# What is your nationality? (Are you proud of it? And other questions..)



## peeyaj

*What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?

If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom? 

Do you wish there would be a change of ''persona'' of your nationality (i.e. the perception that British people are snob (which are from the truth!), Italians are bad-tempered, etc..) or are you content of being like that?* 

I came from the far-flung Philippines, and I am a Filipino. Frankly, I'm not that just enthuasiastic regarding my nationality. Perhaps, it is just the lingering thought that in the last 400 years of our existence, we were invaded and emasculated with three powerful nations (Spain, United States and Japan). But there are certain things, I am very proud of being a Filipino...

If I'm going to change my nationality (5 choices), it would be either a Swiss or a New Zealander. My second would be a Korean. The bottom of the barrel are Japanese and Canadian (those Canadian prices are outrageous!). 

This is only my opinion, and certainly this thread is just a fun experiment..

*
So, what is your nationality? *


----------



## Almaviva

I'm a dual citizen of the United States and Italy. Pride is a strange concept because all I did to earn these privileges or burdens was being born, but I do like what I am and wouldn't want to change.


----------



## World Violist

What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?

I'm American, and not particularly proud of it, partly because of the same reasoning Almaviva gave earlier... I mean, I had to be born somewhere and it happened to be in the US. Besides, I despise all the crazy backstabbing and lying political intrigue dominating the public conscience, it's just wrong.

If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom? 

Top of my list would be either Britain or Finland, and the bottom... I don't know. I suppose China or North Korea, but if I were in their situation I wouldn't know that there were better countries to live in... it's all about perspective.

Do you wish there would be a change of ''persona'' of your nationality (i.e. the perception that British people are snob (which are from the truth!), Italians are bad-tempered, etc..) or are you content of being like that?

If my American-ness were based on my personality I wouldn't even be close to being American. I don't care about money, I'm far from being an opportunist, I care nothing for sports and hate politics. I should clearly go somewhere else in the world but have neither resources nor capability nor will to (I couldn't leave at this point in my life anyway).

What a downer almost right off the bat, eh?


----------



## peeyaj

@World Violist

What a great reply.. You amazed me with your honesty and insight.

Thank you..


----------



## mmsbls

I am American. I agree with Almaviva and World Violinist that I am associated with the US by chance so I don't really have pride in it. It is more a case of liking or disliking things the US does (or does not).

I don't have any desire to change my nationality. I am very comfortable here and enjoy the opportunities I have for work and pleasure. I strongly suspect there are countries where a greater percentage of people would agree with my general ideology. Those might be Scandinavian countries and to a lesser degree European countries.

There are a number of things I would change about the US. The top few are:
1) Political discord - We have conservatives and liberals like everywhere else, but at least now they seem to be at each others throats all the time. We do not seem to act in the best interest of all Americans.
2) I would prefer that religion be less prominent. Interestingly, many religious people here fell we've moved to far away from being a religious people.
3) I agree with World Violinist that wealth is valued enormously too high here. I think many here view someone as of value simply because they are wealthy (not even necessarily that they created wealth).
4) Probably the main thing I would change is the prominent belief among Americans (not all of course) that the US "knows" what's best for the world. The feeling is - what's good for the US is good for the world. We meddle where we should not. I do believe the US has done some remarkably good things (helping Japan after WWII for example), but we push our agenda and our presence everywhere.


----------



## Aksel

*What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?*

I am Norwegian, and I am rather proud of it. Or, maybe not proud of it. It doesn't feel right to be proud of something I have no control over (hoorah for knowing what you want to say but not being able to translate it into English). I am very glad that I live in Norway and not someplace else, but I don't really take much pride in the fact that I am from Norway.

*If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom? *

This one is difficult. I think I would like to be Austrian or possibly French if given the choice. As for nationalities I wouldn't like to have, I think the US actually scores rather high. Or, at least until they get the country sorted out.

*Do you wish there would be a change of ''persona'' of your nationality (i.e. the perception that British people are snob (which are from the truth!), Italians are bad-tempered, etc..) or are you content of being like that?*

This outward persona is kind of difficult, because I don't know how the rest of the world views us. I have this idea of us being seen as a bunch of quasi-socialists waddling in oil and money, which, to be fair, isn't far from the truth. :lol:


----------



## Meaghan

I'm American. I would echo pretty much everything mmsbls said, as far as what I'd like to change about the country. That said, even though I have a lot of problems with stuff my country does, my roots are here and it is my home and where I want to stay. My family and most of my friends are American, and the places I love and find beautiful are in America. But I think I identify with my home state and home city much more than with the country as a whole.



Aksel said:


> This outward persona is kind of difficult, because I don't know how the rest of the world views us. I have this idea of us being seen as a bunch of quasi-socialists waddling in oil and money, which, to be fair, isn't far from the truth. :lol:


The stereotype of Norwegians (and Scandinavians in general, really) I always hear in America is that they are tall and attractive, if that's any comfort. And, of course, socialists.


----------



## Aksel

Meaghan said:


> The stereotype of Norwegians (and Scandinavians in general, really) I always hear in America is that they are *tall and attractive*, if that's any comfort. And, of course, socialists.


Well, that's rather true as well.


----------



## Andy Loochazee

peeyaj said:


> What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?


British. To be more precise, from South East London originally.

Yes, proud to be British. I feel that we have punched well above our weight in terms of population size; we have a distinct national identity, a long heritage, have achieved a great deal in many scientific and artistic fields, and we have many good institutions.



> If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom?


I wouldn't change it. If I was obliged to do so I would probably go for something like France or Italy, with a broadly similar long heritage.

I would be spoiled for choice for the the bottom as there are so many places in the world that I'd hate to associated with. I'm not especially picking on the USA but I wouldn't want to be an American. I think their culture is too diverse from too many backgrounds. Having lived and worked there, I was surprised how little national pride there is behind the superficial flag-waving. Most of the white Americans I came across seemed to be looking back at their European links with greater pride than being American.



> Do you wish there would be a change of ''persona'' of your nationality (i.e. the perception that British people are snob (which are from the truth!), Italians are bad-tempered, etc..) or are you content of being like that?[/b]


I think that Britain's image abroad is not bad these days. The "snob" image for Brits is very old-fashioned. Mind you, I came across a couple from Detroit on vacation in Las Vegas a couple of years ago. I was on the same blackjack table as them, and when they realised I was a Brit, one said to the other "_hey getta load o dat accent there, ain't it cute; hey Mac is it still foggy in London these days"._ To which I replied with a stiff upper lip ... "_ not since about 1956 when we intoduced smokeless zones under the Clean Air Act of that year. How about you poor Yanks? What's it like in LA these days, still suffocating from smog?"_


----------



## TxllxT

I'm Dutch, my wife has Czech nationality, her father lives in St Petersburg (, Russia - not Florida), a son lives in London, his girl-friend is Catalan and a daughter lives with her husband in Moravia, close to the Slovak border. We are happy to be inside the satellite beam of the British Isles and mostly watch BBC. One of the Dutch prides is its healthy social security. We travel quite a lot in Europe (like most of the Dutch) and feel European. No, we have no need to change nationality. Coming back to our home-base we allways go for fresh herring and 'kibbeling' (pieces of cod). (Compare this with Fish & Chips in Britain...) The Dutch kitchen has gone through an integration with the Indonesian, so in the end - who knows? - is my attachment to being and staying Dutch more or less like love going through the stomach...


----------



## nickgray

> What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?


Couldn't care less about nationalities. We're human beings, we live on a planet called Earth and that's all that matters. The sooner we get rid of countries and nationalities, the better.


----------



## elgar's ghost

I'm English but one of the things that has frustrated me over the years is the confusion that exists as regards distinguishing England from UK/Great Britain. My own countryfolk are just as guilty as foreigners - when I was young I did a survey involving my classmates by asking them what the English flag was - most said the Union Flag and only a handful correctly said the Banner of St George. This misconception has been largely eliminated over the last 20 years but I still shudder with embarrassment when anyone gets this wrong. One of the reasons the English are sometimes treated with suspicion/hostility by the Celtic nations within the UK is this mistaken synonymity presumably because England is by far the larger constituent of the UK/Great Britain. Only Russia and their place within the Soviet Union can be compared to it. I am proud to be English more than I'm proud to be British and I don't think there's anything wrong with that - perhaps we're lucky to have two nations! Oh, I'm also embarrassed by the monarchy and I'm also a Eurosceptic.

I've never really thought about being from anywhere else.

There has been a lot of stereotyping with the English/British snob (that synonymity thing again) and thinking we all speak with a generic upper-class accent. If an American heard a working-class Geordie (for the uninitiated, a person from Newcastle, a city in the North-East of England) speak I wouldn't blame him if he thought he wasn't from England at all - the variety of accents and dialects within England (and obviously the UK) is amazing.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

peeyaj said:


> *What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?
> 
> If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom?
> 
> Do you wish there would be a change of ''persona'' of your nationality (i.e. the perception that British people are snob (which are from the truth!), Italians are bad-tempered, etc..) or are you content of being like that?*


LOL these are good questions! 

1. I'm half *Finnish*, half *Swedish *by descent, but otherwise a normal American citizen.  Yes, I'm sorta proud of it I guess, not all boastful or overly patriotic. I mean, it's cool to be a part of a small group of people like them, they are very unique in many ways.

2. I would be RUSSIAN!!! Yes, ironically, the Russians threatened the lives of some of my past Finnish and Swedish relatives due to war, and destroyed/confiscated much property. Some will never be restored (i.e. some property in Karelia). But I still love the Russian people. Their history is awful, but it would still be cool.

3. Finns have the stereotype of being very stoic, pensive and cold (speaking of behavior ). But why not? It's freezing there most of the year! But I would change that maybe, because it's not true for every Finn. Just many of them.  I don't know, people call me a serious person.


----------



## Polednice

Another Brit here. Personally, as others have already mentioned, I'm certainly _pleased_ to have been so lucky as to be born in a well-off, developed nation, but 'pride' is not something I would ever feel. I may be fascinated and in awe of our great history, but that grants the nation no more respect in my opinion.

I certainly wouldn't want to change my nationality - the main thing I love about being British (or, more specifically, English), is that I live in the home-territory of what is becoming a global language. I adore language and literature, and I cherish the assimilation of so many languages and cultures into our own, and see that - despite the stereotypical preference for the sound of romance languages such as French - we have the most beautiful language in the world. Plus, whenever I travel, say to the US or elsewhere in Europe, most people love hearing my quintessential British accent, which I never tire of! 

If I were to change my nationality, then I'd make myself Scottish, purely because I love accents from that region even more, and I love as much cold and rain as possible!


----------



## Jacob Singer

I am an American, and I am not ashamed to say that I am proud of it, at least a little. Sure, we are far from perfect, but so is everybody else. So no, I wouldn't change my nationality if given the chance.

I guess a better way of putting it would be to say that there are things about my country's heritage that I am enormously proud of: We are the country that invented jazz! We were the first constitutional republic. We rescued the world from fascism in WWII. And so on.

I also give the Brits a lot of credit, though, and I have an enormous amount of respect for the British people. If I _had_ to choose another nationality, it would probably be English/British. Or maybe Canadian. 

All in all, though, I don't care that much about nationality. Humanity/civility is far more important to me.


----------



## Pieck

Israeli, sometimes proud somtimes not. Currently not so much.
I would like that people stop thinking we're killing an arab kid or raping some arab women on the way to work, because I only did it once (kidding of course).


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

peeyaj said:


> What is your nationality?


American.


peeyaj said:


> Are you proud of it?


"Proud" is probably not quite the right word for how I feel. I think a better expression would be "fortunate." Then again, I suppose everybody in the First World can count themselves in some measure fortunate.

Still, I do live in a place where movie-stories like "The Pursuit of Happyness" actually come true. A bit of ability mated to an Horatio Alger-esque work ethic can still propel a person onward and upward.


----------



## Almaviva

I see that most people were more specific than my two-liner above, so I'll add to it.

Yes, I feel fortunate for being American, and I also enjoy the fact that my other nationality (Italian) opens for my kids (not for me any longer since I'm already too settled here in the USA) the opportunity to work and live legally and with all rights afforded to citizens in any country of the European Union if they so desire.

I repeat, I don't crave any other nationality. There are many great countries out there and what I'm saying is in no way an attempt to imply that my two countries are better, but I'm simply content with them and have no desire to change.

Now, what do I think of these two countries?

The United States:

Even though I said I don't particularly think that pride is the best word, I actually am a patriot. Nationalism is dangerous, and my particular brand of patriotism is not a flag-waving, bellicose type, but rather, a love for the homeland and for its ideals, which unfortunately don't always prevail in our foreign policy. My patriotic stance and mission, in my opinion, is one of doing my best - given my limited means as a private citizen who doesn't hold political office - to steer the country in the right direction, and I do engage in political activism to do my part.

While I am perfectly aware of the enormous internal problems that my country faces and the questionable actions we have at times taken around the world, I sincerely think that we aren't as bad as many think.

I do extremely value the many contributions we have made to the world, be it when fighting off fascist ideologies, when being generous with our foreign aid and with our attempts to help in times of catastrophes, or when fostering scientific development. To those people out there who always put down America, I like to say that one day chances are that your ailing body will be helped by something that we've developed here, in terms of medical technology.

I also do discount some of our historical mistakes and wrong-doing with the understanding that all dominant empires have strayed at one point or another, and I wonder how the alternative would have been - would we all really prefer a world dominated by Nazi Germans or by Soviet cruel and aggressive rulers? Will the Chinese be much better when *they* become the dominant superpower?

So, sometimes too much anti-American sentiment irks me. We have been a dominant superpower, and our time as such is ending. I don't think we've been much worse or much better than other superpowers in history, and hey, beware of the next one! One day you may look back with longing to the time when *we* were the superpower.

Italy:

I have visited many, many times; I know well almost the entire country and most main cities and regions, and have family members there, but I have never lived there, so my views are not as accurate. While I regret things like the Berlusconi phenomenon, racism in Italian society, the still lagging underdeveloped South, organized crime, etc., there are many other reasons for me to love and admire Italy and Italian culture, going back to the Romans. I am very pleased with my Italian roots and crazily enjoy some aspects of Italian culture, such as the food, the wines, painting, sculpture and architecture, and opera.

While I have traveled extensively in North America, South America, Europe, and part of Africa (I've never been to Asia or Oceania) and am by no means a provincial American with no experience of the large world out there, I have NO desire to live elsewhere than the United States, except for my other country - I may consider retiring in Italy some day although I doubt I'll really do it. I love my country, my state, my town, my neighborhood, and my house; I love the things I do here and the people I meet here, and short of some sort of major change in my life, I'm not going anywhere, except for vacations.


----------



## Art Rock

peeyaj said:


> *What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?
> 
> If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom?
> 
> Do you wish there would be a change of ''persona'' of your nationality (i.e. the perception that British people are snob (which are from the truth!), Italians are bad-tempered, etc..) or are you content of being like that?*


I am Dutch, and have lived about six years abroad (Singapore, France). Proud? No. Nationalism and patriotism (beyond rooting for Dutch sportsmen and women) are alien to me. For the same reason, I have no desire whatsoever to strive to a different nationality.

What is the Dutch persona? Thrifty? Fine with me. I am not a big spender either.


----------



## science

I am American and in some ways I'm very proud of my country and its history, but in many ways I'm sad (not perhaps ashamed) because I realize that from the beginning my people (Anglo-Americans) were pretty brutal to the Native Americans and African-Americans, and not very hospitable to immigrants either. I'm not very proud of our foreign policy on the whole, but there have been some good moments there as well. 

Current US politics makes me really, really angry and I'm happy not to be there because I'm rather afraid of the future. I won't be at all surprised if we become fascist soon. (I realize that some people think we already are, but I think that's at best an exaggeration. The trends haven't been good lately though.) 

If I could change, it wouldn't be because of pride or history. I think the British culture has brought the world a lot of good in the past 500 years. 

In terms of quality of life, I think I'd be happy to be from any industrialized nation (I live in South Korea). 

I've long considered that I may well retire somewhere in the British isles or Northern Europe. I feel that in some ways that's where I'm really from.


----------



## starthrower

I'm an American of Swedish/Scottish/German descent. It's seems strange to criticize this country, then praise the British, who spread tyranny and exploitation around the globe for hundreds of years. I don't think any one nation has a monopoly on bad behavior. Hopefully America will grow up and out of it's greedy childishness in another century or two.


----------



## Sid James

peeyaj said:


> What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?


I was born overseas but raised in Australia. I pretty much consider myself Australian, with a European background. I suppose this country can be proud of some things, but not so much about others (same with any other country, no?). We can be proud for example that we are now a very stable democracy, despite starting out just over 200 years ago (in terms of white colonisation) as a penal colony run by the military. Like other colonised countries, our record in dealing with the native inhabitants can't be said to be all that flash, but I think that successive governments over the past thirty years or so have been working on this with the best of intentions (in that time, we have for example had several Australian Aboriginal members of government on all levels).



> If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom?


I'm pretty much happy in being what I am, an Australian with European heritage.



> Do you wish there would be a change of ''persona'' of your nationality (i.e. the perception that British people are snob (which are from the truth!), Italians are bad-tempered, etc..) or are you content of being like that?


Well the general perception around the world is that Australians are a pretty relaxed bunch. We have traditionally been the home of a "she'll be right, mate" attitude. Some say that this is under threat, and surveys are constantly coming out that point to the fact that many Australians are stressed, even depressed and overworked in particular. I think that the era of the "long lunch" here is history. American corporatism has eroded the traditionally relaxed Australian lifestyle. It's increasingly becoming "dog eat dog" particularly if you look at how our politicians behave.

But basically, the image of the relaxed Aussie drinking (cold!!!) beer at the pub or spending loads of time at the beach is a bit of a myth and stereotype anyway. A large proportion of Australians like me were born overseas and have nothing much to do with that typical image. There are people here from all corners of the world, we are quite a multicultural country. & even the dominant Anglo-Celtic Australians are more aware of the world and have travelled and worked all across the globe, in contrast to the generations born before the second world war, whose main ties were with the UK.

Sometimes I think that it would be good if Australians were more politically involved, say like the Europeans or Americans. We're generally quite apathetic and cynical towards what goes on in our parliaments. But then again, I think the more revolutionary aspects of what has happened in places like Europe or America would not work here. Eg. France and America were founded after bloody revolutions, Australia as a federated nation was created by an Act of parliament (in 1901). But from where I see it, I wouldn't have a bar of the more conservative and institutionalised aspects of the European and American political systems...


----------



## science

starthrower said:


> I don't think any one nation has a monopoly on bad behavior.


This is the thing.

The world isn't divided into bad and good people; it's divided into people with power and without.


----------



## Couchie

I'm Canadian.

I think we have it pretty good. We are highly similar to America, yet less crazy about things like guns, abortion, and gay marriage. Much more of a live and let-live attitude. Our politics are actually quite pathetic, we have a Conservative party (kind of a misnomer because in some respects they're more liberal than the US Democrats), who are currently in power because the liberal votes are split between the Liberals (the US Republicans would **** themselves if the Democrats were anywhere near this Liberal), the NDP (by US standards, practically communist), and the up-and-coming Green party (who don't have any seats but are running 2nd in a lot of ridings and have a fair share of the popular vote). Also, our infamous Bloc-Quebecois, a party solely dedicated to splitting up the country is always in there with about half the Quebec votes. Canadian politics would be hilarious if they weren't also so boring. We are also apparently having another election next month, our 4th in 7 years.

But yes, being next to America yet not _in_ America appears to be an ideal situation. As long as we keep them happy and well-supplied with our ridiculously abundant natural resources, we feel quite safe snuggled against them yet not a target ourselves. Also we get the full glories of American entrepreneurship and innovation usually simultaneously with them, while stuff generally takes longer to hit Europe and Asia. We also get all their entertainment, which is more bittersweet. Our cities are cleaner and less run-down.

