Media trying to make Nationalism a racist idea

a reply to: Grambler


Well I am old enough to remember Vietnam.......and it was all about Viet nationalism as far as the press was concerned.

a reply to: strongfp

Great, they don't need it. They can block their markets and we can block ours .. right?

Or in your world America is forced to accept closed markets and have to keep ours open?

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Grambler

Here is a libertarian take on nationalism.

Nationalism and its cousin nativism are dangerous attitudes that have come and gone almost cyclically throughout American history. They foster an arrogant aura about Americans who embrace them -- we are more deserving than you because our ancestors got here before you or yours did -- and they cause fear and hatred of foreign-born people.
They also lull one into the lazy mental habit of judging the moral worth of people not on the basis of their personal choices and fidelity to first principles but on the basis of their membership in groups marked by immutable characteristics of birth, such as people's place of birth.

This habit rejects a founding American principle that we are all created equal and endowed by our "Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
The quoted words above are not just Thomas Jefferson's most famous musings, which made their way into the Declaration of Independence; rather, they embody natural law. And natural law teaches that human rights come from our humanity -- not from the government -- and they adhere in everyone, not just Americans.

Judge Napolitano
www.foxnews.com...

This is not an excuse for crashing Borders. I like Judge Napolitsno a lot svdbim
Certain that you are taking his words out of context.

You are certain I am taking his words out of context because you like Napolitano.

That doesn't make any sense when I provided the actual video of him saying exactly what I printed.

It's not my fault people don't understand the constitution, the empiricism philosophy the founders used and expanded, and the actual laws.

If they step foot in America illegally they get to be held for asylum hearings. If they wait at the border crossings they get to apply for asylum....

What the border patrol wants to happen is these people are held until hearing so they can LEGALLY be turned around the next time they come.

The border patrol does not want catch and release.. because they keep coming and can keep applying for asylum.

The constitution does not make rules about travel and working. The laws are based on natrualization. Guest workers are not specified in the constitution because back then they believed in the idea of a free market.

They had tariffs back then to pay for the extremely poor country. They didn't have income taxes. This was to promote national growth.

Once we were wealthy, consumer freedom became more important. The right to buy cheaper goods and secure cheaper supply lines.

Folks don't get your opinions from TV. Read some books. I recommend Austrian economics for conservatives. Look at Alan Greenspan for instance compared to Q.E. philosophy.

You folks need to ask yourself if the government is supposed to nanny people or not.

Free markets aren't fair. Life isnt fair.

Fair is a political word used to create victims.

The fact of the matter is free markets allow guest workers if the jobs aren't being filled.

Perhaps all the propping up by the government of corporations has created a lag in innovative new ideas.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: strongfp

Great, they don't need it. They can block their markets and we can block ours .. right?

Or in your world America is forced to accept closed markets and have to keep ours open?

Choosing to accept cheaper goods to enter us ports isnt being forced into anything.

If you believe China has caused US decline and is the root of your victimology you have been brainwashed.

It is literally a spec of dust in the universe compared to corporate welfare and budget deficits.

Does it really make sense to you to create trade tensions and then beg for loans to pay our deficits?

Where do you think the interest payments go on the 800 billion in loans for this year alone?

originally posted by: luthier

Choosing to accept cheaper goods to enter us ports isnt being forced into anything.

Awesome, that literally has nothing to do with the discussion.

The poster I replied to said the US should not be allowed to send dairy into Canada, and Trump saying we will NOT accept some of your goods if you say no to some of ours is wrong and bullying.

So that poster was saying Canada has the right to refuse goods, but America has no right to do so.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: luthier

Choosing to accept cheaper goods to enter us ports isnt being forced into anything.

Awesome, that literally has nothing to do with the discussion.

The poster I replied to said the US should not be allowed to send dairy into Canada, and Trump saying we will NOT accept some of your goods if you say no to some of ours is wrong and bullying.

So that poster was saying Canada has the right to refuse goods, but America has no right to do so.

Of coarse america has the right to act like canada or europe.

That should really help the consumer.

a reply to: luthier

I am glad you agree America can tell other nations that we are only interested in fair deals that benefit us both.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: luthier

Choosing to accept cheaper goods to enter us ports isnt being forced into anything.

Awesome, that literally has nothing to do with the discussion.

