Do Americans feel like they’re main characters?

[Deeprotsorcerer]

Just a good example, but they aren't painting american flags on the missles
If you think Fox news is nationalist then you have completely lost you mind. The only person on fox that could be described as nationalist is Tucker. Have you been loving under a rock?

Don't know if you've been watching what I've been watching, but Hannity and Laura Ingraham more than qualify, as does the general bend of their media bias (and all stations do have bias, we're not talking about the Left's mess right now though ((and the popular left does have a mess)) )

The military is not nationalist, they are painting pride flags and blm logos on bombs before they drop them on innocent kids in the middle east for years now. There

The fact that you think that it's the majority of the military is doing those things tells me how disconnected you are from the real situation. The Proud Boys and Oath Keepers have US military/police origins, and they're as nationalist as nationalist can be. As I said before, these sentiments exist on a spectrum, it isn't an either or thing.

are a lot of christian nationalists, but they are constantly suppressed by the government and big tech.
You are not immune to propaganda.
You don't even know what you are talking about.

Christian Nationalism isn't being suppressed, we still say "one nation under God" in our pledge, political pundits continue to violate the seperation of church and state, and Conservatives still vote in religious blocs.

I was merely explaining what I suspected were causes of American protagonist syndrome (and even mentioned that it wasn't exclusive to Americans). I wasn't even trying to start something like this, but here we are, with someone constantly screeching about how I don't know what I'm talking about when research on political and sociological topics intersects with my actual job...

 

[Zirrboy]

Agree to disagree. Wanting my nation to prosper better than others is still nationalism, regardless of whether it's a self-indulgence/interest or not. Patriotism is simply being proud of what your nationality is and enjoying being in that specific nation. Nationalism is the same thing, just one step forward, meaning you are proud to be a member of your nation, and want it to be better than others. It's like the Olympics. You want your nation to win the most gold medals and the other nations to lose. Prime example of nationalism.

Then what if the US turns into even more of a dumpster fire while Poland (going by your example) offers you great living and working prospects if only you move?

But yeah, agree to disagree, though I think the issue (both with me and whoever you were referring to when you talked about hating nationalism) is a difference in definition.
Yours is result oriented (I think), mine is about motivations.

 

[Discount_Blade]

Then what if the US turns into even more of a dumpster fire while Poland (going by your example) offers you great living and working prospects if only you move?

If this happened then it would be an attack on my U.S. nationalism. If I accepted, and then moved to Poland, than overtime, I could begin to exhibit nationalism for Poland and begin to perceive Poland as the greatest and want it to prosper above all others. Still nationalism.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

Then what if the US turns into even more of a dumpster fire while Poland (going by your example) offers you great living and working prospects if only you move?

So yeah, agree to disagree, though I think the issue (both with me and whoever you were referring to when you talked about hating nationalism) is a difference in definition.
Yours is result oriented (I think), mine is about motivations.

I believe that's the main rub, a lot of what they're saying are nationalistic traits, we ascribe to patriotism, and a if I may be so forward as to assume, I think many people see nationalism as baby jingoism. The limits of the dictionary definitions also don't account for how the terms are used in popular literature.

If we can all calm down we can have a nice open discussion about this instead of the flame war that's brewing.

 

[Lloyd]

Don't know if you've been watching what I've been watching, but Hannity and Laura Ingraham more than qualify, as does the general bend of their media bias (and all stations do have bias, we're not talking about the Left's mess right now though ((and the popular left does have a mess)) )



The fact that you think that it's the majority of the military is doing those things tells me how disconnected you are from the real situation. The Proud Boys and Oath Keepers have US military/police origins, and they're as nationalist as nationalist can be. As I said before, these sentiments exist on a spectrum, it isn't an either or thing.




Christian Nationalism isn't being suppressed, we still say "one nation under God" in our pledge, political pundits continue to violate the seperation of church and state, and Conservatives still vote in religious blocs.

I was merely explaining what I suspected were causes of American protagonist syndrome (and even mentioned that it wasn't exclusive to Americans). I wasn't even trying to start something like this, but here we are, with someone constantly screeching about how I don't know what I'm talking about when research on political and sociological topics intersects with my actual job...

You do not live in reality. Get educated. Like all of this is so obviously uninformed.

 

[Discount_Blade]

we still say "one nation under God" i

Almost no schools still do the morning pledge. While I'm not going to claim Christianity is being suppressed, seeing as I'm not a Christian and have no interest or "dog in the fight", I will say that a lot of Christian-only attitudes are being removed from the public sphere, in favor of a multicultural form. Whether this is good or bad, idk. I suppose it depends on whose asking.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

You do not live in reality. Get educated. Like all of this is so obviously uninformed.