I do love following American politics and affairs at an arm's length. I'm rooting for you guys!


----------



## Jules141

British here. Dispite knowing its complete chance where and when you happen to be born. Growing up in one place and it becoming your home, everything you know, naturally makes you proud (in the least-jingoistic way possible). I suppose I'm very interested in my country's history and culture, but I'm more proud of my fellow people (well maybe proud is the wrong word; maybe pleased I am a part of it).

I used to think everybody everywhere was vaguely the same, same sense of humour, same outlook, same social understanding, until I went abroad. How ignorant of me! Some aspects of my country I cannot bare to be without. The odd little quirks and excentricities of life make life what it is.

... Although I'm sure, had I been born in any other country I would have said exactly the same thing.


----------



## Guest

American. Proud of it. I enjoy visiting other places, just as long as I come back here afterwards.


----------



## Polednice

I wonder quite how provincial our preferences get... For example, I am a UK citizen, and, as described in my previous post, I certainly enjoy being part of this nation. More specifically, I am English, which I'd opt for over any of the other constituent nations, though Scotland has superior weather! Yet more specifically, I live (though wasn't born) in Norfolk, which I _hate_, and would much rather live in and associate myself with Lancashire or Essex, in which counties I lived my childhood years. Really, the more I think about, it seems that there is just as much separating Lancashire from Essex, and both of those from Norfolk as there is separating England from Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland (excepting distance ).


----------



## emiellucifuge

Im also Dual, Dutch and American.

I dont really feel pride for my nationality, but I am proud of certain achievements.

Culturally im not at all American, Im more Dutch but im also very English as I grew up there.

So a big mix of different things, without a clear identity.

Im a citizen of the world.


----------



## Almaviva

This may be slightly off-topic but this thread got me thinking. Yesterday I found myself thinking about it a few times.

My point is, I'm a little surprised when people say "I'd not want to be an American, they have all sorts of problems with guns, crime, health care, etc."

Sure, we do.

But you guys need to put things in perspective.

I'm 54 years old.

Number of times I saw someone other than a cop with a gun in a public place in my lifetime = zero
Number of times I've suffered any kind of threat or violence from guns = zero
Number of times I (or anyone in my immediate family, other relatives, circle of friends) was the victim of any crime in the United States (pickpocketing, mugging, break-ins, car theft, etc.) = zero
Number of times I got into some sort of health trouble caused or aggravated by not getting top notch health care or having to wait for it = zero

The American workplace:

I go to work every day and take my comfortable car onto a smooth road with no potholes, perfectly well maintained, with no traffic jams. I get to my very modern and comfortable workplace and meet my polite and competent co-workers. Over here, it pays to be competent and hardworking, since social and professional promotion does happen to those who are like this, with corruption and favoritism being largely absent from the workplace.

The American standards of living:

I go back home to a well-equipped dwelling with all the modern bells and whistles including perfectly stable heater/AC that keeps the house within the temperature range I want all year long, a hot tube, a huge backyard with patio and large deck for outdoor cooking, and small sports court. I greet my friendly and polite neighbors. I live 30 yards from a park with a walking trail, picnic tables, beautiful woods and flower beds, and a classy aquatic center with a spectacular indoor swimming pool.

American education:

I have attended (and my kids attend) world-class schools where not only one gets pretty good education, but also, life is fun with campus living, varsity sports, and all sorts of extra-curricular activities including study abroad. Yes it is expensive but most people find a way to attend, either through lower in-state tuition, scholarships, or student loans.

American entertainment:

Contrary to the stereotype of a culture of hamburgers, hot dogs, and Hollywood movies with explosions and high body count, I rather attend excellent, world class performances in my town - the last two weeks I have attended the St. Petersburg Philharmonic, the South African Handstring Puppet Company presenting Woyzeck the play, the Netherlands Dance Theater, and this week I'm attending Beijing Dance Company. I watch all sorts of independent and foreign movies just by touching a button on my remote through my Netflix account linked to my TV, which offers me 35,000 titles to choose from for instantaneous, high definition seamless streaming. YouTube streams to my TV as well, just like Pandora. We have in town many exquisite restaurants featuring all sorts of world cuisines. My home is networked with the latest broadband and wireless technology. I'm within a short drive of all sorts of venues for professional and college sports.

My point is - life in America is sweet for the vast majority of the population (this is why this is such a popular immigration destination). We do have the unfortunate among us and I do strive to make their lives better through charity and political activism, but the idea that some Europeans seem to have of America as some sort of hell is very far from reality.


----------



## Polednice

With regards to America, us outsiders are naturally confronted with a lot of sensationalism in the media about the U.S., which we certainly shouldn't take at face value. However, I would still have _huge_ reservations about living there because, despite it being the only nation in the world that instils true democracy in its constitution, it is still f****d up. If I was merely exposed to a load of nutjobs with no real power spouting the discriminatory rubbish we often hear from the American right, then I'd take it with a pinch of salt - but you only have to look at so many things being said by elected representatives, particularly of the Republican party, to be frightened of living there!


----------



## Sieglinde

I'm Hungarian and not proud of it. Proud of my culture, but nationality? We're full of nationalist idiots. I want to kick them. Hard. In the eyes of THESE I'm not even a Hungarian. Just because I'm a leftie, liberal, antifascist and I fart in the dictator's general direction. Dude thinks he can crown himself, oppress free media, steal our money and live without the EU. What a jerk.


My beloved nation-tan, Elizaveta Héderváry, on the other hand, is badass. She pwn's with her frying pan and she sees yaoi everywhere. (Don't know about nation-tans? Go check out Hetalia.)


----------



## starthrower

science said:


> This is the thing.
> 
> The world isn't divided into bad and good people; it's divided into people with power and without.


And people in power do bad things. The ones that try to do the right thing end up dead in many cases.


----------



## TxllxT

Almaviva said:


> This may be slightly off-topic but this thread got me thinking. Yesterday I found myself thinking about it a few times.
> 
> My point is, I'm a little surprised when people say "I'd not want to be an American, they have all sorts of problems with guns, crime, health care, etc."
> 
> Sure, we do.
> 
> But you guys need to put things in perspective.
> 
> I'm 54 years old.
> 
> Number of times I saw someone other than a cop with a gun in a public place in my lifetime = zero
> Number of times I've suffered any kind of threat or violence from guns = zero
> Number of times I (or anyone in my immediate family, other relatives, circle of friends) was the victim of any crime in the United States (pickpocketing, mugging, break-ins, car theft, etc.) = zero
> Number of times I got into some sort of health trouble caused or aggravated by not getting top notch health care or having to wait for it = zero
> 
> The American workplace:
> 
> I go to work every day and take my comfortable car onto a smooth road with no potholes, perfectly well maintained, with no traffic jams. I get to my very modern and comfortable workplace and meet my polite and competent co-workers. Over here, it pays to be competent and hardworking, since social and professional promotion does happen to those who are like this, with corruption and favoritism being largely absent from the workplace.
> 
> The American standards of living:
> 
> I go back home to a well-equipped dwelling with all the modern bells and whistles including perfectly stable heater/AC that keeps the house within the temperature range I want all year long, a hot tube, a huge backyard with patio and large deck for outdoor cooking, and small sports court. I greet my friendly and polite neighbors. I live 30 yards from a park with a walking trail, picnic tables, beautiful woods and flower beds, and a classy aquatic center with a spectacular indoor swimming pool.
> 
> American education:
> 
> I have attended (and my kids attend) world-class schools where not only one gets pretty good education, but also, life is fun with campus living, varsity sports, and all sorts of extra-curricular activities including study abroad. Yes it is expensive but most people find a way to attend, either through lower in-state tuition, scholarships, or student loans.
> 
> American entertainment:
> 
> Contrary to the stereotype of a culture of hamburgers, hot dogs, and Hollywood movies with explosions and high body count, I rather attend excellent, world class performances in my town - the last two weeks I have attended the St. Petersburg Philharmonic, the South African Hamstring Puppet Company presenting Woyzeck the play, the Netherlands Dance Theater, and this week I'm attending Beijing Dance Company. I watch all sorts of independent and foreign movies just by touching a button on my remote through my Netflix account linked to my TV, which offers me 35,000 titles to choose from for instantaneous, high definition seamless streaming. YouTube streams to my TV as well, just like Pandora. We have in town many exquisite restaurants featuring all sorts of world cuisines. My home is networked with the latest broadband and wireless technology. I'm within a short drive of all sorts of venues for professional and college sports.
> 
> My point is - life in America is sweet for the vast majority of the population (this is why this is such a popular immigration destination). We do have the unfortunate among us and I do strive to make their lives better through charity and political activism, but the idea that some Europeans seem to have of America as some sort of hell is very far from reality.


My wife gave up watching what's going on in Wisteria Lane (Desperate Housewives). Because of all the perfection of living standards the bubbles of boredom seem to boil up to an explosive mixture. All of a sudden this series introduced violence and after this more & more violence. So please set my mind to rest: it is just a problem of the scriptwriters that they are not able to put together non-violent soapstories anymore. Tell me, that there's nothing desperate and that Wisteria Lane is soooo unreal.


----------



## Almaviva

TxllxT said:


> My wife gave up watching what's going on in Wisteria Lane (Desperate Housewives). Because of all the perfection of living standards the bubbles of boredom seem to boil up to an explosive mixture. All of a sudden this series introduced violence and after this more & more violence. So please set my mind to rest: it is just a problem of the scriptwriters that they are not able to put together non-violent soapstories anymore. Tell me, that there's nothing desperate and that Wisteria Lane is soooo unreal.


Of course it's unreal. It's a TV show, for Pete's sake!
ER is unreal as well - I have worked in ERs and it's never like that. So is Grey's Anatomy.
My lawyer friends tell me that all lawyer shows are unreal.
And so on and so forth.

Is the life I have depicted above this good everywhere and for everybody? Of course not, but my point is, it is true for the majority of our population (we are a country with a vast middle class). Is it boring? Not at all. I haven't been bored in decades. I find that America is actually a very entertaining place. What is boring about getting well rewarded at work, eating great food in excellent restaurants, attending good cultural and sporting events, enjoying modern comforts and high standards of living, and having access to all sorts of modern technology - at work, at home, for health care, etc.?

Violence in Wisteria Lane? I think the most violent thing I've seen in my neighborhood is a dog chasing away a stray cat.

It's just that sometimes I'm surprised with the image that some people have of America. I've had friends from abroad telling me that they were afraid to visit "because of all the gun violence" and things like this, and once I reassured them and they came, they were quite surprised with our calm and peaceful city and were very impressed with our quality of life.

Again, America is not nearly as bad as many of you seem to think. It's far from perfect, but the way it is depicted by some of our friends in Europe or even in Canada is very distorted and focused on rare events that get blown out of proportion as if they were the rule and happened all the time everywhere. It's not that they don't exist... but the odds that they will happen to the vast majority of our population are pretty slim. Like I said, in my relatively long life I haven't suffered anything bad; much the opposite, I've enjoyed great schools, great workplaces and great quality of life in my leisure and family time.

If American wasn't a very desirable place to live, we wouldn't have so many immigrants. Just think about it.


----------



## Almaviva

Polednice said:


> With regards to America, us outsiders are naturally confronted with a lot of sensationalism in the media about the U.S., which we certainly shouldn't take at face value. However, I would still have _huge_ reservations about living there because, despite it being the only nation in the world that instils true democracy in its constitution, it is still f****d up. If I was merely exposed to a load of nutjobs with no real power spouting the discriminatory rubbish we often hear from the American right, then I'd take it with a pinch of salt - but you only have to look at so many things being said by elected representatives, particularly of the Republican party, to be frightened of living there!


About the noisy extreme right: if we were to listen to Le Front National we would think that France is entirely populated by Nazis. Oh yeah, the politicians do a lot of political posturing. But most extreme bills that they try to implement never make it to law, and when they do, they get constitutionally challenged and cancelled. Our system of checks and balances still works. I don't think my life and my liberties have actually been curtailed by anything that the noisy extreme right has been saying.


----------



## science

Well, I personally am a little worried about the near-term trends in American politics, but long-term I am fairly confident that liberal democracy will eventually re-emerge, as it has in the past. 

I used to work with homeless people, going out in fairly rough neighborhoods after dark. I was nervous on a few occasions, but I never actually had any trouble. Very often the residents were concerned for me! A lot of people assumed I was trying to buy drugs. But I've come to believe that a white guy in a black or Hispanic neighborhood is the safest guy on the street. There were some shootings in neighborhoods I was in, but I never actually witnessed one. I also volunteered one summer in a community that had some trouble with gangs, teaching chess and playing baseball with boys that were considered "at risk" of getting involved. It was great. 

One of my cousins was mugged and beaten once, and another cousin was a victim of an intended robbery at knife-point. He's a great big guy, doesn't need to be afraid of much, and he talked the mugger into selling him the knife instead! I've known two people who were murdered, both "crimes of passion" unrelated to anything like gang warfare or militias or whatever. 

Now I live in South Korea, and appreciate that (aside from the risk of North Korea going crazy) it's even safer here. There definitely are social tensions in the US that aren't here, probably largely because of race, drugs, and the availability of guns doesn't help. But there is a mafia here too, and bad things happen sometimes. Koreans have their own social problems, but still, if not for geopolitical power issues (sucks to be a little country stuck between China, Russia, Japan and the US) I would probably trade societies with them if I could. But not if I were a woman. South Korea is still probably a generation away from being a really decent place for women.


----------



## graaf

I'm Serbian, not proud of it, but (of course) hate to hear somebody bashing Serbs (or Slavs in general, in one topic on this forum), and we had a lot of that during 1990s, and even now I suppose.

Changing nationality? If you mean changing country of living - sure. Top of the list would be some Scandinavian country.

I don't know what would be the personality of Serbs, but I think I heard something about short temper. I'd say I do have short temper, and I'm trying to change it.

It is funny to see people to be so proud of the things "they" did - "we" rescued the world, "we" have great art or long history, "we" have this, we've done that... On the other hand, I have great respect for people who simply say - I'm not into anything emotional about my nation or country, but I am glad I got born into a country organized this way, and I will defend such way of life.


----------



## Delicious Manager

I am British (sub-division English). Like around 99% of the UK population I am a mongrel of indeterminate origin (just look at how many overseas nationalities have invaded or settled in these little islands and then let a fascist, racist 'British' person tell how ANY of us can be 'pure').

Am I proud of it? Well, yes and no. I am not proud of the way that Margaret Thatcher and subsequent Prime Ministers have nurtured the 'special relationship' with the USA which so often seems to be more important than our role within Europe (as a whole) and the EU (specifically). The increasing influence of the US here is not something I relish (in fact, I fight it tooth and nail). I am enormously proud of our broadcasting. The BBC is unique in the world and the quality of radio and TV programming here (including the commercial channels) is without equal in the world. I am proud of that. While I am ashamed that our governments (of whatever persuasion) do not (never have and never will) value culture, I am also very proud that, against all the odds, the arts flourish here.

I was once offered a well-paid job in the USA (many of my orchestra management colleagues have infiltrated those shores). I turned it down. I could not imagine myself (an atheist socialist) living in a country completely obsessed with image and wealth and whose 'system' and government did not care about its citizens (as the aftermath Hurricane Katrina amply showed). Any country that can allow itself not to have a healthcare system available to all is not one I could have anything to do with. So, the USA would be at the bottom of my list of major countries to live in as an alternative. Please don't misunderstand; I know many Americans and have found nearly all of them wonderful people. It's the SYSTEM there I abhore, not the people.

My top alternative? Well, I adore Canada and the Canadians. I love the way they are so open, welcoming and trying NOT to be like the USA. And they seem to value the arts (despite some recent problems).


----------



## Andy Loochazee

Polednice said:


> With regards to America, us outsiders are naturally confronted with a lot of sensationalism in the media about the U.S., which we certainly shouldn't take at face value. However, I would still have huge reservations about living there because, despite it being the only nation in the world that instils true democracy in its constitution, it is still f****d up. If I was merely exposed to a load of nutjobs with no real power spouting the discriminatory rubbish we often hear from the American right, then I'd take it with a pinch of salt - but you only have to look at so many things being said by elected representatives, particularly of the Republican party, to be frightened of living there!


And this:



Delicious Manager said:


> I was once offered a well-paid job in the USA (many of my orchestra management colleagues have infiltrated those shores). I turned it down. I could not imagine myself (an atheist socialist) living in a country completely obsessed with image and wealth and whose 'system' and government did not care about its citizens (as the aftermath Hurricane Katrina amply showed). Any country that can allow itself not to have a healthcare system available to all is not one I could have anything to do with. So, the USA would be at the bottom of my list of major countries to live in as an alternative. Please don't misunderstand; I know many Americans and have found nearly all of them wonderful people. It's the SYSTEM there I abhore, not the people.


It seems that this thread is drifting into a bit of a bash against the USA. Unlike the two posters above, I'm not a left winger in terms of politics, but rather the contrary. Even so, I still wasn't all that impressed with the USA from my working experience there a few years ago. I wrote the following in an earlier thread about two years ago in response to an ex-pat Brit who thought Britain is a dump and said that the USA is much more to his liking.



Andy Loochazee said:


> … To our ex-Brit colleague, who apparently now lives in the USA and who finds favour in American culture to the detriment of things British, all I can say is that you are welcome to it. Having lived in the USA myself for several years, I know it quite well but found myself constantly yearning for a return to "… England's green and pleasant land". To be fair there were some aspects of life in America which I enjoyed, but there was much more that I didn't: awful design of cities, vast areas of ugliness, poor social services for the less well off, a complete lack of society due to the many unresolved racial/ethnic divides, many fat and obnoxious people, immaturity of culture, over reliance on religion, citizens having an over-optimistic faith in themselves and being clueless about history other than their own, and generally possessing proudly a considerable ignorance of the outside world, and the list goes on.


----------



## Delicious Manager

Andy Loochazee said:


> And this:
> 
> It seems that this thread is drifting into a bit of a bash against the USA. Unlike the two posters above, I'm not a left winger in terms of politics, but rather the contrary. Even so, I still wasn't all that impressed with the USA from my working experience there a few years ago. I wrote the following in an earlier thread about two years ago in response to an ex-pat Brit who thought Britain is a dump and said that the USA is much more to his liking.


As I said, I'm not attacking any Americans - I know several whom I count among my dearest friends - only the American system which, as an ardent leftie, is totally alien to me.


----------



## Almaviva

Andy, all that you've said above is true and does exist in our country. However I have always thought of an alternative explanation for the immature culture, and for people who are clueless about history and ignorant of the outside world. One of the characteristics of our demographics is that we are a vast middle class (with 10% poor and 5% ultra-rich), so sometimes the 85% are very visible because they have access to things like the Internet, but they aren't necessarily as educated as they are prosperous. In many countries (and I speak from experience) if you go talk to the mass of blue colar workers, you'll find that they also don't have a sense of history, they consume low brow entertainment, and they are ignorant of the outside world (think of interviewing a beer-fueled crowd out of certain Premiership football games - I think you won't see much difference between their general cultural awareness and that of their American counterparts). However the more educated elites don't usually get in touch with them to even get to collect their opinions and their ways of life, while in America you do see and hear them. Like in any other country, Americans also have a cultural elite, and those are perfectly aware of history, consume sophisticated culture, and know perfectly well what the outside world is about. As for awful design of cities, it depends on where you live, and in terms of vast areas of ugliness, well, it's a vast country, and there is beauty as well. What country doesn't have areas of ugliness?


----------



## Almaviva

Delicious Manager said: The BBC is unique in the world and the quality of radio and TV programming here (including the commercial channels) is without equal in the world.

While the BBC seems to be wonderful, I wouldn't say it is completely without equal. French and German cultural channels are just as good, and the American PBS is not bad (including NPR), although I'd love to see more opera on it. But we do have niche channels that cater to specific tastes, like Met Opera Radio, Classical Arts Showcase, etc.


