride in my country because I am a product of it. I have been ashamed of my government more than once, but a country is led by its people and not its government. That a person should be obligated to be a nationalist is a ridiculous belief, but people SHOULD understand how deeply their culture has affected who they are. People should not be judged by where they are from and don't quote me as saying anything to the contrary, but there is a very real influence there.
And if I didn't live in Chicago I would be missing out on some seriously delicious food.
-
I feel a connection to the people and landscape and culture of where I was born (and have lived my whole life), but not to the country or flags or anything, as those are essentially meaningless and artificial constructs. I feel more patriotic, perhaps even nationalistic feelings, for the specific place where I have lived most my life, the Isle of Wight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_Wight). I think perhaps if the Isle of Wight was its own country (and I think it should be) I would be far more patriotic. VECTIS FOR THE VECTIANS!
I have to say that I find nationalism in particular for places like America and Australia very absurd, unless you happen to be a native american or an aboriginie. I don't think I need to dip into that opinion anymore.
-
I get what you're saying about The Native Americans and Aborigines and it's not a bad point, but I can't agree with it because (as I'm sure is also the case in Australia) we have deep roots despite being young countries.
-
being a proud irish person is kinda sometrhing thats beaten into you, figuratively speaking of course. if youre not rpoud to be irish, its seen as being a bit backwards about going forwards like.
im from cork, which is a whole other story, id always say " im from cork" before saying im irish, and im not all that into this "irish by birth cork by the grace of god" shite... im only like that with all ireland finals in hurling and gaelic football and such... i get really riled up, its kinda embarrassing!
i dunno, i think it all depends on youre upbringing and exposure to this nationalism and patriotism stuff, much like other things in life!
-
What do you say when people say 'Where are you from?'. I don't get that one...
This question is a bit funny. In some places (Australia- probably others?) it's almost seen as borderline offensive, as there is an assumption that the person asking the question is making the assumption that "you're not from here", and that this is a bad thing.
But in other places, some countries in Europe for example, it's pretty much the second most frequently asked question, more like friendly small-talk. And not just to tourists- also asked by and to people from the same country.
-
You haven't got castles outside of Disneyland, dude. Try again.
I don't think I'm seeing your point :|
-
So, I've never lived in one country consistently, so maybe that's why i'm not nationalistic, or patriotic for that matter.
However, since I am Belgian, and Belgium does get given a lot of shit (most recent example is 'In Bruges') I do tend to stand up for Belgium, but this is more defensive than offensive. However, when I'm in Belgium I take the same attitude towards the US.
I don't feel at all attached to it though. I feel attached to the community I live in. In Belgium I feel like I'm from Ghent. In the US I feel like a New Yorker. I feel a lot more connected and proud of a place that I visit/see regularly. So I tend to associate myself with cities rather than countries . In my head this also makes more sense.
I've had this conversation recently with some people. In the modern world, it would probably make more sense to return to City States than to Nation States. Take a look at Singapore, or Hong Kong until recently. I'm sure there's a lot that can go wrong, but economically, it makes a lot more sense to have a global body of laws and let cities conduct their own business (however, I'm not an economist, so feel free to correct me here).
-
I'm from a wee village on the west coast of Scotland and I go to university/spend virtually all my time in Glasgow. I feel a good connection to both these places, but I do not really give a shite about being Scottish. I really think that nationalism is, by definiton, divisionary. I am very much of the opinion that no matter where you are from you can either be a cunt or not a cunt, and I'll be glad to chat to you if you're not.
I also do not understand people that proudly exclaim that X was invented where they are from as if they had anything to do with it's invention whatsoever.
-
Fuck you*, an Australian invented the Goon Bag (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_wine)!
It fulfills multiple functions, being a dispenser of low-quality alcohol, a pillow, and a flotation device. It has also been noted for its use a decorative bauble.
*Not really, of course, I think you're lovely.
-
And an American created the segway, and I cannot have pride in that :cry:
-
I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with nationalism or patriotism in their most simple forms. It's a natural human reaction to form social clumps, and while we, the proud denizens of the internet have access to a world of people, many people don't, and the condescending attitude that is fairly common on the internet of "patriotism and nationalism are a waste of time" is something I find kind of amusing. The fact that it has been used an excuse for atrocities doesn't necessarily mean we should attempt to abolish it altogether, because we are capable of atrocities for whatever reasons, but the move towards global communication is a good step forward with people identifying themselves based on more fundamental aspects of what they are, rather than an arbitrary point where they were born.
With that said, I don't consider place of birth to be any less arbitrary than a lot of other things we identify with, since we are always to a large extent, products of our environment. While a lot of you might resent the determinism of this, I just don't think it makes sense to say "I didn't have a choice as to where I was born" when its so hard to tell exactly what aspects of my personality I actually have a choice in.
-
well I'm sorry but to say that our pride comes only from being taught is fallacious unless you apply it to all pride.
Perhaps the word "roots" is erroneous as it implies a depth of origin, but American culture is certainly something unique and complex (don't be confused by the mainstream, which is, of course, not.)
-
How is feeling a connection with went on thousands of years ago any more legitimate than feeling a connection with what happened 300 years ago?
-
This question is a bit funny. In some places (Australia- probably others?) it's almost seen as borderline offensive, as there is an assumption that the person asking the question is making the assumption that "you're not from here", and that this is a bad thing.
Oh, I didn't realize there was a cultural difference here. In the US that's a perfectly normal question; especially every place I've ever been (big cities mostly) most everyone originated in some other state and moved later in life, so in intensity the question is the equivalent of "what do you do?"
As violent dove said, it's small talk. It just happens that I don't have an easy answer like most people.
I also do not understand people that proudly exclaim that X was invented where they are from as if they had anything to do with it's invention whatsoever.
How about sports fans who go on about how "we won!"
-
Honestly I never thought of the Pledge of Allegiance as strange until you mentioned it just now :lol:
no, it doesn't make you a terrible person, it's just a matter of perspective. Beliefs are only wrong when you deem them universal truths.
-
I also do not understand people that proudly exclaim that X was invented where they are from as if they had anything to do with it's invention whatsoever.
How about sports fans who go on about how "we won!"
I think that that is a bit different as supporters are an integeral part of any sporting team and are invested in the outcome prior to it happening. It's a bit like Henry Bell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Bell)'s mum being proud of the steamboat against me being proud of living near to where the steamboat was invented.
-
Who invented/won what is a pretty fun game because generally Britain wins.
-
While your argument makes sense, I still choose to believe that sports fans are ridiculous.
-
@jhockings
Like most things in society it's just part of the tribal mentality.
Who invented/won what is a pretty fun game because generally Britain wins.
Americans have skyscrapers though!
-
(http://www.llanegwad-carmarthen.co.uk/08raglan.jpg)
We're done here.
-
We get inventions drilled into us at school, possibly to make up for the fact that we have bugger-all else to feel nationalistic about (except sporting heroes, explorers, and the occasional massacre). Apparently the stump-jump plow (what the fuck, guys) and the hills hoist (it's a clothesline) are meant to fill us to the brim with love and pride for our country.
That said, an Australian had a hand in the development of Penicillin... definitely a great thing, but I take no national pride in it whatsoever. I see this more as a reason why collaborative science is great- initially discovered by a Scotsman, further developed by an Australian, and English, Scottish and Americans all had a hand in it's eventual road to a purified, mass-produced drug.
-
*ahem*
"the traditional definition of a skyscraper began with the "first skyscraper", a steel-framed ten story building. Chicago's now demolished ten story steel-framed Home Insurance Building (1885) is generally accepted as the "first skyscraper".
-
The point wasn't we had skyscrapers first.
The point was castles.
-
Other cultures did castles and palaces earlier, the Brits just added useless shit to them.
-
I'd take gothic/neo-gothic and various islamic styles of architecture over all the skyscrapers in the world, but that's just me. Personally, I think these styles produced some of the most beautiful buildings in the world. Modern skyscrapers don't even come close.
-
I am very proud of my heritage and my nationality. That does not mean I am proud of the government here, or that I think being Icelandic makes you better than someone who is not. There are some really terrible people here too.
I feel very attached to the city I live in, Reykjavík, and am fascinated by the history of my country (oldest parliament in the world, forced into christianity by law, etc.), as well as the folklore and sagas (a lot of Icelandic folklore was written down around 1200-1300, and has survived unchanged since. It is interesting to read, both because of the stories themselves, and to see how little the language has actually changed in that time).
I also think I percieve nationality as more of an absolute than most of you do. A lot of you talk about not believing in borders, have lived in many countries, or live in Australia and America. I have lived my entire life on a small, isolated island and have my own language that only 300.000 people speak. I understand that in most other places nationality is more ambiguous, but here pretty much everyone is 100% Icelandic. In fact, being from somewhere else, even if you have lived here for most of your life is pretty novel. Also, because of this extreme seperation between Icelanders and everyone else, racism, especially against the Polish and Thai (we have a lot of immigrants from these countries here) is pretty much socially accepted. It kind of wierds me out actually, how a conversation can turn into talking shit about an entire nation and I am in a minority that thinks that is not cool.
-
Castles are indeed rad.
I'd take gothic/neo-gothic and various islamic styles of architecture over all the skyscrapers in the world, but that's just me. Personally, I think these styles produced some of the most beautiful buildings in the world. Modern skyscrapers don't even come close.
I don't think your opinion will be contested much, but I don't think you should be so quick to disregard today's skyscrapers either
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBC_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/77_West_Wacker_Drive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sears_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Corporate_Center
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mather_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civic_Opera_House_%28Chicago%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrigley_Building
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/311_South_Wacker_Drive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/900_North_Michigan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Title_%26_Trust_Center
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Prudential_Plaza
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Tower_%28Chicago%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smurfit-Stone_Building
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/340_on_the_Park
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UBS_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/55_East_Erie_Street
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Point_Tower_%28Chicago%29
and the future looks pretty good too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Spire
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_International_Hotel_and_Tower_%28Chicago%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterview_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua%2C_Chicago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clare_at_Water_Tower
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldorf-Astoria_Hotel_and_Residence_Tower
-
skyscrapers are pretty okay
-
Rush Limbaugh is sorta misogynistic. :wink:
-
Man, I love art deco architecture like crazy.
Someone should make me an art deco castle.
-
that would be incredible, my mind would orgasm.
-
Who invented/won what is a pretty fun game because generally Britain wins.
You didn't win the Troubles. You still have the North.
Me, I'm not proud to be Irish, any more than I'm proud to be 5'8, or to have curly hair, or fairly stumpy fingers. I'm like that all of these things are true, but I don't think that they make any difference in any real way. I'm proud of things I do, like grow my lovely beard or write a pretty damn good essay, not accidents of genetics or location or whatever.
Sure, I went through the phase of nationalist feeling at one point that I'm sure 95% of Border county kids do, although it never went as far as most folk. I've always been critical of the IRA's campaign, but not necessarily its aim - something I am now, to a certain degree. Thing is, as my political orientation shifted leftwards, the meaning of borders began to make less sense to me. Like Wolves said, what difference does the side of a border I live on mean? Sure, I'll probably have more in common with an Irish person than an English one, but this is cos we have shared cultural standpoints and experiences, not because we have the same location. Any Irish person around my age or older is going to remember the Dublin Riots, the order to dump arms, Omagh, and so on, and so we have certain connections there. Despite this, I still have more in common with most people anywhere than I do with, say, Tony O'Reilly or Denis O'Brien. I don't share anything with them just by virtue of being Irish.
