A Study In Welfare,Liberal Ideology, Racism & Diversity

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Nationalism is good for nations, it receives angst and venom because it is bad for the imaginary "benefits" of globalism.

I don't believe that for a second. Nationalism just removes competition which creates stagnation.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
I don't believe that for a second.

Good for you, glad you're not in a position of policymaking. The simple fact of the matter is this, we live in the country with the largest economy in the world. Globalism requires those in the strongest countries to weaken their positions for the benefit of the weakest countries. As an American, I see no reason whatsoever to support that nonsense. If I was a Mexican or Korean, sure... I'd love me some globalism and I totally understand why they jump at the chance to take America's manufacturing jobs for pennies on the dollar. Nationalism doesn't remove internal competition, in DEMANDS internal competition. What it removes is the foreign component that comes in and buys a manufacturing contract for 15% of what the same domestic bids come in at because it's manufacturing the crap in a third world slum city where $0.50 a day gets you 3 hot meals and a solid roof over your head. Just being honest here, I don't care about the plights of the people in those countries, but I do care about the jobs situation in the US and the only logical solution is strong national protectionist policies which allow all the internal competition one could want while keeping the door closed to avoid external rabble from entering the discussion and skewing the balances.

I am still hoping for someone to discuss the alleged strengths from diversity and the issue of national identity. Japan has maintained its national identity as has China and a few other places. Identity is important its not racist its integral to how we perceive ourselves. Sweden is in danger of losing its national identity as is Germany. Russia appears to be keeping its national identity and according to what I've read, will fight tooth and nail to do so. France are determined not to lose French identity by pushing assimilation.

Political philosophers have long argued that all humans seek meaning and identity from their culture nationality and social group and that it is essential to the well being of people to have that sense of identity. (see Charles Taylor or Bikhu Parekh). Immigration requires that the immigrants are able to adopt or assume a new sense of identity based on their host nations values and customs

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
I am still hoping for someone to discuss the alleged strengths from diversity and the issue of national identity.

It's all BS.

Neither makes a nation stronger.

I see people saying that globalism will end in a hive type civilization where everyone is the same.

So people want individualism as long as everyone is the same?

Did I mention that it was all BS?

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
I am still hoping for someone to discuss the alleged strengths from diversity and the issue of national identity. Japan has maintained its national identity as has China and a few other places. Identity is important its not racist its integral to how we perceive ourselves. Sweden is in danger of losing its national identity as is Germany. Russia appears to be keeping its national identity and according to what I've read, will fight tooth and nail to do so. France are determined not to lose French identity by pushing assimilation.

Political philosophers have long argued that all humans seek meaning and identity from their culture nationality and social group and that it is essential to the well being of people to have that sense of identity. (see Charles Taylor or Bikhu Parekh). Immigration requires that the immigrants are able to adopt or assume a new sense of identity based on their host nations values and customs

What are some traits that make up America's national identity?

a reply to: Tsubaki

Sorry I can't answer that, I'm not American for one and I think the identity issue is either a) at a subconscious level or b) very subjective. I'm afraid I don't know if there are specific traits as such, or more a feeling of belonging, which is what some writers believe is missing when migration occurs and why migrants will flock togther

Sadly this is true.

I think multi-culti was born out of the guilt of realizing what was done to some cultures under the colonial rule. They were utterly destroyed and in brutal fashion, but many people of different cultures have since moved to the US and assimilated to our culture without losing the bits of their own culture that are important to them. It makes for interesting flavor the fabric of the country, but they are still undeniably American at the end of the day.

And that's what we should be demanding.

People who move here need to want to learn to be American. That doesn't mean completely surrendering who or what they were before, but it does mean adopting what we are and learning to be one of us.

originally posted by: Tsubaki

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
I am still hoping for someone to discuss the alleged strengths from diversity and the issue of national identity. Japan has maintained its national identity as has China and a few other places. Identity is important its not racist its integral to how we perceive ourselves. Sweden is in danger of losing its national identity as is Germany. Russia appears to be keeping its national identity and according to what I've read, will fight tooth and nail to do so. France are determined not to lose French identity by pushing assimilation.

Political philosophers have long argued that all humans seek meaning and identity from their culture nationality and social group and that it is essential to the well being of people to have that sense of identity. (see Charles Taylor or Bikhu Parekh). Immigration requires that the immigrants are able to adopt or assume a new sense of identity based on their host nations values and customs

What are some traits that make up America's national identity?

I think for one thing you aren't going to be offended by seeing an American flag no matter what day is being celebrated. So in other words, you understand that just like St. Patrick's Day is a day in the US to celebrate our Irish heritage folks, then Cinco de Mayo is also a day we celebrate our folks with Mexican heritage, but it is just as American, so the American flag is equally appropriate at either celebration.

I mean, really, they barely even celebrate Cinco de Mayo in Mexico.

You identify as American and with other Americans before you immediately seek your own ethnic/cultural/religious others.

"So where are you from originally?" is no longer viewed as an insult because you understand that we Americans are a highly mobile bunch and move around a lot and are as likely to sport an accent ourselves as you might being from another country (assuming you immigrated).