----------



## Polednice

Almaviva said:


> About the noisy extreme right: if we were to listen to Le Front National we would think that France is entirely populated by Nazis. Oh yeah, the politicians do a lot of political posturing. But most extreme bills that they try to implement never make it to law, and when they do, they get constitutionally challenged and cancelled. Our system of checks and balances still works. I don't think my life and my liberties have actually been curtailed by anything that the noisy extreme right has been saying.


Unfortunately, it does seem like there is a hell of a lot of wasted time on frankly insane, unconstitutional bills; and only recently Idaho became the latest in a short string of states to have its senate vote in favour of a shortened permissible time-span in pregnancy for abortion - based on faux evidence, and without consideration for rape.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

If only Illegal Immigrants shared the plurality view of America expressed here! :sigh:

I wish that this sentiment could be deployed in a "counter-missionary" initiative.


----------



## Almaviva

Polednice said:


> Unfortunately, it does seem like there is a hell of a lot of wasted time on frankly insane, unconstitutional bills; and only recently Idaho became the latest in a short string of states to have its senate vote in favour of a shortened permissible time-span in pregnancy for abortion - based on faux evidence, and without consideration for rape.


Sure, but what usually happens is that a few years down the road some other legislature with a different ideological composition goes and changes the law back to what it was. Like I said, things here move slowly and the Supreme Court most of the time strikes down the most outrageous laws. The country goes in more conservative versus more liberal waves in a sort of alternation that has been like this throughout history.

On the other hand, I wonder what European country would have elected for president or prime-minister a member of a minority, like we have just done. Can you imagine a French president of Algerian descent? Or an Italian president of Ethiopian descent? In some regards we're actually more progressive than some European countries.


----------



## Guest

Polednice said:


> With regards to America, us outsiders are naturally confronted with a lot of sensationalism in the media about the U.S., which we certainly shouldn't take at face value. However, I would still have _huge_ reservations about living there because, despite it being the only nation in the world that instils true democracy in its constitution, it is still f****d up. If I was merely exposed to a load of nutjobs with no real power spouting the discriminatory rubbish we often hear from the American right, then I'd take it with a pinch of salt - but you only have to look at so many things being said by elected representatives, particularly of the Republican party, to be frightened of living there!


First of all, the constitution doesn't actually instill true democracy. This is a common misconception. Over the years, certain terms, such as democracy and liberal, have been misused. Democracy implies one person, one vote. That isn't how it works here. This is a republic. We elect people who then vote on the issues. In a true democracy, every person would vote on every matter. State referendums are closer to it than our federal government. It used to be even less so - we used to not have direct election of senators, rather they were elected by our state legislators. This system was enacted with the idea of putting a degree of separation between the citizens and the legislation, in an effort to eliminate more radical agendas. By electing representatives, you dilute out the voices of more radical minority groups.

Regarding the comment someone made about the U.S. having been, and remaining, a liberal democracy, well, again, the definition has changed. Thomas Jefferson was a staunch liberal. He would no doubt reject much of the "liberal" agenda today, which is more appropriately labeled "progressive." Liberalism, in its original sense, tended away from more government control and more individual freedom. The modern Libertarian party in the USA is more akin to Jeffersonian liberalism than Jefferson's own Democratic party, which has become the progressive party - more central control and planning, necessitating greater government involvement.

And regarding the crazy right wingers, well, it really has become quite a cliche. Apart from the obviously uninformed views that so many here are parading as right wing politics, I question whether anybody actually honestly looks at the conservative agenda, rather than parroting stereotypes. I'm sure you all think that us right wingers are misogynistic, racist, rich white men who want to go nuke every non-English speaking country in the world, but as educated people, do you really think that such a large group of people would really think that way? Have you ever talked to a right winger, or are you just regurgitating what left-wing sources are telling you?


----------



## Polednice

To Almaviva, although it is sad that there is still an engendered bias in the chambers of European governments towards privately schooled, elitist white men, I don't think that the _public_ would care about a leader's ethnic background so long as they had good policy. At least in the UK we have an openly atheist Deputy Prime-Minister (otherwise a total sell-out!), about which nobody cares. I'd like to see that in the U.S. where there's supposed to be freedom from religion 



DrMike said:


> And regarding the crazy right wingers, well, it really has become quite a cliche. Apart from the obviously uninformed views that so many here are parading as right wing politics, I question whether anybody actually honestly looks at the conservative agenda, rather than parroting stereotypes. I'm sure you all think that us right wingers are misogynistic, racist, rich white men who want to go nuke every non-English speaking country in the world, but as educated people, do you really think that such a large group of people would really think that way? Have you ever talked to a right winger, or are you just regurgitating what left-wing sources are telling you?


In 2008, I actually spoke to the campaign manager of the Philadelphia area for the Republican party, who quite freely declared that Jews were an easy target for hyperbole in pamphlets, and admitted that they tell 'small lies' about policy to win people over. I don't think all state-side right-wingers are misogynistic, racist, and rich; but I do think a lot of them are woefully misguided and lacking in principles - not to mention their unwillingness to 'live and let live'.


----------



## mmsbls

What has always amazed me is how much citizens of other countries know about the US. Obviously there is much misinformation, but in my experience, US citizens know vastly less about the rest of the world (and not just small countries) than they know about us. I understand some basic reasons why this is so, but I still am often surprised at how much detailed knowledge others have of the US.

I do have a question for everyone based on a recent political event in the US. Recently a US senator (there are a total of 100 in the US so it's a VERY high level national office) argued a specific point in a debate about our budget. He wanted to remove national funding for Planned Parenthood, an organization that provides health services including abortions to women. In a nationally televised statement he said, that abortion was "well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does." In fact the true number is roughly 3%. When asked about the discrepancy by a news organization, the senator's office released a statement saying, "_his remark was not intended to be a factual statement_, but rather to illustrate that Planned Parenthood, a organization that receives millions of dollars in taxpayer funding, does subsidize abortions."

This senator is conservative, and certainly liberal or progressive politicians in the US are not immune from ridiculous statements. I don't know whether the senator had any idea whether the 90% value was reasonable or preposterous. While some liberal groups here are attacking both the senator's original statement along with the staff's follow-up, I suspect that this will blow over quickly. My question to those from other countries is: Would such a misinformed statement coupled with a followup suggesting a lack of interest in the truth be perceived as a significant political event or would it just get a bit of press attention and then go away?


----------



## Guest

Polednice said:


> In 2008, I actually spoke to the campaign manager of the Philadelphia area for the Republican party, who quite freely declared that Jews were an easy target for hyperbole in pamphlets, and admitted that they tell 'small lies' about policy to win people over. I don't think all state-side right-wingers are misogynistic, racist, and rich; but I do think a lot of them are woefully misguided and lacking in principles - not to mention their unwillingness to 'live and let live'.


As a general rule, I don't put much stock in one-off anecdotal examples. Show me a trend, and I'll believe it - but a single individual that only you had this conversation with hardly is a representative cross-sampling of an entire group. I have interacted with Democrats that have had equally spurious things to say of Jews - I hardly take that as representative of the Democratic party in general. And historically, I would say that Jews have fared much worse in Europe in general, even excluding the Holocaust, than in the U.S. even under the most right-winged administrations. And as of late, there have been more liberals, or people associated with left-wing ideology, getting into trouble for anti-semitic remarks than right-wingers or conservatives.

Right-wingers, as they are so labeled, stand for the following:
Smaller government that remains within the restraints spelled out in the constitution.
Lower tax burdens for all, and lower government spending.
Reform of the entitlement programs that are bankrupting our country.
Reversal of the unconstitutional ruling in Roe v. Wade that made abortion a federal right, and return the power to the states to individually decide its legality.
Return to the original understanding of eminent domain, eliminating the ability of government to seize private property to sell for private use.
Controlling our borders, establishing a sane immigration policy, not granting amnesty to those who entered the country illegally.

There are other issues, no doubt, but these are some of the highlights that have been at the forefront in recent years.


----------



## TxllxT

Well, there are people outside the US who read Time magazine (I'm one of them) and follow the news from the World and from the US on internet (CNN). I've read Philip Roth's _The Plot against America_, which leaves a creepy impression on me. What if such a no-brainer like Charles Lindbergh would have won the elections in the thirties instead of FDR? It is a dangerous process, when nearly everyone feels disgusted of political ploys and at the same time the no-brainers get the chance to take over the helm, because the 'brainers' are turning themselves towards a-political interests. This is quite according to the plot that Philip Roth describes in his book.


----------



## Guest

Clearly a mistake on his part, and he should have just come out and said so. I think he probably had old data, because I found something online from the early 90's that showed that it was closer to 90%, but now it is down to about 3% of their services. But they are the nation's largest abortion provider, and one estimate has abortion, at only 3% of their total services provided, bringing in roughly 30% of their income. 

As to the relative level of knowledge of Americans concerning other countries, and vice versa, well, put it into context. When the U.S. acts, in general it has a much larger effect on the world in general than most other countries. And your comparison is tricky. How many different nationalities have you polled? Do Greeks know more about Americans than Americans do of Greeks? What about Ukrainians? Vietnamese? Bolivians? And how many different countries are you thinking the average American should be informed about? And are there specific ones? Okay, so people from other countries know a bit about the U.S. How much of it is accurate? And is it because, in general, they are more informed about multiple countries around the world, or is it more just that the U.S. generates more news-worthy events that people are interested in? Because let's face it - the workings of American politics is more important to the world in general than, say, those of Portugal. That is not meant as an insult, nor is it said out of ignorance. That is simply the way it is right now. The U.S. economy is a major factor in global markets, the U.S. military is projected broadly around the globe. For good or for ill, those things have major bearing on the world in general, and so how they are controlled is of global interest.

Finally, are you asking the right people in America about other countries? Are the demographics between nationalities that you have talked with similar? A high school grad here vs. a college grad there?


----------



## emiellucifuge

mmsbls said:


> My question to those from other countries is: Would such a misinformed statement coupled with a followup suggesting a lack of interest in the truth be perceived as a significant political event or would it just get a bit of press attention and then go away?


Here in NL im sure it would be all over the media, and would most definitely cost that party many votes. The senator would most likely not be reelected.


----------



## Polednice

DrMike said:


> As a general rule, I don't put much stock in one-off anecdotal examples. Show me a trend, and I'll believe it - but a single individual that only you had this conversation with hardly is a representative cross-sampling of an entire group. I have interacted with Democrats that have had equally spurious things to say of Jews - I hardly take that as representative of the Democratic party in general. And historically, I would say that Jews have fared much worse in Europe in general, even excluding the Holocaust, than in the U.S. even under the most right-winged administrations. And as of late, there have been more liberals, or people associated with left-wing ideology, getting into trouble for anti-semitic remarks than right-wingers or conservatives.


I knew perfectly well that no one would be convinced by an anecdote, yet you were so flippant with everyone's remarks based on the information and media that _is_ available to them in other countries, that I don't know what you'll accept - do you want me to spend a decade living in the U.S., interviewing every Republican I can find before you'll give me a shred of credibility? Sure, the media of other nations is bound to represent a caricature of the States, but that doesn't stop level-headed individuals from weeding out the nonsense and still coming to the conclusion that, _at least in comparison to other countries_, the U.S. is a land of unsightly extremes.

To mmsbls, a mistake like that in the UK would be taken as a major political 'gaff', and it would take some time for the politician to live it down. However, as astutely noted by an audience member on Question Time last week in response to an MP claiming that the majority of GPs are in favour of NHS reform, even if a quoted statistic _is_ justifiable, those statistics can be formed and cited in such a way as to sound impressive, but, when unpacked, are actually flimsy and unrepresentative of the issue at hand.


----------



## Edward Elgar

I'm British and not proud of it! We are a nation of thieves and drunkards. I can't wait to emigrate!

Top choices:
America
Holland
Germany
Canada

Bottom choices:
Afghanistan
Saudi Arabia
Israel (you get the picture!)


----------



## mmsbls

DrMike said:


> Clearly a mistake on his part, and he should have just come out and said so. I think he probably had old data, because I found something online from the early 90's that showed that it was closer to 90%, but now it is down to about 3% of their services. But they are the nation's largest abortion provider, and one estimate has abortion, at only 3% of their total services provided, bringing in roughly 30% of their income.


I was not so much concerned about the issues surrounding abortion or how large his mistake was. I was much more concerned about his staff's statement that he would apparently argue specific facts without regard to the truth about those facts.



DrMike said:


> As to the relative level of knowledge of Americans concerning other countries, and vice versa, well, put it into context. When the U.S. acts, in general it has a much larger effect on the world in general than most other countries. And your comparison is tricky. How many different nationalities have you polled? Do Greeks know more about Americans than Americans do of Greeks? What about Ukrainians? Vietnamese? Bolivians? And how many different countries are you thinking the average American should be informed about? And are there specific ones? Okay, so people from other countries know a bit about the U.S. How much of it is accurate? And is it because, in general, they are more informed about multiple countries around the world, or is it more just that the U.S. generates more news-worthy events that people are interested in? Because let's face it - the workings of American politics is more important to the world in general than, say, those of Portugal. That is not meant as an insult, nor is it said out of ignorance. That is simply the way it is right now. The U.S. economy is a major factor in global markets, the U.S. military is projected broadly around the globe. For good or for ill, those things have major bearing on the world in general, and so how they are controlled is of global interest.
> 
> Finally, are you asking the right people in America about other countries? Are the demographics between nationalities that you have talked with similar? A high school grad here vs. a college grad there?


My comment was a simple statement of surprise at how much detail others knew about the US. It was not intended to mean that Americans are ignorant, ought to know more, or should feel badly about any lack of knowledge. It certainly is not the outcome of some poll, study, or other attempt to get information. As I mentioned, there are reasons why others would know more about the US than we knew about other countries. You mentioned many of these, and I wholeheartedly agree. I was thinking of saying some of these myself, but choose to save space. I am also somewhat surprised that Americans who didn't grow up near New York City (where I grew up) know details about New York such as the names of the 5 boroughs. Yes, New York is a "great and important" city, but I' still amazed they know the name of all boroughs. I was expressing the same wonder about knowledge of our country.


----------



## Guest

Polednice said:


> I knew perfectly well that no one would be convinced by an anecdote, yet you were so flippant with everyone's remarks based on the information and media that _is_ available to them in other countries, that I don't know what you'll accept - do you want me to spend a decade living in the U.S., interviewing every Republican I can find before you'll give me a shred of credibility? Sure, the media of other nations is bound to represent a caricature of the States, but that doesn't stop level-headed individuals from weeding out the nonsense and still coming to the conclusion that, _at least in comparison to other countries_, the U.S. is a land of unsightly extremes.
> 
> To mmsbls, a mistake like that in the UK would be taken as a major political 'gaff', and it would take some time for the politician to live it down. However, as astutely noted by an audience member on Question Time last week in response to an MP claiming that the majority of GPs are in favour of NHS reform, even if a quoted statistic _is_ justifiable, those statistics can be formed and cited in such a way as to sound impressive, but, when unpacked, are actually flimsy and unrepresentative of the issue at hand.


I wasn't trying to be flippant, but as one who would probably be characterized as right-wing, I found the simplistic caricatures of people like me as rather uninformed. Honestly, what sounds more extreme to me is countries like Greece and Portugal, with entitlement programs run so out of hand that the entire countries are having to seek bailouts like third world banana republics. And right-wingers, who want to pull America back before it gets that far, are somehow extreme. Well, I guess if that is the continuum we are using for comparison, then I guess going from national bankruptcy to fiscal solvency is an extreme jump.


----------



## World Violist

Edward Elgar said:


> Bottom choices:
> Afghanistan
> Saudi Arabia
> Israel (you get the picture!)


Holy wars tend to lower immigration rates. Bit of a shame, really. It just means that they care more!


----------



## peeyaj

In my impression, Americans tend to favor corporations than their own government.. But that just me.


----------



## Almaviva

Interesting event in the news today: the House approved the measure ending funding for Planned Parenthood, but then the Senate took it out, as part of the agreement to fund the Federal government until the end of the fiscal year. Like I said, our checks and balances still work, and the centrist agenda tends to win it at the end.


----------



## Pieck

Edward Elgar said:


> I'm British and not proud of it! We are a nation of thieves and drunkards. I can't wait to emigrate!
> 
> Bottom choices:
> Afghanistan
> Saudi Arabia
> *Israel* (you get the picture!)


May I ask why? we're not a third world country


----------



## science

I guess there used to be some intellectual kind of conservatism in the USA. I met a lot of intellectual conservatives when I was in college. But conservatism in the USA today is Glenn Beck and the rest of Fox News (which now claims not to be news), Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Ann Coulter, Michael Savage. Conservatives who aren't spoken for by that group are a minority.


----------



## Ravellian

^ You forgot Sean Hannady. 

I am American, and not particularly proud of it. I think I would fit in much better in Japan, where the importance of the individual is downplayed and the emphasis is always placed on the honor of the family and society as a whole. There are a number of reasons why I prefer the culture of the Japanese; for example, they place high importance on respecting and honoring your fellow man, they are always on the leading edge of technological innovation, and they are discrete about their personal relationships. 

I'm trying to learn Japanese; the language is just so difficult for us westerners to grasp.


----------



## gurthbruins

I just read this thread title anew as "What is your mentality? Are you proud of it?" 
I may be vain and conceited, but not proud of anything, nor indeed ashamed. Because I don't believe anything originates in me. I am only a conduit.

Japanese say: "The nail that sticks out gets hammered" but I think that is a recipe for mediocrity. Leading edge of innovation? I don't agree, they don't invent anything, they perfect what others invent. E.g. Sudoku was invented in America, by An American. But America was too backward to apppreciate it. Biorhythms is another European invention that needed the Japanese to put it on the market. Buddhism is another foreign invention perfected by the Japanese. Transistors? Electronics? Bill Gates gave us computers, not the Japanese.

I'd love to learn Japanese. Maybe a nice Japanese girl will teach me.

Meanwhile, Viva la norteamerica and right-wing capitalism.


----------



## Edward Elgar

Pieck said:


> May I ask why? we're not a third world country


I can't speak for the whole country because I've never been there, but I can imagine that in some regions (particularly Jerusalem) there is tension between Jew and Arab communities. It must be dangerous to live in such a hostile environment which is the reason for my reluctance to visit!


----------



## Guest

science said:


> I guess there used to be some intellectual kind of conservatism in the USA. I met a lot of intellectual conservatives when I was in college. But conservatism in the USA today is Glenn Beck and the rest of Fox News (which now claims not to be news), Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Ann Coulter, Michael Savage. Conservatives who aren't spoken for by that group are a minority.


No, those are not part of the intellectual conservative movement. Most that you listed are entertainers and commentators or actual politicians, but aren't really the ones that drive the thought behind conservatism. Many of those can be found elsewhere - read National Review, or the American Spectator, or the Weekly Standard. People like Thomas Sowell, Charles Krauthammer, George Will, Pat Buchanan, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Victor Davis Hanson, William Bennett, Robert Bork - these are the intellectual conservatives.

I might just as easily say that there used to be some kind of intellectual progressivism in the USA, but today all you have are MSNBC and Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Alan Colmes, and Harry Reid.

Do you guys on the other side of the spectrum actually take the time to listen to the other side? Honestly, I spend at least 1.5 hours each day listening to liberal radio shows (Sirius satellite radio Sirius Left channel) and watching MSNBC (Hardball, Maddow, Schultz), just so I can get a feel for the other side. Is there no intellectual curiosity on the other side, or do you guys just parrot talking points?


----------



## Guest

Ravellian said:


> ^ You forgot Sean Hannady.
> 
> I am American, and not particularly proud of it. I think I would fit in much better in Japan, where the importance of the individual is downplayed and the emphasis is always placed on the honor of the family and society as a whole. There are a number of reasons why I prefer the culture of the Japanese; for example, they place high importance on respecting and honoring your fellow man, they are always on the leading edge of technological innovation, and they are discrete about their personal relationships.
> 
> I'm trying to learn Japanese; the language is just so difficult for us westerners to grasp.