I can't really think of any positive aspects to nationalism, to be entirely honest. Look at Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia, Chechnya, and fascism, to name just the four examples that come to mind quickest. I'm not saying, of course, that imperialism is better, just that defining yourself as part of a specific ethnic group that happens to maintain the accepted monopoly of force in an area has tended to lead to bad things.
As for patriotism, it's always meant "dumb blind faith in my country, right or wrong" to me. Therefore, it's even worse, I guess.
inflatable_slide, I love that you post in Corkonian. It has made my day.
-
Um so I didn't expect this to be an argument about whether modern skyscrapers can be as cool as gothic architecture. As our resident architecture student I'd like to kindly say 'shut up'. Stop shitting on architecture by quoting Wikipedia and thinking you get it.
I would like to agree that it doesn't matter whether your country's history is 1000 years or 100 years. China is the longest surviving continuous empire in the world. I feel connected to it somewhat. Why? Because I am brought up understanding and dealing with it's culture and deep-rooted beliefs. That's something I learnt in the 19 years I've been alive. I don't feel any national connection to it, and neither do my parents. My grandparents might.
I feel very connected to the Australian culture and people because of the same things relating to my upbringing. It's not because my ancestors came here as convicts on ships, it's because I live and breathe modern Australian society and place and landscape.
I think if half of Australia belonged to another country I would not feel as connected to it, it would be similiar to my feeling of New Zealand.
So basically yeah, I think nationalism is very much based on the upbringing and how we are taught and introduced to the idea of it. It's ingrained in upbringing though. For those who have fought for national identity, it is natural for them to pass on their beliefs.
And yes, I guess it is a cultural note that 'where are you from?' is somehwhat borderline offensive here. I used to see it as terribly rude, especially when I was younger. As young as primary school, I remember being particularly miffed that a boy would ask me that, though he probably didn't know any better.
-
it's so weird that a question so commonplace somewhere can be an insult elsewhere. Ok, well I guess it isn't but it still sort of is.
I see no problem with quoting wikipedia in most scenarios, particularly as I am merely linking it to demonstrate the appearance of a few buildings in my city. It doesn't matter whether or not "I get it", this conversation doesn't involve even the most basic understanding of architecture, it's just an exchange of opinions that need not have any correlation to a person's level of education on the subject.
I didn't mean to suggest that I felt one way or another as far as the "superior" building, because I don't, they're completely different things, but I don't think it's fair to disregard what is modern simply because of its age because it requires that a person maintain a subjective viewpoint.
-
Can we move on from architecture before we derail this thread any further? The first post on this page made some interesting points but we just barrelled past.
I have lived my entire life on a small, isolated island and have my own language that only 300.000 people speak.
This strikes me as a pretty big thing when considering nationality and culture.
And coincidentally I just finished reading Things Fall Apart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Things_Fall_Apart) by Chinua Achebe which deals with, amoung other things, the cultual loss of a Nigerian clan when white man came bringing western influences like Christianity and a new form of Government. One of the more important things I noticed while studying it (I'm reading it for my English Lit course so I've been taking notes and all that) was that after the outsie influences started affecting the culture the language used by the clansmen changed. They stopped refering to days in terms of market days and instead said Sunday (or what have you) for example.
Would everyone agree that language is of huge cultural significance?
By extension would everyone agree that the assimilation of another language, or aspects of another language, into a culture would create problems with the preservation of culture and with that nationality?
I'm conflicted on this. I think that language is a huge part of cultural identity, but I also think that culture is not a frozen thing and that it evolves with the nature of the people it represents.
-
The attempted assimilation of the Quebecois into English Canada created a cultural rift that lasts to this day.
So yeah, it creates problems.
-
And yes, I guess it is a cultural note that 'where are you from?' is somehwhat borderline offensive here. I used to see it as terribly rude, especially when I was younger. As young as primary school, I remember being particularly miffed that a boy would ask me that, though he probably didn't know any better.
I'm Australian-born, but my family isn't from here. My mum is four-generations Kiwi, and my father is from Manchester. Because I'm white, I've never been asked "Where are you from?" in the sense that Ali mentions, and I can see why she finds it offensive. The implication that I don't belong in Australia (which, by the way, I love with every fibre of my being - although I frequently don't agree with the views of those running the place) would piss me off in short order as well.
That said, the fact remains that unless you're Indigenous, your Australian roots can only go back a few generations max before they head off to some other interesting part of the world. This is hands-down one of the best things about our culture. My close friends and I have roots including the Spanish royal family, upper-nobility bastards in Germany, Druze dissidents in Lebanon, Argentinian explorers, Baha'i Iranians who fled the Revolution, Vietnamese refugees from when it was still French Indochina, etc.
This makes for fascinating conversation. As such, one of the first things I'll ask someone when I'm getting to know them is where their families have come from - not out of implication that they don't belong here, but purely because every different answer I get reinforces my love for Australia.
-
You didn't win the Troubles. You still have the North.
Yeah but we invented Television and the Jet Engine and Steam Trains so suck it paddy.
-
And computers!
-
American architecture is nothing compared to castles, temples, cathedrals, pyramids, tombs, etc. from pre-America. Also, I think American history kind of boring. Given the chance to choose between living in a skyscraper or a castle, heck yes I'd choose castle.
But to say Americans can't have as much pride in their country because we haven't been around as long is silly. No, people haven't been around here as long as say Europe or Asia or Africa, but we've still done some pretty notable things in the time we've had. Also, this country is known for being a melting pot, so it's kind of cool to know where your ancestors came from and when they came here and why.
-
I think the only thing that can be said about castles vs. skyscrapers is that castles are by and large just decrepit old ruins or show buildings preserved for historical significance while skyscrapers actually have a practical place in modern society. Not to mention they are significantly more advanced in terms of engineering, the architecture part of it is completely subjective.
"Which is cooler" or "Which looks better" is pretty irrelevant since it's so much more relative when compared to "which is more useful."
-
While your argument makes sense, I still choose to believe that sports fans are ridiculous.
No more ridiculous than people who hold Religious beliefs.
It's cute the way you act like they're not one and the same to the British.
I think if half of Australia belonged to another country I would not feel as connected to it, it would be similiar to my feeling of New Zealand.
While it's not the sole factor in determining whether people will identify with each other, someone sounding very much the same as you is bound to foster some kind of mutal kinship in a way, and because of the fact that an Australian from Perth will sound very much like someone from Brisbane, I think that in a hypothetical situation where Australia was split up into multiple countries, the bond between the two countries would still be incredibly strong based on that alone.
Also this would explain why giving shit to New Zealanders is such a fantastic national pastime.
I think the only thing that can be said about castles vs. skyscrapers is that castles are by and large just decrepit old ruins or show buildings preserved for historical significance while skyscrapers actually have a practical place in modern society. Not to mention they are significantly more advanced in terms of engineering, the architecture part of it is completely subjective.
"Which is cooler" or "Which looks better" is pretty irrelevant since it's so much more relative when compared to "which is more useful."
When the Normans invade again, try to tell me that Castles aren't useful. You won't be able to because you'll be speaking French
As for the whole "how much history the US has compared to the rest of the world", I think we should probably take into account that while American History is comparatively short, it is incredibly dense compared to a lot of much older civilisations. The fact that America wasn't around in the 14th century does a LOT to balance out the averages.
-
Yes, it's up to the individual to decide what is cooler, but I'd still take this (http://inventorspot.com/files/images/Himeji.img_assist_custom.jpg), this (http://www.mapsofworld.com/travel-destinations/images/windsor-castle.jpg), or this (http://www.travel-images.com/turkmenistan29.jpg) over a skyscraper. The engineering may be better, but still, these are so much more awesome to me.
-
While recognizing your joke, Hat, I feel the need to go ahead and clarify the fact that useful historically and useful to modern society are also about as different as the difference between engineering marvels and architectural marvels. Humanity has outgrown the need for medieval fortifications and the very fact that we don't need it anymore in hardly any way makes skyscrapers more useful by definition (though the argument can be made that humanity doesn't truly need skyscrapers, but the economy of such a building is indisputable.)
And Linds, I have to admit I do agree with you. I've seen very few buildings in America as beautiful as things overseas, but even then I've seen very few buildings as economical as buildings here in America. (Though, Americans should keep in mind that a lot of countries in East Asia are becoming engineering giants as well. Actually probably a lot of countries have already overtaken America.)
And Hat pretty much hit the nail on the head regarding American culture and history's density vs. age. And as an American I think it's perfectly reasonable to be proud of our history, and actually if any of you foreigners disagree then I would make the argument that you just don't "get it."
-
Who invented/won what is a pretty fun game because generally Britain wins.
Another fun game to play is "Who's responsible for a lot of the world's current problems," because Britain generally wins there too, what with artificially carving out countries in the Middle East and Africa with no regard to tribe, religion, history, etc. Of course the French did their share of that too in Africa--Mauritania's border is composed of nothing but straight lines drawn randomly. (note: I'm [mostly] kidding.)
Anyway, nationalism is one of the most violent and damaging forces in the world, ranking up there with religious fanaticism and ideologies like Stalinism. All borders are artificial creations anyway. Why do people feel the need to define themselves as a chunk of random lank at odds with other chunks of random land? It's only natural that different tribes and peoples clash with one another, but why is so much sacrificed in support of of nationalism? In the past, it was empire-building. Part of that was guaranteeing access to resources and such, but it was largely built around nationalistic glory. Domestic problems in countries often lead to the leaders of those countries trying to re-direct attention to clashes with foreign entities, to rally the people around their nation and distract them from the issues that actually make a difference in their day-to-day lives. The idea of "my country over all other countries" just doesn't seem to have much logical basis, unless it's viewed as the equivalent of different dens of wolves or prides of lions competing amongst themselves. But even then, often times a lot of the people living in those countries aren't bound together by anything other than a vague national story, particularly in recently created nations in Africa and Asia. So what holds that system together?
I, personally, truly do love my country. But I think the most patriotic way to show that love is to question everything it does and demand nothing but the best from it. It has terrible faults, but it also has tremendous accomplishments and has more often than not in the past stood for "the right thing," although that in itself is subject to interpretation. That's why the occurrences of the past few years have been so infuriating to me. I see the current leaders of America betraying everything this country was founded on. Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, Abu Graihb, renditions, torture, political curruption, religious extremism and intolerance on the rise... John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin and George Washington would probably disavow this country of any relation to the nation they forged, were they alive. But what I love about my country is that it has the potential to reinvent itself endlessly, and it's been in similar situations in the past, and has always managed to return to its core principles, though never perfectly. I'm a staunch pacifist for the most part, so foreign military adventures are something that I can't support. But if this country were to be invaded or attacked, I would be one of the first people to stand in its defense. I'm not even sure why.
-
I used to think patriotism and nationalism were both ridiculous ideas since you dont decide were you are born, however when I thought about it you dont pick your family either but most people would say it is rational to love them.
