Current countries are not nations. The goalposts have already been moved. These are basically just economic zones. Multiculturalism is a completely failed ideology.

Borders are necessary to preserve a people and their culture. Are current borders doing that? Well considering the countries of today are largely just controlled economic zones that are being harvested in the name of GDP then I'm not sure it makes a difference.

But I think this is where you're getting the idea that these things are arbitrary. From the current globalist nonsense that's been forced on the world.

The reality is there are irreconcilable differences between cultures and peoples that exist today. And those people will come into countries with malicious intent but make themselves appear peaceful. This is literally happening today in the United States.

I'm defending the original idea of a nation. I believe this concept has largely been robbed of us from globalists that are out to turn every nation into an open society. Mainly to place certain groups at the center of power under the guise of preventing the rise of "another Hitler."

I think those same groups have influenced people like you to take on the their battle of this no nations no borders bullshit.

I mean why should I respect a foreigner views on my country? Why would I take that seriously? That makes no sense. That's me disrespecting myself and my people. That's counterintuitive.

If you are against ethnocide you should be arguing in favor of borders and nations. That's just basic logic.

I like in a place that has had immigrants pour in by the millions in a very short amount of time. I didn't get a say in this. I don't get a say in whether or not they leave. I don't get a say in where they shop or where. They're being given money from my taxes to live off of. They're making traffic worse. Their culture is not similar to mine and they are not respectful of the people who are from here. They're invaders. And you're telling me if I change myself because of my neighbors that's a me problem? If I look out my window and see a war zone do you not think that should change me?

What exactly are you calling a strawman? Everything I said is happening in my country. You condoning ethnocide? You do. Or at least the concept of being against borders is diametrically opposed to preserving ethnic and cultural groups.

There will always be a dominant culture. If Hispanics start to outnumber whites in the United States then Hispanic culture will be the dominant one. If Muslims outnumber whites they'll be the dominant culture. If either of those things happen then we will see white culture be eradicated.

As much as you might not believe in authority other people do. You are NOT any authority to be making some sweeping call on how other people deal with being the dominant group in any place.

You are claiming you don't believe in authority while trying to convince me you're an authority on why nations are arbitrary.

You will probaly fail to see how retarded that is.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

"You can't define it"

https://www.etymonline.com/word/nation

You can absolutely define it. It's defined.

Are you done arguing yet or do you have to continue to be wrong?

you're strawmanning left to right... i don't want to convince you, i couldn't care less what you think. there is no need to get personal

i looked for common ground. but i guess it is easier to see the other as an enemy, cause we don't agree on everything. sad...

Reddit ass response.

what's your obsession with reddit? never used it

either way: you're right, thanks for the exchange!

Invoking logical fallacies and not elaborating on what you believe they are is very reddit behavior. No borders no nations is a very reddit stance. Morality and niceness policing is pretty reddit.

i did but you ignored it. you were claiming things i never said and moved definitions around. it is hard to argue like that. we are going around in a circle and as i said, i don't want or need to convince you of anything

it is a little bit ironic that you use "reddit behavior" and "reddit stance", putting a whole lot of people in a single group. again creating a we vs them, needing a bogeyman. we are all human, no need for division

It's weird that you're saying that I'm putting people in an us vs them thing. It's like you're saying you're not part of a group that puts people in an us vs them thing which is an us vs them thing.

that is a strawman, you're implying things i never said

I'm not implying anything. You just said "putting a whole lot of people in a single group. again creating a we vs them"

And you're simultaneously saying "we are all human, no need for division"

Do you believe you don't do this? Do you put people into groups and make it we vs them?

Cause you just did.

According to your logic. I'm the type of person that puts people in groups and you are not. Unless of course you're saying you're a hypocrite?

huh? groups, plural. with one group there is no we vs them...

Are you a part of a group that doesn't group people yes or no?

Am I a part of a group that groups people yes or no?

we are turning in circles. same answer i have about borders. it doesn't help or add to my life. you are a human being. i am a human being. i don't put people in groups, for what? it doesn't help, it just divides... i repat myself again... it was even a mistake of mine saying we humans are a group, i don't see it like that, what does it matter? it doesn't, for me. you can use groups, put people in groups, draw borders. if you think it helps and enriches your life, do it, i am happy for you if it helps you

Yes but you put me in a group of people that puts people in groups. You did that. You do put people in groups. At least you did. That's why you're not answering the question and trying to find your way out of it. And you're saying "I'm not like that and you are" thus creating a us (non grouper people) vs them (people who group).

Like you can't just magically say you didn't do that. You did.

It's also human (oh I know we aren't supposed to group people now) nature.

Again this is exactly like you seeing yourself above the "superstition of authority."

You're playing pretend and then ridiculing others for not going along with your fantasyland nonsense.

To pretend as though we shouldn't be grouping people for one reason or another is asking to ignore biology, psychology, and culture.

You can "not see it like that" all you want. I can close my eyes and pretend I live in Disneyland too. It doesn't make it reality.

If humans aren't a group what are they? What's a species? Isn't that a grouping? Hmmm.

What's a race? Isn't that a grouping?

Do you just pick random words to take issue with for arbitrary reasons?

i said i was wrong. you just picking at me at this point. of course we use words to group things and put labels on it. what i meant to say is, that in certain situations it is needed and helpful. but in certain situations it doesn't help at all and divides us and creates an enemy image. and yes, these situations are arbitrary again

not sure it helps to tell you again: i have no intend to convince you of anything. i never mentioned anything from you shouldn't put people into groups. i just wanted to say that i don't find it useful to draw a line, call it border and every person on the other side is somehow so much different than i am. from my point of view it is arbitrary. nothing more. you can think whatever you want... i repeated that multiple times now...

Hey guys, this is nostr, not X

Are you saying these types of topics are off the table here?

Not really. I just had the feeling that I was scrolling on Musk's platform again. Sorry about that. Please follow on.

What I like most of nostr, more than the general subject, is the general atmosphere.