Its official - the shooter was a democrat.

[Five of swords]

5 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

Well, yeah, I would say it's important. It happened less than a hundred years ago, and it's understandable that people bring it up. But people go overboard.

National socialists don't hold the monopoly on nationalism, though. I would say nationalism is a pretty broad term. I think many people today would define themselves as nationalists in contrast to globalism and open borders. I suspect you might argue they are not real "nationalists", but then I think there could be an argument made that your guy wasn't a pure nationalist, either.

The guy was saying nationalism can become violent. And he suggested that national socialists were willing to resort to violence. Both of those claims are true. That is the only logically relevant part of this discussion. 

 

As far as 'true nationalism' goes...National socialism is a weltanshuung that is complete, coherent, and internally consistent. I would suggest that all other forms of nationalism are either obsolete (incompatible with modern technology or circumstances) or they suffer from fatal internal contradictions.

[User]

14 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

In fact,no nationalism is nazism. Because nazism isn't a real thing...it is a pejorative used for national socialism and in practice it just means being mean for no reason...which is totally unrelated to what national socialism actually was. 

Hey, go yell into the wind. Clearly Nazism is in fact a thing. You might as well sit here arguing there is no grass. 
 

15 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

Regardless, the point being made was correct. National socialism was nationalist, and it also certainly was not pacifist.

That was not the point being made. The discussion here was about nationalism until you know who drug up Nazism. 

 

[CouchPotato]

13 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

As far as 'true nationalism' goes...National socialism is a weltanshuung that is complete, coherent, and internally consistent.

I don't think anyone is qualified to say what true nationalism is. You can look up definitions of nationalism, and they are all different. Some define nationalists as people who would put the nation state first, and others would say that a nationalist would put a certain ethnicity or group within that state first. Political ideologies are not so cut and dry. Right and left wing for instance are not always well defined. Some people have a collection of ideas from both. And some people refer to people as being right wing for very different reasons than they might consider someone else as right wing.

Anyways....

What was "The First Reich"?

Edited July 27 by CouchPotato

[Five of swords]

2 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

I don't think anyone is qualified to say what it is. You can look up definitions of nationalism, and they are all different. Some define nationalists as people who would put the nation state first, and others would say that a nationalist would put a certain ethnicity or group within that state first. Political ideologies are not so cut and dry. Right and left wing for instance are not always well defined. Some people have a collection of ideas from both. And some people refer to people as being right wing for very different reasons than they might consider someone else as right wing.

Anyways....

What was "The First Reich"?

Dude...a nation state is a state representing a single nation. So your two 'kinds' of nationalism are actually identical.

 

And I just dismiss your assumption that it is impossible to speak of nationalism. It is quite possible to become educated on the subject.

[CouchPotato]

Just now, Five of swords said:

Dude...a nation state is a state representing a single nation. So your two 'kinds' of nationalism are actually identical.

Not at all. Nation states are made up of all kinds of ethnic groups. Germany had Jews. They were citizens of that state.

[Five of swords]

7 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

Not at all. Nation states are made up of all kinds of ethnic groups. Germany had Jews. They were citizens of that state.

Not a nation state. In a nation state there might be physical presence of multiple ethnic groups, but only a single one of them actually matters and has any say in politics. Germany, for example, was not a nation state until after Adolf Hitler took over.

Edited July 27 by Five of swords

[CouchPotato]

1 minute ago, Five of swords said:

Not a nation state. In a nation state there might be physical presence of multiple ethnic groups, but one a single one of them actually matters and has any say in politics. Germany, for example, was not a nation state until after Adolf Hitler took over.

Fair enough, then. I was ignorant in my use of terminology. I will rephrase. In some definitions of nationalism the elevation of a specific ethnicity is a key defining characteristic, in others the nation itself (regardless of ethnicity) is elevated.

[Five of swords]

1 minute ago, CouchPotato said:

Fair enough, then. I was ignorant in my use of terminology. I will rephrase. In some definitions of nationalism the elevation of a specific ethnicity is a key defining characteristic, in others the nation itself (regardless of ethnicity) is elevated.

Nation wasnever considered synonymous with country until people literally became retarded during the 1960s. That is an incoherent use of the term. A nation always has represented a particular people.. specifically people with a sense of common legacy and common destiny.

[CouchPotato]

6 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

Nation wasnever considered synonymous with country until people literally became retarded during the 1960s. That is an incoherent use of the term. A nation always has represented a particular people.. specifically people with a sense of common legacy and common destiny.