So now I would consider myself a patriot, I take pride in my country and its many achievements but Im not a nationalist. I wont back it right or wrong and I dont have some crazy belief that British people are inherently better than anyone else or that only British people should be allowed to live in Britain.
-
But what exactly do you mean by "British people"? Is it everyone who is born in Britain? Everyone who fits in with the predominant British culture/society?
-
Do British people say Brit or Briton? Do Canadians ever get pissed off after they find US pennies and nickels in their change? These are the questions that haunt me.
-
I've never heard a British person say "Brit" nor seen them write "Briton". Also why would anyone be mad about finding change from other countries in amongst their native change? It's not like that change is coming over to your country, stealing your jobs and marrying your women.
-
I don't know why people get annoyed by it, but finding Canadian change is pretty common in America and I have seen plenty of people get annoyed by it rather than the more appropriate reaction of excited. It's like finding a wheat penny.
-
Man, we get change from New Zealand all the time. I like it because it's never been refused in a shop before (not for me anyway) and it's fun seeing what crazy animals they have on their coins.
-
all we ever get is pennies mostly, but it's pretty sweet when you get a Canadian nickel. Why? I'm not sure.
Australian currency has some pretty crazy animals on it too.
-
Man, we get change from New Zealand all the time. I like it because it's never been refused in a shop before (not for me anyway) and it's fun seeing what crazy animals they have on their coins.
Really sucks when they get refused by vending machines though.
-
Sometimes, foreign coins are worth their weight in gold in vending machines.
And sometimes, they just block up the coin slot mechanism.
Wow... that's like a metaphor or something.
-
Considering that Fargo is only a couple hours away from the border, we get quite a few Canadians shopping here all the time. We can't take Canadian change because it will mess up the balance of our registers at the end of the night, but it finds its way into our tills anyways. Even the little rolls of change from the bank have some in them. Luckily it's easy enough to tell if a person is Canadian by their accent so you can generally slip them the Canadian change if they pay with cash.
-
i hate getting Canadian pennies.
not because they won't be accepted or they're "worth less" (which probably isn't true anymore anyway), but simply because they weigh less than American pennies. it bothers me to no end for some reason.
-
The lightest coins I've ever held are Japanese pennies.
-
I've never heard a British person say "Brit" nor seen them write "Briton". Also why would anyone be mad about finding change from other countries in amongst their native change? It's not like that change is coming over to your country, stealing your jobs and marrying your women.
Briton always turns up in the newspapers. And the tabloids are very fond of using "brit" as in "brits run amok in greece" or some variation thereof
-
So how is Briton pronounced? Is it like Britain or brit-'on or what?
-
I am Arthur, king of the Britons.
-
I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.
-
Damnit Tommy, you need to finish that quote so we can continue this. The next line doesn't work without the end of yours there.
-
Would everyone agree that language is of huge cultural significance?
By extension would everyone agree that the assimilation of another language, or aspects of another language, into a culture would create problems with the preservation of culture and with that nationality?
I'm conflicted on this. I think that language is a huge part of cultural identity, but I also think that culture is not a frozen thing and that it evolves with the nature of the people it represents.
Here's an article (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/brj.htm) (written by Slick, apparently) I came across recently while browsing American Indian articles on wikipedia. Kinda long, so if you're in a hurry, you can just read number 4 under "Why should we care?"
-
Language is certainly of major cultural significance. For example, the Jews maintained a very solid cultural identity over hundreds upon hundreds of years without any land to call their own, in large part due to their emphasis on reading sacred texts in Hebrew. And we can all think of examples of cultures being devastated either because they lacked a written tradition or their written tradition was destroyed when faced with zealous conquerors (particularly in the Americas) But that goes without saying, I suppose.
-
I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous collective.
Photograph taken a couple weeks ago of the House of Lords:
(http://records.viu.ca/~soules/medi402/walker/borg1.GIF)
-
After being in Europe for close to a month, American money felt fake to me. The Euro is much better. It's shiny. And different sizes.
-
If I lived in old england, around the time of the empire, I would be pretty patriotic (screw feeling about the slave trade, or ruling people's asses). I'm not patriotic at all about england nowadays, though. It's gotta a kinda 'we ruled your asses and now we're very sorry' mentality, and politically we have degenerated into a kind of lackey for america, which is a shame. I am proud of the english language, though- How can you not be proud that your country has forced some stupid illogical bollocks on large areas of the world.
-
I'm a patriot. Not that I've really thought that much about it. I guess it's a combination of the usual propaganda in school and an actual pride in the achievements of our country. The thing is that the nationalistic movement in Norway is traditionally a democratic and left-winged thing, while a lot of countries has a right-wing and elitist nationalism, often an upper-class thing. Norway as an independent nation hasn't been ruled by a king since the 14th century. So as long as it doesn't turn into racism, I think believing in your country is a good thing.
My main reason for believing in Norway and my wish to preserve Norway as it is, is the European Union. We are one of the lucky few European countries that has managed to keep out of that shit, and I hope it stays that way. I really, really believe in the social democracy. It owns. And I'm proud to be a part of it. The filthy socialistic/capitalistic cross-breed works like hell, and any other political system is inferior. Yes, I know this sounds like the ravings of a Patriot fanatic, and there's a lot of my country that I'm not proud of (we sound like Homer Simpson's retarded twin when we speak English). But all in all, this place is great. Don't get me wrong, I have no problems with immigration, I believe in much more open borders than we have now. Immigration is never a problem as long as you keep high minimum wages.
Would everyone agree that language is of huge cultural significance?
By extension would everyone agree that the assimilation of another language, or aspects of another language, into a culture would create problems with the preservation of culture and with that nationality?
I'm conflicted on this. I think that language is a huge part of cultural identity, but I also think that culture is not a frozen thing and that it evolves with the nature of the people it represents.
Language is a really big part of cultural identity. But I think you forget something. Culture is not a frozen thing at all, but language develops too. But your example is fascinating. It's nerdish, yes, but I'll probably want to browse through that book.
Anyway, nationalism is one of the most violent and damaging forces in the world, ranking up there with religious fanaticism and ideologies like Stalinism.
Not at all. Nationalism isn't violent and damaging, it can be used in such a way that it causes violence. The same thing goes for religion and political systems, if you prioritize them over the welfare of the people, you always go wrong.
-
I don't care about countries (and I'm all for immigration and completely open borders). I love the landscape of the U.K. though, it's beautiful and it feels like home but that's just because I've lived here all my life.
I was thinking how I probably wouldn't be happy about some distant power controlling the country, but then I don't like our government controlling the country.
-
I would say that I'm pretty damn glad that I live in Australia. A free society that for the last few generations hasn't done anything particularly bad, that has pretty high living standards, is quite friendly, not all that violent and overall is just a very nice place to be- I've been to about 35 countries and this is the best I've seen thus far. I guess I would consider myself a patriot, really; I would sign up if we were getting invaded or what not.
To be honest, I've never been completely certain as to what exactly Nationalism entails, but seeing as I'm a bit of a right winger (well, in terms of authoritarianism, anyway) I imagine it would sit well with me, and I like the wiki definition of it. Pride in your country and culture, a tendency towards a homogenous culture? Yes please! Honestly guys, I have to wonder just WHY anyone would willingly allow multiculturalism.
-
I would say that I'm pretty damn glad that I live in Australia. A free society that for the last few generations hasn't done anything particularly bad, that has pretty high living standards, is quite friendly, not all that violent and overall is just a very nice place to be.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations
.... Our teacher had us see "The Rabbit Fence". I kinda lost respect for Australian history. But what the hell, it was probably a bit biased.
-
I'm comfortable calling myself a patriot. The word gets misused a lot in the states, especially around ballot-time.
As far as saying nationalism or religious extremism causes all the world's trouble...meh. People cause all the world's trouble. It just depends on what kind of hat they wear. Folks will always identify as "us" vs. "them", and until you get them out of that mentality it doesn't matter if we're talking about a nation state feeling frisky with its borders or a social clique excluding the quiet kid. It's all damage.
-
but then again I am not entirely against the "us against them" dichotomy. It can have devastating consequences in the wrong mindset, but so can any idea. I think that in the right circumstance, the "us against them" can (and has) protect people from self-destructive rationales in times when they necessarily do something that can logically be described as unethical.
*edit*
Also, it can be romantic as hell
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations
..You don't think I'm familiar with that?
A free society that for the last few generations hasn't done anything particularly bad
-
Khar, We invented the airplane functioning one anyway, so all inventions to improve upon the design are thus technically ours. And, if you want to get real technical, the first "jet engine" was url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile]developed about 1900 years ago.[/url]
Also, we invented the modern fucking car, nuclear weapons, and Ebonics. The US wins, followed by the Romans, than the Egpytians, then Greeks...
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations#Australian_federal_parliament_apology
We are trying to work about fixing what we did. Everyone is taught in high school (hell, probably primary school) about the Stolen Generations, so it's not as if we're ignoring it. This apology has taken a long time to come about, a lot longer than it should, but it's showing that we're willing to say we did something wrong. You lost respect for a country that did something wrong in the past? What about the British, do you have no respect for them because of all the "colonising" they did? What about Israel when the videos came out showing soldiers breaking children's arms? What about Germany and that whole holocaust thing?
I am rather apathetic about my country. I went through the whole "embrace your Irish roots!" phase when I was about 12, but that is just because my mother is most definitely Irish. If I had been born from two descendants of convicts instead of just one, I would probably be even less interested in my background. Sure I live here, and it's a nice place, and I'll be quick to tell people that they should live here, it's awesome, but like most places (probably every place, actually) people her have done bad shit which makes me embarrassed to by associated with them because I am Australian. Plus the stereotypes of us have always been awful. Steve Irwin? "Put another shrimp on the barbie!"? All those terrible Americans-being-Australian accents? Ick.
-
Dude, trying to criticize somebody for what their country did is FUCKING RETARDED.
we have...
McCarthyism
Destruction of Native American land
Dropping 2 nuclear bombs (I believe it was justified, but it is still a very easy criticism)
Dick Cheney (inexcusable)
Slavery in a country founded on equal rights
Oppression of African Americans long after slavery ended
Confinement of the Japanese during WWII
Guantanamo Bay
etc...
etc...
And all countries have horrible things they've done, you certainly can't criticize a citizen of that country for what they weren't even involved in. I get that that might not have been the point you were trying to make, but let's not even leave it open to interpretation.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations#Australian_federal_parliament_apology
We are trying to work about fixing what we did. Everyone is taught in high school (hell, probably primary school) about the Stolen Generations, so it's not as if we're ignoring it. This apology has taken a long time to come about, a lot longer than it should, but it's showing that we're willing to say we did something wrong.
"We did something wrong"?
Last time I checked, I was not born early enough to have done anything regarding this. Basically I am saying the latest apology (nothing wrong with apologising right after the event) was somewhat unnecessary and a load of nonsense, to say the least.
-
Jesus, was to take shit literally. We as in Australians. We as in the government at the time who thought it would be a good idea to take kids away from their families and raise them up "properly". You know what I meant, there's no need to be an argumentative arsehole.
You may think the apology was unnecessary and a load of nonsense, but what about the people who had been taken and lost a lot of their sense of history? It's fairly fucking important to them. If you have evidence of a proper apology like Rudd gave from an earlier time then I would be quite interested in seeing it.