Interesting - have you spent time in Japan? I have a cousin who married a Japanese girl, and their Japanese-American children get treated pretty poorly when they go to visit Japan. Here in the U.S. they have no problems. Not exactly what I would consider respecting and honoring your fellow man.


----------



## emiellucifuge

@DrMike. If you read Science's post again you may discover that you are actually in agreement.


----------



## Guest

emiellucifuge said:


> @DrMike. If you read Science's post again you may discover that you are actually in agreement.


Not really. I think there is a very vibrant intellectual conservative movement out there still, and not everybody listens to those mentioned above. Every few years we hear again about the death of conservatism - either after the GOP has taken a beating at the polls, or these types of attempts to marginalize conservatives and claim that they are too far out of touch with most Republicans and brand them as marching in lockstep with some of the more vocal elements. Usually what happens next is that the Democrats take a pounding at the polls (e.g. when Nixon won in a landslide, when Reagan won in an even bigger landslide two times, when the GOP retook the House for the first time in decades in '94, when the GOP had the largest pickup of seats in 2010 since the 1930's).

There is a very vibrant intellectual conservative movement, and those who are actually conservatives know it is there, while those who are progressives and liberals who claim to be so knowledgeable about what conservatives really think are rather uninformed. Conservatives still like to read Bill Buckley, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell, and the likes.


----------



## science

DrMike said:


> No, those are not part of the intellectual conservative movement. Most that you listed are entertainers and commentators or actual politicians, but aren't really the ones that drive the thought behind conservatism. Many of those can be found elsewhere - read National Review, or the American Spectator, or the Weekly Standard. People like Thomas Sowell, Charles Krauthammer, George Will, Pat Buchanan, R. Emmett Tyrrell, Victor Davis Hanson, William Bennett, Robert Bork - these are the intellectual conservatives.
> 
> I might just as easily say that there used to be some kind of intellectual progressivism in the USA, but today all you have are MSNBC and Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Alan Colmes, and Harry Reid.
> 
> Do you guys on the other side of the spectrum actually take the time to listen to the other side? Honestly, I spend at least 1.5 hours each day listening to liberal radio shows (Sirius satellite radio Sirius Left channel) and watching MSNBC (Hardball, Maddow, Schultz), just so I can get a feel for the other side. Is there no intellectual curiosity on the other side, or do you guys just parrot talking points?


I don't spend 90 minutes a day listening to conservative talk shows, but I do see a bit of Fox News, I've read books by Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson. I grew up conservative, so I know that side of things pretty well.

I don't know why you had to turn insulting. I know that there has been a great intellectual conservative tradition, but I think it's pretty weak right now. You menioned George Will, who is ok, and Thomas Sowell, who is good. Clyde Prestowitz and Niall Ferguson are great. Donald Kagan is great; his son is ok. David Gelertner is good. Wendell Berry is at the very least intelligent and thought-provoking. I've never thought of Pat Buchanan as an intellectual. For that matter, I never thought of Krauthammer that way either.

So there are conservative intellectuals, some that I probably respect more than you do (Prestowitz, Ferguson) and some that you seem to respect more than I do (Krauthammer, Buchanan). But those guys are a minority and they speak to a minority. Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck - these guys have a following. They speak for tens of millions, not thousands.

Also, I'm going to stick up for Maddow and Olbermann here. In their tone, they're equivalent to Fox News (although Maddow's image is actually cute-smart rather than aggressive); but I'm unaware of them being systematically misleading. Alan Colmes was a joke, intentionally put on there to compare unfavorably with Hannity. I'm unaware of Chris Matthews or Ed Schultz being systematically misleading, but I don't see Matthews much and never saw Schultz.

Also, they don't have a following. Maybe Michael Moore does, and that would be a better comparison because he has at times been systematically misleading.

Now I have re-thought my post in this way: it turns out that leftist intellectuals (Chomsky, Said, etc.) don't have much actual influence either. The more centrist types (Krugman, Stiglitz) are arguably more similar to the fairly centrist conservatives like Prestowitz, and in fact I'd guess that most actual GOP policies are more influenced by the likes of Prestowitz or CATO than by Limbaugh or O'Reilly; just as most actual Democratic policies are more influenced by the likes of Krugman and Stiglitz than by Chomsky or Said or Michael Moore.

Edit here:



DrMike said:


> Not really. I think there is a very vibrant intellectual conservative movement out there still, and not everybody listens to those mentioned above. Every few years we hear again about the death of conservatism - either after the GOP has taken a beating at the polls, or these types of attempts to marginalize conservatives and claim that they are too far out of touch with most Republicans and brand them as marching in lockstep with some of the more vocal elements. Usually what happens next is that the Democrats take a pounding at the polls (e.g. when Nixon won in a landslide, when Reagan won in an even bigger landslide two times, when the GOP retook the House for the first time in decades in '94, when the GOP had the largest pickup of seats in 2010 since the 1930's).
> 
> There is a very vibrant intellectual conservative movement, and those who are actually conservatives know it is there, while those who are progressives and liberals who claim to be so knowledgeable about what conservatives really think are rather uninformed. Conservatives still like to read Bill Buckley, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell, and the likes.


I didn't see this post; it occured as I was typing the earlier stuff.

Again, "those who... are rather uninformed" is obviously a reference to me, and there is no need for that. You're jumping to unwarranted conclusions about me, as I showed above.

When I was in college I hung out with the kinds of conservatives who read Buckley, Hayek and so on, but I don't find those guys in the world so much anymore. Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck seem to be much more influential on the ground.


----------



## science

emiellucifuge said:


> @DrMike. If you read Science's post again you may discover that you are actually in agreement.


Maybe so. It was good of you to suggest it.


----------



## Guest

science said:


> I don't spend 90 minutes a day listening to conservative talk shows, but I do see a bit of Fox News, I've read books by Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson. I grew up conservative, so I know that side of things pretty well.
> 
> I don't know why you had to turn insulting. I know that there has been a great intellectual conservative tradition, but I think it's pretty weak right now. You menioned George Will, who is ok, and Thomas Sowell, who is good. Clyde Prestowitz and Niall Ferguson are great. Donald Kagan is great; his son is ok. David Gelertner is good. Wendell Berry is at the very least intelligent and thought-provoking. I've never thought of Pat Buchanan as an intellectual. For that matter, I never thought of Krauthammer that way either.
> 
> So there are conservative intellectuals, some that I probably respect more than you do (Prestowitz, Ferguson) and some that you seem to respect more than I do (Krauthammer, Buchanan). But those guys are a minority and they speak to a minority. Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck - these guys have a following. They speak for tens of millions, not thousands.
> 
> Also, I'm going to stick up for Maddow and Olbermann here. In their tone, they're equivalent to Fox News (although Maddow's image is actually cute-smart rather than aggressive); but I'm unaware of them being systematically misleading. Alan Colmes was a joke, intentionally put on there to compare unfavorably with Hannity. I'm unaware of Chris Matthews or Ed Schultz being systematically misleading, but I don't see Matthews much and never saw Schultz.
> 
> Also, they don't have a following. Maybe Michael Moore does, and that would be a better comparison because he has at times been systematically misleading.
> 
> Now I have re-thought my post in this way: it turns out that leftist intellectuals (Chomsky, Said, etc.) don't have much actual influence either. The more centrist types (Krugman, Stiglitz) are arguably more similar to the fairly centrist conservatives like Prestowitz, and in fact I'd guess that most actual GOP policies are more influenced by the likes of Prestowitz or CATO than by Limbaugh or O'Reilly; just as most actual Democratic policies are more influenced by the likes of Krugman and Stiglitz than by Chomsky or Said or Michael Moore.
> 
> Edit here:
> 
> I didn't see this post; it occured as I was typing the earlier stuff.
> 
> Again, "those who... are rather uninformed" is obviously a reference to me, and there is no need for that. You're jumping to unwarranted conclusions about me, as I showed above.
> 
> When I was in college I hung out with the kinds of conservatives who read Buckley, Hayek and so on, but I don't find those guys in the world so much anymore. Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck seem to be much more influential on the ground.


Actually, my comments were more generally directed, not just at you - as you will notice, it is in line with other comments I've made in the last day or so.

I enjoy some of the individuals you have mentioned, but I think it all comes down to this - those individuals are political entertainers. While many conservatives may listen to or watch or read these individuals, that doesn't necessarily mean that is where they go for their conservative principles. When you consider that most conservatives tend to be older, and then consider that, with the exception of Limbaugh, most of these commentators tend to be rather new on the scene, it really does suggest that those who are actually thinking about their conservatism have other sources of enrichment. Now, are there johnny-come-lately conservatives that have jumped on some kind of bandwagon? Absolutely. Every movement has those. But where I think you are wrong is the weight you give those individuals. I don't find any one of those individuals that comprehensively expresses what I believe, and I think most conservatives are the same way. But still, given the dearth of news sources with a neutral or conservative agenda until only just recently, I think what you are seeing is that people are drawn to these individuals because it is something that wasn't available until talk radio and cable news really started to overtake the old school journalism that has been exposed as slanted.

The popular political entertainers certainly have their following, but that doesn't mean that they speak for those people. It is more that they get large listener groups because for the longest time, they were the only source for ANY kind of popular conservatism. Most conservatives aren't intellectual. Most liberals aren't intellectual. Most Republicans aren't intellectual. Most Democrats aren't intellectual. For those that are, there will always be intellectual leaders to fuel their appetite for in depth political discourse.

And if I came off as insulting, I apologize. I didn't mean to. I didn't feel that my comments were any more offensive than much that has been said regarding right wingers (not by you).


----------



## science

DrMike said:


> Actually, my comments were more generally directed, not just at you - as you will notice, it is in line with other comments I've made in the last day or so.
> 
> I enjoy some of the individuals you have mentioned, but I think it all comes down to this - those individuals are political entertainers. While many conservatives may listen to or watch or read these individuals, that doesn't necessarily mean that is where they go for their conservative principles. When you consider that most conservatives tend to be older, and then consider that, with the exception of Limbaugh, most of these commentators tend to be rather new on the scene, it really does suggest that those who are actually thinking about their conservatism have other sources of enrichment. Now, are there johnny-come-lately conservatives that have jumped on some kind of bandwagon? Absolutely. Every movement has those. But where I think you are wrong is the weight you give those individuals. I don't find any one of those individuals that comprehensively expresses what I believe, and I think most conservatives are the same way. But still, given the dearth of news sources with a neutral or conservative agenda until only just recently, I think what you are seeing is that people are drawn to these individuals because it is something that wasn't available until talk radio and cable news really started to overtake the old school journalism that has been exposed as slanted.
> 
> The popular political entertainers certainly have their following, but that doesn't mean that they speak for those people. It is more that they get large listener groups because for the longest time, they were the only source for ANY kind of popular conservatism. Most conservatives aren't intellectual. Most liberals aren't intellectual. Most Republicans aren't intellectual. Most Democrats aren't intellectual. For those that are, there will always be intellectual leaders to fuel their appetite for in depth political discourse.
> 
> And if I came off as insulting, I apologize. I didn't mean to. I didn't feel that my comments were any more offensive than much that has been said regarding right wingers (not by you).


That's all fair enough. Obviously we disagree about how influential or important these commentators ("entertainers" sounds pretty dismissive to me) are, especially among the long-time conservatives. But it's good to have the other points cleared up.


----------



## mmsbls

DrMike said:


> I enjoy some of the individuals you have mentioned, but I think it all comes down to this - those individuals are political entertainers.


Exactly right. On both the right and the left people hear the opinions of entertainers. Americans in general do not take the time to study issues in depth. (I don't mean that this is true of just Americans.) They have a very simplistic view of critically important issues that need attention. The sound bites and political rhetoric they see on TV or hear on the radio is pretty useless in understanding the best solutions.



DrMike said:


> While many conservatives may listen to or watch or read these individuals, that doesn't necessarily mean that is where they go for their conservative principles.
> Most conservatives aren't intellectual. Most liberals aren't intellectual. Most Republicans aren't intellectual. Most Democrats aren't intellectual.


I can't say for certain (and I would be very interested in data on this), but I think that Americans overwhelmingly do get their political and economic information from TV and radio. Even the straight news shows on CNN, Fox, NBC, CBS give very little background information. You are correct that Americans (and people in general) are not intellectual. The "debates" that I see on TV or hear from many friends are hopelessly simplistic. Further people don't seem at all interested in learning more to understand which policies might work or which policies are probably flawed. I would be shocked to learn that even 5% of Americans regularly read any magazines such as National Review, the American Spectator, the Weekly Standard, the Nation, Reason, or the Progressive.

I can't tell you how frustrating it is to listen to Fox or MSNBC and see talking heads discuss economic issues that they are not experts on. It's true that occasionally Krugman will appear, but generally he's asked a few simple questions and leaves. I still don't have a very good sense of what practicing macroeconomists think of stimulus versus tax cuts in the short and long term and their effect on the deficit and job growth.

Overall I would absolutely love this country to have a real debate between thinking conservatives and thinking progressives. To hear the issues discussed as though the other side were not either stupid racists who wanted to kill poor people and aliens or elite socialists whose greatest desires were to kill all babies and destroy the US as we know it.


----------



## Guest

mmsbls said:


> Overall I would absolutely love this country to have a real debate between thinking conservatives and thinking progressives. To hear the issues discussed as though the other side were not either stupid racists who wanted to kill poor people and aliens or elite socialists whose greatest desires were to kill all babies and destroy the US as we know it.


 Like this one?


----------



## Almaviva

Good. It looks like the hands-off approach is paying off and some edgy comments have been rectified. Thanks, guys.


----------



## mmsbls

DrMike said:


> Like this one?


Wow. What a shame that two people with so much to say would say so very little (at least in that clip). Somewhat amusing though.


----------



## Guest

mmsbls said:


> Wow. What a shame that two people with so much to say would say so very little (at least in that clip). Somewhat amusing though.


 Sorry, I should have prefaced it a bit more. It was meant more as a joke. There was much more to the show, but this is a famous clip (at least for political junkies) between Buckley and Gore Vidal. It did get heated. Buckley was usually much more reserved and calm (just look at any of the old clips of him on Firing Line - he even interviewed Noam Chomsky, Huey Newton, Mohammed Ali), but Vidal got under his skin calling him a crypto-Nazi.


----------



## mmsbls

DrMike said:


> Sorry, I should have prefaced it a bit more. It was meant more as a joke. There was much more to the show, but this is a famous clip (at least for political junkies) between Buckley and Gore Vidal. It did get heated. Buckley was usually much more reserved and calm (just look at any of the old clips of him on Firing Line - he even interviewed Noam Chomsky, Huey Newton, Mohammed Ali), but Vidal got under his skin calling him a crypto-Nazi.


I'm sure the rest of the debate was much more informative. Those two cared too much about ideas to miss an opportunity to share them.


----------



## Almaviva

With my thanks to member gurthbruins who generously requested that his phrasing that seemed to have caused offense be edited, I did that, and deleted the four or five posts that wouldn't make sense any longer given that the cause for them has been eliminated.


----------



## KJohnson

I am thrilled by the number of people here who think nationality is not a matter of pride. If this kind of statistics were true for the whole world, we would make the earth a paradise in less than a decade.


----------



## delallan

I am a Canadian, living quite close to the American border. Although I am thankful to live in Canada, our much cheered health care system, although strong in many respects, is by no means perfect. Earlier this year I needed to see a specialist for a serious medical condition, and was told that my wait time in Canada to see this doctor was 5 - 6 months. As my symptoms progressively got worse, I asked if I could shorten the wait time. I was told 'no'. Fortunately I was able to go to the USA and pay for my medical services. I am fortunate that I have ongoing care for this condition in Canada, but my initial wait time was potentially life threatening. The American doctor who treated me told me that she sees MANY Canadians who cannot tolerate the Canadian wait times, and have to come to the USA for treatment and assessment.


----------



## science

Almaviva said:


> With my thanks to member gurthbruins who generously requested that his phrasing that seemed to have caused offense be edited, I did that, and deleted the four or five posts that wouldn't make sense any longer given that the cause for them has been eliminated.


A productive turn of events.


----------



## science

delallan said:


> I am a Canadian, living quite close to the American border. Although I am thankful to live in Canada, our much cheered health care system, although strong in many respects, is by no means perfect. Earlier this year I needed to see a specialist for a serious medical condition, and was told that my wait time in Canada to see this doctor was 5 - 6 months. As my symptoms progressively got worse, I asked if I could shorten the wait time. I was told 'no'. Fortunately I was able to go to the USA and pay for my medical services. I am fortunate that I have ongoing care for this condition in Canada, but my initial wait time was potentially life threatening. The American doctor who treated me told me that she sees MANY Canadians who cannot tolerate the Canadian wait times, and have to come to the USA for treatment and assessment.


In South Korea, you basically have both options. There are private hospitals and public ones, and you get better service at public ones, but you pay more for it. I'm not sure about the details of course. Even the public system is very, very much less expensive than in the US. Perhaps 1/10th of the cost.


----------



## Almaviva

delallan said:


> I am a Canadian, living quite close to the American border. Although I am thankful to live in Canada, our much cheered health care system, although strong in many respects, is by no means perfect. Earlier this year I needed to see a specialist for a serious medical condition, and was told that my wait time in Canada to see this doctor was 5 - 6 months. As my symptoms progressively got worse, I asked if I could shorten the wait time. I was told 'no'. Fortunately I was able to go to the USA and pay for my medical services. I am fortunate that I have ongoing care for this condition in Canada, but my initial wait time was potentially life threatening. The American doctor who treated me told me that she sees MANY Canadians who cannot tolerate the Canadian wait times, and have to come to the USA for treatment and assessment.


This only means that you guys need to improve your system. Canada carefully controls the number of doctors and discourages any foreign doctors from being licensed (through draconian requirements, unlike the US). Then, you get a glut and waiting times (of course, this also reduces costs). France has a mixed system public/private with sectors 1, 2, and 3; 1 being completely socialized medicine with universal access and 100% of refunds from Social Security, available to all citizens; 2 being a hybrid sector with refunds but steeper co-pays; and 3 being private sector, fee-for-service medicine with no refunds and no governmental controls. Patients can choose what sector they want to see, and doctors can choose in what sector they want to practice. Result, no waiting lists, and the number 1 health system in the world, in terms of performance and outcomes.

What you are saying shouldn't be seen as an indictment on socialized medicine. It's a matter of perfecting the system.


----------



## delallan

Almaviva: You said, "What you are saying shouldn't be seen as an indictment on socialized medicine. It's a matter of perfecting the system." I agree with you, our system needs improvement, and my comments were not made as an indictment against socialized medicine.


----------



## PetrB

You make it sound like Nationality is genetic


----------



## Ukko

PetrB said:


> You make it sound like Nationality is genetic


Native nationality is usually an 'accident of birth', and so is one's genetic make-up, although the latter is apparently 99.9x% the same everywhere. Racial miscegenation is a folk-myth.


----------



## science

science said:


> In South Korea, you basically have both options. There are private hospitals and public ones, and you get better service at public ones, but you pay more for it. I'm not sure about the details of course. Even the public system is very, very much less expensive than in the US. Perhaps 1/10th of the cost.


I messed this post up pretty severely. It should be:

In South Korea, you basically have both options. There are private hospitals and public ones, and you get better service at _private_ ones, but you pay more for it. I'm not sure about the details of course. Even the public system is very, very much less expensive than in the US. Perhaps 1/10th of the cost.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

I should feel fortunate, but I have no sense of--shall we say--spiritual connection to where I live. There's more lowest common denominator consumerism than actual culture or community.
Not proud, but I'm also not ashamed of any way I happened to be born, which seems to be en vogue among the "enlightened" these days.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I am Australian. I was born in Sydney, but that place sucks so I moved to Melbourne.