The poster I replied to said the US should not be allowed to send dairy into Canada, and Trump saying we will NOT accept some of your goods if you say no to some of ours is wrong and bullying.

So that poster was saying Canada has the right to refuse goods, but America has no right to do so.

Nope. I said Canada has the right to control the goods coming in and out.

But when we dig deeper into the whole situation, Trump is a literal hypocrite in saying the American farmers are being taken advantage of. No, they aren't, the Canadian government allowed the dairy industry to control their own market, and they set it to what they thought was good for THEM, which also included imports from the US to supplement what the Canadian market could not handle.

This is NAFTA at it's finest, a free trade market to allow capitalism to thrive WITHOUT government intervention.
But guess what, Trump barged his way into things and took control of it all and literally threatened a big Canadian and Mexican economy, talk about a bully, talk about being greedy, talking about BIG government.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: luthier

I am glad you agree America can tell other nations that we are only interested in fair deals that benefit us both.

I don't agree that the trade deals didn't benefit us.

I personally own two Chinese made table top CNC machines that I have paid 10's of thousands in taxes over the years with. I know lots of people who have cheaper supply lines and can employ people because of it.

You can't decide which interventions you think are free market. That isn't how the market works. Markets don't respond to what you personally believe are fair. That is why the message should be to adapt, innovate, and become entrepreneurs even if it's a service business.


Sure over the coarse of time you should make sure new deals as they naturally occur are beneficial for your country. That also always changes.

Anyhow we pay the Chinese about 60 million a day in interest for the 1.4 trillion we borrowed. So the trade war is kind of silly. We just added 800 billion more wonder where the loan came from and at what interest rate.

originally posted by: strongfp
Nope. I said Canada has the right to control the goods coming in and out.

Yes. Canada does. America does not. When America does it we are bullying.

And if you are not even American and you are Canadian wth were you talking about how your family were illegal immigrants in America and the whole American dream talk.

a reply to: luthier

You do not need to agree whether it benefits us or not. The Canadian said Canada has the right to decide what goods they want to trade. He then said America does not and it is bullying when America makes those same decisions.

Using your personal experience as if it proves anything is a logical fallacy. NAFTA has led to the loss of over a million jobs and led to wage depression. None of the promises made turned out to be true and the winners were the elite and other countries, not America.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: luthier

You do not need to agree whether it benefits us or not. The Canadian said Canada has the right to decide what goods they want to trade. He then said America does not and it is bullying when America makes those same decisions.

Using your personal experience as if it proves anything is a logical fallacy. NAFTA has led to the loss of over a million jobs and led to wage depression. None of the promises made turned out to be true and the winners were the elite and other countries, not America.

Lol, right. It's not just my experience it's the experience of nearly every manufacturer and their supply lines.


Uh, markets change. I think maybe not having any understanding of economics may be the problem here.

Do we have high unemployment or low unemployment? Funny how trump says we have low unemployment and the Chinese took all out jobs. So we have the lowest unemployment in history according to trump. Yet we have no jobs.

Americans are extremely wealthy. Even poor people have stuff.

It's fun to be a victim these days but, fair has nothing to do with real life.

By the way tariffs pick winners and losers as well. This trade war of it continues will be devastating to the people trump thinks he is helping by acting like Canada or Europe and using interventionist protectionist policy.

a reply to: luthier

Yawn. If you think Canada should decide what trade deals America is allowed to have then there is little point in discussing anything with you.

The late British historian Arnold Toynbee said of nationalism: “It is a state of mind in which we give our paramount political loyalty to one fraction of the human race . . . whatever consequences this may entail for the foreign majority of the human race.”

Because nationalism is so divisive and destructive, Toynbee said of it: “Nationalism is a mental disease.”

So who is this Arnold Toynbee, does he know what he's talking about (since I've quoted him before in this thread)?
Arnold J. Toynbee - Wikipedia

...was a British historian, philosopher of history, research professor of international history at the London School of Economics and the University of London and author of numerous books. Toynbee in the 1918–1950 period was a leading specialist on international affairs.