-
Man. The whole response to that that "I didn't do anything wrong personally, the government shouldn't have apologized." basically made me think that Australia was full of dicks, except for the prime minister who was finally a big enough dude to not be a dick about it. I mean, given the enormity of the dicklishness that the initial act was, you don't consider it to be the same trend of dickery to say "I don't support any government who admits that that was a dickhole move and apologizes?"
Dicks.
-
Caspian, it's not about apologising for something that we ourselves have done, but the government admitting that in the past it acted in a way that was Not Very Nice. When Rudd said sorry he wasn't saying it on a personal level, he was acting on behalf of the government. There has been no governmental admission of this in the past, it has been more like "oh, get over it", which is a remarkably insensitive and damaging position to take.
-
Starting the Apology - From Paul Keating
We non-Aboriginal Australians should perhaps remind ourselves that Australia once reached out for us. Didn't Australia provide opportunity and care for the dispossessed Irish? The poor of Britain? The refugees from war and famine and persecution in the countries of Europe and Asia? Isn't it reasonable to say that if we can build a prosperous and remarkably harmonious multicultural society in Australia, surely we can find just solutions to the problems which beset the first Australians - the people to whom the most injustice has been done.
And, as I say, the starting point might be to recognise that the problem starts with us non-Aboriginal Australians. It begins, I think, with the act of recognition. Recognition that it was we who did the dispossessing. We took the traditional lands and smashed the traditional way of life. We brought the disasters. The alcohol. We committed the murders. We took the children from their mothers. We practised discrimination and exclusion.
It was our ignorance and our prejudice. And our failure to imagine these things being done to us. With some noble exceptions, we failed to make the most basic human response and enter into their hearts and minds. We failed to ask - how would I feel if this were done to me? As a consequence, we failed to see that what we were doing degraded all of us.
[Part of Prime Minister Paul Keating's speech at Redfern, December 1992]
-
@OP
I think Nationalism in the sense of nation-states is still a solid concept. There are, obviously, lines that are blurred like PLO, terrorists, etc. But, in the end, every Nation-State looks out for their own and teaches their own rhetoric. Every, every country indoctrinates with the notion that they are the best nation, have done things the best, etc. Every textbook is written for their own countries. America, my fatherland, is guilty of thi--but is not exclusive by a long shot. So, no, it's pretty alive.
I think what a lot of people are confusing for racism is actually just xenophobia. For example, take the French mockery that's pretty prevalent here. I don't think people are saying people of French decent are innately inferior, but are simply making comments--albeit ignorant--on the French culture. If there was a term for culturaist I'd use that.
To be honest, America does pretty well as far as race goes. It's bad, yes. But, our aspirations are pretty high too. Racism is everywhere, in every country, and I'll ROFL at you if you think that there's any innocent, color-blind countries. This doesn't mean, though, we shouldn't aspire to be better.
I am of Korean (if you ask which one I'll stab you) decent. This is what I consider to be my motherland. Being bi-cultural has given me a pretty unique perspective on things. I can see the flaws in both cultures, and I see a lot in my mother country. Aside from the work ethic, and sympathy for the years of devastation Korea has gone through, I"m honestly pretty ashamed. I'm proud that it coudl go from the second lowest GDP int he world to a Top 10 country. But, the social and welfare issues are 50-years behind.
-
I admit that I didn't know Keating had given an apology, but how does that change the underlying intent of Rudd's apology? I haven't ever heard anything about Keating's speech, despite having a mother who works pretty closely with local indigenous community groups. I am not sure it had the same effect that Rudd's speech was intended to have. Also, the years of Liberal govt between Keating's speech and Rudd's speech had basically given the finger to indigenous people (well, all Australians really, but Howard's attitude toward the stolen generation really was quite shit) which would have wiped out whatever gains the Keating apology made.
I mean, if you want to bring shit like that up Hawke also tried his hand at the whole reconciliation bit but it was a rather half-hearted attempt, leaving many indigenous people feeling exploited by the whole affair.
Oh also, please note that I am not saying that Rudd's latest effort isn't merely a political play. Only time will be able to show if he's being genuine or not, unfortunately.
-
Also also: despite Howard's best efforts Australia remains a Pretty Cool Place to live, especially when compared to some other places. For example, I wouldn't want to live in China. I am pretty sure I would only live in certain parts of the US and England. I definitely wouldn't want to live in say, Zimbabwe.
Australia is pretty ace.
-
Also also: despite Howard's best efforts Australia remains a Pretty Cool Place to live, especially when compared to some other places. For example, I wouldn't want to live in China. I am pretty sure I would only live in certain parts of the US and England. I definitely wouldn't want to live in say, Zimbabwe.
Australia is pretty ace.
awww, I liked Howard (and you certainly can't argue that Australia has gone places over the last 10 years or so). At the very least, his epic farewell speech totally showed everyone just how sweet a guy he was. No, I think the howard years were pretty good, and while he could've brushed up his attitude over a few things overall he was a solid dude. There were reasons he got elected 4 times in a row.
Out of curiousity, est (for some reason I keep on thinking you're inlander- guess you australian mods are quite alike) how well travelled are you? Perhaps it's just me but I find that the more I've travelled, the more I've realised just how awesome Australia is.
-
awww, I liked Howard (and you certainly can't argue that Australia has gone places over the last 10 years or so).
You bet. It's gone from being an egalitarian, inclusive, welcoming society to a place where we are encouraged to be suspicious of our neighbours (especially if they're wearing turbans or eat strange food), a place that is more than happy to invade other places for no real reason (as long as the Yanks OK it first), a place where it's OK for bosses to summarily fire their workers for no reason whatsoever (as long as they're employing less than a hundred people), and a place where the lives of 353 asylum seekers are disposable (but worth their weight in gold as an election stunt).
Oh, but the economy got better. Funny thing, so did the economy in much of the rest of the world. Also, something called "globalisation" really came into play. But surely no connection there, it was all due to Howard. Hooray for him.
Basically the only thing that stopped Australia going totally to shit is the inherent awesomeness of the place, and I honestly think that if the Libs had won again even that may have dissipated like frost in the sunshine.
At the very least, his epic farewell speech totally showed everyone just how sweet a guy he was. No, I think the howard years were pretty good, and while he could've brushed up his attitude over a few things overall he was a solid dude. There were reasons he got elected 4 times in a row.
Howard? Sweet? What planet are you living on? Brilliant politician, yes. Conniving bastard, yes. Pathetic power-walking, sporting-hero-worshipping jingoist, sure. But sweet? Away tae fuck.
As for reasons he got elected four times in a row: they were called the "Aussie battlers", remember them? The little people who were foolish and/or naive enough to fall for his appeals to crass xenophobia and historical revisionism. The ones who Howard promptly shafted with Workchoices as soon as he could get it through the Senate? They were the reason he got elected four times in a row, and thank fuck, they were the reason there wasn't a fifth.
Finally, there's a fairly decent chance that I'm more travelled than you, and the more I see of the world, the more I realise how precious Australia is and how much we need to hang on to it. We are seriously in danger of going down the same tubes as the US - a great place originally with a fantastic ethos, until the power-mongers took over and shat all over the dreams of the populace.
-
I am of Korean (if you ask which one I'll stab you) decent.
Are you from West Korea?
-
Joe is from East Korea.
He is a tough guy.
-
You bet. It's gone from being an egalitarian, inclusive, welcoming society to a place where we are encouraged to be suspicious of our neighbours (especially if they're wearing turbans or eat strange food),
Ahahaha, are you serious? First, that's a massive (massive!) exaggeration- tampa was a massive mess, obviously, but I'm curious as to what other proof you have that Howard introduced a 'culture of fear' or what have you. Second, do you honestly think that post 9/11, labour would've approached security any different? People got more suspicious after 9/11 - and would have regardless of who was in charge.
As for reasons he got elected four times in a row: they were called the "Aussie battlers", remember them? The little people who were foolish and/or naive enough to fall for his appeals to crass xenophobia and historical revisionism.
You lefties (generalisations, woo!!) are terrible at this! The whole "hah, they were just too foolish to see the truth, poor working class people" line, again. I don't really know what to say to this, and I'm sure a lot of swearing won't go down too well. I think I'll just leave that line up there so it can embarrass you.
Finally, there's a fairly decent chance that I'm more travelled than you, and the more I see of the world, the more I realise how precious Australia is and how much we need to hang on to it. We are seriously in danger of going down the same tubes as the US - a great place originally with a fantastic ethos, until the power-mongers took over and shat all over the dreams of the populace.
Agreed with your final point, but don't assume that I haven't been too quite a few places. It's odd how I end up arguing for howard when in some ways I'm quite the communist when it comes to economics (but probably not so with worker's right). It seems that this forum board in particular brings out the contrarian (if that's even a word) in me.
Finally, by "sweet guy" I certainly didn't mean cute and cuddly. I assumed it was obvious I meant something along the lines of "cool dude".
-
I don't know why, but I am fascinated by this list:
Wikipedia's Democracy Index (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index)
I think there should be a global competition to see who can improve their scores the most. Yes? Yes.
-
Oh, yeah, I forgot. I can never forgive my country for being the only nation that has ever used the atomic bomb--TWICE--both times on areas of high and dense civilian population with little to no military value, then having the audacity to spent the next 60 years telling anyone it doesn't like that they can't be allowed to develop nuclear technology.
Most of the "bad" things America has done can be justified through some prism, but to me, this simply cannot be. History has shown that Japan had been looking for a way out, but wouldn't accept unconditional surrender because they feared the Emperor, whom they regarded as a living god, would be dethroned and/or killed. The U.S. refused to negotiate on the point, demanding full and complete surrender with no caveats. All they had to do was guarantee the emperor's safety, and it's likely that Japan would have surrendered. This is documented history. Instead, we killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. If anything begs an official apology, it's that.
Also: I'm not an Australian, and have never even been to Australia, but Howard always struck me as a supreme douche. He even looked like one. Just a kind of guy that, when you see him, you get that "douche" vibe.
-
I thought you were French :-P
-
Nope. American.
Although my ancestry is about 45% French, and I'm descended from Charlemagne.
-
Well aren't you special.
-
Nope. American.
Although my ancestry is about 45% French, and I'm descended from Charlemagne.
I'm descended from Charlemagne too! So that makes us nominally related!
-
If you think about it mathematically, it would be almost impossible to find someone alive today of European descent who wasn't descended from Charlemagne.
-
yes, but how many of them know they are? :evil:
-
We are trying to work about fixing what we did. Everyone is taught in high school (hell, probably primary school) about the Stolen Generations, so it's not as if we're ignoring it. This apology has taken a long time to come about, a lot longer than it should, but it's showing that we're willing to say we did something wrong. You lost respect for a country that did something wrong in the past? What about the British, do you have no respect for them because of all the "colonising" they did? What about Israel when the videos came out showing soldiers breaking children's arms? What about Germany and that whole holocaust thing?
I said I lost respect for Australia's history. It's great with the apology and all, but I'm reacting to the bunch of people saying that the apology wasn't needed. And Britain was a dick head nation in the past. And Israel was the worst idèa ever. The point here is that everyone can change. I never meant any offence, I just reacted to the whole "A free society that for the last few generations hasn't done anything particularly bad", since this lasted into the sixties. Sorry, let's get back on topic, shall we? My bad.
