Posts Tagged ‘nationalism’

Quote of the Day: Putin is “The Good Hitler”

April 6, 2014

“The fact is that while Hitler was gathering German lands he united Germany, Austria, the Sudetenland, and Memel without a single drop of blood. If Hitler stopped at that, he would be remembered in his country’s history as a politician of the highest order.”

from a Russian newspaper article April 3rd by Andranik Migranyan, head of the New York office of the “Institute for Democracy and Cooperation,” an NGO set up under President Vladimir Putin in 2007 to monitor human rights in Western countries.

Ännu en debatt med en nationalist

January 31, 2012
  • @karleinararne Being nationalistic means you think your own nation is better than others. This is also called cultural conservatism. It’s also necessarily racist prejudice generalization. Any adjective is relative, like, you can only have tallness if something is relatively shorter. So, saying your culture is good necessarily implies other cultures are worse. You can call it culturalism if you like, but it’s still just like good old nazi racism. (Nazi is short for nationalism btw)
    (more…)

Min debatt med två xenofober

March 21, 2011
13 kommentarer till Onyanserat om nyansering i Falköpings Tidning
Eric skriver:

En helsida med ”folkuppfostran så alla ”tycker rätt”??

Göran skriver:

Vad nytt kan månne den goda nyhetschefen ha att tillföra?
Hur den s.k. invandringen fungerar är sedan länge en offentlig hemlighet. (more…)

Svenskarna FÖRST!

September 25, 2010
[Detta är en kommentar till http://kajsalynx.blogspot.com/2010/09/vem-vare-som-facking-rosta.html]

Vem svälter ihjäl i Sverige?

Vilka utsätts för tortyr?

Vilka utsätts för religionsförtryck?

Vem avrättas på grund av sin regimkritik?

Det pratas mycket om SD nu, men är det som sägs vettigt?

Vilken misär är det ni pratar om? Om 1 miljon invandrare lever i misär, dvs mer än 10% av Sveriges befolkning, (more…)

France Bans Sunglasses?

July 14, 2010

France just banned the burkha. I guess the reason is that people want to be able to see each others’ faces, but it seems like they’re afraid of muslims and the terrorism and the crimes and the bombings and I don’t know what they’re thinking.  Either way, it’s just nonsense, because it should be a person’s right to dress in anyway they see fit, including being nude, wearing a T-shirt that says “I hate muslims”, “God rules” or “Niggers will rape your uncle” or wearing a Nazi-cross or a Nazi-belt that says “God is with us”. I say nude, because we’re all naked monkeys and having a societal dress code to cover up our bodies is like living in denial of accepting our bodies and this denial prevents us from having a healthy attitude towards sex. I mention the T-shirts and the symbols because I am all for freedom of speech, without ANY restrictions. Just because people can’t say they hate jews doesn’t mean they don’t hate them, they just keep it in their heads. Banning the expression of thoughts is like shooting the messenger, you don’t solve the problem by banning the expression of it, you’re just hiding it under the mattress pretending it’s gone away because you’re no longer hearing of it.

The Nazis came to power in a society formed by the enlightenment with religious tolerance and culture more important than base human behaviour like war and slavery, yet we all know what happened 1933-1945. You see, these fancy words – peace, freedom, tolerance, love, equality, justice – they all sound very nice, but they don’t mean anything at all! Today, the most vocal people, like politicians, use these words while the rest of the people say “bomb this” and “bomb that” and not even the politicians mean what they’re saying. There’s absolutely no reason why World War 3 can’t happen and why the Holocaust cannot happen again, only with a new victim. In fact, it’d be astounding if it didn’t happen since history has proven that we oppress and kill each other without ever learning to prevent it from happening again.

And it all starts off so innocently. “We just want protection”. Yeah, the persecution of muslims in the US is nothing like what happened in Germany 70 years ago. Tell that to the fairy princess. A teacher in Birmingham said this about banning burkhas:

“I see it as a good thing because it is important to have eye contact with people.” Yeah, well niqabs don’t cover the eyes, whereas sunglasses do. Why aren’t we banning sunglasses? I can’t think of a better illustration of double standards than that.

“I disapprove more of the way young girls dress like hookers these days than I do of muslim women wearing full face covering,” said a person in a blog comment. Yes, great point, let’s be afraid of our bodies. However, the fine for wearing a burkha is very small compared to the fine for forcing a woman to wear a burkha and I can guess that what they’re trying to get at here is dissolving religion by dissolving connected culture, like the reverse of combining many pagan festivals with Christianity to ease the assimilation. Well, doesn’t matter if it’s a religious or cultural thing, because both should be a personal choice and not geographical.

The tradition for men to cover up the women seems similar to the old Swedish sex laws, where the woman could be blamed for getting raped by a man because of what she was wearing, as if the mouth says no but the clothes say yes. Who are these men that talk to the clothes instead of the woman? A woman (or a man) should be able to walk naked wherever she wants without being afraid of getting raped. This seems to be very problematic to get into some thick-headed people’s little box mind-sets. And the French people who voted for this ban seem to equally erroneously think that banning a fashion adopted a long time ago will prevent the oppression of women that originally started the fashion. Again, we’re banning the effects and not doing anything about the causes of the problem.