Those are just a few I can think of off the top of my head ...

a reply to: ketsuko

I agree but with regard to colonial rule, I'm not sure specifically with regards to cultures, but certainly many countries benefited greatly from colonial rule. Generally & historically speaking many conquered countries come out on top having learned from their conquerors. After all, normally a conqueror is often more advanced hence the ability to conquer. We in Britain whether we like it or not learnt one hell of a lot from the Romans and Normans which in turn helped us in our conquering and colonising same can be said for Germany & Japan who now lead the world in manufacturing & technology and so it goes on throughout history

I'm no expert but from what I've read a national identity is comprised of a common origin cultural ties and common belief system whether that be political religious or core values and again what I said above, a sense of belonging. Whereas Nationalism is political self-determination

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

The only possibility I can see is this:

English is a remarkably flexible and adoptive language. It regularly takes in words from other languages, and it's grammatical structure is flexible enough that there are dialects of it that exist in places where almost no recognizable English words are used such that even though the grammatical framework makes it undeniably English, it is a dialect most of us would consider a foreign tongue if we ever heard it.

America's culture is aiming to be similar. It likes to take in new ideas and practices to add to its own framework. It remains American, but we see new things crop up. Look at Cinco de Mayo or sushi. That adoptive nature and flexibility can make a culture more resilient in the sense that it is open to examining new practices or ideas, something that may save it. Of course, that same tendency can also serve as a weakness.

a reply to: ketsuko

hmm I'll have to have a think on that and respond after my night's sojourn up the stairs to beddy byes
Thanks for your input!

a reply to: ketsuko

So this resilience can be a strength or weakness. I stand by my assertion that it is all BS for this very reason.

By the way, many places are open to taco shops and shushi bars. It isn't an american thing or something exclusive to the english language.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Dude. Multiculturalism dates back to the Roman Empire.

As an enforced social policy by Government it is only 30/40 years old.

"dates back to the Roman Empire" is "sigh".....here have a look at how there was a distinction made on the different class of citizenry...


www.quora.com...

At its greatest extent, the Roman Empire spanned Europe, North Africa and the Middle East (File:Roman Empire Trajan 117AD.png). Like many other empire builders, the Romans were enthusiastic in their promotion of their own culture, but they were very inclusive in their cultural imperialism, actively promoting the adoption of Roman culture by local ruling elites. There is a useful discussion here: Romanisation: The Process of Becoming Roman.

The Empire can be said to be multicultural in the sense that the Roman Army drew its manpower from across these territories, so for example, legions based in Britain have been shown to include a very diverse mix of soldiers, with 'Syrians', North Africans and Europeans all doing military service. When their military service was over, many ex-soldiers would settle where they had served so cultural diversity was also common across the Roman Empire.

The Empire was also outstandingly tolerant of religious diversity. As the centre of the Empire, the city of Rome was multicultural in that people of widely diverse cultural origins lived and worked there. The Emperors themselves were increasingly drawn from around the Empire over time (List of Roman emperors).

That said, Roman citizenship was a complex issue and while it was not defined by nationality, various classes of citizenship existed (see: Roman citizenship) and your rights (and duties) varied with the class of citizenship you held. So while the Roman Empire was in many ways multicultural, it would be unwise to extrapolate that too far in terms of what we understand as equality. It should also be remembered that theirs was a slave-owning society, even though their slaves were as culturally diverse as the rest of their society

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Fun fact: Nationalism is why China was so far behind the rest of the world back in the 90's.

LOL - they had closed borders and a one party Marxist system. I wouldn't define that as Nationalism

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: ketsuko

So this resilience can be a strength or weakness. I stand by my assertion that it is all BS for this very reason.

By the way, many places are open to taco shops and shushi bars. It isn't an american thing or something exclusive to the english language.

Then we create fusion!

Cinco de Mayo is a minor holiday in almost all of Mexico, but it's becoming a real thing in the US.

Sushi or tacos are created traditionally in their native countries. We create sushi tacos or taco sushi in the US.

Cut off the city of Detroit from social programs and I'm willing to bet within a month they'll be shooting your kids and eating your dogs.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Then we create fusion!

Fusion is all good but the point is that the US isn't the only country that does that.

Also, the idea that doing so is good or bad for a country is a false dilemma.

im betting your a pilgram, the first illegal

originally posted by: PhyllidaDavenport
I am still hoping for someone to discuss the alleged strengths from diversity and the issue of national identity.

I don't think you will find anyone that could rationally debate the benefits of forced diversity at the expense of the host nation losing their identity.

If you view the whole forced diversity campaign for what it is, everything becomes crystal clear. It is a war by the globalist to make the final thrust into countries that are still somewhat sovereign and will thwart their agenda.

Forced diversity does nothing but weaken the host country. It is all by careful deliberation and design. As this plan continues and if there are countries that somehow make it out of this somewhat intact, we will have their game plan from A to Z. They must succeed at this point or their playbook will be available to all of those who wish to learn.

Interesting times.