Oh, yeah, I forgot. I can never forgive my country for being the only nation that has ever used the atomic bomb--TWICE--both times on areas of high and dense civilian population with little to no military value, then having the audacity to spent the next 60 years telling anyone it doesn't like that they can't be allowed to develop nuclear technology.
Well, since the American government was so bitchy about getting a complete surrender, this was the best thing they could come up with. If the war had gone on... But it was still not very fucking nice. I think nationalism was quite important on both sides. USA wanted revenge for Pearl Harbour. Unlimited revenge. And Japan was sure that any surrender would lead to a total destruction of their culture and traditions. These are both cases were nationalism was used by governments to excuse hundreds of thousands of deaths. (woho, a bit of topic!)
-
yes, but how many of them know they are? :evil:
I imagine that there's about as many people that know they're descended from Charlemagne as there are that care about anyone being descended from Charlemagne.
-
Anyone who's done the math is pretty darn sure. Also, if you think about the (probably false) statistic someone once gave me that 5% of all people are mistaken about who their father is, and project that backwards 40 or so generations, it becomes pretty likely that you're not descended from Charlemagne the way you think you are.
-
Who the fuck is Charlemagne?
Sounds like a dick.
-
He pretty much was. But he ruled the Holy Roman Empire, which encompassed a large chunk of Europe. So that's cool.
-
Pah, who cares about which historical figure you are probably descended from? I used to give a damn that I'm probably related to Vlad the Impaler but I'm pretty sure heaps of people are related to him, as they are (and as am I) to Genghis Khan. It isn't that important because your distant ancestors in no practical way have any bearing on who you are.
Besides, it is much more interesting that I am possibly related to this guy (http://forums.questionablecontent.net/index.php?action=profile;u=736)
-
I honestly do not care about anyone's ascendace. This means that I've never given patriotism and nationalism any thought, since they seem incredibly absurd to me. How can anyone be proud of being born somewhere if you had no choice or merit in it? It would be like someone being proud of having skin of a certain colour, which is one of the stupidest things i have ever heard of.
-
Did you know some of the atoms in your body used to be part of Shakespeare? (http://jupiterscientific.org/review/shnecal.html)
Don't you feel proud?
-
yes, but how many of them know they are? :evil:
I imagine that there's about as many people that know they're descended from Charlemagne as there are that care about anyone being descended from Charlemagne.
my mom is really into genealogy is all, she almost cried when she found out she was descended from King Edward I.
-
(stuff that I agree with)
I don't really like arguing politics, because it is like pissing into the wind. I will say that I agree with James completely, and that I feel that even though Howard probably thought he was doing the right thing his version of "the right thing" is so different to mine that it looks to me like evil. I know the guy isn't evil and it's all just opposing viewpoints, etc. However, the reason I don't argue about this shit is because there's no way anyone will change a fundamental belief that I have, and likewise there isn't really any way for me to change someone else's opposing viewpoint.
By the way, that is one of the reasons why we have a rule here barring political debate (as well as religious debate).
-
Did you know some of the atoms in your body used to be part of Shakespeare? (http://jupiterscientific.org/review/shnecal.html)
Don't you feel proud?
Someday you will die somehow and some thing's gonna steal your carbon! (hey hey hey!)
-
NOOOOO not my carbons!!!
-
History has shown that Japan had been looking for a way out, but wouldn't accept unconditional surrender because they feared the Emperor, whom they regarded as a living god, would be dethroned and/or killed.
Uh, don't you mean the emperor wouldn't accept unconditional surrender because he cared about his own power over the well-being of his people?
And not that it contradicts what you're saying, but he didn't end up dethroned or killed, which I find unfortunate.
-
It's worth noting that some have interpreted Japan's surrender as not even as a result of the atomic bombs. Their actions in the Nagasaki bombing (getting people to place themselves in the bombs way, in different positions and hiding in different areas to find out how best to survive more of them) certainly supports this. Rather, it was the entrance of the Soviets into the Pacific Theater that compelled Japan to surrender to America: they had no hope of survival either way, but at least the Americans would treat them better than the Russians.
-
It seems I got into this thread a bit late, but I echo the thought that it really depends on your definition of patriotism and nationalism. I love what America could be, the American Dream, no, not getting rich and having the media pay constant attention to you, being allowed to live your life the way you see fit. I would hazard a guess that most of the immigrants to the U.S. throughout history since the 1600s came here for that, coming from persecution, hoping to find a place to live their life free of interference. If being a patriot is loving what your country should and could be, I am a patriot, if being a patriot is doing what you are told because someone said that it is patriotic, I am not a patriot, and despise those who are.
-
Uh, don't you mean the emperor wouldn't accept unconditional surrender because he cared about his own power over the well-being of his people?
And not that it contradicts what you're saying, but he didn't end up dethroned or killed, which I find unfortunate.
The emperor wasn't exactly in control of Japan. Obviously he knew what Japan was doing, but he wasn't really running the government. The Shogunate was. Hideki Tojo was the "leader" of Japan during WW2. The Emperor was already largely a figurehead, just one conveniently exploited by the nationalists.
-
... the shogunate?
While the official party line has always been that Showa was merely a figurehead, this was fostered by the occuation government so as to ot damage the imperal family and prevent any possible revolts, and to secure a basically puppet figurehead in the imperial family, despite the direct involvement of several members of the family in war crimes. There is also increasing debate and evidence that Showa had far more control and decision aking ability than it is normally assumed, the constitution explicitly placed the emperor as the head of the armed forces and he formed part of many decisions concerning the war effort. Furthermore, what can't really be argued is that he used his position fo anything beneficial, the best that could be said is that a man who had unmeasurable power and influence did not choose to act, and that for me merited him a place alongside Tojo.
-
:Shrug: That's just what I've come to learn through school, what I've read, and in talking about it with my dad, who's a History major with an emphasis on Japanese history. But I could totally be wrong. (I'm not being snobby or sarcastic there. I really could be wrong.)
-
I find the idea of patriotism quite strange to be honest. Much the same as religion. Why should I feel patriotic simply because of the country I was born/raised in and the family/situation I was born into? It's nothing more than sheer chance. A one in billions chance even. I would rather look at things from the outside and refrain from getting drawn into the whole my country is better than your country argument.....
I was born and raised in Scotland, a country which is well known for being very patriotic and even has a percentage of the popualation who could be described as nationalistic (i.e. seeking independance from the UK). This patriotism is most obvious in certain members of the population after a few units of chemically enhanced alcohol and a late night viewing of Braveheart.
Personally I have no feelings of patriotism towards either the UK or to Scotland. It's hard to feel patriotic about a country you don't really like. One where the culture revolves around complaining about the weather, celebrity gossip, "lads mags", binge drinking, political correctness, and heavy state intrusion into your daily life.
Scotland itself is a small-minded, biggoted, miserable, angry little country. One where Catholics and Protestants still march up and down the high streets celebrating events that most of the congregation know nothing about, only that it winds up the other side (and that's what's important after all). Where a person's social life revolves around alcohol and those who don't drink to get drunk are seen as the strange ones.....
I have no ties to Scotland or to the UK. I've lived in both Scotland and England and I can't say that I have any real desire to remain and settle into a life here. As such I've felt very temporary for years, always with the desire to emigrate and make a better life for myself. As such I have plans to emigrate through my job (police officer) to Australia or possibly New Zealand in 2010. Whilst I am well aware that neither country is exactly the land of milk and honey, I have to do what I feel is right for me.
Fact is I don't fit well into Scottish life. I don't support either of the Old Firm (soccer), don't fall into either biggoted camp of Protestant or Catholic, I don't consider getting pissed at the weekend to be the only highlight of life to live for, and don't believe in socialism. From that point of view I'm pretty stumped!
-
As an American, I've always drawn a pretty thick line between nationalism and patriotism. Patriotism is in-your-face flag waving; it's treating your home country as a brand-name, which I refuse to do on principle. I see nationalism as an educated version of patriotism. Nationalists take the time to figure out all the reasons why they'd rather not be a citizen anywhere else. I'm an American nationalist mostly because I know I wouldn't be fully accepted anywhere else in the world. When your family comes from everywhere and nowhere, a mutt of a country like America is the only glove that fits.
-
The funny thing is that even though I share very similar definitions of nationalism and patriotism, the closer I look at these definitions the more I feel that they should be switched. However with WW1 (taught to me and many others in an oversimplified manner as nationalism gone to its most horrific extreme) so far away, and the Patriot act so very close, it makes a lot of sense for us to look at it the other way around.
-
Patriotism is a funny thing for americans, for example we hate people burning our flag but don't give a crap about having the sacred american icon on our boxers.
-
Today is the 63rd Anniversary of the Nagasaki bomb.
-
I see nationalism as an educated version of patriotism. Nationalists take the time to figure out all the reasons why they'd rather not be a citizen anywhere else. I'm an American nationalist mostly because I know I wouldn't be fully accepted anywhere else in the world. When your family comes from everywhere and nowhere, a mutt of a country like America is the only glove that fits.
I'm sorry but...what? This is a combination of bullshit and circular reasoning, in that you are basically saying that you have made a rational choice to suck Americas dick because you were born in America. I mean seriously, it makes a rather good deal of sense that you are most likely to immediately fit in in the country you were born and accultured to. But please don't trot out the myths of America as the all-embracing land of the free. It's easier to emigrate to almost any European country, for a start.
They're also mostly much less racist!
-
I've had a very hit-and-miss relationship with nationalism in my lifetime. Because of nationalist horsefuckery, my country's embassy in Serbia was torched by anti-Kosovar protesters in Belgrade when Kosovo decided it didn't feel like being ruled by the historically-oppressive Serbs. Personally? I'm glad that the Kosovar nationalists finally got what they've been desperately wanting for so long. But it's because of nationalist jealousy on the part of Serbian nationalists (with a special mention of their Ultranationalist Party) that there were massive violent protests throughout Belgrade as well as many attempts by pitchfork militias to overrun NATO-KFOR's border guards and attack the Kosovar Albanians.
tl;dr: nationalism can be great, because now Kosovo is free. But it's a mixed blessing because the Serbs still somehow feel entitled to the land, claiming it as the "Heart of Serbia". When two forces of that strength collide, the result isn't pretty.
-
Wow, who pissed in your cheerios?
I made a reasoned decision to support my nation because my family came over from Europe back before this was even a country. Men in my family have been involved in all the big wars of American history - the Revolution, Civil War, WWII, even the Cold War to a much lesser extent. I'm invested in this place. And having been to Europe, I know exactly what sort of reaction Americans get when they mention their 'heritage'. If an American man were to try what John Wayne's character did in The Quiet Man, he'd be laughed out of the country at best. If you think it's easier to emigrate to any European country, walk into Switzerland and try to buy land.
As for Americans being more racist than anyone out there? I'd point to Switzerland again as a prime example, not to mention France. One of my ancestors actually forced his unusually rich parents to buy a town in South Carolina in order to free the slaves there and give them the land, before the Civil War. Last I checked, they still have the town named after him. The money in my family tree just happened to dry up after they spent everything they had for the sake of human rights.
