The Caravan

[Zombie]

View attachment 6311

It's probably a bit more complicated than this little cartoon, but to me the difference has been that Nationionalists are proud of their nation in the way it represents the interests of a particular identity. In the US they tend to be White Nationalists, but there are Black Nationalism movements in the US as well.

 

[Alfalfa]

View attachment 6311

I don't see the difference betweem those two things. That's like saying white pride is okay, but white supremacy is not. These are just semantics. Word play. Not real philosophical differences. Patriotism is simply nicer sounding word than nationalism. Not substantively different.

 

[babe]

View attachment 6311

That's whackadoodle stuff.

Words mean what we mean when we say them. For most folks, "patriotism" is an excessive pride bordering on believing you're better than folks in other countries. It's more educated meaning refers to features of your governmental system that can be argued as morally better, or better in principle.

An American Patriot even today is often someone who believes the principles of limited government and stated inviolable human rights is better than, oh, say Xi or Putin one-man rule.

A nationalist, like Trump, might be someone who believes a particular one man is a better representative of national interests than another.... say, like Trump might say.... a Hillary or Obama who is more focused on globalism agenda visions than the interests of our particular citizenry.

But in fact, Trump's idea of America is on the line of the Patriotism I described above. He does have a few notions of rebalancing power towards the people as envisioned in our Constitution, but he is far from a principled Constitutionalist. More like just practical and just wanting business to be more efficient and profitable.

 

[babe]

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/1805864002

Pentagon is sending 5,000 troops to the border to stop the caravan.

I heard it run out on Brietbart, which has perhaps the best journalists on the subject, that Trump might work with the Mexican President to set up a camp inside Mexico and take the applications for amnesty there. This would avoid becoming subject to the bad US law that requires release into the interior with little hope they'll appear on their court hearings.

Trump would make it a good deal for Mexico, and the camp would be something like a joint consulate, not US territory. I believe Trump would incentivize Mexican participation in resolving the issues.

 

[One Brow]

I don't see the difference betweem those two things. That's like saying white pride is okay, but white supremacy is not. These are just semantics. Word play. Not real philosophical differences. Patriotism is simply nicer sounding word than nationalism. Not substantively different.

From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of patriotism
: love for or devotion to one's country "Although poles apart ideologically, they are both unashamed of their patriotism."— Christopher Hemphill


Definition of nationalism
loyalty and devotion to a nation especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups "Intense nationalism was one of the causes of the war."

Nationalism adds a sense of superiority and exceptionalism to patriotism.

 

[Red]

I don't see the difference betweem those two things. That's like saying white pride is okay, but white supremacy is not. These are just semantics. Word play. Not real philosophical differences. Patriotism is simply nicer sounding word than nationalism. Not substantively different.

I'm relying on Timothy Snyder a great deal lately. I guess he provides me with meditations of a sort....

“The president is a nationalist, which is not at all the same thing as a patriot. A nationalist encourages us to be our worst, and then tells us that we are the best. A nationalist, “although endlessly brooding on power, victory, defeat, revenge,” wrote Orwell, tends to be “uninterested in what happens in the real world.” Nationalism is relativist, since the only truth is the resentment we feel when we contemplate others. As the novelist Danilo Kiš put it, nationalism “has no universal values, aesthetic or ethical.” A patriot, by contrast, wants the nation to live up to its ideals, which means asking us to be our best selves. A patriot must be concerned with the real world, which is the only place where his country can be loved and sustained. A patriot has universal values, standards by which he judges his nation, always wishing it well—and wishing that it would do better. Democracy failed in Europe in the 1920s, ’30s, and ’40s, and it is failing not only in much of Europe but in many parts of the world today. It is that history and experience that reveals to us the dark range of our possible futures. A nationalist will say that “it can’t happen here,” which is the first step toward disaster. A patriot says that it could happen here, but that we will stop it."

― Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century



“What is patriotism? Let us begin with what patriotism is not. It is not patriotic to dodge the draft and to mock war heroes and their families. It is not patriotic to discriminate against active-duty members of the armed forces in one’s companies, or to campaign to keep disabled veterans away from one’s property. It is not patriotic to compare one’s search for sexual partners in New York with the military service in Vietnam that one has dodged. It is not patriotic to avoid paying taxes, especially when American working families do pay. It is not patriotic to ask those working, taxpaying American families to finance one’s own presidential campaign, and then to spend their contributions in one’s own companies. It is not patriotic to admire foreign dictators. It is not patriotic to cultivate a relationship with Muammar Gaddafi; or to say that Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin are superior leaders. It is not patriotic to call upon Russia to intervene in an American presidential election. It is not patriotic to cite Russian propaganda at rallies. It is not patriotic to share an adviser with Russian oligarchs. It is not patriotic to solicit foreign policy advice from someone who owns shares in a Russian energy company. It is not patriotic to read a foreign policy speech written by someone on the payroll of a Russian energy company. It is not patriotic to appoint a national security adviser who has taken money from a Russian propaganda organ. It is not patriotic to appoint as secretary of state an oilman with Russian financial interests who is the director of a Russian-American energy company and has received the “Order of Friendship” from Putin. The point is not that Russia and America must be enemies. The point is that patriotism involves serving your own country."
― Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century