By all means, tell me where I'm wrong. Back up your statements, as I have mine. Or I'm just not going to take you seriously. No hard feelings, chap.

If this happened then it would be an attack on my U.S. nationalism. If I accepted, and then moved to Poland, than overtime, I could begin to exhibit nationalism for Poland and begin to perceive Poland as the greatest and want it to prosper above all others. Your example doesn't alter my point.

Oh. Oh, I think I see now. It's more like you're willing to integrate with and support the nation you live in because you chose the nation, but you won't blindly follow it if it commits evil, and you can move on to another as you will. That's not the kind of sentiment I'm criticizing.

 

[Zirrboy]

If we can all calm down we can have a nice open discussion about this instead of the flame war that's brewing.

But I like flame wars!

 

[Discount_Blade]

By all means, tell me where I'm wrong. Back up your statements, as I have mine. Or I'm just not going to take you seriously. No hard feelings, chap.




Oh. Oh, I think I see now. It's more like you're willing to integrate with and support the nation you live in because you chose the nation, but you won't blindly follow it if it commits evil, and you can move on to another as you will. That's not the kind of sentiment I'm criticizing.

Mostly the choosing part. Many people think nationalism applies only to your birth nation, or whichever nation holds the most members of whatever ethnicity you are. To me, a Polish-American could still think Poland is the greatest and want Poland to rise above every other nation, even the U.S., despite them living in the U.S.

Patriotism is more associated with having pride in your birth nation or what you were born as, whereas Nationalism is individually chosen, and can be altered circumstances and views depending.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

Almost no schools still do the morning pledge. While I'm not going to claim Christianity is being suppressed, seeing as I'm not a Christian and have no interest or "dog in the fight", I will say that a lot of Christian-only attitudes are being removed from the public sphere, in favor of a multicultural form. Whether this is good or bad, idk. I suppose it depends on whose asking.

Depends on the area you're in. A lot of private schools and schools on bases have it as an institutional thing, and there's significant pushback to return to that state in places where the requirements have dropped. Even in a good amount of places where the morning pledge has been made optional, teachers enforce it, or it's still played over intercoms where students are "encouraged to, but not required" to follow along with all the social pressure that entails. It's by no means a clean divide.

Patriotism is more associated with having pride in your birth nation, whereas Nationalism is individually chosen, and can be altered circumstances and views depending.

I see, our definitions are flipped. Probably due to a difference in where we went to school and who our teachers were. I actually don't have much of a beef with your ideology in that case.

 

[Discount_Blade]

Depends on the area you're in. A lot of private schools and schools on bases have it as an institutional thing, and there's significant pushback to return to that state in places where the requirements have dropped. Even in a good amount of places where the morning pledge has been made optional, teachers enforce it, or it's still played over intercoms where students are "encouraged to, but not required" to follow along with all the social pressure that entails. It's by no means a clean divide.




I see, our definitions are flipped. Probably due to a difference in where we went to school and who our teachers were. I actually don't have much of a beef with your ideology in that case.

View attachment 12054

First off, what is this game? I swear it looks familiar.

Second, how is Laura Ingraham?

I like to watch Tucker and Gutfeld but have never seen Hannity or Ingraham.

.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

First off, what is this game? I swear it looks familiar.

Second, how is Laura Ingraham?

I like to watch Tucker and Gutfeld but have never seen Hannity or Ingraham.

.

Master of Orion 2, where I ironically practice the fun side of nationalistic xenophobic jingoism and cleanse entire planets without any real world consequences by the day. The space combat and ship customization is beyond its time. I highly recommend it.

Laura Ingram pushes the Great Replacement among other things catagorized under the "othering citizens to exclude them from the national identity" side of nationalism or rather, a certain definition of nationalism. Should I just say jingosim to avoid language uncertainty? Like, the crap she says might run afoul of the forum rules, I'll send you a PM of a specific link.

 

[Zirrboy]

If this happened then it would be an attack on my U.S. nationalism. If I accepted, and then moved to Poland, than overtime, I could begin to exhibit nationalism for Poland and begin to perceive Poland as the greatest and want it to prosper above all others. Still nationalism.

Even if that's just you being a smartass about the strict definition, I can't disagree because I like to do the same thing.
Almost everyone is nationalist to some degree and if they're not they have some other idol they worship.

On a more serious note I do think that it's relatively clear which degree of it they're talking about.
If context based communication wasn't a thing, you would find nothing wrong with the unspecified positive sentiment of "progressive" after all.

I think the fear of nationalism is little about the people themselves, but rather the political interests that can be pursued through them, even to that nation's detriment.

Of course there are some who wish for all humans to be equally protected, but I doubt all too many harbor this deeply enough for it to exceed their own interests in doubt.