So yeah, go ahead and jack off to your ideas of American inferiority. I'll just be over here holding up the ethics and work habits that made this country the number one destination for political refugees from just about everywhere in the world.
-
I haven't read much of this thread, but there seems to be a misunderstanding of what the words "Patriotism" and "Nationalism" mean.
Patriotism: Love of country. This doesn't have to be unthinking flag-waving and saber-rattling. One can love the country one wishes to reform.
Nationalism: The idea that a people with the shared language, history, culture, and religion also share a destiny and should therefor be grouped together as a single nation. In it's most extreme forms, it tends to hold that whatever nationality it supports is somehow superior to all others.
One can be a patriot without being a nationalist. For example, there aren't many nationalists (in the strictest sense) in the US because we don't have a shared language, history, culture, or religion. Thlayli, you may really want to reconsider calling yourself an American Nationalist. Most of the people who do so are white supremacists who believe that only white, English speaking protestants belong in this country.
One can also be a nationalist without being a patriot, for example if one's "nation" is currently a part of another country. Though if you later win independence, you may become a patriot, and even be regarded as a great patriot.
As for who's "more racist," I don't think that's a simple thing to say. While it is now true that it is easier to go to many European countries then it is to go to the US, this is a relatively recent development. The US has had a long struggle with the kind of racial and cultural diversity that's really just starting in Europe. Already, we're seeing the cracks in places like France. Europeans of European descent in Western and Northern Europe are becoming very concerned with assimilation it seems. We will have to see what happens when large portions of most major European cities have African or Middle Eastern majorities and when these people want to maintain there own cultures.
Canada has done relatively well, though, with similar conditions to the US. I'm not sure what the difference was, but if I had to venture a guess, I would point to a lower population density coupled with some key historical differences.
-
One of my ancestors actually forced his unusually rich parents to buy a town in South Carolina in order to free the slaves there and give them the land, before the Civil War. Last I checked, they still have the town named after him. The money in my family tree just happened to dry up after they spent everything they had for the sake of human rights.
That's really nice. I'm sure you feel fucking proud. Didn't stop the lynchings though, did it? Didn't mean America didn't have legal slavery long after it was abolished by the British, French, Dutch, Spanish, Portugese, Danes, Japanese, Brazilians, etc. etc. etc. Didn't stop Jim Crow, segregation, the KKK etc.? I mean, it's wonderful your ancestor was such a swell guy, but his laudable actions don't mean America wasn't a racist hell-hole, and they don't mean America isn't still particularly rife with institutional racism. When did you personally take any positive action to end racism and bigotry? Still resting on your great great great whatever?
Ethics and work habits? Sweet Jesus. I hope you know that's bullshit.
For the record, I don't think Americas inferior, so much as unusually arrogant and blind to it's incredible failings. Don't sweat it anyway, world economy's collapsing in a couple of years, then we'll see that great mom and apple pie crying bald eagle god bless America work ethic in full swing whilst you shoot each other in the street for a loaf of bread.
-
I've always quietly chalked up the worst excesses people attribute to nationalism as really being more of a problem with imperialism, actually. Nationalism on the face of it, makes a fair bit of sense. A shared culture, after all, is really no more than a fancy term for a set of shared interests and priorities, so it makes sense that people with the same general priorities should cooperate and work as a unit. For example, as a United States citizen hailing from Minnesota, it seems foolish that I should have much to say about the lives of trawler captains working of the coast of Greenland. The problem comes about when some bozos pick up a map and start telling people they know how to manage their lives than better they do. After all, nationalism has been a response to tyranny as often as it has been a tool of dictators.
-
It's easier to emigrate to almost any European country, for a start.
They're also mostly much less racist!
ahahahaha... what? i can't speak for every european country, but i'll just go ahead and speak for italy. i honestly have no idea what the immigration process is like, although i am sure it's less invasive & strict than the american way. but at least you have the option of eventually becoming an american citizen once you've been here long enough. in italy and several other european countries (i am pretty sure germany and france operate along the same lines) you really have no chance of ever being considered a citizen, no matter how long you live there, unless you are married to one or have family originally from there. even your children won't be considered citizens, even if they are born there, if they are not descended from citizens!
as for racism... seriously? you think that europe is less racist? again, i'll just go ahead and speak for italy where racism is completely ingrained into the culture. if you say something racist against the polish, gypsies, albanians, moroccans... no one even gives you a second glance. not everyone is racist, but it's considered normal to have at least some blatantly racist sentiments. i won't even start on the french and germans who i've known to be openly and unashamedly racist.
i'm definitely not going to deny that america has plenty of issues when it comes to racism. but honestly, at least it is mostly frowned upon as being wrong and politically incorrect. and it's ridiculous to suggest that america is alone or "the worst" in its racism, when really prejudice and discrimination can be found all over the world in various forms.
america has a lot of issues and problems, but just because patriotism pisses you off doesn't mean that you need to go on a bashing spree. all countries all over the world have wonderful things and terrible things about them. and yes, some have more bad than good, or good than bad. but there is no reason to get all arrogant and up-in-arms just because people love their country for its good qualities and despite its flaws. it's only natural to feel attached to the culture which formed you, which you can identify with and that you most truly belong to. taken to an extreme in which you think your country is superior, this can be a bad thing. but there isn't anything wrong with appreciating the place you grew up in becuase you got a lot of good out of it - and i'm sure thlayli is not completely ignorant of america's bad qualities just because he loves his country. i don't see why him feeling glad about fitting in america is any worse than you being so completely judgmental and accusatory of an entire nation.
basically what i am trying to say, khar, is that you need to stop getting so angry on the internet.
-
Damn painkillers are making me all giggly 'n' shit. I only read the OP before posting earlier so now I'm just stuck here snickering at the fact that I didn't notice I was posting in the midst of a brewing shitstorm. I find this unreasonably amusing. /blog
Anyway, yeah, what MaiAda said. Also, I find the idea of pulling the immigration card out against the US kind of funny considering I'm a legal citizen despite the fact that until 5 years ago I still had living relatives who were illegals when they came here, and for the most part my family hasn't had to take shit from anyone. I know it's the racists who get all the press when it comes to concerns about illegal immigration, but for every stereotypical asshole out there who's really only got a problem with skin color there's a whole mess of people who plain don't care as long as you're a decent person or who honestly have legitimate economic concerns with the situation in general rather than the people involved in particular.
-
I would posit that true racism has fallen out of favor in America, even among racists.
By true racism, I refer to considering a person better or worse because of the genetics and physiology. The old idea of racism from which eugenics emerged, the idea that flaws in a person's character come from genetic background rather than upbringing.
It has been replaced with a cultural racism, the idea that black people come from inner city lower-class culture and the like, so they prefer to be uneducated and ghetto, or that hispanic people come from recent immigrants, legal or otherwise, and do menial labor.
It's much easier for a person to be judged by the conditions around their life that turned them into the person they are rather than the genetics that decided the color of their skin in modern America than it was 50 years ago. I call that progress, because it at least makes a grain of sense.
-
ahahahaha... what? i can't speak for every european country, but i'll just go ahead and speak for italy. i honestly have no idea what the immigration process is like, although i am sure it's less invasive & strict than the american way. but at least you have the option of eventually becoming an american citizen once you've been here long enough. in italy and several other european countries (i am pretty sure germany and france operate along the same lines) you really have no chance of ever being considered a citizen, no matter how long you live there, unless you are married to one or have family originally from there. even your children won't be considered citizens, even if they are born there, if they are not descended from citizens!
The Italian immigration system is unusually harsh, has come under strong criticism from the EU and is probably going to be changed soon anyway. Besides which, Italy is hardly the definitive example of a European state. The French, German, British, Spanish, Polish, Swedish, Austrian (etc.) immigration policies are not as harsh. Plus, we don't have the same institutional racism as the states. Oh, it's there, but nowhere near on the same level. The thing about America is that it is wrong to be openly bigoted, but all that really means is that the endemic racism built into American society is swept under the table. Look at the figures for black and latino families living below the poverty line. Blacks and latinos with no health insurance. Blacks and latinos behind bars. Racism isn't just calling someone spic or nig[ger, and you're a fool if you think hushing down open bigotry ends racism. Sure, European countries have our problems with racism, especially in the baltic and environs (ie italy) with gypsies and such forth. What I'm objecting to is the painting of America as some sort of halcyon utopia where people of all creeds and colours are welcome and treated as equals. Bullshit!
Furthermore, he was not saying he loves his country because he was bought up there. What he said was he has undergone a rational process of weighing up all the countries in the world and America is best because he was born there. Then he trotted out all this absurd jerking off on the fucking stars and stripes land of the free bullshit. Tell it to the fucking Sioux.
-
Judging a country you've never been to that spans 3.89 million square miles, has a population of 300 million people, and consists of hundred of distinct cultures as one particular thing sure is easy.
-
Hundreds of distinct cultures?
Please, holmes.
-
Well that was certainly a well thought out response! Do you really think that the scraps you've been spoonfed represent America as a whole? Do you think that you could go to New Orleans or New England and get basically the same experience? You're just clinging to some half thought out idea out of a determination to hold a grudge, you don't understand anything and you should just shut your damn mouth.
You're being irrational and xenophobic, basically.
-
Distinct cultures? Come off it please. If America had a hundred distinct cultures it would not be a nation, and any nationalism or patriotism would make no sense. Just because people in different parts of a country drink different beer and pronounce bath differently doesn't mean they're distinct cultures. Besides which, you know fucking nothing of what I've been 'spoonfed' of America, and are in fact just cleaving to a handy stereotype which handily allows you to ignore everything I say.
Fuck yeah!
-
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v12/sademie/RAAAAGE.png)
-
in fact just cleaving to a handy stereotype
Doesn't that put us on equal footing? And anyway, I am a moderately well-informed person who still knows only the simple fundamentals of many other nations, why should I expect somebody who lives five thousand miles from me to know as much about my life as I do? And I think you're just intentionally being a dick when you take what Ozy said and turn it into something literal. The US is nearly 10 million square kilometers, is it really that hard to imagine that there are many, many regional variations?
-
So what? The UK has a huge amount of 'regional variations' too. America is America, you pay for things in dollars, you get thanksgiving and christmas off, you go wild on spring break if you're in college, you drink coffee, eat bagels, waffles, donuts and pancakes, shop in places that could contain villages...
-
stuff
Yeah, and the Turkish immigrants in Germany aren't subjected to fierce and occasionally violent racism, nor the Algerians in France, nor Moroccans in Spain, nor the Pakistanis in Britain...come the fuck off it. You're as full of shit as anyone. Migrant workers (i.e., Muslims and Eastern Europeans) are treated with the same ammout of institutionalized disdain and racism in Western Europe as they are in America, and at least here the Hispanics usually assimilate into the wider culture of the country. The same isn't true for, say, the Pakistanis in England at all. They're distinct and separate and often hate the country they find themselves in. Its European countries who have been debating banning the building of mosques and minarets, and France who ruled that a woman couldn't be a citizen because she wore a Burka. Note that I actually think that ruling was semi-smart; but don't tell me Europe isn't just as racist, if not more, than America. You're not more an enlightened society than we are.
-
Note that I actually think that ruling was semi-smart.
Really? You think that people shouldn't be made citizens because of what they wear?
