Society/Culture Please explain?
- Thread starter Tim H
- Start date
- Tagged users None
No it's not. It means a love of your nation - which is why it's not really any different to nationalism.
I/we are worthy of equal respect is egalitarianism. Quite a different thing altogether.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Common sentiment doesn't equate concepts.
'I hate all muslims because they are terrorists' is a bigoted and factually incorrect statement. That still doesn't make it racist.
There's a lot of tippy toeing around race, religion, nationality etc., predominantly because of the political correctness agenda that has been drilled into society and the fact that so many can't separate logic and emotion.
- Banned
- #29
There's a difference between religion & nationality. Back onto nationality, I'm not claiming that saying "All Americans are stupid" is racist. I'm trying to work out why such a phrase is more acceptable than racism, when everything that makes racism undesirable (It's something the individual doesn't choose, it's something which has no definitive bearing on ones personality/values/intelligence) all apply to ones nationality too. Can you explain why degrading someone because of their nationality is more acceptable than degrading someone because of their race?
- Thread starter
- #30
Patriots are expected to put thier country first because it's more important.
- Banned
- #31
Put it first ahead of what? I would never put my country ahead of my family, or my convictions or any number of things I find more important than were I happen to have been born.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
It isn't, and no I can't.
'I hate Asians' is not the same as 'I hate Koreans', for example. Likewise I hate 'Hindus' or 'I hate Indians'. Whether or not one is more 'acceptable' than another is up to personal preference.
The issue with 'racism' lies with the fact that in any discussion about race, nationality, religion etc. it's only a short matter of time before someone pipes in with 'that's racist', because saying that seems to eliminate the need to provide any intelligent contribution. Just say 'that's racist' and the stigma attached to the word will ensure that the need to logically demonstrate a position will disappear. Plus whoever says it gets to walk away feeling warm and fuzzy.
- Thread starter
- #34
Obviously he's asking for input and thoughts. What's the point of your post? Sarcasm? Because there are plenty of other web sites for you to post like that, and they wouldn't have been any more trouble than posting this here and having me card you for the hell of it
Bollocks. Sometimes something is just plain racist - and not saying so is just avoiding the elephant in the room.
Also, while abusing people for being Hindu or American may not be specifically racist, the nature of the abuse usually comes across as equally as disgusting as plain racism - backing behind semantics to escape the accusation of racism doesn't wash.
If you're insulting or abusing people based on their religion, race, nationality, whatever, then your're all about the same.
Niximus
Brownlow Medallist
Race and nationality I'll agree but attacking someone's religion is IMO the same as attacking their political views. Completely fair game.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Bollocks back at you. ‘Sometimes, something is plain racist’? Ten points.
I’ve heard people say the Kangaroos are a drain on the AFL and should be booted out. I guess anyone who disagrees with their position should just claim racism, no?
Claiming semantics and introducing emotion is just a smokescreen to cover up a complete lack of coherent argument. Something is either racially based or it isn’t, and regardless of your moral viewpoint you can’t simply equate different concepts because you feel like it.
Your post is typical of exactly what I was referring to, claim racism and dust off your hands as though it exempts you from presenting a position. Are you familiar with conversion of logic? ‘All racists disagree with Mr Q, therefore all that disagree with Mr Q are racists?’ That’s a ludicrous conclusion to draw, and essentially what you are advocating above. A statement can be racially based without being abhorrent, and can likewise be abhorrent without being racially based.
That sounds a bit like like ‘if you’ve got a turban and a funny long beard then you’re all about the same’, the sort of sweeping generalisation that the moral guardians love to jump all over. Not being insulting or abusive doesn’t make a generalisation any less hypocritical.
Nick85 said:
Crikey. That’s a fair can of worms right there.
Military_man
Premiership Player
i cant see how loving one`s country can be confused with racism. Unless you love that country so much you don't want foreiners in it. Slogans like "asians go home" may have been made up by a patriot. So maybe there is a link to racism and Patriotism.
- Banned
- #40
Totally agree, but I still maintain that attacking someones nationality is far more socially acceptable than attacking someones race.
