Nationalism is pride in being enslaved by the government you live under.
Stockholm syndrome is a phenomenon where victims develop a psychological alliance with their abusers.
Discussion
Why can’t nationalism be more grass roots culture and founding ideals rooted?
Maybe you view this context always circling back to the State?
A nation is an area that shares one thing in common: the slave masters.
Do you have a different definition of nation?
A collective worship of this: https://i.nostr.build/Y6amKJ2Sm5hXppdy.webp
Fading Nations is how people get pillaged, raped, and become conquered.
A nation is just a large tribe. A group of people with a shared race, values, customs, and language. Bad governance is not an argument against nations.
Said better than I could’ve ⚡️
This “nation” is constantly being pillaged, raped, and conquered by its own government.
Bad governance is an oxymoron. Murder, theft, and kidnapping are features and not bugs.
Anyone that is not happy living in the US is welcome to leave. The fact that almost no one does and millions of people risk their lives to come here and millions more are waiting in line to come here legally tells you what you need to know. Not all nations can come out victorious in conflict, but only nations can.
How is it an oxymoron? Do families, clubs, companies not have governance?
Dood seems to be taking the edgy and bold takes too far into unpractical world 😅
Not at all. The entire concept of government is illogical and evil. No man has a right to your money or labor.
https://video.nostr.build/4ea168f6cf963bed49cfad736cb12960fb890f66f2cbde2c0f3a7e9117455b1b.mp4
Governments existed before fiat money and involuntary taxes. This is why no one takes libertarians seriously and why they are political losers
That’s a fallacy. Just because it existed for a long time, doesn’t mean it’s good or necessary lmao don’t be a cuck there is no winning in politics
How is pointing out a fact a fallacy? Who said government is good or necessary?
Feel free to argue me and not the straw man
Yeah ross being free is a total L
Moving the goalposts was the fallacy!
You changed the subject to be about libertarians being political losers and that government has existed before when I was talking about the illegitimate nature of government. Try to stay on topic.
Ross went to prison for what 14 years?
Who put him in prison? Who controls the prison? Who put the samourai team in prison? The root of the problem is the government. Ross is free now but why isn’t the samourai team free yet? And again why didn’t trump pardon him before?
Political bribery isn’t a good thing 😂
yes which is why the american contract left ZERO room for that AS LONG as the sheep remained vigilant in their DUTY.
taxes remain illegal and only applicable to "employees" of the federal government engaged in what is termed "trade or business" WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
which highlight the original delegated powers which were EXCLUSIVELY for dealing with foreign states and other international dealings....
the fact that your fathers and grandfathers chose potbellies, alcohol, and football over education, investment, civic duty and maintaining their LEGAL STATUS and the government's SUBSERVIENT role says more about your genetic heritage than it does the proper role of government.
It's not illogical to form a team to protect a people's interests.
While the Libertarian critique of the institution of the state does have some valid points when viewed through the materialistic lens of property rights, it does not account for game theory law of the jungle power dynamics posed by competing nations that have organized themselves into nation-states.
The difference is that the formation of teams to protect your interests is voluntary.
Well, maybe at first it is, but later as organization at the societial level plays out, and larger national "super tribes" are formed, it all depends on your view of how "voluntary" the exit costs are I suppose.
Actually a lot of people are leaving. The US has one of the highest rates of citizenship renunciation. “That should tell you all you need to know.”
People are not coming here for freedom or economic opportunity. People are coming here for handouts: food stamps, cheap housing, cheap or free healthcare. The same people are trying to get into Canada and the UK.
“If you don’t like it just leave” is a weak argument. Does the government own the land? Because that is what you are implying. This statement comes from brainwashed slaves not from free individuals.
Also, do you like everything the government does? If you don’t then you should also leave 🤷♂️
Families, clubs, and companies are voluntary. If I choose not to engage in business with Walmart, they won’t come knocking on my door with guns and throw me in a cage.