-
So what? The UK has a huge amount of 'regional variations' too. America is America, you pay for things in dollars, you get thanksgiving and christmas off, you go wild on spring break if you're in college, you drink coffee, eat bagels, waffles, donuts and pancakes, shop in places that could contain villages...
that was not my point.
And you forgot bourbon.
-
Then what was your point, if you don't mind explaining?
-
I was just saying that America is not just the single, transparent society that [I feel that] Khar made it out to be. Just stop trying to make everything a comparison, it's unproductive.
-
I remember reading an op-ed piece in support of that French ruling by a female muslim minister in the French government.
There's like, one muslim in congress?
Anyway, where's the magical place in America where there's no racism?
-
I was just saying that America is not just the single, transparent society that [I feel that] Khar made it out to be. Just stop trying to make everything a comparison, it's unproductive.
I think you have to explain it a little better than that, with evidence and such because I don't see how it isn't. It's unproductive to just state a point, you have to back it up a bit or slow people like me won't get it.
-
I remember reading an op-ed piece in support of that French ruling by a female muslim minister in the French government.
There's like, one muslim in congress?
Anyway, where's the magical place in America where there's no racism?
Did I say there was a place in America where there was no Racism? No. I didn't. But you were going on as if Europe is so much less racist and more open-minded. And that's bullshit. People in Europe--and that includes Britain--are just as xenophobic and racist and the average American is.
Note that I actually think that ruling was semi-smart.
Really? You think that people shouldn't be made citizens because of what they wear?
No, not necessarily, but I don't think it's brilliant to be making people citizens who have no interest at all in the culture or way of life of your country. I don't think that's racist. Maybe xenophobic. But it seems like you're asking for large trouble if you just say "everyone come on and you won't have to make any attempt to learn the language or assimilate into society," and France already has a problem with unassimilated Muslim/African youths in Marseilles and the ghettos of Paris.
-
ALERT ALERT
THREAD GOING DOWNHILL CAPN
TOO POLITICAL
ADDITION: To try to be constructive I suppose I'll elaborate on why I've sounded the alert. The thread was tense at times but no biggie for the first three pages, but this last page has been straight shouting back and forth. Instead of arguing about whether or not America is racist, how about we get back on topic?
-
Anyway, where's the magical place on earth where there's no racism?
-
I was just saying that America is not just the single, transparent society that [I feel that] Khar made it out to be. Just stop trying to make everything a comparison, it's unproductive.
I think you have to explain it a little better than that, with evidence and such because I don't see how it isn't. It's unproductive to just state a point, you have to back it up a bit or slow people like me won't get it.
Fine.
First of all, no well established society is going to single-faceted. Even in a place where legitimate self-expression is extremely dangerous (such as North Korea) I believe that there is going to be some cultural variation. What I mean by "I believe" will be explained in a minute.
Something you need to realize is that a person simply cannot fully understand a culture until they've embraced it, as far as I'm concerned it is impossible. The mainstream media is no representation of real life or thoughts, I have no idea what it is other then a vanilla brainfuck that allows even the most incompetent person to sit down and have something to stare at while he dies.
As a species thrives it branches out and changes, this is evolution. With a culture it is no different; two people within the same culture will separate and facilitate change just as two organisms will. When a foreign idea enters a populace it is either embraced or rejected, and when embraced it changes both itself and its environment.
Consider also that America has been tremendously influenced by other cultures. People have called it the melting pot. My great grandparents were almost certainly involved in the Herrin massacre, but you don't know what that is, of course. Herrin has spent the entire time since that event trying to make up for it, and for that reason (on top of being one of the most friendly and welcoming places around) I don't think that today it has any true parallel. It is not any particularly special place, but if you just consider how immensely that single event changed the town, and then think that thousands of other remote towns have been made unique by their own history, I think that it's only fair to say that nowhere in the world is going to be exactly what an outsider thinks it is.
If you're willing to say that America is basically what you perceive it to be then you have no place suggesting that any other stereotype is invalid. Is England a place where everybody sits around drinking tea and eating crumpets and being ridiculously prudent and mannersome? Fuck no, of course not, some things really are not as simple as they appear.
-
SHUT IT HITLER
AMERICANS ARE NAZIS
-
EUROPEANS TOO
-
my bad.
-
Also while it hasn't popped up on this page, I read through this thread again and see the sentiment "people will always divide the world into an us vs them mentality" pop up over and over again and I think its disgraceful that some people who find this distasteful can't have a little fucking optimism that one day in this rapidly shrinking world, we (a general majority of people in the world) might find such arbitrary distinctions to be useless and maybe learn to embrace our differences as part of what makes us great as a species.
I'm just saying this idea that human nature is immutable is inherently counterproductive towards our emotional growth as a collective species with one definite thing in common, that we are all human.
-
Man I love this thread.
So Much.
Also, Hat, when we get to the point where we all band together as a species do you think we're just going to hate on the rest of the universe?
Hurrah for the Earthicans!
-
Man, we'll probably start on the environment first before we work our way up to other planets.
Goddamn environment has it coming anyway
-
fucking environment.
coming over here.
stealing our women, raping our jobs
fucker's goin down. send him back home!
-
If there's one good thing about American immigration systems, it's the "melting pot" idea. Anyone is free to come over, and then assimilates and becomes and American. Entirely fair, accepting the culture etc when you move somewhere else, and a system we over here could use for new arrivals, and also for our expats to adopt the culture of their host country when they leave here.
-
Man, it is interesting how I am getting accused of anti-americanism and xenophobia when all I have done is mention broad problems with American state institutions. I have never said I don't like Americans or anything. People just cannot seem to seperate criticism of a nations institution and balls-out hatred of its entire populace.
This is the problem with nationalism in a fucking nutshell.
-
Vendetagainst I think you're confused about the meaning of the word culture like many people confuse the words accent and dialect.
-
Anyone is free to come over
Talk to any mexicans lately?
I meant the classic immigrants to america, in the boat pulling up near the Statue of Liberty, wearing shorts, flat caps, maybe playing a few violins
-
If there's one good thing about American immigration systems, it's the "melting pot" idea. Anyone is free to come over, and then assimilates and becomes and American.
The problem being that some people interpret the melting pot idea as meaning "leave your old culture at the door, you're an AMERICAN now", and not understanding the point of the melting pot is to create a society where all cultures can mingle together. It's entirely common, at least in Australia for people to use the term assimilate to criticize the desire for immigrants to maintain their ethnic identity.
-
Vendetagainst I think you're confused about the meaning of the word culture like many people confuse the words accent and dialect.
That could be, if I did then my bad.
Anyone is free to come over
Talk to any mexicans lately?
Um... yes.
Hate to quote wikipedia, but in Chicago...
"26.02% of the population were Hispanic of any race. 21.72% of the population was foreign born; of this, 56.29% came from Latin America, 23.13% from Europe, 17.96% from Asia and 2.62% from other parts of the world"
So more than one in four people is hispanic and one in five is foreign born, do you think these people are hiding out in crumbling shelters somewhere? 'Cause they're not, you know.
-
(http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/2748/prowarprot202iv1.jpg)
-
as for racism... seriously? you think that europe is less racist? again, i'll just go ahead and speak for italy where racism is completely ingrained into the culture. if you say something racist against the polish, gypsies, albanians, moroccans... no one even gives you a second glance. not everyone is racist, but it's considered normal to have at least some blatantly racist sentiments. i won't even start on the french and germans who i've known to be openly and unashamedly racist.
This is pretty much dead on. It's the one thing I've never been comfortable with while living in Europe. Shit, man, I was playing a gig one night back home in Albania, and this guy was telling me about how he visited Chicago and didn't like it because there were too many black people (he used a much less pleasant term for them). He wasn't even the first. And I don't even want to talk about my school in Luxembourg except to mention that such strong nationality-based hatred was one of the reasons I dropped out and have no solid plans to pursue higher education.
do you think these people are hiding out in crumbling shelters somewhere? 'Cause they're not, you know.
Wikipedia knows fuck-all about this kind of thing.
I have an assignment for you. Go anywhere in California between Salinas, Watsonville, and Santa Cruz during harvest time. While driving around, look out your window. There's lots of Mexicans all bent over in the fields, picking strawberries or what have you. Drive around the nice parts of town and you will not see any of these Mexicans. Drive around the shitty crumbly parts? Suddenly, Mexicans everywhere. Hate to break it to you, but illegal immigration is definitely a reality, and these people will never see the end of my sympathy as long as they have to hide out and do backbreaking labor just to make a goddamn dollar.
-
The problem being that some people interpret the melting pot idea as meaning "leave your old culture at the door, you're an AMERICAN now", and not understanding the point of the melting pot is to create a society where all cultures can mingle together. It's entirely common, at least in Australia for people to use the term assimilate to criticize the desire for immigrants to maintain their ethnic identity.
This strikes me as the most sensible and compelling response in the thread thus far. I completely agree. So strange, this division of the new and old world. The former is in theory a recreation of the latter across the sea but most people seem content to ignore this.
I know from experience that everyone hates it when I get needlessly Debordian but I can't help but think the existing stereotypes of new world patriotism/nationalism are the hallmarks of the spectacular. The culture of those who occupy the new world has been compartmentalised in the face of the new mythology as dictated by the mass media. This could explain why whenever I go to the US I can never find any Americans as they are often represented as a cultural archetype. To me it always seems like more Europeans, Asians and Africans who happen to live across a significant body of water. The 'new' culture is young enough to be based near enough entirely on commodity fetishism and appropriately it comes across as somewhat inauthentic to independent observers like KharBevNor.
It's a classic hallmark of Capitalism and I think it's also a trend set to continue as the world does develop into a global mentality. In fact, it's probably a crucial stage in this process, the abandonment of heritage and the adoption of a newer, streamlined society fixated on the present rather than the past. In this manner the idea of distinct Nationalities can be gradually dismantled in the face of a sort of all-encompassing cultural hegemony. Naturally, as someone who is on the beneficial end of Capitalism, it doesn't bother me in particular.
-
The problem being that some people interpret the melting pot idea as meaning "leave your old culture at the door, you're an AMERICAN now",
Surely in America it was always that way? Italians, Irish, Germans etc in the late 19th/early 20th century came over and were encouraged to "Americanise", so second generations onwards lost the old ways of their ancestry and spoke english, drove big cars, ate apple pie, played baseball etc. Give the hispanics a couple of generations and it'll be the same with them, completly immersed in the mainstream. Of course there will always be a few who don't change, but on the whole they'll be considered American, not Latino
-
What I'm objecting to is the painting of America as some sort of halcyon utopia where people of all creeds and colours are welcome and treated as equals. Bullshit!
Then he trotted out all this absurd jerking off on the fucking stars and stripes land of the free bullshit. Tell it to the fucking Sioux.
First, a piece of advice: If you are European do not bring history into this. Just don't do it. You have the longest history of racism, bigotry, and waging war under false pretences. If you think that is American arrogance, you are probably right, but it is arrogance through only being a disphit for 200 years, rather than 1000.
Second of all, no one paints America as a Utopia (l2use halcyon right), and what is wrong with believing that a certain country is better? We don't blame you for not being born here, but we just want you to know that you could have tried a little harder during conception.
-
We don't blame you for not being born here, but we just want you to know that you could have tried a little harder during conception.