Well, America, for instance is made up of people of all kinds of ethnic origins who have much in common. In many cases, Americans share more culture with other Americans of other ethnicities than they do with people from the countries their ancestors came from. In some ways they don't.

My ancestry is mostly British/Irish. I think in some ways I do still have some of the values of those cultures instilled in me. But in others, I have more in common with other Canadians.

Edited July 27 by CouchPotato

[Five of swords]

1 minute ago, CouchPotato said:

Well, America is made up of people of all kinds of ethnic origins who have much in common. In many cases, Americans share more culture with other Americans of other ethnicities than they do with people from the countries their ancestors came from. In some ways they don't. 

The usa certainly is not a nation state.

 

Arguably it was a pan-european nation state prior to 1865. Not after. 

[CouchPotato]

Just now, Five of swords said:

The usa certainly is not a nation state.

 

Arguably it was a pan-european nation state prior to 1865. Not after. 

Ok but once again. Nation state was a term I used improperly. It was not used in the definition of nationalism I mentioned.

https://www.google.ca/search?sca_esv=be16b17cae58a747&sca_upv=1&q=nationalism&si=ACC90nwKPQWKXvO0LWGU61hOTgoDpsMrmgs3nmT6LMxLZuZm3Ho8Ez1E1MXprPb0eAzkpDtsAx4luS9zzYuyBMqHZvHln3EA2_-D-wL9vXs3SBNdMACXBlY%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi-mfPos8iHAxVqMlkFHcdrNQoQ2v4IegQIFBAq&biw=1176&bih=515&dpr=2.5

noun: nationalism; plural noun: nationalisms

1. identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

   "their nationalism is tempered by a desire to join the European Union"

    

    

    

    

    

[Five of swords]

4 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

Ok but once again. Nation state was a term I used improperly. It was not used in the definition of nationalism I mentioned.

https://www.google.ca/search?sca_esv=be16b17cae58a747&sca_upv=1&q=nationalism&si=ACC90nwKPQWKXvO0LWGU61hOTgoDpsMrmgs3nmT6LMxLZuZm3Ho8Ez1E1MXprPb0eAzkpDtsAx4luS9zzYuyBMqHZvHln3EA2_-D-wL9vXs3SBNdMACXBlY%3D&expnd=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi-mfPos8iHAxVqMlkFHcdrNQoQ2v4IegQIFBAq&biw=1176&bih=515&dpr=2.5

noun: nationalism; plural noun: nationalisms

1. identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

   "their nationalism is tempered by a desire to join the European Union"

    

    

    

    

    

Ok so...white people and black people in the usa do not feel like they had a common legacy nor that they have a common destiny. Therefore they are distinct nations. They might both be ruled by the same state, but they are distinct nations. 

 

Usually nationalism is in opposition to the state. In the enlightenment Europe, nationalism opposed monarchy or theocracy. Irish nationalism opposed the British empire. White nationalism opposes the integrationist us state.

Edited July 28 by Five of swords

[WestCanMan]

4 hours ago, Rebound said:

He didn’t condone rioting? He started one! And he told people at his rally’s that he would pay their legal bills if they beat protesters. And he tear gassed protesters so he could hold a Bible and get his picture taken. Oh, and he told police officers to bang suspects’ heads into the frame of their police cars. 

No, at no point did Trump ever condone or incite rioting. 

Compare that to Obama, who pretended that Trayvon Martin was just an innocent little kid trying to go get some skittles, just to get rioting started. Turns out, Trayvon actually did sneak-attack that guy, and the guy's screams can be heard on a 911 call.

Then there's M Brown: Obama was still talking to the congressional black caucus about the innocent gentle giant long after video had come out showing that he was a violent criminal. There were still riots going on while Obama was lying to keep the gentle giant riots going. 

Obama did nothing to stop any of that rioting, he just kept fanning the flames. 

Then when there was rioting going on in 2020, Obama's despicable piece of trash wife told HS grads to "stay angry, focus you anger, and never let anyone tell you not to be angry."

Can you imagine if Trump said that during the brief "mostly peaceful protest" on J6? He asked for peace 3 times in less than 3 hrs, but leftards say that he didn't do anything. Can you imagine if he quoted the former first ho? 

[CouchPotato]

12 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

Ok so...white people and black people in the usa do not feel like they had a common legacy nor that they have a common destiny. Therefore they are distinct nations. They might Noth be ruled by the same state, but they are distinct nations.

Well, yeah in some cases, there are a huge cultural differences. I mean you can predict how most black people will vote in the coming election. But the cultural differences are not inherently genetic. And people are the same in many ways.  You could make the same argument about Alabamans vs Californians.