The initial conversation was about nations. I said bad governance is not an argument against nations. Don’t twist my words to try to make it seem like I’m defending bad governance. You claim that all governance is inherently evil, so I brought up examples that refute that.
Totally, everyone knows the millions of college graduates applying for visas and citizenship are really after food stamps.
Yes, people that refuse to be politically active and are dissatisfied with their nation should consider leaving. There’s nothing weak about that argument if you don’t conflate nations with governments.
No, probably unlike you, I know politics matters, so I will seek to effect change through politics before considering moving to a foreign nation.
I think you have a different definition of nation. Seems like you’re conflating nation with culture or society. A nation is an area ruled by a government body.
But I’m glad you keep investing time and energy into politics with no return. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.
I defined a nation in my original response, but good you caught on to it now.
Yeah Ross is totally not free and the DOJ is still going after bitcoin developers.
Such a waste of a vote. Absolutely no return on the 10mins it took to vote. You got me there 👍🏼
Your understanding of the term nation is incorrect.
According to American Founder John Jay in Federalist 2, there are six elements for BEING American: shared ancestry, shared language, shared religion, similar conceptions of government and law, a shared culture, and a shared historical experience.
Sounds like America isn’t a nation
It isn't. It's a continent.
What? Whose lining up? Thought they were only sending the worst people?
😂
"listen, they're not sending us their best and brightest"
Hey if you don’t like then leave
nostr:npub1pzzrdngrnlufqazx3lfj07k0vfuya6ehfy8q5yv2h8c5e8fxgmxqhxdsr8 you’re right, voting doesn’t do anything. It definitely doesn’t free people from 2 life sentences in prison. 👍🏼
You got me, everyone knows there’s no demand for green cards
conquered by the lapse in civic and kinship duties by THE PEOPLE... who ARE(were, until they fucking act) "the government".
yes. go to the root fucking etymology.
Natal.
A nation is a people. You are conflating the term nation, with the nation-state, an institution that was created ostensibly to protect, care for and nurture the development of a particular nation.
what is the difference between a nation and a race?
See my other response regarding John Jay's articulation of the concept please.
I saw it but it doesn’t answer my question. Your post just suggests that America isn’t a nation at all
Modern day "America" is increasingly a witches brew of incompatible nations vying for political and economic power of the state.
That's why it has so much division.
So it isn’t a nation?
The actual American nation does not include everyone living in the border of the territory under the political control of the U.S. government.
For example, the Kurds are a nation, but they have no nation-state to protect them.
Therefore they suffer.
You’re not answering my question. Is the US a nation?
By "US", do you specifcally mean the United States of America?
Yes
No, that is a political entity also known as a nation-state.
There are nations with and without their own nation-states.
The Kurds are an example of a nation without a state. The Jews are a nation formerly without one, but now with one since 1948.
Where is the nation of Kurds located?
Can the term race be substituted for nation here?
No.
What is the difference between race and nation when it comes to the Kurds?
Same as it is for any other nation, it's one component in addition to several others.
What is the difference between race and nation when it comes to any other nation?
These questions are becoming increasingly lame and repetitive, just rephrasing the same question.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you don't meet one or more of John Jay's six elements of being an American.
Thus these dumb questions are just a lame attempt to "deconstruct" the concept of a nation, in the best of the gay race communism tradition.
You’re taking yourself in circles. So far you have established that America is not a nation based on a retarded definition. Nice appeal to authority by the way. You can’t articulate the difference between a race and a nation. And you can’t tell me what nation your ancestors belonged to before America.
It feels repetitive and annoying for you because it illustrates the retarded logic you follow and your stubbornness to be right.
You most definitely can change nations. The ancestors of Americans belonged to European nations before they even knew the United States existed. A lot of Americans don’t even remember who their ancestors were or where they came from.
What you stubbornly refuse to admit is that what is referred to by the Kurds and Israelis as “nation,” can also simply be referred to as just their race or ethnic group.
The definition of nation:
a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.
The definition of country:
a nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory.