----------



## moody

starthrower said:


> I'm an American of Swedish/Scottish/German descent. It's seems strange to criticize this country, then praise the British, who spread tyranny and exploitation around the globe for hundreds of years. I don't think any one nation has a monopoly on bad behavior. Hopefully America will grow up and out of it's greedy childishness in another century or two.


I wish that you would give everyone a break and stop spouting your anti-British poison , it's becoming boring.


----------



## moody

Edward Elgar said:


> I'm British and not proud of it! We are a nation of thieves and drunkards. I can't wait to emigrate!
> 
> Top choices:
> America
> Holland
> Germany
> Canada
> 
> Bottom choices:
> Afghanistan
> Saudi Arabia
> Israel (you get the picture!)


Perhaps you would be kind enough to let us know when you are due to leave, I look forward to that day.


----------



## moody

Ravellian said:


> ^ You forgot Sean Hannady.
> 
> I am American, and not particularly proud of it. I think I would fit in much better in Japan, where the importance of the individual is downplayed and the emphasis is always placed on the honor of the family and society as a whole. There are a number of reasons why I prefer the culture of the Japanese; for example, they place high importance on respecting and honoring your fellow man, they are always on the leading edge of technological innovation, and they are discrete about their personal relationships.
> 
> I'm trying to learn Japanese; the language is just so difficult for us westerners to grasp.


Yes,their history is full of examples of how they treat their fellow men.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

I am Belarusian and I am in *no* way proud of it. I'd rather be German or American, including all the stereotypes commonly attributed to those nations.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Sometimes I wish I was Japanese. I don't know why.


----------



## sheffmark

I'm English and *EXTREMELY* proud of it!
We should all be proud of who we are and where we're from.
There is good and bad in every colour,creed,race and religion but we are *ALL* Gods children!


----------



## LordBlackudder

It's only when you've been abroad to places like Libya, Yemen and America that you realize how amazing Great Britain is.

I wouldn't say I'm proud but more just very thankful to live here with the free health system, incredibly rich and diverse culture, amazing food, and a place where people of all nationalities, class and religion can live together peacefully.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Perhaps the people who do dislike the UK would do well to remember that we have also been abused/exploited/targeted by other nations or peoples in the past. The difference with us is that we don't make a point of bellyaching about it.


----------



## moody

What is this nonsense about being born in a country by happenstance? Well of course, but that's where you are and that is what governs your outlook on life.
I live in Great Britain and I am of English,Canadian,German and Irish extraction.
I am proud of my country's history and believe we have given a lot to the world. It is easy to criticise a great power, i am sure the Romans were heavily criticised but they brought so much to the countries they conquered, including this one.
The people who suggest that we were so wicked in regard of our colonies are on the whole wrong, or they've been listening to or reading too much pub talk or left wing press.Also it is the fashion for students to be left wing (after all their teachers are) and to spout nonsense. They know nothing and they've been nowhere but don't ever let a small fact like that stop anybody. Of course if it was not for brave men they would not be allowed to spout anything
most certainly not in most of the countries they rave on about.
We have brought a civilised outlook in our dealings plus much culture and invention along with this.
It is interesting to note that immigrants and asylum seekers travel through Europe to get to us, pity more of them don't drop off on the way but they don't, I wonder why?
Our way of conducting business in both Houses of Parliament is the best there is and has been widely copied. Plus our system of justice is superior to most.
Things are not too good at present for we have allowed a monstrous overflow of immigration to overwhelm us and the illegal immigration situation is out of control.Most of these people are those who wish harm to us and to that you can add gangsters from Bulgaria, Romania and Albania who are running drugs and sex slaves, how did they get in?
I fear that our way of life may be gone for ever as these people have no interest in us, our traditions or anything else and of course have no tradition of democracy in any shape or form.
The government was ineffectual under Labour(Socialism) and now under the Conservativ/Liberal coalition may be worse.
Members say that you should not be nationalistic, yes you should because you need something tangible to stand up for and I'm afraid that the brotherhood of man does not fit the bill. You need to believe, whether it's your football team,your regiment, but most certanly you should believe in your country or what use are you? Nationalism does not equate with dictators or fascism, we have always been fiercly patriotic but have turned out no dictators.
Turning to another subject I too am annoyed by an amount of anti-Americanism that I come across because we do have a special relationship and they are our good friends, along with Australia, Canada and New Zealand
I plus the majority of English people do not want to be governed from the European Union---most of the countries there especially the French and Germans are certainly not our friends.
When we had a referendum we were led to believe that it was for a COMMON MARKET which is a very good idea, in fact the EU was then called the Common Market--very sneaky you see! We were tricked and I want out and if there were a referendum tomorrow we'd be out. By the way contrary to more lies there is no need for us to be in it.
I was born in 1938 and obviously have seen a lot and I was a regular soldier so have seen much that normal folk don't see.
But one thing that needs to be set straight as it's been mentioned and was a few months ago is that our American friends did not deliver us from fascism----but they certainly helped a lot!
The Royal Airforce terminally injured Hitler's Luftwaffe during the Battle of Bitain. It was weakened for the Russian front and not really effective there thus leading to defeat because you must have air superiority. We destroyed Hitler's navy and what was left was not allowed out---apart from the Uboats of course. We also defeated Rommel in the desert along with his Italian allies. This was all before the Americans joined in.
So in fact it was the British along with its Empire soldiers, the Americans, Russians who brought down the Axis powers not to mention the Poles, Irish and many others who came here to fight.
People who ctiticise their country should be able to demonstrate what steps they have taken to change things , the Syrians are ,are they not? You get nowhere through moaning and sniping and if you can't stand it get out, that's what most Americans did in the first place including my English ancestors on a funny little ship called "Mayflower" do you know it? Yes I'm sure you do, anyway off you go to Russia, China, Pakistan, Afganisthan or wherever--they love whingers there.
If i had to live in another country it would be the US or Canada as I used to be there seven months of the year on business and was always treated with respect and wonderful hospitality where ever I went. I don't admire the ridiculous political correctness that they are stifled with nor the crazy fundamentalist Christians that abound particularly in the South.
Next would be Italy.
Bottom of my list would be France or Russia.

i leave aside the arab countries.


----------



## Cnote11

Being born in the United States did govern outlook on life. This is why my outlook is anti-nationalist.


----------



## Trout

I'm Vietnamese-American and fairly proud. Not sure what other nationality I would want to change to.


----------



## Ukko

I admit to not really understanding the concept of national pride. I'm not even comfortable with pride, period. It seems to me to be a sentiment moderately damaging to the mind. I'm glad that I was born into a Vermont hillfarm family, glad to be a Vermonter, a New Englander, even glad to be an American. I consider myself to be an honorable, ethical humanist. What I don't think I am is _proud_.

:tiphat:


----------



## kv466

Same description as the above except I'm American with Peruvian and Inca blood.


----------



## Ukko

An additional comment re 'pride'. The island nation of Malta is composed of two islands of some size, and some smaller ones. The next largest island after Malta is mostly agricultural, with a few villages serving the farms and the fishermen. The natives are known for their acceptance of and hospitality toward visitors - as long as they are not _proud_. Their interpretation of the word may seem deviant at first, but if you think about it... .


----------



## Polednice

I'm certainly pleased and thankful for having been born in the UK - a country that leads in terms of rights and welfare without quite the same depressing melodrama of U.S. politics (not that we don't have our share!). I think some of the Scandinavian countries are where we ought to look to for inspiration, but I have nothing against the UK. It's a beautiful country, I'm unique in that I love its weather, and my healthcare is completely free!

The main problem I have with national pride is all this talk of what "we" have done as a nation for ourselves and for the world. The last I checked, I hadn't done anything to shape the country, and I don't think you or 90% of others have. There is no "we", it's just a trick of the tongue to make people think they've been a part of something of which they haven't actually played even a minor role.


----------



## Jeremy Marchant

I am English by birth, but a quarter Belgian and a quarter Welsh by descent. I have no sense of the Belgian bit at all, but I do lean to the Welsh as much as the English.

I am neither proud nor not proud of this. Being proud of ones nationality is clearly something a lot of people feel, but I just don't get it myself. Like Polednice, I am grateful for being born in the UK and I agree with his other points, too.


----------



## Guest

moody said:


> I don't admire the ridiculous political correctness that they are stifled with nor the crazy fundamentalist Christians that abound particularly in the South.


I would highly recommend the South - my wife is from there, and I have lived 6 of the last 11 years here. You will not find a more friendly or courteous group of people. There is a reason the term "Southern Hospitality" is such a cliche. And the food is wonderful - it may not be terribly healthy, but it sure makes you feel like you've died and gone to heaven.


----------



## Cnote11

I've been to the south plenty of times and I would just like to say NO THANK YOU. The food looks gross, as well. My stomach can no longer handle those kinds of things after a long period of eating healthier. It is hard enough for me to handle a pop, let alone gallons of grease and those sweet teas with 10 pounds of sugar they drink down there.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Cnote11 said:


> Being born in the United States did govern outlook on life. This is why my outlook is anti-nationalist.


How about you move over here to the former USSR and live here for a year, not as a tourist, but as an ordinary citizen? I'm pretty certain by the end of the year you will become a very patriotic American.


----------



## PetrB

What is your nationality? 
Cultural ~ American, 100%
Genetic ~ Columbian / Dutch: my appearance is about as 'anglo' as it gets.'

Are you proud of it? 
Of what... my luck in the genetic lottery? the accomplishments or failures of others?

Accidents of birth, nationality, 'class' 'title,' innate genetic inheritance, whether good bad or indifferent, are nothing one should take pride in, rue or regret: they are accidents


----------



## Chrythes

So SiegendesLicht, are you not proud of your nation or of your government (or both)?
Most of the former SSRS countries are struggling. I live in Lithuania, and it's certainly not one of the best places to live in Europe. 
Of course, compared to Belarus we at least have political freedom and a relationship with the European Union. 
But still - it's a new country, it's deeply scarred, but it's catching up. I believe that Belarus will achieve more freedom, with the end of Lukashenko's reign. Hopefully soon.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Chrythes said:


> So SiegendesLicht, are you not proud of you nation or of you government (or both)?


There is a saying: "Every nation deserves the government it gets". So, I am not really proud of either. Also, the future of this country does not look very promising to me. It's only going downhill, to more authoritarian policies and more broken diplomatic relations.

Besides, has anyone ever heard of a classical composer of Belarusian descent?


----------



## Chrythes

Well, I'm not sure how true is that saying, since I don't think Lithuania (and the other former SSRS countries) deserved to be occupied by the Soviets. One of the reasons why the resistance came only after half a century is because most of the Inteligentia were deported to Siberia, so we had no authoritative figures to rise and lead the nation. 
Sometimes a nation is so suppressed that it takes a long time until it gathers enough power to resist.

And why does it matter so much if someone heard of Belarusian composers? 
I am almost certainly sure that no one here has heard about the Lithuanian composer Ciurlionis, but it doesn't mean his music is worthless or worse than that of the famous ones. His symphonic poems The Sea and The Forest are beautiful romantic works!


----------



## moody

DrMike said:


> I would highly recommend the South - my wife is from there, and I have lived 6 of the last 11 years here. You will not find a more friendly or courteous group of people. There is a reason the term "Southern Hospitality" is such a cliche. And the food is wonderful - it may not be terribly healthy, but it sure makes you feel like you've died and gone to heaven.


I know, it's my favouritr area and I had so many friends there e.g. at the Dallas Symphony. I used to always take a week out in New Orleans so that I could eat and drink and go to Preservation Hall to chat to the musicians---after the tourist buses had left !.


----------



## Polednice

I sometimes find it amusing when people call themselves part this, part that, like Americans who from such a young country with little history feel the need to point out their Irish or Italian or Scottish origins. I just think, "Nah... you're American through and through." After all, after how many generations is the line drawn? I'm English, but I must also be part Celtic and part Angle, Saxon or Jute, and, push it far back enough, we're all African. I think what matters is the culture you grew up in, not the culture of your forebears, so I have no time for people who insist on pointing out their 1/32 Aborigine origin.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Question: Should I be proud to be an Australian?


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Chrythes said:


> Sometimes a nation is so suppressed that it takes a long time until it gathers enough power to resist.


At least half of our population does not consider itself suppressed, at least not by our own government. The oppressors are always the EU, the USA, sometimes Russia, but not Lukashenko's regime. In fact, a lot of people view the regime as defenders against imaginary Western aggression.



Chrythes said:


> And why does it matter so much if someone heard of Belarusian composers?


The achievements of a nation's greatest citizens are one of the usually cited reasons for national pride. And this is a music forum, so composers would be most important here.

Personally, I believe the most valid reason for national pride is not so much the achievements of individual fellow countrymen (we had nothing to do with them) as the overall quality of life in a given country, the economic power and ordinary everyday things: clean streets (almost nonexistent in my country), safety, good healthcare and education and other things we common citizens can put our hand to and whose existence is dependent on the whole nation's work.


----------



## Cnote11

SiegendesLicht said:


> How about you move over here to the former USSR and live here for a year, not as a tourist, but as an ordinary citizen? I'm pretty certain by the end of the year you will become a very patriotic American.


Please tell me, what is so bad about living in your country? Also, I highly doubt I'd become a patriotic American. I might say that life is of better quality in America, but in no way would I ever be proud of this country. I am not my country; my country is not me. The people in office did nothing to give me my freedoms, so if I'm going to be proud of anything it would be those people. Then I'd have to be proud of those who were the catalyst behind the ideas that led the way for those who fought for my freedom, and so on and so forth. I am proud of those things, as I am proud of KNOWLEDGE, and not transient things. I hardly identify with American culture. The only thing really American about me is my love of sports, but I also watch Football (soccer) and international sports, so it isn't a purely American thing. I just happen to enjoy sport. Perhaps I might have been proud of the ideas that America once espoused, but I no longer am. I do not pin myself to one place. At the moment, I'd rather say I'm proud of the Scandinavian countries or something like that, instead of being proud of America.


----------



## Guest

Cnote11 said:


> I've been to the south plenty of times and I would just like to say NO THANK YOU. The food looks gross, as well. My stomach can no longer handle those kinds of things after a long period of eating healthier. It is hard enough for me to handle a pop, let alone gallons of grease and those sweet teas with 10 pounds of sugar they drink down there.


you do know that virtually everywhere you have the option of sweet out unsweet tea. My father-in-law always gets the unsweet, and then sweetens it himself with Splenda. Barbecue is incredible, and then there is fried okra, cheese grits, cornbread, banana pudding . . . I could go on, but I'm making myself hungry.


----------



## Cnote11

DrMike said:


> you do know that virtually everywhere you have the option of sweet out unsweet tea. My father-in-law always gets the unsweet, and then sweetens it himself with Splenda. Barbecue is incredible, and then there is fried okra, cheese grits, cornbread, banana pudding . . . I could go on, but I'm making myself hungry.


I realise that it isn't impossible to eat healthy in the south, Dr. Mike. That much is obvious... but I'm just talking about the prevailing culture that I experienced. Then again, up here you have people who walk around shoving their faces with McDonald's every five seconds, stopping at every single one on the way anywhere for one of those aforementioned sweet teas!


----------



## Operadowney

As Guglielmo says in _Cosi fan tutte_ "...one can not find my equal from Vienna to Canada..."

...I'm from the latter.


----------



## violadude

I am from the USA. Like other people here, I don't really care about national pride. It's a value that my parents tried to instill in me but it never resonated. I am grateful to have been born here rather than, say, Libya or something but that's about it. I would probably have more national pride if I was born somewhere in Asia. It seems that everything I love comes out of Asia and everything I hate comes out of the USA 

But in all seriousness I suppose I can say that I am proud of certain aspects of the USA. I'm proud of the fact that Jazz originated here, (although it might not have if it weren't for our history of slavery and racism so maybe that is the wrong thing to be proud of....). I'm also proud of all the amazing composers that have come out of America and all the amazing musicians that have done a particularly good job of outreaching to the common person in their promotion of classical music (Aaron Copland, Leonard Bernstein, Micheal Tilson Thomas all come to mind).


----------



## arturo

I am Mexican, and I'm proud of it.

If I could change my nationality, it would probably be to either British or Russian. In honor of two of my favorite composers, Elgar and Tchaikovsky. As well as the fact that I like how strong and independent those two nations are. And Australian, for kicks.
Last on my list would be (pretty much) any nation in Africa (with the exception of South Africa, the Republic of Madagascar, and Egypt), Chinese and Korean. Simply because their living conditions aren't ideal (mainly Africa), and their ideals are very controversial (mainly China and N. Korea).

The way I came to this conclusion is by asking myself which nation I would have liked to be raised in, if I weren't Mexican (wouldn't change it, by the way). And England, (modern) Russia, and Australia seemed pretty good.


----------



## Crudblud

Citizen of Earth, nations are just arbitrary borders, I am proud of my heritage as a human being, of culture stretching from East to West and North to South and back again, and so on and so forth.


----------



## moody

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Question: Should I be proud to be an Australian?


That is the question that YOU are supposed to be answering, so think about it and answer ---I'm surprised we haven't heard from Sid on this one.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

moody said:


> That is the question that YOU are supposed to be answering, so think about it and answer ---I'm surprised we haven't heard from Sid on this one.


Well I suppose so then.


----------



## Chrythes

SiegendesLicht said:


> At least half of our population does not consider itself suppressed, at least not by our own government. The oppressors are always the EU, the USA, sometimes Russia, but not Lukashenko's regime. In fact, a lot of people view the regime as defenders against imaginary Western aggression.


Is it an opinion that is more popular with the older population? Maybe there's more dissatisfaction with the current state among the younger ones? 
And just out of curiosity - did Belarus ever had a strong ethnic movement? I know their lands were always a part of other Empire's and State's (Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Russian Empire and then SSRS).
Any resistance during those years? (e.g the nationalist movements in the mid 19 century among the Polish and Lithuanians against the Russian Empire. The Patriotic Resistance against the Soviets by the Lithuanians in the 50's. It seems that our nation was always fighting the occupiers, since they felt a strong ethnic bond among themselves. Did Belarusians ever had this ideology - to protect their nation at any cost?)
You see, I just wonder how deep are the roots of the Belarusians ethnic culture and nation, and how much they are distinct from the other Slavic countries' traditions, because I think that one of the main reasons to why the ethnic Lithuanian resistance was so strong is because our cultural roots are very different from the Slavic ones. 
Even the first time Lithuania was mentioned in the map during the beginning of the XI century was because our ancestors were Pagans and killed the Christians Missionaries.



> The achievements of a nation's greatest citizens are one of the usually cited reasons for national pride. And this is a music forum, so composers would be most important here.


This is why I asked why would you care if others (other nations) know about Belarusians composers. It's that nation's national pride - it's supposed to be the most relevant and important to them.



> Personally, I believe the most valid reason for national pride is not so much the achievements of individual fellow countrymen (we had nothing to do with them) as the overall quality of life in a given country, the economic power and ordinary everyday things: clean streets (almost nonexistent in my country), safety, good healthcare and education and other things we common citizens can put our hand to and whose existence is dependent on the whole nation's work.


With this I completely agree.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Cnote11 said:


> Please tell me, what is so bad about living in your country?


Even without mentioning political freedoms (or rather lack thereof), a more than 100% inflation during 2011 and increasingly worsening relations with most other countries are bad enough. However, in place of Belarus I could name Russia, Ukraine or most other countries. I simply mean that a lot of Westerners do not appreciate the degree of freedom and prosperity they have unless they live for a while in a country that is deprived of both.


----------



## Cnote11

I certainly do appreciate the relative freedom and the relative prosperity that I have. I'd just certainly rather be elsewhere. Why is it that you do not move from your country?


----------



## SiegendesLicht

As soon as I am educated enough to be attractive for Western employers or get any other kind of opportunity, I am going to, you can trust me on that.


----------



## Cnote11

I believe you're already educated to make it in the west. You like WAGNER after all.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

I wish I could PLAY Wagner...