 

[Discount_Blade]

Even if that's just you being a smartass about the strict definition, I can't disagree because I like to do the same thing.
Almost everyone is nationalist to some degree and if they're not they have some other idol they worship.

On a more serious note I do think that it's relatively clear which degree of it they're talking about.
If context based communication wasn't a thing, you would find nothing wrong with the unspecified positive sentiment of "progressive" after all.

I think the fear of nationalism is little about the people themselves, but rather the political interests that can be pursued through them, even to that nation's detriment.

Of course there are some who wish for all humans to be equally protected, but I doubt all too many harbor this deeply enough for it to exceed their own interests in doubt.

In full agreement here.

Context-based indeed does muddy the definitions, making them unreliable at times in specific conversations.

I mean, the idea of "progression" is inherently positive. But as per its political usage, I say any and all "Progressives/American Democrats" are at best well-meaning imbeciles who don't truly understand the ramifications of their decisions, especially social, and at worst, are openly stirring the pot to see what shiny new monstrosity(talking point) pops out and enjoying the division it creates. So yeah, I suppose it is a little odd to stick to the definition so strictly.

 

[Lloyd]

By all means, tell me where I'm wrong. Back up your statements, as I have mine. Or I'm just not going to take you seriously. No hard feelings, chap.




Oh. Oh, I think I see now. It's more like you're willing to integrate with and support the nation you live in because you chose the nation, but you won't blindly follow it if it commits evil, and you can move on to another as you will. That's not the kind of sentiment I'm criticizing.

Allow me to give you just one example of how brainwashed you are.
Separation of church and state.
You don't even understand what it means.
A little history for you. America rebelled from the English, who had a national church after their king split from the catholic church. He did this so he could get like 10 divorces and confiscate all the church's land in england for himself.
Separation of church and state isn't a law or in the constitution.
It cannot be violated because its only an idea the founders wrote about in the federalist papers.
It's purpose wasn't to keep religious dogma from influencing law. It was simply an idea to prevent a church of america from forming because the founders though it would become corrupt much like the English church was.
Your idea of separation of church and state is modern propaganda with zero historical understanding.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

Separation of church and state isn't a law or in the constitution.
It cannot be violated because its only an idea the founders wrote about in the federalist papers.

I was speaking about the separation of church and state as an idea (which still holds up as a guiding principle of the nation as reflected in the First Amendment, if not explicitly encoded into law, I'm not claiming that they are the same, but that they influence each other) not a law, I also spoke under the pretense that we all understood that. Your tangent has next to nothing to do with the argument I made, it was about how Christian Nationalism is still largely represented in politics, not its legality. Stop trolling, you tried to attack the weakest point and didn't even scratch the paint on that.

 

[Discount_Blade]

it was about how Christian Nationalism

Out of curiosity, what would you consider Christian Nationalism? I mean besides catholicism and its very bureaucratic nature in modern society, and of course, the early morning pledges in school, what else is currently still being done that you would describe as a product of Christian Nationalism?

 

[Lloyd]

I was speaking about the separation of church and state as an idea (which still holds up as a guiding principle of the nation as reflected in the First Amendment, if not explicitly encoded into law, I'm not claiming that they are the same, but that they influence each other) not a law, I also spoke under the pretense that we all understood that. Your tangent has next to nothing to do with the argument I made, it was about how Christian Nationalism is still largely represented in politics, not its legality. Stop trolling, you tried to attack the weakest point and didn't even scratch the paint on that.

I'm not going to argue with you after I gave you evidence you have been influenced by propaganda and you refuse to even admit you are wrong.

 

[Deeprotsorcerer]

Out of curiosity, what would you consider Christian Nationalism? I mean besides catholicism and its very secular nature in modern society, and of course, the early morning pledges in school, what else is currently still being done that you would describe as a product of Christian Nationalism?

That's rather blurry, but you can see it in certain news and radio shows (Bott Radio Network, though they're a very soft example that doesn't do much harm if any), as well as political forces (the Groypers) that make no distinction between Christianity as a religion and the country. Basically people who would unironically be two steps from agreeing to the founding of an caliphate if morality weren't an issue, and a few words were changed.

A note: I myself am a Christain, I'm just not a radical >.>

I'm not going to argue with you after I gave you evidence you have been influenced by propaganda and you refuse to even admit you are wrong.

Okay, Lloyd.

 

[Lloyd]

That's rather blurry, but you can see it in certain news and radio shows (Bott Radio Network), as well as political forces (the Groypers) that make no distinction between Christianity as a religion and the country. Basically people who would unironically be two steps from agreeing to the founding of an caliphate if morality weren't an issue, and a few words were changed.

A note: I myself am a Christain, I'm just not a radical >.>



Okay, Lloyd.

We both know you're just moving the goalpost after I've shown how uneducated you are.