Today We Celebrate the National Day of Sweden – A Manifestation of Egoism

June 6, 2010

Nationalism and patriotism and many related terms are used to describe how egoism and egotism manifest themselves in society.

My starting point is that all humans consist of inseparable parts of a coherent universe. To care for your own body and mind more than others is to be unfair, unjust, unequal. To care for everyone as much as you do for yourself is to treat everyone the same way (you are included in the term everyone). To care for your mother and father more than for anyone else is not equality. To care more for your lover, brother, teacher, neighbour, than a goat in Istanbul is to be unjust. Of course, both the goat and your lover would probably prefer that you spent more time caring for your lover’s orgasm than the goat’s so equality doesn’t simply relate to quantity of time spent caring but considers the desired form and amount of care asked for by all individuals in the universe.

Nationalism and patriotism are difficult terms to define. Most of the time we mean by these words that we love our own country (the territory), our culture, our laws, our relatives (genetically closely related population), our common taste in music, our whatever that we define as something that binds us together and make us a group, and often that is followed by the dislike, hatred and discrimination of those who don’t agree. Usually there’s a lot of prejudice about who belongs to which groups and what their opinions and genetics et cetera are. Also, there’s often a desire for isolationism involved; people who divide people into groups want to divide them physically as well.

First of all, all humans are unique so dividing people into groups is more often generating prejudice than helping us deal with reality. Only when people are divided on the basis of singular subjects it has a positive practical function as opposed to division based on connecting subjects, like terrorism and islam or apartheid and vikings or whatever. Secondly, all actions are unique. We often connect ourselves with the actions of others. We take pride in the actions of people we defined ourselves to be in the same groups as. However, I didn’t create the democracy in Sweden and it is not a permanent thing so taking pride in it is not the way to maintain it. Besides, democracy in Sweden is far from perfect and I am personally opposed to the idea of nationstates and would like to see the end of the official Sweden. I don’t mind calling a piece of nature Sweden, but only if that comes with the recognition that nature is fluent and an everchanging constant.

To many people isolationism sounds like a good idea, because people of similar backgrounds don’t fight as much. I think that’s a valid point but there are two problems with that. Isolationism could be replaced by open-mindedness. If you strive to learn the thoughts of all humans that have ever lived you’d be able to get along with anyone. The second problem is that I don’t believe in ownership, I think it’s impossible to own nature, a dog owns itself, a flower owns itself, nature just is, it does not belong to humanity or individual humans, who themselves are natural and just are. Therefore a human has no right to claim a piece of territory for it’s group and exclude other groups from that territory, unless everybody agrees with such a division, which is perfectly possible of course seeing as we should respect each other’s lives, lifestyles and past, but the main thing is communication: just talk to each other and maybe there will be no more wars.

Norway taps into the Black Gold-Reserve, Celebrates National day and Record Eurovision Conquest

May 16, 2009

Norway spends more than a billion more money on countering the financial crisis which some capitalist douche-bags started “because it is fun to make the global human civilization suffer”, presumably. The most aggressive budget in 30 years. So, it’s not really news because it’s happened before, but economy is an ongoing process that have effects stretching over decades and millenia. And it’s not really news because it only rose from an original 13 billions, which was the news-worthy bit, to 14 billions.

Relatively speaking, any definition is subjective. Just like music.

http://www.eurovision.tv/page/history/facts-and-figures

Norway just won the Eurovision Song contest with the most points any song has ever gotten in the history of the competition. Even though countries often vote for neighbours and other countries they like, this song was good enough to receive a common liking. A potential step towards both Europeanism and mutual acceptance.

Also, May 17th is the day in 1814 when Norway declared to be an independent nation. It’s funny how nationalism arises within geographic borders, regardless of the fact that so many different people are grouped together as if they were all identical. Or, as in the case of Kurds, who are divided by the borders of Iraq, Iran and Turkey, without a nation of their own. Do like Israel and ship around the monkeys in diaspora, far away from their geographic origin?

When it comes to perspectives I just read the words Somali diaspora, realizing yet another example of the same kind of history as in so many other places and times on earth. Monkey civilization – it’s not paradoxical, it’s just a bit funny to think we’re monkeys with computers.

The Red Army is back?

May 11, 2009

Russia beat Canada at the 2009 World Ice  Hockey Championships.

2-1

May 11th is also the day Russia celebrates victory over the Nazis in WW2. Last year, more than half a million people crowded together on the Red Square in Moscow after Russia won the World Championships in Canada. They won the finals against Canada that time too and were treated as national heroes.

Russian hockey-players have been national icons since the time of the Soviet Union, when Russia could not be beaten, until the Miracle happened; the US winning over Russia, winning over communism, winning the space race, winning the cold war.