You mention nations like Ireland and Britain. Well those places were invaded by different peoples throughout history. They weren't always united as a people. I mean in England you had Britons, then Anglos and Saxons and then Normans. Lots of bloodshed. Probably some huge cultural differences. By comparison, USA is doing pretty good.

Edited July 28 by CouchPotato

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Five of swords said:

Well I suppose you should label me a democrat

Well, i think you've made it clear you prefer being thought of as a nazi - but that's not all that much different from the democrats these days so perhaps you can be an honorary democrat or something   

[Five of swords]

23 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

Well, yeah in some cases, there are a huge cultural differences. I mean you can predict how most black people will vote in the coming election. But the cultural differences are not inherently genetic. And people are the same in many ways.  You could make the same argument about Alabamans vs Californians.

You mention nations like Ireland and Britain. Well those places were invaded by different peoples throughout history. They weren't always united as a people. I mean in England you had Britons, then Anglos and Saxons and then Normans. Lots of bloodshed. Probably some huge cultural differences. By comparison, USA is doing pretty good.

Irrelevant. Irish nationalism means Irish. I'm confused why you are bringing up people being conquered or genetic. If people believe they are distinct in their legacy and destiny from other people because of genetic difference, then they are distinct nations. It is irrelevant whether they are correct.

Edited July 28 by Five of swords

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

Irrelevant. Irish nationalism means Irish. 

Prodestant or Catholic?

You're a complete re-tard for using Ireland of all places as an example. 

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Five of swords said:

In fact,no nationalism is nazism. Because nazism isn't a real thing...it is a pejorative used for national socialism and in practice it just means being mean for no reason...which is totally unrelated to what national socialism actually was. 

 

Regardless, the point being made was correct. National socialism was nationalist, and it also certainly was not pacifist.

Communism is not nationalist. It is international socialism. 

Huh...nationalizm has nothing to do with either.

You ain' as smart as ya think y'are...are ya.

[CouchPotato]

1 minute ago, Five of swords said:

I'm confused why you are bringing up people being conquered or genetic.

I am pointing out that when you talk about people groups with a common legacy and culture, that was not always the case. There was a lot of disunity before there was unity. The Britain you mention as a people was actually a lot of different peoples who beat each other up a lot.

It's not that I am totally discounting the existence of cultures. I think culture is very important. I think culture does have a huge bearing on values and political ideas. This is something the left completely ignores. If you bring in large numbers of people with different values all at once, there are going to be cultural and political struggles. I think it makes a lot of sense to try to avoid that. But at the same time a lot of people from all kinds of places share western values.

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Huh...nationalizm has nothing to do with either.

You ain' as smart as ya think y'are...are ya.

Well we don't know that.  What if he's trying to put on a facade and deep down really actually knows he's more of a mess than a dung beetle that's lost interest in it's job and really let itself go?

Although now that i think about it he's still  not that smart so you'd still be right. 

[Five of swords]

2 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

I am pointing out that when you talk about people groups with a common legacy and culture, that was not always the case. There was a lot of disunity before there was unity. The Britain you mention as a people was actually a lot of different peoples who beat each other up a lot.

It's not that I am totally discounting the existence of cultures. I think culture is very important. I think culture does have a huge bearing on values and political ideas. This is something the left completely ignores. If you bring in large numbers of people with different values all at once, there are going to be cultural and political struggles. I think it makes a lot of sense to try to avoid that. But at the same time a lot of people from all kinds of places share western values.

Yes. People change, countries change, etc. Nationalism that isn't insane generally refers to a people who currently exist.

 

I simply reject your idea that genetics have zero influence on behavior. I guess we would need to throw away biological science if that were true. But it also isn't relevant to the current discussion of nationalism

Edited July 28 by Five of swords

[CouchPotato]

9 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

Yes. People change, countries change, etc. Nationalism that isn't insane generally refers to a people who currently exist.

You are right. I am not arguing that because cultures have emerged and died throughout history we should just surrender our culture to something else. That would be extreme. You are able to see the insanity of that. But you are at the other extreme.

Edited July 28 by CouchPotato

[Five of swords]

13 minutes ago, CouchPotato said:

You are right. I am not arguing that because cultures have emerged and died throughout history we should just surrender our culture to something else. That would be extreme. You are able to see the insanity of that. But you are at the other extreme.

I'm just telling you what nationalism is, lol. I'm not really offering much of my own outlook on the subject. 

[WestCanMan]

This is the second Dem assassin in the last 8 years now.

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Yes dear...

BANKRUPT again. LMAO