«12. . .11,59111,59211,59311,59411,59511,59611,597. . .12,35912,360»
tbh i'm very much more on the "promised land" side of the debate as opposed to the "crusader state" side for that very reason. It's also the reason why while I consider myself a Ukrainian nationalist i'm also proud to be an American; I believe that Ukraine needs it's independence and needs to be free of foreign influence (thought I do thing that perhaps some aspects of US democracy could serve to do some good in Ukraine) but at the end of the day I believe that the ideals of the US constitution that I personally hold dearly are to be worked and perfected in the US as opposed to evangelized abroad; if other nations want to pick them up themselves then that's awesome but we aren't to shove them down other nation's throats.
It's also why I don't think American nationalism is a thing, because America is all about the ideas of the constitution and perfecting them in the US as opposed to nationalism for any other country which is about the nation and ethnicity itself.
Nationalism for any other nation is about blood and soil (which I do believe is very important) but the United States isn't about blood and soil, it's about an idea enshrined in the US Constitution. It's why I belive my Ukrainian nationalism and US Consitutionalism are completely compatible, and why I don't believe in American nationalism; there's no blood and soil to the US as there is to other nations; its all about the constitution.
i'm too intoxicated to go into greater detail than this right now fyi, sorry.
People who don’t identify with their origin here but are patriotic exhibit American nationalism.
I’m mostly Polish, but I’d never say I’m patriotic for Poland. I’m an American first, all else second.
Total snooze fest
Since I technically live in Wisconsin that means Paul Ryan is technically my Congressman.
Whereas I argue that it isn't nationalism, it's something else entirely. The something else is completely valid, and something that I hold dear, but it isn't nationalism.
Then again part of that for me is because nationalism and ethno-nationalism are kinda one in the same for me, and there isn't an American ethnicity; that's part of the beauty of it.
America in my mind is a completely unique situation, and that is why it doesn't fit into Nationalism because there is not American ethnicity, Americans are a union of people who came here because they believed the ideals of the US Constitution were correct and they believed that they were something that could better themselves, better their posterity, and in many instances that they were worth fighting for. Every other nation is united by it's ethnicity; hence nationalism, but America isn't united by nationalism; it's united by an idea; the constitution.
I still legally have residence in Illinois though. So that means I will be voting in the Illinois mid-terms.
Also a reminder to everyone that isn’t registered to vote to please do so. It’s your civic duty as American citizens to participate in our political system. Let’s not keep making a mess of sh!t with >50% turnout. Like seriously.
North America and the Great Lakes and Zhongguo dalu
Yeah ‘Murica woo! *waves flag*
Petition to change the national anthem to the sonic underground theme, exist to sign
Ftfy
You're talking to a sonic fan rn mate
Reminder that American 'ideals' are a myth perpetuated by the failed Enlightenment Project of justifying morality.
We are living in the alt. history where NAGL and I agree on a few things
Moral concepts and principles are inherently subjective in nature, and cannot be derived from any degree of rational thought, and can only be applied subjectively.
How can you apply an irrational moral theory universally?
Reminder that if your conclusion towards moral thought isn't; ''All I know is that I know nothing'' then you're deluded.
How can you apply an irrational moral theory derived from an unseen imaginary dude in the sky universally?
Obviously morality is subjective and changes with locale and circumatance. It’s an elusive definition.
But to say the Enlightenment is somehow a failure is ludicrous. It’s basic common sense that no one person should rule over the others inherently, and that as human beings we have a right to basic liberties and decency.
How many politicians in the last half century have worked a real days labour in their lives? How many dollars have you paid towards someone else so that they can pay for your medical treatment should illness befall you.
All the Enlightenment did was replace the feudalism of dynasticism, of blood, faith and of tradition, and replace it with the feudalism of democracy, of irrational and idealistic 'logic', and first and foremost of pure and unrepentant greed.
And it's pretty easy to apply an inherently irrational moral theory universally when it is guided by the overhanging belief that the source of that morality (God), is himself universal.
Implying greed didn’t exist beforehand.
People have hoarded wealth since wealth became a thing, don’t act like it’s new.
How convenient. /s
«12. . .11,59111,59211,59311,59411,59511,59611,597. . .12,35912,360»
Advertisement