 

[Red]

A nationalist, like Trump, might be someone who believes a particular one man is a better representative of national interests than another.... say, like Trump might say.... a Hillary or Obama who is more focused on globalism agenda visions than the interests of our particular citizenry.

Here, Rabbi Rachel Barenblat describes two ways of describing "globalism". One is it's use as a very well known anti-Semitic trope. And one is its use in a manner that holds out hope for a more enlightened humanity. I very much like that latter use of the term. But then I remain idealistic and naive. I actually believe in humanity's higher angels, even when times are darkest.

https://forward.com/scribe/412627/yes-ranting-against-globalism-is-anti-semitic/

Of course, the monster who saw fit to slaughter members of a Jewish congregation a few days ago does not see the world as I do. And even though it would be hard to describe Donald Trump as anti-Semitic, still, the rhetoric he uses, playing to hatred and anger as the consummate demagogue he is, and the rhetoric used by some members of the Republican Party, are clearly understood by those for whom anger and hatred embolden in these dark days:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...403b32-daec-11e8-b3f0-62607289efee_story.html

After a “lone wolf” Islamist militant attack, the media invariably ask: What inspired him to kill? Usually the answer is found in Islamist militant propaganda. We need to ask the same question about right-wing terrorism. What inspired Cesar Sayoc to allegedly send mail bombs to prominent liberals? What inspired Robert Bowers to allegedly gun down 11 people in a Pittsburgh synagogue? What inspired Gregory Bush to allegedly kill two African Americans in Jeffersontown, Ky., after failing to enter a predominantly black church?

To ask these questions in no way obviates the perpetrators’ ultimate responsibility for the evil that they do. But terrorists do not operate in a vacuum. So who created the environment in which right-wing terrorism has become far more commonplace — and, since 9/11, far more deadly — than Islamist terrorism in America?

President Trump — by championing “nationalism,” denouncing “globalists” such as Jewish financier George Soros, vilifying immigrants as “snakes” and “animals,” fearmongering about a refugee caravan and defending white supremacists as “fine people” — bears a substantial share of the blame.

Some of his Republican followers are even more extreme. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) brought a Holocaust denier to the State of the Union and has blamed Soros for financing a Central American immigrant caravan. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) gave an interview to a far-right Austrian website in which he endorsed the white-supremacist claim that white nations are committing “slow-motion cultural suicide” by allowing in immigrants of color.

Even GOP leaders are joining in. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) posted and then deleted a tweet accusing Soros, Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer of buying the election. (Soros and Bloomberg are Jewish; Steyer is an Episcopalian whose father was Jewish.) Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, blamed Soros for funding protestsagainst then-Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh.

Where do these politicians get these noxious ideas? From a right-wing media industrial machine that includes Fox News, Breitbart, Infowars, Newsmax, the Daily Caller, Gateway Pundit and many other outlets. It was Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business Network who asked Grassley if Soros was behind the Kavanaugh protests — and after Grassley endorsed the charge, Trump gave it his imprimatur. The Wall Street Journal, in turn, ran an op-edendorsing this calumny. Last week, Fox Business host Lou Dobbs interviewed Chris Farrell of Judicial Watch, who claimed that the Central American caravan was directed by the “Soros-occupied State Department,” echoing neo-Nazi propaganda about a “Zionist-occupied government.” (Fox Business has since apologized.)

 

[Alfalfa]

From Merriam-Webster:

Definition of patriotism
: love for or devotion to one's country "Although poles apart ideologically, they are both unashamed of their patriotism."— Christopher Hemphill


Definition of nationalism
loyalty and devotion to a nation especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups "Intense nationalism was one of the causes of the war."

Nationalism adds a sense of superiority and exceptionalism to patriotism.

Thanks Siri. But the difference between "loyalty and devotion" to a country and "love or devotion" to a country is arbitrary. Patriotism is just a more acceptable name for nationalism. If you're a patriot then you're a nationalist. Having pride in who you are is not substantively different from having pride in who you're not.

 

[Alfalfa]

I'm relying on Timothy Snyder a great deal lately. I guess he provides me with meditations of a sort....