----------



## Cnote11

I wish I could WAGNER *WAGNER*


----------



## Cnote11

or better yet

I wish I could Wagner *LIGETI*


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Somehow I suspect Ligeti would object to being *Wagnered. *


----------



## Chrythes

Are you a student Siegen? If not, do you plan on studying abroad?
And why do you ignore(?) my post? Is it because it's irrelevant/you don't know/offensive/reason x?
I'm only trying to understand the situation there from the perspective of this thread - nationalism and ethnicity. 
You can disregard the history part, but I'm still interested in knowing if there is at least some resistance to the current state, and if it's been stronger/weaker/non-existent over the past years (e.g the Orange Revolution in Ukraine)?


----------



## violadude

Chrythes said:


> Are you a student Siegen? If not, do you plan on studying abroad?
> And why do you ignore(?) my post? Is it because it's irrelevant/you don't know/offensive/reason x?
> I'm only trying to understand the situation there from the perspective of this thread - nationalism and ethnicity.
> You can disregard the history part, but I'm still interested in knowing if there is at least some resistance to the current state, and if it's been stronger/weaker/non-existent over the past years (e.g the Orange Revolution in Ukraine)?


Maybe he's ignoring you because he's actually dodecaplex.


----------



## Dodecaplex

lolwhut?

....


----------



## Chrythes

You imply that for some reason dodecaplex should ignore me?


----------



## violadude

Chrythes said:


> You imply that for some reason dodecaplex should ignore me?


Only for the reason that the other character is made up. However, I see that they are both online. Perhaps Siegen was joking when he said he was dodecaplex talking to himself.


----------



## Cnote11

Siegen is a woman and is not Dodecaplex.


----------



## Cnote11

Although I spot Dodie's dots... suspicious


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Chrythes said:


> Are you a student Siegen? If not, do you plan on studying abroad?
> And why do you ignore(?) my post? Is it because it's irrelevant/you don't know/offensive/reason x?
> I'm only trying to understand the situation there from the perspective of this thread - nationalism and ethnicity.
> You can disregard the history part, but I'm still interested in knowing if there is at least some resistance to the current state, and if it's been stronger/weaker/non-existent over the past years (e.g the Orange Revolution in Ukraine)?


I apologize. I did not ignore your post, I was just thinking over an answer 

No, I am not dodecaplex.

I am done with my studies for now but I do intend to get a second degree in the near future. I am only not sure what exactly I want to study.

As for the resistance to the regime, historically it was the strongest in the XIX century, when the current Belarusian territory belonged to the Russian Empire. And yes, most people who oppose the regime are younger people. Most older people believe any change is for the worst and of course the memory of the Soviet Union is very much alive here. I think this is part of the problem: people want a strong leader who can comfort them from the TV screen and say he will make everything alright. Plus, issues like the Orange Revolution and the Baltic States' entrance into the EU are currently portrayed by the media in a negative light. The regime puts a lot of importance on the idea of "independence", going our own way and not the way the West "wants to force" this country to go. Kind of like a lighter version of North Korea 

However, even among people who think something needs to be done, there is no unity on exactly what needs to be done. At the presidential election last year we had EIGHT opposition candidates running against Lukashenko. Of course none of them could stand a chance, there wasn't even any need for any falsifications (this is one of the biggest reasons I am so disappointed with this country).

As for Belarusian ethnic culture, that is a difficult question. There must have been some, but afer many years of being under a variety of Russian regimes, not very much is left of it, and what is left (even historical episodes like the resistance movement against the Russian Empire or against the nazi occupation during WWII) is used to flaunt this very idea of a "special way" this nation should go. And after all, of what importance is the culture when the economy is failing?


----------



## Dodecaplex

See, we're different people!

;-) ::devildevil::


----------



## Cnote11

I'd hope you wouldn't waste your time writing all of that just to keep up an appearance.


----------



## Dodecaplex

No, no, I would not. I'm a theoretical computer scientist anyway. What's that? History stuffz?

Though I am a polymath, after all.


----------



## Cnote11

My thoughts have been confirmed.


----------



## violadude

Cnote11 said:


> My thoughts have been confirmed.


See what I mean.


----------



## Chrythes

SiegendesLicht said:


> I apologize. I did not ignore your post, I was just thinking over an answer
> 
> No, I am not dodecaplex.
> 
> I am done with my studies for now but I do intend to get a second degree in the near future. I am only not sure what exactly I want to study.
> 
> As for the resistance to the regime, historically it was the strongest in the XIX century, when the current Belarusian territory belonged to the Russian Empire. And yes, most people who oppose the regime are younger people. Most older people believe any change is for the worst and of course the memory of the Soviet Union is very much alive here. I think this is part of the problem: people want a strong leader who can comfort them from the TV screen and say he will make everything alright. Plus, issues like the Orange Revolution and the Baltic States' entrance into the EU are currently portrayed by the media in a negative light. The regime puts a lot of importance on the idea of "independence", going our own way and not the way the West "wants to force" this country to go. Kind of like a lighter version of North Korea
> 
> However, even among people who think something needs to be done, there is no unity on exactly what needs to be done. At the presidential election last year we had EIGHT opposition candidates running against Lukashenko. Of course none of them could stand a chance, there wasn't even any need for any falsifications (this is one of the biggest reasons I am so disappointed with this country).
> 
> As for Belarusian ethnic culture, that is a difficult question. There must have been some, but afer many years of being under a variety of Russian regimes, not very much is left of it, and what is left (even historical episodes like the resistance movement against the Russian Empire or against the nazi occupation during WWII) is used to flaunt this very idea of a "special way" this nation should go. And after all, of what importance is the culture when the economy is failing?


I sometimes see this attitude here as well. A fair number of older people are missing the Soviet days (e.g my grandfather, he's even got a small sculpture of Lenin) and it makes sense. The social and economic stability is very poor compared to what we had during the times of SSRS, and some, especially the working class (which is most of the older people) is missing what they most cared about - the political freedom is not their first priority.

Either way I think these times are ought to end, either by the death of the tyrant or a revolution. North Korea has requested aid only after their leader died. Lukashenko's death might bring a new order as well. 
It's interesting - seems that some (or even most) people are proud of their nation in terms of the past, some require a present reason to be proud.

This is partially what I was trying to get at - that maybe "not very much is left of it". I know it might not matter much anymore, but it think it can be held as one of the reasons to why there's a regime like that over there that values economy and material prosperity much more than culture. Belarus even has 2 national languages: Russian and Belarusian, even though 80% of the population is ethnic Blarusians.

The economy is failing over there? I thought it was one of your strongest sides! Since as far as I know Belarus basically maintains itself by producing and distributing all the goods between the citizens - not very much of trade with other countries is going on there. And Belarus has the highest Human Development Index among the former Soviet Countries! I guess everyone gets hurt when the world bleeds.

Anyway, I'm just trying to say that the inability of a nation to change a regime might have something to do with a very a painful past, and if we assume that Collective unconscious exists, it seems that at least partially it's understandable why it is like it is over there.


----------



## dieglhix

I am Chilean and it's a shame to say I am not proud because we are chauvinistic and have very retrograde culture compared to our other neighbours. We think we are the best because we're economically better situated than our other neighbours but even so, we are known for being disrespectful, obscene, ignorant, racist, homophobic and have lack of humour, haha. Chile still have some cool stuff though...

Good thing I'm leaving... (In a couple of years but I AM leaving, far... far away...)


----------



## Lenfer

I'm French/Swiss I hold nationality for both. Am I proud no? Happy to be me yes! Havomg a wide range of nationalities in my family has enabled me to learn many languages from a young age. Which has enabled me to have a rather rich life in terms of places I've been much more so than the average Joe.

I think it's rather strange to be proud of where you were born. If your mother happened to be somewhere else you'd have a different nationality. I also think one shouldn't take on the guilt of what a country has done in the past unless it was your fault of course.


----------



## clavichorder

Nationality not so much. But I am fairly proud of the different states that I hail from. I love the state of Washington and the region that is the Pacific Northwest. I also love Iowa(such good childhood memories and Des Moines is a wonderful place to be a kid), even though it is the midwest...


----------



## Hassid

I'm Argentine and I feel very, very sad for that. You see, Argentina is a huge, wonderful country. It has all you can ask for, and more. But it has one extremely grave and insoluble problem: the people.


----------



## Andreas

I was born in West Germany and have been living there ever since. Not proud of it of course, for there is no reason to be proud of something like that. My father was born during WWII in a village that was German at the time but after the war became part of Poland. A good reminder, and one that's pretty close to home, of what being German entails.


----------



## BurningDesire

America :3 dad is from England and mom's family was from Sweden/Norway


----------



## Klavierspieler

I'm an Antarctican. We secretly rule the rest of the world from our base in Marie Byrd Land.


----------



## cwarchc

Jestem Europejczykiem, moja matka była Angielką, a ojciec był polskim

But I can't speak the language


----------



## clavichorder

Andreas said:


> I was born in West Germany and have been living there ever since. Not proud of it of course, for there is no reason to be proud of something like that. My father was born during WWII in a village that was German at the time but after the war became part of Poland. A good reminder, and one that's pretty close to home, of what being German entails.


It hasn't been long enough that German's can be proud be a part of a great tradition of literature and music, and also beautiful architecture?


----------



## Lunasong

I am American and live in Ohio, which has more political ads per hour than any other state.

_If you live in Ohio, good luck trying to tune out the election.

Ohio residents are drowning in a tsunami of political ads on television - not only from President Obama and Mitt Romney, but also from a cascade of political action committees and advocacy groups. This Monday night, a viewer tuning in from 8 p.m to 11 p.m. will see 46 political advertisements during the commercial breaks. Put another way, *more than two out of every three commercials* on the station will hawk a candidate or a cause._
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-10-14/news/34435733_1_political-ads-political-spots-commercials

Even Jon Stewart of _The Daily Show_ has been making fun of our "strategic importance" to the upcoming election.


----------



## clavichorder

Klavierspieler said:


> I'm an Antarctican. We secretly rule the rest of the world from our base in Marie Byrd Land.


Shuddup. You are from the best state in the contiguous U.S. and you know it.


----------



## Lukecash12

*What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?*

My family and I come from Ireland, and live in America, and I mention Ireland first because I identify more with Ireland. In a sense, I'm proud to be "Scotch-Irish". Very pleasant people and place to live, if you're a country boy. But if you're into living in the city, depending on which cities you choose... What country isn't like that, though? I'd rather live in Ireland than pretty much anywhere else, regardless of whether or not some other country has a better economy. It's the culture I know and love, the places I know and love. Sure, I can probably get some nostalgia somewhere else, but it won't be the same as being around folk like me, and seeing my kin.

*If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom?*

I wouldn't change my nationality. We have an oral history that actually predates Christ, fantastic hunting and fishing, colder climes, mists rolling off of perfectly green hills and treetops. And then there's hay to buck, wood to split, meadows to sit in, redheaded country girls to go hunting with...

Other places that I consider highly would be Montana, Oregon, northern California, and other similar areas in America, as well as Scandinavia, Berma, or just missionary locations around the world (preferably somewhere cold and somewhere with trees, like Latvia). The bottom of my list would be any poverty struck middle eastern country, or somewhere like China. It must be hard to live in, say, Laos. But I still don't know if I'd call them the bottom of the list, because they are great missionary locations, so I'd probably be pretty content out thataways too.

*Do you wish there would be a change of ''persona'' of your nationality (i.e. the perception that British people are snob (which are from the truth!), Italians are bad-tempered, etc..) or are you content of being like that?*

I don't really know what people think about the Irish. Of course I know the basic stereotype, but I doubt anyone really just assumes that, and I haven't heard anything else that people have assumed about my kin. I've no problem with the basic stereotype, because it's not all that bad.


----------



## emiellucifuge

Lukecash12 said:


> Berma


You mean the iranian village? http://www.maplandia.com/iran/mazandaran/berma/


----------



## Lenfer

Lukecash12 said:


> *If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom?*


No I wouldn't although if I had to at gun point I've always thought it would be nice to be *Japanese*. I think it's nice that something like 90% of the people who live in *Japan* are *Japanese*. I'm not xenophobic but I just find it strange Western go on and on about being multicultural and what not. Where as in *Japan* they don't seem to care they just get on with it.

I have friends who live in *Japan* and it's apparently incredibly clean the people are terribly polite and everything runs on time, sounds good to me. 

Least preferred? *Zimbabwe* purely for alphabetical reasons I don't like coming last.


----------



## Lukecash12

emiellucifuge said:


> You mean the iranian village? http://www.maplandia.com/iran/mazandaran/berma/


Berma is one of China's western neighbors, and it is a country, unless that has changed since last I heard. But I'm pretty confident it is a country, because just this summer I worked alongside some missionaries who lived in China for twelve years and visited Berma fairly frequently. I believe you have two different places confused. There most certainly is a Berma in Iran, but this Berma is a medium-small country that touches the western border of China.


----------



## Lenfer

It's now officially the *Republic of Myanmar*.


----------



## Lukecash12

Lenfer said:


> It's now officially the *Republic of Myanmar*.


Interesting. It's hard to believe I hadn't heard that, considering that I wanted to go not many blue moons ago.


----------



## aleazk

Argentina, of Basque and Italian ancestry. If my quality of life is maintained reasonably well and if I can study and work on what I like, in that case, nationality is something irrelevant for me.


----------



## Ramako

I live in the land of hope and glory...


----------



## Lukecash12

Ramako said:


> I live in the land of hope and glory...


It's interesting that so many from your part of the UK just call it the UK, when people who aren't from Britain name their own area, instead of the UK.


----------



## superhorn

I'm American . My grandparents were Russian/Ukrainian Jews with possibly some Tatar admixture .
I don't look stereotypically Jewish/Semitic at all . I could easily pass for nay Ukarainian or Russian , and some people say I have an almost asian-looking face , with a wide, round face,high cheekbones and slightly slanted eyes . My mother's mother, the only one of my grandparents
who lived long enough for me to know, was born in the late 19th century in the southwestern Ukrainian town of Chernivtsi near the Romanian border .
At that time, it was part of the Austro-Hungarian empire but was latrer incorporated into the Ukraine .
This region is kown as Bukovina, because of the abundance of beech trees there . There was a mixture of Russians, Ukrainians, Jews and Romanians , and my grandmother spoke German and Yiddish as well as Romanian and Russian .
I love America but if I were to change nationality I would prefer to live in either Germany or Austria, because they're such cool places , with such a rich cultural heritage and such civilized people .
The history of America has been filled with terrible treatment of blacks and American Indians etc,, but there have been horribly oppressed people all over the world over the centuries, and I don't think this country is any more racist than the rest of the world . Russia conquered an enormous number of peoples over the centuries to create its huge empire , and treated these numerous peoples at least as horribly as America .
Just look at the way the Chechens and other peoples of the Caucasus have been treated to name only one example .
America has made enormous progress from the past, when blacks and women could not vote , blacks could not serve along with whites in th emilitary and interracial marriage was ilegal . And whne gay people were at risk of being sent to mental institutions if found out and subject to brutal electroshock "therapy" and even lobotmies . And where poor pregnant women risked their lives every day from botched illegal abortions .
But right-wing extremist barbarians are at th egate here, and I am fearful . They threaten to undue almost all of the progress made and to turn America into a totlaitarian right-wing fascist and theocratic police state.


----------



## Lukecash12

superhorn said:


> But right-wing extremist barbarians are at th egate here, and I am fearful . They threaten to undue almost all of the progress made and to turn America into a totlaitarian right-wing fascist and theocratic police state.


Man, I wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole, but it says something that someone would say that here.


----------



## Metalkitsune

I'm american


----------



## drpraetorus

I'm american and proud of it.


----------



## Guest

Metalkitsune said:


> I'm american





drpraetorus said:


> I'm american and proud of it.


Not *A*merican?

I'm English, mostly, with some Scottish thrown in for fun, with a British passport. If I were to be another nationality, it might be Dutch or Swedish, but that's as far as I'd go in airing my irrational prejudices about other nationalities. I wouldn't want to insult them by saying who might be the bottom of my list. And I'm not well-enough travelled to know whether there are real differences between the nationalities such that I could say how the English personality should be changed.

Come to think of it, I don't think I have a "nationality" (except that I'm given one by convention and passport). Though I do like cricket and warm beer, I have done Morris Dancing (once) I speak RP and I was born in one of the most English of cities, I've never worn a bowler hat and my favourite food is not roast beef!


----------



## regressivetransphobe

superhorn said:


> But right-wing extremist barbarians are at th egate here, and I am fearful . They threaten to undue almost all of the progress made and to turn America into a totlaitarian right-wing fascist and theocratic police state.


This is what both sides say (the right have their own version of leftist fascist bogeymen), but it's a load. The world won't end if the guy you don't like is elected in. Both sides have the same corporate interests.


----------



## Badinerie

Well...It says British on my passport which is fair... My blood is 40% Italian 20% Irish and 40% proof by volume.
Im happy with that. If I had to choose something else It would be Australian, but I would move to Britain.


----------



## violadude

I was born in what our government calls the United States of America. But more importantly I was born on Planet Earth and I think one day in the future we should rid ourselves of the idea that the world is broken up into countries which only certain people have ownership of.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

That's noble, but for most people, all it takes to turn that kind of anti-nationalism into "what was that, you limey Mexican Polish [whatever] *******?" is an off comment about your country. : p


----------



## science

I share superhorn's fears, and while I agree that the Democrats aren't helping much, the Republicans (with a few exceptions) are the main problem. Our government is controlled by money; the voters still have some influence but we are hopelessly divided and distracted and misinformed. You can see how democratic a country is by looking at its tax policy, so.... 

Well, we have some big bills to pay in the near future. Of course some GDP growth would help, but even so the deficit has to be cut. We have essentially four options: 

A) cut defense spending.
B) cut Medicare spending.
C) inflation.
D) raise taxes on people with money (raising taxes on the poor won't raise enough revenue to be effective).

The voters won't easily accept A or B, the money won't easily accept A, C, or D. The money has the power, so B it is. (Note that we could probably keep the program itself strong while cutting spending significantly, and this would be in the voters' interest, but not in the interest of the money receiving those payments, who have a stronger say than the voters. So we won't do it that way.) But Medicare is so popular with the voters that really the only way to achieve its demise is to blatantly ignore democracy. We're taking steps to that with things like voter-ID laws, making it harder to vote. As the non-WASP segment of the population grows, such measures may well become more popular in attempts to preserve the traditional social hierarchy. 

Or, it could go the other way. 

Looking back through the history of American government, it is clear to me that there is always a power struggle between the majority of the people and a disproportionately influential minority. (That is true even if you don't consider slaves and Native Americans, but is even more obvious if you do.) The majority isn't always right about what would be best for the country, but in order to preserve our government the balance has to be preserved.


----------



## violadude

regressivetransphobe said:


> That's noble, but for most people, all it takes to turn that kind of anti-nationalism into "what was that, you limey Mexican Polish [whatever] *******?" is an off comment about your country. : p


Hahaha

Jeeze, good thing I'm not like most people. I fully accept criticism of my country as long as it is deserved.


----------



## jani

I am not very nationalistic person so i am not proud to be Finnish but i am thankful that i was born to a rich welfare state.
I will probably move away to another country in the future.


----------



## Tero

Dual US and Finland.

Patriotism no longer works for me, but no love of Russia the country.


----------



## jani

Tero said:


> Dual US and Finland.
> 
> Patriotism no longer works for me, but no love of Russia the country.


US is one of the top options were i would like to live on my list.
Maybe it just a typical teenage "dream" but i would live to live in a big city were there is no winter and loads of places to play live/watch gigs etc... And people would speak English, i know that my English ain't perfect but i know that it would improve fast if i would speak it all the time.

But who knows were my life takes me.
Everything is possible.


----------



## moody

Lukecash12 said:


> It's interesting that so many from your part of the UK just call it the UK, when people who aren't from Britain name their own area, instead of the UK.