Especially when it comes to being light hearted. I can say ****ing Pom's with no smilies & noone would bat an eye, say ****ing blacks with no smilies & you'll be shot down. Yeah, I know context is all important. Our relationship with England makes it OK. But it seems many aren't so understanding of context when it comes to race.
- Thread starter
- #41
Nationallity is a random act.
If you discovered that you were born in another Country would you change your allegience?
Would you suddenly become a patroitic Englishman, Iranian or Itallian?
Pie eyed
Premium Platinum
- Jun 26, 2007
- 42,593
- 23,344
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Magpies
If people choose to identify themselves by a loose collection of fables, let them speak for them and then even attempt to justify a logical argument with said fables then they get everything they deserve.
Your Religion should remain a totally private matter unless you are willing to back it up with some facts and get a little "peer review".
GeorgeGrljusich
Club Legend
- Banned
- #43
You will have to excuse me as I have been out of the country, at this time of the year, for the past 5 years.
What I notice in spades, in Perth at least, is the unbelievable prevalance of Australian flags, some small and the odd full size, flying from cars and utes, respectively.
Is this some new found proclamation of patriotism or the incidious stench of nationalism seeping through.
Frankly, it makes me uncomfortable to say the least.
I know which country that I am from, and yes, I know that the "celebration" day is coming up.
So who are these people waving their flags at?
What I notice in spades, in Perth at least, is the unbelievable prevalance of Australian flags, some small and the odd full size, flying from cars and utes, respectively.
Is this some new found proclamation of patriotism or the incidious stench of nationalism seeping through.
Frankly, it makes me uncomfortable to say the least.
I know which country that I am from, and yes, I know that the "celebration" day is coming up.
So who are these people waving their flags at?
GeorgeGrljusich
Club Legend
- Banned
- #45
Yeah, that was my reading of it as well bp.
- Banned
- #46
When I was in Bolivia I spent a month (kinda) working at a hostel, the self-proclaimed bar manager was this big, bearded, chrome dome Aussie bloke who proudly slept with an Australian flag draped over his bed and a dinky little flagsticking out of the top of his pack, and regularly wore '**** off we're full' and 'this is Australia, we eat meat, drink beer, and speak ****ing english'. He was quite an embaressment, you could see othe rAussies just cringe when they first walked into the bar (which I had th misfortune to on Australia Day of all days). It was horrible.
- Apr 1, 2008
- 3,525
- 638
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Monbulk, Upwey, Strathmore, St Alba
You seem to be answering your own question, Tim.
Is the thread just to reinforce your presupposition and therefore superfluous?
- Banned
- #48
I know I'm taking a very simplistic approach to the term nationalism, but is saying "My country is superior to yours, look what 'we' have achieved" any more justifable than saying "My race is superior to yours, look what 'we' have achieved?
There's nothing wrong with patriotism. I'm a patriotic Australian, I love this country.
Nationalism brings in the concept of superiority, and usually a more aggresive stance - "If you don't love this country I'm going to smash your face in."
Racism doesn't really have anything to do with either, but they will overlap. e.g. the yobbos who will be running around on Tuesday draped in flags and threatening violence to anyone who doesn't do likewise are being nationalistic. They are probably racist as well, but that doesn't make racism and nationalism the same thing. Nationalism is probably the more dangerous of the two as well.
Nationalism brings in the concept of superiority, and usually a more aggresive stance - "If you don't love this country I'm going to smash your face in."
Racism doesn't really have anything to do with either, but they will overlap. e.g. the yobbos who will be running around on Tuesday draped in flags and threatening violence to anyone who doesn't do likewise are being nationalistic. They are probably racist as well, but that doesn't make racism and nationalism the same thing. Nationalism is probably the more dangerous of the two as well.
I think there tends to be a progression. Patriotism leads to nationalism which leads to xenophobia which leads to racism. I don't think it takes very long to reach the end of the scale either once nationalism is reached.
Racism and nationalism might not be the same thing, but they certainly appeal to the same people, and for much the same reasons.
What I found hilarious was the juxtaposition of the cartoon in the West Australian the other day which took the piss out of car flags, and the ad on the bottom of the facing page where the West was selling those self same flags for $2 a set.