“The president is a nationalist, which is not at all the same thing as a patriot. A nationalist encourages us to be our worst, and then tells us that we are the best. A nationalist, “although endlessly brooding on power, victory, defeat, revenge,” wrote Orwell, tends to be “uninterested in what happens in the real world.” Nationalism is relativist, since the only truth is the resentment we feel when we contemplate others. As the novelist Danilo Kiš put it, nationalism “has no universal values, aesthetic or ethical.” A patriot, by contrast, wants the nation to live up to its ideals, which means asking us to be our best selves. A patriot must be concerned with the real world, which is the only place where his country can be loved and sustained. A patriot has universal values, standards by which he judges his nation, always wishing it well—and wishing that it would do better. Democracy failed in Europe in the 1920s, ’30s, and ’40s, and it is failing not only in much of Europe but in many parts of the world today. It is that history and experience that reveals to us the dark range of our possible futures. A nationalist will say that “it can’t happen here,” which is the first step toward disaster. A patriot says that it could happen here, but that we will stop it."

― Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century



“What is patriotism? Let us begin with what patriotism is not. It is not patriotic to dodge the draft and to mock war heroes and their families. It is not patriotic to discriminate against active-duty members of the armed forces in one’s companies, or to campaign to keep disabled veterans away from one’s property. It is not patriotic to compare one’s search for sexual partners in New York with the military service in Vietnam that one has dodged. It is not patriotic to avoid paying taxes, especially when American working families do pay. It is not patriotic to ask those working, taxpaying American families to finance one’s own presidential campaign, and then to spend their contributions in one’s own companies. It is not patriotic to admire foreign dictators. It is not patriotic to cultivate a relationship with Muammar Gaddafi; or to say that Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin are superior leaders. It is not patriotic to call upon Russia to intervene in an American presidential election. It is not patriotic to cite Russian propaganda at rallies. It is not patriotic to share an adviser with Russian oligarchs. It is not patriotic to solicit foreign policy advice from someone who owns shares in a Russian energy company. It is not patriotic to read a foreign policy speech written by someone on the payroll of a Russian energy company. It is not patriotic to appoint a national security adviser who has taken money from a Russian propaganda organ. It is not patriotic to appoint as secretary of state an oilman with Russian financial interests who is the director of a Russian-American energy company and has received the “Order of Friendship” from Putin. The point is not that Russia and America must be enemies. The point is that patriotism involves serving your own country."
― Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century

What is "the worst" and "best" in us is subjective and depends on who you ask. Patriotism or nationalism are the exact same kind of identity. The difference is in presentation. Nationalism has a taint to it because of some of the groups that used it, so people with nationalist tendencies (and some without, but who would still like to conform to a something seen as a good value), will use the word patriot instead. The Patriot Party, for example, is clearly a nationalist organization.

 

[Red]

What is "the worst" and "best" in us is subjective and depends on who you ask. Patriotism or nationalism are the exact same kind of identity. The difference is in presentation. Nationalism has a taint to it because of some of the groups that used it, so people with nationalist tendencies (and some without, but who would still like to conform to a something seen as a good value), will use the word patriot instead. The Patriot Party, for example, is clearly a nationalist organization.

I've never been much for nationalism, at least for most of my life. The era of nation states isn't that old, relatively speaking, and I do prefer to think of myself as a citizen of the Earth. And nationalism can be divisive, and is a principle cause of our world wars. At the same time, I was born an American, and it's no secret I hate the fact that Russia interfered in our 2016 election. It did assault our sovereignty and my pride as an American. So, I am contradicting myself, it is clearly a mixed bag with me.

But, just listening to Trump's rallies, it is clear enough to me that he aims to bring out the worse in his listeners, simply by appealing to their fears, their anger and anxieties, their hatred of "the others", that Trump, as a demagogue, has identified as scapegoats for their fears and anger. He gets them to chant "USA! USA!", and gets them to feel they are the best by telling them, as I heard him tell them, that demonstrators at his rallies represented "the worst people in America", and that his followers should feel free to beat on those demonstrators. This is a nationalism that brings out the worst in his countrymen, while making them feel they are really the finest of Americans. Quite diabolical, quite divisive, and he would not have it any other way.

Whenever he gives lip service to unity, as he briefly did following the massacre at the synagogue, he speaks in a dull monotone. His heart is never really in it. Never. It's very clear that he's reading and not speaking from the heart. Then, within hours he's back calling the media "the true enemy of the American people", at his very next rally, and he puts his heart into that hate and anger. And the crowd responds in kind.

 

[Gameface]

Thanks Siri. But the difference between "loyalty and devotion" to a country and "love or devotion" to a country is arbitrary. Patriotism is just a more acceptable name for nationalism. If you're a patriot then you're a nationalist. Having pride in who you are is not substantively different from having pride in who you're not.

The definition didn't end there...

 

[Alfalfa]

The definition didn't end there...