He is best known for his 12-volume A Study of History (1934–1961). With his prodigious output of papers, articles, speeches and presentations, and numerous books translated into many languages, Toynbee was a widely read and discussed scholar in the 1940s and 1950s.
...
In 1912 he became a tutor and fellow in ancient history at Balliol College, and in 1915 he began working for the intelligence department of the British Foreign Office. After serving as a delegate to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 he served as professor of Byzantine and modern Greek studies at the University of London.
...
In 1925 he became research professor of international history at the London School of Economics and director of studies at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London. He was elected a Fellow of the British Academy (FBA), the United Kingdoms national academy for the humanities and social sciences, in 1937.
...
Academic and cultural influence

Michael Lang says that for much of the twentieth century:

"Toynbee was perhaps the world’s most read, translated, and discussed living scholar. His output was enormous, hundreds of books, pamphlets, and articles. Of these, scores were translated into thirty different languages....the critical reaction to Toynbee constitutes a veritable intellectual history of the midcentury: we find a long list of the period’s most important historians, Beard, Braudel, Collingwood, and so on."
...
Named after Arnold J. Toynbee, the [Toynbee Prize] Foundation was chartered in 1987 'to contribute to the development of the social sciences, as defined from a broad historical view of human society and of human and social problems.' In addition to awarding the Toynbee Prize, the foundation sponsors scholarly engagement with global history through sponsorship of sessions at the annual meeting of the American Historical Association, of international conferences, of the journal New Global Studies and of the Global History Forum.[38]

The Toynbee Prize is an honorary award, recognizing social scientists for significant academic and public contributions to humanity. Currently, it is awarded every other year for work that makes a significant contribution to the study of global history.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: luthier

Yawn. If you think Canada should decide what trade deals America is allowed to have then there is little point in discussing anything with you.

Cool, the same goes for me for anyone who doesnt understand consumer freedom or free markets.

If you think the government should decide how much something costs maybe you would actually like canada better.

The funny thing is that not just the media but also politicians are doing that from the highest state posts !
The president of Italy says that nationalism is the reason that brought to the 2 world wars. This is obviously not true... and anybody knows that the reasons for WW1 were purely related to colonialism, and not to nationalism.

Meanwhile the reasons for WW2 were almost completely related to the economic situation derived from the "Illuminati" bankers manipulations, not due to nationalism at all. Hitler was not a nationalist, was an imperialist. Mussolini was notorious for his colonialist campaigns in Africa and finally and most notably, Japan during WW2 was the perfect representation of modern imperialism, which creates a fake "oil crisis" in order to justify a war against the US to the opposition at home.

Japan's trick of "oil shortages" due to the evil US, is still in use today ... "Peak oil tells you anything ? ..."
The problem that the EU-NATO and imperialist Japan have this time, is that they don't understand to what extend they really are technologically inferior to Russia. That's why there will be no actual war.

Remember ... the mighty invincible NATO hasn't finished yet the war against some of the poorest and weakest countries in the world, after almost 17 years of sick war ... and just to be accurate : NATO will never win them !

a reply to: Grambler

Yes, it all comes down to tyrannical, globalist empires wanting to harm countries the world over for their own self interests (more for themselves and less for literally everyone else.) Jobs to foreign countries = globalists benefit. Ilegally low-paid, illegal workers at home = globalists benefit. Trade deals that allow such benefits for themselves = obviously. Globalization is an aggressive takeover on the global scale and our leaders are selling out to them and betraying us BIG TIME. To see Trump actually looking after his own people and to oppose the globalists, I applaued him. I only wish our prime minister here in Canada could see the light and follow suit.

It's a shame that so many people (even here in Canada) are unknowingly being played by political players in this whole 'Get Trump' thing. Their rhetoric and propaganda spins things all around so that looking after your own people is racism, standing for law and order is racism, patriotism is racist. If you stand against corporate greed, you're racist. So many of our political and cultural leaders and 'heroes' have sold us out, and people are mindlessly following suit. I PRAY that Clinton is exposed and brought down. These globalists are pushing for an uprising, even if it causes civil war, just to stop Trump from hurting their interests. If Clinton is brought down, that might change everything.

Nationalism is not racism. Race does not exist, and nations can be diverse. Nationalism being racism is idiotic. God split humans by language for a number of reasons. One effect of this is that his word would be translated into the languages of various nations. If someone modified the text the others would show it to be a counterfeit, much like an early form of block-chain verification. We choose nationalism for a similar reason, because a global society run by a few individuals would become corrupt, but many nations could correct a signal nation which has strayed. It just be stressed that nationalism has works better in the America's than it has historically done in Europe, so a nationalist America should not be compared to the Nazi party.