Yes it is peculiar--when I talk to most people I say I'm English but to Americans I say the UK.
I remember the glazed look that came into the eyes of some Americans when I once mentioned Wales,they'd never heard of it! Also another lot who thought that Ireland was actually attached to Great Britain.


----------



## drpraetorus

Unfortunately most Americans are rather unaware of the geography of the British Isles. For some of the students I had, it was a willful ignorance. Consequently, they new very little beyond the confines or their 'hood.


----------



## Lukecash12

moody said:


> Yes it is peculiar--when I talk to most people I say I'm English but to Americans I say the UK.
> I remember the glazed look that came into the eyes of some Americans when I once mentioned Wales,they'd never heard of it! Also another lot who thought that Ireland was actually attached to Great Britain.


Hmmm... I'd never tell anyone that I was English.


----------



## Lenfer

Lukecash12 said:


> Hmmm... I'd never tell anyone that I was English.


*English* people are actually quite nice I have many *English* friends and lived in *England* for some years. I feel bad for the *English* some times people seem to have something against them I think it's due to the Empire etc.


----------



## Hassid

On other times, when I worked as a lawyer and made some money, I went to England several times.
I have never find more kind, educate and helpful people. And I just love London, the most fascinating
and exciting city I ever know.


----------



## Lukecash12

Lenfer said:


> *English* people are actually quite nice I have many *English* friends and lived in *England* for some years. I feel bad for the *English* some times people seem to have something against them I think it's due to the Empire etc.


That's all well and good. Irish folk just don't like feeling as if they're still under an Englishman's thumb after all this time, so we call ourselves Irish. We have our own landmass, our own culture, our own prestigious schools, and so on and so forth. Seems fairly intuitive to us, to call ourselves Irish, not English, not a generic UK inhabitant, just Irish. Nothing against others from the UK.


----------



## elgar's ghost

What's also confusing about UK/Great Britain is yet another term - 'British Isles'. Essentially it is a catch-all term for all of the four 'core' nations, the islands associated with them and the other bits like Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man who are British but not English - but the really confusing bit is the fact that the term still also officially includes the independent Republic of Ireland. It may have been convenient long ago when all of the territories were under British sovereignty but it must be confusing to people in this day and age when this now unhelpful and anachronistic name still gets bandied about and if I were Irish it could be an understandable source of irritation as it gives the impression to outsiders that Eire still has some kind of connection to Great Britain. The 18/19th century jurist and thinker Jeremy Bentham suggested the name 'Brithibernia' - still useless for this day and age, of course, but at least it sounds poetic.


----------



## moody

Lenfer said:


> *English* people are actually quite nice I have many *English* friends and lived in *England* for some years. I feel bad for the *English* some times people seem to have something against them I think it's due to the Empire etc.


It's called jealousy.


----------



## moody

Lukecash12 said:


> That's all well and good. Irish folk just don't like feeling as if they're still under an Englishman's thumb after all this time, so we call ourselves Irish. We have our own landmass, our own culture, our own prestigious schools, and so on and so forth. Seems fairly intuitive to us, to call ourselves Irish, not English, not a generic UK inhabitant, just Irish. Nothing against others from the UK.


You would not be expected to call yourself anything but Irish because that's what you are. But if you are from Northern Ireland you are part of Great Britain as well.
You seem to have a very hazy knowledge re:Ireland.


----------



## moody

elgars ghost said:


> What's also confusing about UK/Great Britain is yet another term - 'British Isles'. Essentially it is a catch-all term for all of the four 'core' nations, the islands associated with them and the other bits like Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man who are British but not English - but the really confusing bit is the fact that the term still also officially includes the independent Republic of Ireland. It may have been convenient long ago when all of the territories were under British sovereignty but it must be confusing to people in this day and age when this now unhelpful and anachronistic name still gets bandied about and if I were Irish it could be an understandable source of irritation as it gives the impression to outsiders that Eire still has some kind of connection to Great Britain. The 18/19th century jurist and thinker Jeremy Bentham suggested the name 'Brithibernia' - still useless for this day and age, of course, but at least it sounds poetic.


I have never thought of Eire as being part of the British Isles.


----------



## EricABQ

jani said:


> US is one of the top options were i would like to live on my list.
> Maybe it just a typical teenage "dream" but i would live to live in a big city were there is no winter


Most of the US's great cities experience winter.

And many of those that don't have miserable summers.

Except San Diego. That's nice all the time.


----------



## Sonata

jani said:


> US is one of the top options were i would like to live on my list.
> Maybe it just a typical teenage "dream" but i would live to live in a big city were there is no winter and loads of places to play live/watch gigs etc... And people would speak English, i know that my English ain't perfect but i know that it would improve fast if i would speak it all the time.
> 
> But who knows were my life takes me.
> Everything is possible.


Don't come to live in Michigan then. Plenty of winter. And plenty of small towns in the U.S.  80% of my life has been spent living in small towns.

As to whether I am proud of my nationality: no, nor am I ashamed of it. I was born where I was born. I have no desire to live elswhere, but that's largely because I wouldn't want to be far from our families. Plenty of places I'd love to travel to and visit though: Korea, Japan, Italy, Australia, Scotland. I'm almost certain we'll hit Japan and/or Korea because my husband is very involved in martial arts culture, and that's one of his "before I die" dreams. The others, I do not know. Oh, and I'd love to hit the caribbean for scuba diving.


----------



## Guest

Lukecash12 said:


> Hmmm... I'd never tell anyone that I was English.


Why?



Lukecash12 said:


> That's all well and good. Irish folk just don't like feeling as if they're still under an Englishman's thumb after all this time, so we call ourselves Irish. We have our own landmass, our own culture, our own prestigious schools, and so on and so forth. Seems fairly intuitive to us, to call ourselves Irish, not English, not a generic UK inhabitant, just Irish. Nothing against others from the UK.


Oh, so, you're not English. So why would you have to worry about not telling people you're English...when you're not...sorry, I don't understand!



elgars ghost said:


> What's also confusing about UK/Great Britain is yet another term - 'British Isles'. Essentially it is a catch-all term for all of the four 'core' nations, the islands associated with them and the other bits like Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man who are British but not English - but the really confusing bit is the fact that the term still also officially includes the independent Republic of Ireland. It may have been convenient long ago when all of the territories were under British sovereignty but it must be confusing to people in this day and age when this now unhelpful and anachronistic name still gets bandied about and if I were Irish it could be an understandable source of irritation as it gives the impression to outsiders that Eire still has some kind of connection to Great Britain. The 18/19th century jurist and thinker Jeremy Bentham suggested the name 'Brithibernia' - still useless for this day and age, of course, but at least it sounds poetic.


Let's not confuse geography with politics. British Isles is a geographical term for a collection of islands. Great Britain is the largest of these islands, which comprises the political entities of England, Scotland and Wales. The UK is the political entity comprising GB and Northern Ireland - which is the north eastern corner of Ireland which is the name given to the second largest of the British Isles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain

(Though I didn't need to look this up on Wiki!)


----------



## elgar's ghost

MacLeod said:


> Let's not confuse geography with politics. British Isles is a geographical term for a collection of islands. Great Britain is the largest of these islands, which comprises the political entities of England, Scotland and Wales. The UK is the political entity comprising GB and Northern Ireland - which is the north eastern corner of Ireland which is the name given to the second largest of the British Isles.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain
> 
> (Though I didn't need to look this up on Wiki!)


Of course, McLeod, but I can appreciate why the term itself can cause head-scratching in some quarters. An American acquaintance of mine couldn't figure out why the term - geographical as it is - was necessary. I just gave up and said the closest examples I could think of was Scandinavia and the West Indies and even then the comparison is quite flawed. Still, at least it sparked off some lively discussion in the beer garden.


----------



## Lenfer

Lukecash12 said:


> That's all well and good. Irish folk just don't like feeling as if they're still under an Englishman's thumb after all this time, so we call ourselves Irish. We have our own landmass, our own culture, our own prestigious schools, and so on and so forth. Seems fairly intuitive to us, to call ourselves Irish, not English, not a generic UK inhabitant, just Irish. Nothing against others from the UK.


*Irish* folk have always been *Irish* never *English* (nor *British*) it was the *United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland* (now *Northern Ireland*). Now the *Irish* more so than any other member nation suffered a great deal of injustice under *British* rule but that doesn't change the fact the fast majority of *English*/*British* folk had nothing to do with that, it doesn't mean they're not nice people either.



elgars ghost said:


> but the really confusing bit is the fact that the term still also officially includes the independent Republic of Ireland.


I don't think *Ireland* was ever part of "*Britain*" (*England*, *Scotland* and *Wales*), part of the *UK* yes but not *Britain*. I may be wrong though...


----------



## Sonata

Lenfer said:


> I'm French/Swiss I hold nationality for both. Am I proud no? Happy to be me yes! Havomg a wide range of nationalities in my family has enabled me to learn many languages from a young age. Which has enabled me to have a rather rich life in terms of places I've been much more so than the average Joe.
> 
> I think it's rather strange to be proud of where you were born. If your mother happened to be somewhere else you'd have a different nationality. I also think one shouldn't take on the guilt of what a country has done in the past unless it was your fault of course.


exactlty comedian George Carlin's take on it. And I agree.


----------



## violadude

Sonata said:


> exactlty comedian George Carlin's take on it. And I agree.


I love George Carlin.


----------



## violadude

I don't feel personally guilty about what the United States has done in the past. But I do think that the fact our foundation as a country was built on a contradiction (African Americans are slaves, the Native Americans are savages but all men are equal and free) is catching up to us and causing a lot of inner conflict within our collective consciousness.


----------



## drpraetorus

There is no spotless, innocent as a new born babe country.


----------



## BurningDesire

drpraetorus said:


> There is no spotless, innocent as a new born babe country.


what about Sealand?


----------



## clavichorder

violadude said:


> I don't feel personally guilty about what the United States has done in the past. But I do think that the fact our foundation as a country was built on a contradiction (African Americans are slaves, the Native Americans are savages but all men are equal and free) is catching up to us and causing a lot of inner conflict within our collective consciousness.


I think most of that already caught up to us. Though we aren't perfect these days, in terms of racism we've come a long way since the 1940s. We are still impacted heavily by it, to be sure, but things aren't as they once were.


----------



## dionisio

I'm portuguese

About pride? Only one thing comes to my mind: "_A minha pátria é a minha língua_" or "_My country is my mother language_"

For the rest, i don't care much about national pride.


----------



## jani

violadude said:


> *I don't feel personally guilty about what the United States has done in the past.* But I do think that the fact our foundation as a country was built on a contradiction (African Americans are slaves, the Native Americans are savages but all men are equal and free) is catching up to us and causing a lot of inner conflict within our collective consciousness.


You shouldn't feel guilty. You didn't have any part on it. Why should you feel guilty?


----------



## Lukecash12

MacLeod said:


> Why?
> 
> Oh, so, you're not English. So why would you have to worry about not telling people you're English...when you're not...sorry, I don't understand!


I was responding to someone who had said that they just say they're English when asked what their nationality is. However, apparently, this person is from Wales, not England.


----------



## Mesa

I'm technically British, but more correctly i'm a closet Frenchman.


----------



## Lukecash12

Lenfer said:


> *Irish* folk have always been *Irish* never *English* (nor *British*) it was the *United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland* (now *Northern Ireland*). Now the *Irish* more so than any other member nation suffered a great deal of injustice under *British* rule but that doesn't change the fact the fast majority of *English*/*British* folk had nothing to do with that, it doesn't mean they're not nice people either.


It's not so much about animosity, as it is about that some other UK'ers identify with England, while we don't. It wouldn't be helpful for us to call ourselves English like Welsh people apparently do (or so it seems so, from the member here I was discussing this with), because we are so different from the English. We look different, talk different, eat different, and generally live different. England is more modernized than Ireland, for example. Our population sprawls, while theirs clusters more.


----------



## KenOC

I seldom speak of my nationality because, hey, who's ever hear of Tannu Tuva? And why should I be proud of something that's no fault of mine? But we do serve a smashing slime mold smoothie!


----------



## Guest

Lukecash12 said:


> some other UK'ers identify with England,


Identify with the UK, perhaps. Surely not 'England'? Or perhaps, some other UKers feel an affinity with, rather than identify with their neighbours?


----------



## moody

Lukecash12 said:


> I was responding to someone who had said that they just say they're English when asked what their nationality is. However, apparently, this person is from Wales, not England.


If you mean me I am certainly not Welsh but English.
No Welsh people would call themselves English ,we seem to have a confusion here.


----------



## violadude

jani said:


> You shouldn't feel guilty. You didn't have any part on it. Why should you feel guilty?


That's why I said I don't feel personally guilty. I feel guilty about what we do in the Middle East though. Sometimes I just wanna go over there and say I'm sorry! Not all of us agree with what our government is doing to you.  Actually, I think the majority of us want us to get out of there.


----------



## superhorn

Ken OC, I'm very interested in the republic of Tuva in the south of Siberia on the border of Mongolia, because that's where the famous throat singers of Tub=va come from .


----------



## superhorn

Oops. My notoriously sloppy fingers again. That's Tuva.


----------



## drpraetorus

I feel a bit concerned when people say they are not particularly proud of their country. "Breaths there a man with soul so dead, who never to himself hath said, this is mine own my native land..." etc. I'm not one for bombastic or belicose Chauvinism, but I do feel that, at the least, we all should have respect and some emotional attachment to our native lands. If not that, than to our native cultures. I hate the modern trend towards homogenization of the earths people. This seems to be paricularly strong in Europe and North America. When I travel, I make it a point not to eat at American fast food places. Why go to Peking and have Kentucky Fried Chicken? I appreciate when people speak to me in English if they can, but I don't want it exclusively. I want to hear the local languages. Human language is a form of music as compelling as any instrumental music. 

One of my great fears is that one day we will wake up to a Star Trek world where only English is spoken and only one culture is practiced. I see all around, especially in the afore mentioned Europe and North America, people throwing away their culature and nationalism in exchange for some vague international ideal that has all the interest of a poorly made white sauce. 

Every member of a culture, and by extension the nation it entails, are the guardians of that culture and language. No culture or language is more than a generation away from extinction. If it is not passed to the nexct generation it dies. And, if it's guardians do not value it enough to pass it one, it is as good as dead. The barbarians are always at the gates. In the form of pressure to be "modern" and accepted by the internationalist intelligentsia. No one wants to be seen as a backward rube, but there is more to be lost than gained by turning in embarrassment from our individual cultures and nations.

As an example, here in America, since the earliest of our history, it has been the policy to assimilate the Indians. That was the benevolent policy. Removal was more often the actual policy. In Jamestown and Plymouth, it was the intent to Christianize and Anglicize the Indians. After 1783 it was Christianize and Americanize. This meant to destroy their cultures, religions and languages. Indian children were removed from their families and sent to schools hundreds of miles from thier reservations. They had their hair cut, given American clothing and forbidden to speak their native languages. This was helped out because there were children from many different tribes at those schools. To communicate it was necessary to speak english. 

This was not confined to the United States. Similar things happened in Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Spain, Mexico etc. It is more than economics that has driven the native languages in the countries to near extinction. In Mexico, most of the population spoke their native languages until about 150 years ago when the church decreed that everyone needed to learn Spanish. this was to make teaching the religion easier. 

In America the effort was quite successful. Most native speakers are in the older generation now. If a grandchild wants to speak to their grandparent, they must do it in english. Thier now native language, their grandparents second language. Very few tribes have native speakers of their languages any more. On a deeper level however, the policy has done untold harm. A deep cultural devide was created between the indians who stayed on the reservation and those who went to the schools. It created a generation of people without a place in either the indian or anglo worlds. The result is a national disgrace. For this and other reasons, the reservations are the poorest places in America. Social problems are rampant with alcoholism and suicide far above that of any other polulation group in the country. Suicide among the youth became almost epidemic. 

Things looked bleak for american indians. Some did find a way to live in the anglo world. Some quite successfuly. It usually meant leaving the reservation and not looking back. Others could not. For many of them the solution lay in the bottle or death, often both. 

Tribal leaders saw this and struggled with solutions. The solutions that were tried did not work until someone said, "we need to bring them back into the tribe and teasch them what it means to be Ute or Lakota or Mohawk or whatever tribe. The children are increasingly being taught in their own communities in their own languages and learning their cultures again. They learn english and other skills and subjects that will allow them to make a living in the modern U.S. but they learn that it is not a bad thing to be an indian. That they have a heritage worth preserving and that they are not the savage children of savages. Regaining their culture has not curred all the ills of the reservations, but, they are making progress in a place that seemed condemned to poverty and misery. 

Culture and nation are an indelible aspect of being human. We are trooping animals after all. Our cultures, our historys our nations help us to know who we are and our place in the world. We have seen far too much tragedy in the name of nation, language and nation. But the solution is not to homogenize the world or to look at it all with a jaundiced and world weary blase eye. What is needed is to respect our culture and the other guys. To enjoy what each has to offer. Nations and culture need to be supported and strengthened not weakened and eliminated. Be proud of who and what you are and let the guy across the boarder be proud of who and what he is. It is not an insult if the guy across the boarder loves his country. It is not an insult to the rest of the world for you to love and be proud of yours.

Sorry for the rant.


----------



## KenOC

superhorn said:


> Ken OC, I'm very interested in the republic of Tuva in the south of Siberia on the border of Mongolia, because that's where the famous throat singers of Tuva come from .


Yes, here in Tannu Tuva our singers can throat diminshed sevenths, augmented ninths, or anything you like or desire. So our choirs need only a few singers to perform Bach and other many famous composers. We plan to developing our music industry to earn foreign exchange in big amounts and bring prosperity to our people. If you can help us, we will reward you with many yaks. All will be healthy and capable of reproduction quickly. You have my word, that is respected in classical music people here.


----------



## superhorn

Forcing children from the American Indian tribes was NOT a good thing. It has caused the loss or near loss of who knows how many indiginous languages in north America , and the kids were often beaten merely for speaking their native languages .
Today, very few of the American Indian languages have many speakers . Navajo is one of the few which is reasonably viable, and there are even a small number of Navajos in isolated areas who do not speak English !
This has been a terrible tragedy . In the former Soviet Union, the situation is very different. Most of the more the 100 ethnic mnorities there have retained their native languages , and in former republics there which are now independent, the languages are now official .
For example, in the republic of Azerbaijan on the Caspian sea just north of Iran, Turkish, or the Azerbaijani form of Turkish, is now the official language , and ethnic Turks are the majority there .


----------



## superhorn

That should read "forcing the Indian kids to speak English was not a good thing ".


----------



## Schubussy

Lukecash12 said:


> It's not so much about animosity, as it is about that some other UK'ers identify with England, while we don't. It wouldn't be helpful for us to call ourselves English like Welsh people apparently do (or so it seems so, from the member here I was discussing this with)


Don't know who this member is but we certainly do not ever call ourselves English haha. But really I call myself Welsh or British about equally.



> I remember the glazed look that came into the eyes of some Americans when I once mentioned Wales,they'd never heard of it!


A friend of mine went to America and said someone asked him 'are you Walish'?


----------



## korenbloem

Hello, 

I am a Dutchman and this is my first post on the forum. I have been lurking this site for years btw.


----------



## violadude

korenbloem said:


> Hello,
> 
> I am a Dutchman and this is my first post on the forum. I have been lurking this site for years btw.


Welcome, I'm a fan of your guys' pastries.


----------



## korenbloem

I am only know a few of Sweelincks David psalmen.


----------



## drpraetorus

my kingdom for a GOOD gouda. Just get the local imitations here.


----------



## Lukecash12

drpraetorus said:


> my kingdom for a GOOD gouda. Just get the local imitations here.


Yep. I really miss the cheese and the butter back home. Especially the butter.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

I'm an Aussie (OZ Land), folks came here in 1843 and escaped the leaking tub that was the British Isl.