Man, is that a bad joke or are you a giant ass?
My thoughts on Nationalism/Patriotism: Fuck the notion that your ancestors matter. Live your life today with the people around you. Fuck the thought that you have any intrinsic prestige or dishonour from the past. Live your life in the world you are in today and do what you can not to fuck other people's shit up. Everyone has the time in their life to realize what's good and bad about their past and to not do it in the present.
-
First, a piece of advice: If you are European do not bring history into this. Just don't do it. You have the longest history of racism, bigotry, and waging war under false pretences. If you think that is American arrogance, you are probably right, but it is arrogance through only being a disphit for 200 years, rather than 1000.
Maybe I am just angrier than I used to be, but fuck this sentiment. Every nation has a shit load of bad stuff in their past.
History is great. It really is. It's an amazing fruitful source of intellectual and academic discourse, and it's invaluable in helping us figure out what to do with our future and avoid the mistakes of the past.
Debating about history as though it means anything today is kind of fucked, as I see it, though. I was born under thirty years ago. I've got mixed blood from many cultures. I don't see why ancient grudges mean shit. There are a whole bunch of people on this planet and we are all trying to live right now.
-
Yes I know this is politically correct,
But it comes to you spiritually direct,
An attempt to thoughtfully affect,
Your way of thinking.
That is if you believe in race,
Or that you were born,
In the right time or place,
This is a thought:
About face your way of thinking...
-
First, a piece of advice: If you are European do not bring history into this. Just don't do it. You have the longest history of racism, bigotry, and waging war under false pretences. If you think that is American arrogance, you are probably right, but it is arrogance through only being a disphit for 200 years, rather than 1000.
I am going to stop ranting the shit out of this reply any minute now, but my ancestors who were not of noble stock are not to blame for meaningless wars under false pretenses. Poor fishermen might be worked up to think someone's the enemy, but in the end, they're working hard jobs for little money and the upper class keeps all of all the power. The entirety of the population of Europe is not to blame for the fucked up workings of monarchies and empires.
-
The problem being that some people interpret the melting pot idea as meaning "leave your old culture at the door, you're an AMERICAN now",
Surely in America it was always that way? Italians, Irish, Germans etc in the late 19th/early 20th century came over and were encouraged to "Americanise", so second generations onwards lost the old ways of their ancestry and spoke english, drove big cars, ate apple pie, played baseball etc. Give the hispanics a couple of generations and it'll be the same with them, completly immersed in the mainstream. Of course there will always be a few who don't change, but on the whole they'll be considered American, not Latino
I thought that was because they were white? Also one of the problems with your argument is that Mexicans have been around for a pretty long time. And by pretty long time I mean they were living in states like California and Texas while those areas were still part of Mexico. Blacks/asians/arabs/latinos are still looked at as 'other', even if they've been here for many generations as well.
-
I have an assignment for you. Go anywhere in California between Salinas, Watsonville, and Santa Cruz during harvest time. While driving around, look out your window. There's lots of Mexicans all bent over in the fields, picking strawberries or what have you. Drive around the nice parts of town and you will not see any of these Mexicans. Drive around the shitty crumbly parts? Suddenly, Mexicans everywhere. Hate to break it to you, but illegal immigration is definitely a reality, and these people will never see the end of my sympathy as long as they have to hide out and do backbreaking labor just to make a goddamn dollar.
Well of course illegal immigration is a reality. And yeah, the people who come here have nothing to start with and have to do things that they absolutely should not have to do to get by, but it's not like there aren't Mexicans gaining legal citizenship to this country. I was on a plane from Tucson going to Chicago and by the end of the flight I was helping the woman next to me practice for her citizenship test, she came here for college (I don't remember her major) and she wasn't in some field picking fruit. Illegal immigration is just as much Mexico's fault as anybody's, if their country wasn't a shit place to live for a LOT of people then so many people wouldn't be trying to get out of it.
The entirety of the population of Europe is not to blame for the fucked up workings of monarchies and empires.
That could be said of any country though.
-
I was born in Labrador (Canada), and I love my home. Maybe it's who I am or just the fact that I grew up there, but I just love the place. It makes me so goddamned happy to stand on top of a humbled old mountain and look across a barren winter wasteland. I love being in the place
Maybe I'd be just as happy somewhere else, but that's where I was born and this is who I am.
I think Canada is pretty neat, I like our reputation, and I like to think I live up to it most of the time. I like that, when traveling abroad, people can see a Canadian flag and just like me right away, and I like that traveling within Canada, I tell people I'm from Labrador and everyone just likes me right away, and newfies consider me old friends.
Now, my approach to understanding what this means to me is just that people seem to like the idea of Canada, and if they treat me nice I'm going to do my damndest to treat them right as well.
I wouldn't say I'm proud to be what I am, just that I consider myself lucky and would like to live up to expectations and make them better.
-
if their country wasn't a shit place to live for a LOT of people then so many people wouldn't be trying to get out of it.
(http://www.electrical.com/phpBB2/images/smiles/011.gif)
Come on, folks. A bit of decorum and tact needed here. From everyone.
-
The entirety of the population of Europe is not to blame for the fucked up workings of monarchies and empires.
That could be said of any country though.
Yes, exactly, that is what I was getting at. Gold star.
-
@Tommy
I've been to Mexico. When people live in very literal shacks on the side of the road without any reliant source of water, when the government has ownership over all of the fucking land, and when the police are fucking brutal beyond any level found in the states or in Europe, I would say that's a pretty shit place to live.
That's not the point! I was arguing the statement that said "everyone is welcome here" when they obviously are not.
Well I get what you might be saying, but people are welcome if they just follow the parameters of entry. I get that there are times when this is not possible for them, and I'm not even against illegal immigration, really, but it's not like somebody trying to legally gain citizenship isn't going to be thrown out for their ethnicity, creed, etc.
-
I know from experience that everyone hates it when I get needlessly Debordian but I can't help but think the existing stereotypes of new world patriotism/nationalism are the hallmarks of the spectacular. The culture of those who occupy the new world has been compartmentalised in the face of the new mythology as dictated by the mass media. This could explain why whenever I go to the US I can never find any Americans as they are often represented as a cultural archetype. To me it always seems like more Europeans, Asians and Africans who happen to live across a significant body of water.
You're obviously not looking close enough. It's somewhat offensive to imagine someone believing that American culture is shaped by the mass media.
I'm curious about where you've been in America anyway. I mean you might be able to make that observation in distinctly suburban areas, or cities in California, or New York, perhaps. But even places like Boston and New England are culturally distinct and aren't really represented in the mass media. I'm from the south and it's pretty flat out wrong if you don't think there's a very rich and distinct culture that's been built up here over the years. Regardless of whether it seems uninviting to you or you look down on it for certain aspects. Places in the south are also pretty hard to compare to each other. You can't really compare rural Arkansas to New Orleans. It's likewise hard to compare Memphis to Alabama or Texas.
African-American culture is completely distinct from traditional African culture. Even small town suburban, American culture is different from what you'd see in other places (and lately it seems this suburban culture is what's represented in the mass media.)
The American archetype that's been talked about in this thread is something I've never seen after living in America for my entire life. But it's frankly ignorant to discern that we're all media sheep with no history or depth of culture.
-
The American archetype that's been talked about in this thread is something I've never seen after living in America for my entire life.
Yes, that was my point. You quoted it -
This could explain why whenever I go to the US I can never find any Americans as they are often represented as a cultural archetype.
I was positing the theory that it's a construct of sorts. It comes from the most visible media which is likely to travel abroad. That's how a lot of people see America.
Possibly I was unclear but on re-reading my post I want to say exactly the same again. Maybe I can clarify -
The culture of those who occupy the new world has been compartmentalised in the face of the new mythology as dictated by the mass media.
The cultures of the US have been obfuscated by the construct we previously discussed above. The archetype of the generic American has become more real than legitimate Americans in the minds of certain people.
I'm not saying that America is bereft of history or culture. I was commenting on the discrepancy between my experience of America as compared to the version which is popularised through mass media.
-
kids listen to your mother, she knows best.
-
"There are only two things I can't stand: People who are intolerant of other peoples' cultures,
and the Dutch!"
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/c/c7/Goldmember3.jpg)
-
Stuff
Yes, but I was more replying to your observation about how Americans seem to you like people from overseas living in America.
I was trying to make the point that that is completely untrue.
-
My personal observation that Americans seem to me to be like people from overseas living in America is completely untrue?
Ah.
-
Presumably with the exception of Native Americans, everyone who lives in America is from overseas.
-
My personal observation that Americans seem to me to be like people from overseas living in America is completely untrue?
What is your favorite kind of pie, chocolate fudge or banana cream?
-
(I'm actually wanting him to answer the question. It's an old bit from the Daily Show.)
...
(but y'know never mind now, the joke is now ruined.)
-
I think I prefer chocolate fudge, but I will change my answer to hear that joke if necessary.
-
My personal observation that Americans seem to me to be like people from overseas living in America is completely untrue?
Ah.
You implied that the cultures are not distinctly their own in America.
So yes, that is completely untrue. You can make a personal observation that is wrong.
-
I was more replying to your observation about how Americans seem to you like people from overseas living in America.
Then why did you lead off with this?
It's somewhat offensive to imagine someone believing that American culture is shaped by the mass media.
I mean, that's a completely different point, and one that he agrees with you on. It strikes me as odd that you are trying to drum up an argument with someone who is basically agreeing with you.
-
I really wasn't trying to start an argument, just not being completely clear when disagreeing with a very specific part of his post. Mainly saying that he seems to believe that the culture of most Americans is indistinguishable from people overseas. That Americans are "just Europeans, Asians, and Africans" living in America. I suppose I muddled what he was saying about the mass media as part of it. But essentially my point still stands. Americans have a very distinct culture(s) and Tommy does not seem to see that.
I realize I was unclear in my original point. But who cares, this is what I'm trying to say.
-
It's more that all those cultures (European, Asian, African) still exist, but have taken on their own American flair, and contributed to the wider American culture as a whole.
-
Of course, culture evolves in an organic manner like everything else. But most American cultures are so vastly different from everything overseas you can't mistake them for any other culture any more.
Someone from the American south, who really is a part of the culture, is completely unlike someone pretty much anywhere else.
-
(I'm actually wanting him to answer the question. It's an old bit from the Daily Show.)
So! You expect us all to revel in your culture you imperialist pig
(http://www.crittersetc.com/Quickstart/ImageLib/Pig_toga_prod.JPG)
-
shut up you don't ruin my bitingly sarcastic quips
Except that he never asserted that Americans invented pie in the first place, so being sarcastic about it was pretty pointless.
-
In retrospect, I can see why he thought that's what I meant.
-
Someone from the American south, who really is a part of the culture, is completely unlike someone pretty much anywhere else.
Come on, now, we all know that if you live in a city with more than half a million people in it, you're a Yankee.
-
Well I get what you might be saying, but people are welcome if they just follow the parameters of entry. I get that there are times when this is not possible for them, and I'm not even against illegal immigration, really, but it's not like somebody trying to legally gain citizenship isn't going to be thrown out for their ethnicity, creed, etc.
That's what I meant by my earlier posts
And if we're talking about American culture, it is distinct and the same-created from many other cultures blended into one.