The cold war may be over, but international relations remain strained as always. Russia has quite a list of past enemies, historically having warred most of the European nations at one point or another.

Sports have been stirring emotions for millennia. Just compare the fighters in the UFC to the Roman gladiators. The fans were no different than now. Sports, of course, don’t always lead to nationalism. Just ask a Barca-fan about his relationship with Spain. And yes, I said his, expect a majority of men in this clip:

That was one month ago, pretty much on my door step. Soccer fans were creating havoc in Gothenburg. All soccer fans are not hooligans and all the people fighting might not be taking cocaine and just going to the game to find an opponent to wage war against.

Because, that’s what it is. Sports is war. It’s civilized war, but it’s still war. The Olympics is a way to vent nationalist emotions, an outlet for xenophobics. Nationalism is a phenomenon a few hundred years old by now – it’s not very modern. Liberalism still hasn’t penetrated the Olympics.

Comparing it to UFC once again, the fighters fight for themselves and for their fans and not necessarily for their cities, like the NHL or European soccer leagues.

Right this minute people are debating at the People and Defense Conference in Sälen in Sweden. Russia has been a long-standing enemy of Sweden and the fear of Russia is probably a part of most of the West, in Europe as well as the US. And of course the eastern part of Eurasia  as well, a part we normally know very little of on this side.

And the monkeys dressed in suits stand there on television debating the Russian threat and how it compares to other threats, and how differently Russia was treated during the invasion of Georgia compared to how US-invasions are treated. Russia is described as a dictatorship, which grandness relies on being a military threat to it’s neighbouring countries. At the same time the US thought of as different, because of it’s claim to democracy, despite ignoring UN just like Russia did.

They also talk of the importance of a nation with a tiny population of 9 millions to argue internationally for the right of nations not to be invaded. Yet, we have soldiers in Afghanistan; and we export an ungodly amount of arms without people raising an eyebrow.

-The big bad Russians feel humiliated, they have phantom pains, hey have lost economical and political influence, power, democracy, territory.

How dangerous are the Russians, is asked.

– They won’t attack us, BUT we are part of an international arena, part of the EU, and can’t rule out that a conflict can arise. The Baltic is a major concern of course. The cold war is over, but Russia is suffering from post-imperial stress.

Really? Maybe so; nationalism is not a new thing in Russia, it has led to a lot of ethnic discrimination. Maybe that’s natural, maybe it will calm down, like the Roman emperors who cooled down, at least in terms of territorial wars, after just a few thousand years of papacy. Like how the British lost their empire and had to give it all back to the people it belonged to. Except the Falkland Islands, which they needed for strategic sheep purposes, to quote British comedian and less-transvestite-lately-for-some-reason-or-maybe-I’m-imagining Eddie Izzard:

The Mediterranean is to the old empires what the Baltic sea was to the Swedish empire and now Russia will have a legitimate reason for keeping troops in the Baltic sea, because of the gas pipeline they’re leading through the sea to mid-Europe. According to Swedish law it can be considered illegal to publish our military concerns. Will I be executed for high treason? Probably not, but the point is that it’s not up to me to decide. I am subject to the state and it’s laws and it’s law enforcement.

Do we need to have an army big enough to be able to defend the Swedish territory? My answer is no. Territory is just numbers on a paper that emperors can brag about at parties, for the individual, territory is the planet they stand on and it’s not like we’re gonna be standing on some other planet anytime soon. This is why pacifism works, because you can never make a person do as you say by shooting him/her/it. Terrorism only works if people are afraid of it.

I have drifted off topic because the debate went technical, politically petty and stale. The difference between nationalism and individualism or liberalism is that we group individuals with nationalism. Any form of grouping, like being Swedish, being a journalist, being dark-haired, being right-handed et cetera, creates an ‘other’ group like Foucault perhaps would say. Individualism, ideally, strives to dealing with reality as if each individual was a unique person, not necessarily groupable together with any specific grouping.

I’m Swedish, you’re Russian. No, we’re individuals. You were born by monkeys i clothes just like me, you were loved and hated, you have loved and hated, you like to indulge in spare time activities just like me, you eat what can be found where you live, just like me, you have a heart pumping blood round and round and round and round within your body, as long as we both shall live. Which is a very Christian reference to make (the holy union), but of course, I have a lot of experience of Christian culture because I am not responsible for where I was born and for what my ancestors did. wouldn’t have mattered if I was Macedonian, I am still not Alexander the Great, and can take no credit for his greatness as I had no influence what so ever on him, regardless of how Macedonian I might be. Or Greek, according to the Greeks of course. Nationalism you know…

Taking pride for others’ achievements. That’s what we do when we gather in front of the television and watch our national team go at it at whichever sport our nation is best at. We crave this pride and go so far as to thinking curling is a fun sport, just because we’re good at it. Since nobody else cares for it. Of course, curling is no different from soccer, all sports follow the same principles, but soccer is a lot more popular globally.

This has been a test broadcast. Hope you have enjoyed it. Watch for an updated About-page lining out the aim, audience and nische of this piece of international media.