The definition of territory:
an area of land under the jurisdiction of a ruler or state.
The definition of nationalism:
identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.
So a nation IS a particular country or territory. A country/territory is unified by a government. And nationalism is identification with that country/territory. What makes it a nation/country/territory IS the government. So nationalism is pride in being ruled by a specific government. It is the preference of your ruler over another ruler. So yes nationalism is Stockholm syndrome. I can’t make it any simpler for you than that.
nostr:npub1hhczaensvm77hgj4uxk804n6m9gy3hk4p6ugtgqu4vu32mjzst0s83cz98 nostr:npub180czphasst2k8035u9nuk4wdmt9eppme9l03tp5j43qck7s8emwqr8agc0
Race is one aspect of nationhood, see the "shared ancestry" element.
If the people in the US do not hold a shared ancestry, then the US is not a nation according to the criteria of this “founder?”
It's not a single nation anymore, that is correct.
So what is nationalism in the US?
It depends on who you ask and how clear a sense of their own identity that person has.
I think have articulated my own identity as an American national, with a massive hat tip to John Jay, clear.
There are a lot of people living here that don't even know what a nation actually is, much less what the six elements of being an American are.
I can't answer for them regardless.
How can you identify as an American national when you have proven that America is not a nation?
There is the "America" the nation (comprised of the _actual_ American people), and America the country (the territory) that the American nation occupies, along with several other nations and diasporas.
They are distinct things and concepts.
I’m going to rewrite your note and substitute the definition of nation that YOU provided. Since the American nation doesn’t exist, the term nothing will be used as a substitute,
There is the "nothing" the nation (comprised of the _actual_ American people), and nothing the country (the territory) that the nothing nation occupies, along with several other nations and diasporas.
This note is complete nonsense based on your definitions of a nation.
The American nation does exist. It is a distinct people (not to be confused with a country, or a nation-state, etc etc), as I have been patiently trying to explain for over a dozen posts.
If you're unable to parse the concept because of some prior miseducation or an unacknowledged conflict with your worldview, sorry but can't help you there.
You have made all the claims here. You said that the American nation consists of a group of people of the same race, culture, and language.
Where is this American nation? Who are the members of this nation?
The nation is located within the United States of America.
I have already answered who the members of this nation are, refer to post referencing the six elements of being American.
Is the American nation exclusive to the United States of America? Can the American nation exist in Europe for example?
No, there can be diaspora populations of the American nation in Europe or other parts of the world, just like there are diaspora populations of the Chinese nation in most corners of the world.
Can someone change his nation?
Because I know who and what I am, where I come from, how and for exaxtly whom America was originally founded for, and the discernment to know the difference between America the nation, the nation-state, the country and its territories.
I am going to do the same thing with your note here. I will substitute the word nothing for America since it is not a nation according to YOUR definition.
Because I know who and what I am, where I come from, how and for exaxtly whom nothing was originally founded for, and the discernment to know the difference between nothing the nation, the nation-state, the country and its territories.
Based on your own criteria, your statements make no sense. Consider the possibility that this founder’s definition may not be useful.
Can't get an ought from an is
Today we learn
The term "Stockholm syndrome" was coined after a bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1973. During this incident, Jan-Erik Olsson took four employees of Sveriges Kreditbank hostage for six days. A criminologist and psychiatrist, Nils Bejerot, was asked by the Stockholm police to analyze the hostages' reactions and their status as hostages. Bejerot described the hostages' reactions as a result of being brainwashed by their captors and called it "Norrmalmstorgssyndromet," meaning "The Norrmalm Square syndrome," after the location of the attempted robbery. The term later became known outside Sweden as Stockholm syndrome.
Political Stockholm syndrome: The rush of gratitude that a leader may not be outright murderous, merely wrong on almost everything.
Wish I could zap this
and just like that we now have our lightning address set up https://blossom.primal.net/f7122a3f475803b1cb1ade31615dacc5bdd5974b47b46eba7227816f35e5738f.webp
Coinos.io 😂