It did for patriotism. I quoted the corresponding part for nationalism. I don't agree with the rest about how nationalism elevates one nation over others, while patriotism doesn't. As I explained, both can presented in either way. One can claim to be a nationalist with the justification that one loves his or her country, without regard to where said country ranks.

 

[Gameface]

It did for patriotism. I quoted the corresponding part for nationalism. I don't agree with the rest about how nationalism elevates one nation over others, while patriotism doesn't. As I explained, both can presented in either way. One can claim to be a nationalist with the justification that one loves his or her country, without regard to where said country ranks.

Okay, so if you don't like "nationalism" as the word we all use to describe a type of devotion to one's nation that elevates it above all other nations and is generally tied to a common sense of national identity then please provide us a word to describe that since you're not going to accept it when we use the word that is defined that way in the ****ing dictionary.

 

[Alfalfa]

I've never been much for nationalism, at least for most of my life. The era of nation states isn't that old, relatively speaking, and I do prefer to think of myself as a citizen of the Earth. And nationalism can be divisive, and is a principle cause of our world wars. At the same time, I was born an American, and it's no secret I hate the fact that Russia interfered in our 2016 election. It did assault our sovereignty and my pride as an American. So, I am contradicting myself, it is clearly a mixed bag with me.

But, just listening to Trump's rallies, it is clear enough to me that he aims to bring out the worse in his listeners, simply by appealing to their fears, their anger and anxieties, their hatred of "the others", that Trump, as a demagogue, has identified as scapegoats for their fears and anger. He gets them to chant "USA! USA!", and gets them to feel they are the best by telling them, as I heard him tell them, that demonstrators at his rallies represented "the worst people in America", and that his followers should feel free to beat on those demonstrators. This is a nationalism that brings out the worst in his countrymen, while making them feel they are really the finest of Americans. Quite diabolical, quite divisive, and he would not have it any other way.

Whenever he gives lip service to unity, as he briefly did following the massacre at the synagogue, he speaks in a dull monotone. His heart is never really in it. Never. It's very clear that he's reading and not speaking from the heart. Then, within hours he's back calling the media "the true enemy of the American people", at his very next rally, and he puts his heart into that hate and anger. And the crowd responds in kind.

I don't disagree that Trump and the nationalists are toxic trash. I just don't want the opposition hanging on to similar concepts, no matter how they dress them up.

 

[Alfalfa]

Okay, so if you don't like "nationalism" as the word we all use to describe a type of devotion to one's nation that elevates it above all other nations and is generally tied to a common sense of national identity then please provide us a word to describe that since you're not going to accept it when we use the word that is defined that way in the ****ing dictionary.

I do accept it. Just as I except that patriotism is just another word for it.

 

[Alfalfa]

I gotta add that I find "but it's in the dictionary" argument hilarious. I read the poster DutchJazzer claiming that the Nazis were left-wing socialists because "they have that word in their name!". I guess that's a common kind of argument around these parts.

P.S. The dictionary is written by people to reflect how words are being used at this moment in time. It is not Yahweh's declarations. I'm sure if you look up certain words, say, homosexuality, in 1950's Webster, the tone would be very different from the definition today.

 

[One Brow]

Thanks Siri. But the difference between "loyalty and devotion" to a country and "love or devotion" to a country is arbitrary. Patriotism is just a more acceptable name for nationalism. If you're a patriot then you're a nationalist. Having pride in who you are is not substantively different from having pride in who you're not.

You have the inclusion backwards. Nationalism is a subset of patriotism, which includes the elevation of your country above others. You can be patriotic without downplaying/dismissing other countries.

 

[One Brow]

I gotta add that I find "but it's in the dictionary" argument hilarious. I read the poster DutchJazzer claiming that the Nazis were left-wing socialists because "they have that word in their name!". I guess that's a common kind of argument around these parts.

You asked what the difference was; the dictionary clearly explained it.

P.S. The dictionary is written by people to reflect how words are being used at this moment in time. It is not Yahweh's declarations. I'm sure if you look up certain words, say, homosexuality, in 1950's Webster, the tone would be very different from the definition today.

Since I'm using a dictionary from our time to describe how I'm using words today, I don't see that problem as applicable.

 

[Gameface]

I gotta add that I find "but it's in the dictionary" argument hilarious. I read the poster DutchJazzer claiming that the Nazis were left-wing socialists because "they have that word in their name!". I guess that's a common kind of argument around these parts.

P.S. The dictionary is written by people to reflect how words are being used at this moment in time. It is not Yahweh's declarations. I'm sure if you look up certain words, say, homosexuality, in 1950's Webster, the tone would be very different from the definition today.

Yeah, but we were talking about what words mean.

 

[Zombie]

Nationalism and patriotism being the same thing is a really strange hill to die on.