Antipodean to the core..... cobber
G'day,mate..how are you Owyergoin, to-die? That's dinkie die, I swear...
Bullamanka Dinkum, fair dinkum Ridgy-didge Hooly-Dooly Strewth what a Silk shirt on a pig


----------



## Lotte

I'm Australian, and I'd never change that. Well. Maybe after the next election depending on how much of an insult slinging contest it becomes. :lol:

I'd love it if the "persona" of Aussies wasn't that we were all racist, violent, drunks. I mean. We can all put away the beer, that's just expected at birth, but the stuff that's coming out now, is relatively out of character, usually we're pretty friendly. Drunk friendly.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Never met a bad Aussie in my life. I've long admired their lack of pretentiousness in general and their combative qualities on the sports field in particular - even their sledging in cricket matches is almost an art form. Once I got over myself by realising that being called a Pommie ******* could be a term of endearment I've got on with the ones I've met really well. I like to think I'm the sort of person who would get on well with both Clive James AND Sir Les Patterson. 

:tiphat:


----------



## Lotte

:lol: that's really good to know! A lot of the things I've heard lately from friends overseas isn't exactly good in relation to how the rest of the world sees us. Which is kind of sad 

Glad to know our persona to some is still the of the top bloke variety!


----------



## Salix

A bit late to post but I am half Y'upik Eskimo from Central Alaska. I like the term "half-breed" and find it entertaining when non-Natives get insulted or even offended when they hear me use it. It's so homogenized now I don't even say if I'm native or not - people don't care as much as they used to and I like that.


----------



## Guest

elgars ghost said:


> Never met a bad Aussie in my life. I've long admired their lack of pretentiousness in general and their combative qualities on the sports field in particular - even their sledging in cricket matches is almost an art form. Once I got over myself by realising that being called a Pommie ******* could be a term of endearment I've got on with the ones I've met really well. I like to think I'm the sort of person who would get on well with both Clive James AND Sir Les Patterson.
> 
> :tiphat:


I'm an Australian who finds the stereotype embarrassing and grating. I lived in Europe all through 2011 (Vienna) and when I was over there I watched quite a few of our current affairs programs via the computer and admit I found the self-congratulating smugness of our nation really annoying. On "Q&A" (a panel discussion program about politics) we would regularly hear "we are such a lucky, tolerant country" - not to mention the Australian in-your-face tendency overall. I'm over it and would live in Vienna in a heartbeat. The refinement and politeness of the Viennese is hard to beat.


----------



## OboeKnight

I'm boring....just a white American with no real cultural roots except for some Native American really far back.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

American is not boring. If anyone has a right to be proud of his country, it's the Yankees. They made it from scratch to a political and economical superpower in just three centuries. Plus, you have some of the most gorgeous nature on Earth.


----------



## OboeKnight

SiegendesLicht said:


> American is not boring. If anyone has a right to be proud of his country, it's the Yankees. They made it from scratch to a political and economical superpower in just three centuries. Plus, you have some of the most gorgeous nature on Earth.


This is true, even if we did steal it from the Native Americans lol. ....we are a bit sneaky.


----------



## Guest

OboeKnight said:


> This is true, even if we did steal it from the Native Americans lol. ....we are a bit sneaky.


Show me one piece of land on God's green earth that hasn't changed hands multiple times. Do you think Brazil or South Africa or Australia naturally had blonde-haired and blue-eyed fair-skinned natives? Ever wonder where the name "Hungary" came from? I'll give you a hint - it has to do with a group of people that overran the country some centuries back. The Middle East and Europe have seen various regions exchange hands so many times you need a diagram to keep track. What about the Turks stealing Istanbul, etc., from the Romans?

All history is one group of people encroaching on another. Populations expand and come into conflict with other populations, and generally the one with the technological advantage wins out. We will likely see less and less of it from "Western" civilizations as so many of them now are dropping below the replacement fertility rate, and are spending more of their money on social welfare programs and not military (relatively speaking).


----------



## SiegendesLicht

*DrMike*, I think we don't need to ask you if you are proud to be an American :cheers:


----------



## Guest

SiegendesLicht said:


> *DrMike*, I think we don't need to ask you if you are proud to be an American :cheers:


Absolutely - but I do enjoy seeing the world. I am quite fond of Germany, Switzerland, and Austria, where I spent a couple years about a decade ago.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

I lived in the US for a year a while ago (and had the fortune to see some amazing places like the Rockies and the Grand Canyon) and absolutely loved it. Unfortunately that was before I was introduced to Wagner (or rather I was introduced to his music just a few days before leaving), otherwise I would have done my best to find a way to see one of the wonderfully true-to-the text American productions.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

CountenanceAnglaise said:


> I'm an Australian who finds the stereotype embarrassing and grating. I lived in Europe all through 2011 (Vienna) and when I was over there I watched quite a few of our current affairs programs via the computer and admit I found the self-congratulating smugness of our nation really annoying. On "Q&A" (a panel discussion program about politics) we would regularly hear "we are such a lucky, tolerant country" - not to mention the Australian in-your-face tendency overall. I'm over it and would live in Vienna in a heartbeat. The refinement and politeness of the Viennese is hard to beat.


I would say that on a lot of levels - you are correct and the aussie thing can be over the top. However, its does define the nation or at least characterise it in some way apart from others- even if it's not true or miss-representative of most. But I can tell you (as you would know), there are location in Oz that I would fear to tread with no ocker (English) traits.......


----------



## Guest

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> But I can tell you (as you would know), there are location in Oz that I would fear to tread with no ocker (English) traits.......


You're right on the money there. And they are increasingly becoming part of the landscape, not just in Australia but the world over. It's Babel in Vienna these days. Nobody feels the need to bother learning Deutsch. The only place to see the 'true blue' Viennese is at the classical music venues and at Sonntag Hochamt in Kirche.


----------



## drpraetorus

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> I would say that on a lot of levels - you are correct and the aussie thing can be over the top. However, its does define the nation or at least characterise it in some way apart from others- even if it's not true or miss-representative of most. But I can tell you (as you would know), there are location in Oz that I would fear to tread with no ocker (English) traits.......


I like Aussie and Kiwis. What I haven't figured out is why it is so popular in the U.S. to have advertizements narated by someone with an Australian accent. It seems to be the flavor of the month in the advertizing industry here. Even worse are the ads for a place called the Outback Steakhouse. The voiceover for those are so obviously a fake Aussie accent it is laughable, especially since they are trying so hard to show that they an authentic, by U.S. standards, Aussie place. Would it be so hard for someone in New York to call someone in Sydney and have a real Australian do the voiceover?


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

drpraetorus said:


> I like Aussie and Kiwis. What I haven't figured out is why it is so popular in the U.S. to have advertizements narated by someone with an Australian accent. It seems to be the flavor of the month in the advertizing industry here. Even worse are the ads for a place called the Outback Steakhouse. The voiceover for those are so obviously a fake Aussie accent it is laughable, especially since they are trying so hard to show that they an authentic, by U.S. standards, Aussie place. Would it be so hard for someone in New York to call someone in Sydney and have a real Australian do the voiceover?


God knows why the American like it (not complaining here) - but the English have always derided the Aussie accent........


----------



## HoraeObscura

peeyaj said:


> *What is your nationality? Are you proud of it?*


*

I'm from Belgium, not really proud of it don't know what I should be proud of, my country is a mess lol... I'm proud to be a "Bruggeling" (citizen of Bruges) though



peeyaj said:



If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom? 

Click to expand...

 Portugese or Dutch on the top... American or Chinese on the bottom. I like both countries though, but not their regimes!*


----------



## sharik

i'm Russian, not proud of my nationality but i'm proud of my country and its history and the decisive importance it has for mankind.


----------



## Antihero

i'm Lithuanian.



sharik said:


> i'm Russian, not proud of my nationality but i'm proud of my country and its history and the decisive importance it has for mankind.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Baltic_states


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Antihero said:


> i'm Lithuanian.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Baltic_states


Great to meet another Western neighbor! I was on vacation in Palanga once and loved it. Hope your stay will be long and productive.

As for the links you posted... yes, we all know that Russia is not the best country to live close to, but this is really not the best place for old historical disputes.


----------



## Guest

drpraetorus said:


> I like Aussie and Kiwis. What I haven't figured out is why it is so popular in the U.S. to have advertizements narated by someone with an Australian accent. It seems to be the flavor of the month in the advertizing industry here. Even worse are the ads for a place called the Outback Steakhouse. The voiceover for those are so obviously a fake Aussie accent it is laughable, especially since they are trying so hard to show that they an authentic, by U.S. standards, Aussie place. Would it be so hard for someone in New York to call someone in Sydney and have a real Australian do the voiceover?


Yeah, we love accents. Want something to sound authoritative - just get a refined British accent, and people will accept it as gospel.

As for the Australian accent, I can't think of all that many, other than for Australia-specific products (Outback Steakhouse, Foster's Beer). A while back, Energizer used a real Australian footballer for their commercials (Get Energizer! Oi!). I guess we just think the accent is cool, and we have a particular affinity for the Aussies.


----------



## Mahlerian

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> God knows why the American like it (not complaining here) - but the English have always derided the Aussie accent........


Basically, what DrMike said, but we Americans seem to have an inferiority complex about our own accent. At the same time, northerners here would not dream of having a southern accent or affecting one except as a joke. It's entirely unfair, of course. I have a "general American" accent, which makes most people think I either don't have any accent, or that I have one, but they can't quite place it...


----------



## Ravndal

Antihero said:


> i'm Lithuanian.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Baltic_states


Touchè!

hehe


----------



## cwarchc

I'm a human (at least I think I am)
You don't chose where you are born, therefore your nationality
This site is for us to share our love(passion) for music
not the place to drag up old nationalistic disputes
If you want too, you can drag up bad things about any country
However you can also find the good things, in the words of Eric Idle:
"Always look on the bright side of life" (it's the only one you have, so spend it wisely)


----------



## Ravndal

That is correct, and i agree. But, you do chose what to say. But of course, i might get this the wrong way around. Maybe the decisive importance Russia's story over the last 100 years has for mankind, that people have learned how horrible something can go? Because I'm pretty sure Russia's leaders after Tsar Alexander the third has not been of the good kind. And now, the average age of death for men is 60 years. Sorry. I just didn't understand what he was so proud of.

I don't mean to denigrate Russia. Not at all. Great country which has contributed a lot culturally. But i was just put of by his phrasing... He should be proud of his nationality.


----------



## moody

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> I'm an Aussie (OZ Land), folks came here in 1843 and escaped the leaking tub that was the British Isl.
> 
> Antipodean to the core..... cobber
> G'day,mate..how are you Owyergoin, to-die? That's dinkie die, I swear...
> Bullamanka Dinkum, fair dinkum Ridgy-didge Hooly-Dooly Strewth what a Silk shirt on a pig
> 
> View attachment 12457


Really,I thought they were convicts who got shipped there.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

DrMike said:


> Yeah, we love accents. Want something to sound authoritative - just get a refined British accent, and people will accept it as gospel.
> 
> As for the Australian accent, I can't think of all that many, other than for Australia-specific products (Outback Steakhouse, Foster's Beer). A while back, Energizer used a real Australian footballer for their commercials (Get Energizer! Oi!). I guess we just think the accent is cool, and we have a particular affinity for the Aussies.


When you said "Get Energizer! Oi!", unfortunately I could immediately Identify who that was - we got the same ad here -Mark "Jacko" Jackson, ex Aussie rules footballer, who has thankfully dropped of the radar here in recent years, but he left us scarred with attempts at "popular" music like this (in addition to trying boxing etc), Be warned this is not good (horrible in fact)-


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

moody said:


> Really,I thought they were convicts who got shipped there.


Yes, a lot of the earlier immigrant where convicts. particularly in the settlements of Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne and very early on in Hobart (Tassy). But other places such as Adelaide were set up as free settler colonies in the early 1800's (were my people originally came) - hope that clarifies. But these days in you can find a convict in your ancestry, it's seen like a mark on honour here- as a families link to the past - You must remember that the old blarney was very keen to rid its self of people (peasants etc), especially after Yanky land got nasty with them, most were deported for very minor things such as steeling bread etc (as well as the odd murderer etc).


----------



## moody

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Yes, a lot of the earlier immigrant where convicts. particularly in the settlements of Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne and very early on in Hobart (Tassy). But other places such as Adelaide were set up as free settler colonies in the early 1800's (were my people originally came) - hope that clarifies. But these days in you can find a convict in your ancestry, it's seen like a mark on honour here- as a families link to the past - You must remember that the old blarney was very keen to rid its self of people (peasants etc), especially after Yanky land got nasty with them, most were deported for very minor things such as steeling bread etc (as well as the odd murderer etc).


Not the old blarney--that's Irish.I think you mean Old Blighty.
We have quite a few people to get rid of at the moment--got any spare room ?


----------



## Antihero

cwarchc said:


> I'm a human (at least I think I am)
> You don't chose where you are born, therefore your nationality
> This site is for us to share our love(passion) for music
> not the place to drag up old nationalistic disputes
> If you want too, you can drag up bad things about any country
> However you can also find the good things, in the words of Eric Idle:
> "Always look on the bright side of life" (it's the only one you have, so spend it wisely)


----------



## OldListener

Jacob Singer said:


> I am an American, and I am not ashamed to say that I am proud of it, at least a little. Sure, we are far from perfect, but so is everybody else. So no, I wouldn't change my nationality if given the chance.
> 
> I guess a better way of putting it would be to say that there are things about my country's heritage that I am enormously proud of: We are the country that invented jazz! We were the first constitutional republic. We rescued the world from fascism in WWII. And so on.
> 
> I also give the Brits a lot of credit, though, and I have an enormous amount of respect for the British people. If I _had_ to choose another nationality, it would probably be English/British. Or maybe Canadian.
> 
> All in all, though, I don't care that much about nationality. Humanity/civility is far more important to me.


I'm in agreement with Jacob.

Bill


----------



## deggial

> Originally Posted by Jacob Singer
> We rescued the world from fascism in WWII.


careful with that wording, it's got a way of annoying Europeans and I would think for good reason.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

My eastern neighbors the Russians are absolutely convinced it was them who saved the world from fascism (though their own regime at the time was no better, if not worse), and the way this "WWII cult" is promoted here in Belarus, one would believe that it was the Belarusians who single-handedly saved the world, but I am quite in agreement with Jacob too. In fact I believe the British were the real heroes in the war: they defended their island pretty much on their own for over a year in 1940-41, when the US was still neutral and most continental Europe defeated. 

Just my two cents. Sorry if I have just offended any continental Europeans.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Note there was some aussies and NZers, free pols etc there too amoungst many others and the Russians


----------



## elgar's ghost

SiegendesLicht said:


> My eastern neighbors the Russians are absolutely convinced it was them who saved the world from fascism (though their own regime at the time was no better, if not worse), and the way this "WWII cult" is promoted here in Belarus, one would believe that it was the Belarusians who single-handedly saved the world, but I am quite in agreement with Jacob too. In fact I believe the British were the real heroes in the war: they defended their island pretty much on their own for over a year in 1940-41, when the US was still neutral and most continental Europe defeated.
> 
> Just my two cents. Sorry if I have just offended any continental Europeans.


Being an island certainly helped in our case in 1940 - we developed decent fighter planes in the nick of time and thankfully Panzers couldn't walk on water.


----------



## Tristan

I'm from the United States, but I'm more proud of being Californian and being the child of two immigrants (my dad is from Italy, my mom is from Albania). Ethnicity-wise I am 1/2 Italian and 1/2 Albanian with some Lebanese in there too. I wouldn't change my nationality or my ethnicity--perfectly content with both


----------



## SiegendesLicht

SiegendesLicht said:


> My eastern neighbors the Russians are absolutely convinced it was them who saved the world from fascism


Oops, I meant, from national-_socialism_.


----------



## deggial

SiegendesLicht said:


> My eastern neighbors the Russians are absolutely convinced it was them who saved the world from fascism (though their own regime at the time was no better, if not worse), and the way this "WWII cult" is promoted here in Belarus, one would believe that it was the Belarusians who single-handedly saved the world, but I am quite in agreement with Jacob too. In fact I believe the British were the real heroes in the war: they defended their island pretty much on their own for over a year in 1940-41, when the US was still neutral and most continental Europe defeated.
> 
> Just my two cents. Sorry if I have just offended any continental Europeans.


Yalta = the Russians, the Americans and the Brits pretty much divided Europe the way it suited them.


----------



## Ravndal

But we must not forget that it was the soviet who stopped Japan in the second world war.

If i remember correctly, that is..


----------



## SiegendesLicht

deggial said:


> Yalta = the Russians, the Americans and the Brits pretty much divided Europe the way it suited them.


Well, I do believe it was a mistake of the Americans and the British to ally themselves with one evil in order to defeat another, especially since it was the Russians and the Nazis who had planned on dividing parts of Europe between them just a few years earlier (see Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact), but whatever happened cannot be changed.


----------



## Ravndal

If they didnt ally with the Russians, things could have gone horribly wrong.. I believe it was necessary. Sometimes you just have to compromise..


----------



## deggial

SiegendesLicht said:


> but whatever happened cannot be changed.


of course. I'm not even saying there was necessary a better way out (I don't know enough history to comment on "if onlys"). What interests me though is all the suffering and resentments even this decision left in its wake.


----------



## Crudblud

SiegendesLicht said:


> Oops, I meant, from national-_socialism_.


The Russian Winter didn't exactly do Hitler any favours, but if you're making the connection I think you're making, you might want to read up on what socialism actually is. It has very little to do with Nazism (in addition to the Jewish population, the Nazis persecuted socialists in Germany along with communists and trade unionists), and even in Lenin's time the Soviet Union was quite far removed from socialism. With Stalin the gap between the Soviet Union and socialism only widened. In this video, Noam Chomsky explains (with far more accuracy than I ever could) how even in its earliest stages the Soviet Union cannot be called upon as an accurate representation of a socialist state. I really don't enjoy going back and forth with you on this topic, but it pains me somewhat to see you making sarcastic remarks about something you don't seem to know all that much about.


----------



## Itullian

Italian...


----------



## Guest

I am not quite sure why some people claim that, since they had no doing in their nationality, it is pointless to express pride in one's nationality. I had no say in my parentage, and yet I can feel pride in my parents and what they have done. And I can easily feel pride in my nationality despite the fact that I had nothing to do with its history up until the point that I was born. And I should also point out that pride in one's nationality does not necessarily imply disdain at the nationality of others. For me, being proud to be an American does not cause any knee-jerk disdain for any other nationalities. Now, I do have criticism for other countries that do not embody the same principles that instill in me the pride of my own nationality (countries that lack some of the basic freedoms that I enjoy). But even then, it usually doesn't rise to the level of disdain.

As to the whole WWII thing - each of the Allies played a critical role. Russia staying in the war on the Eastern Front was critical to keeping the Axis engaged on two fronts, which is a difficult thing even in the best of circumstances. Great Britain was so critical in the early stages of the war, and keeping Germany engaged on the Western Front, unable to completely throw its forces against Russia. The U.S. was critical, even before it officially entered the war, because it was providing, especially to Great Britain, the supplies it so desperately needed, being an island nation under siege. No one country going it alone would have been victorious over Hitler. So it is pointless. It is like forming a coalition government. There might be stronger pluralities in the coalition, but the fact of the matter is that no one group would have the power to succeed without the help of the others.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Crudblud said:


> The Russian Winter didn't exactly do Hitler any favours, but if you're making the connection I think you're making, you might want to read up on what socialism actually is. It has very little to do with Nazism (in addition to the Jewish population, the Nazis persecuted socialists in Germany along with communists and trade unionists), and even in Lenin's time the Soviet Union was quite far removed from socialism. With Stalin the gap between the Soviet Union and socialism only widened. In this video, Noam Chomsky explains (with far more accuracy than I ever could) how even in its earliest stages the Soviet Union cannot be called upon as an accurate representation of a socialist state. I really don't enjoy going back and forth with you on this topic, but it pains me somewhat to see you making sarcastic remarks about something you don't seem to know all that much about.


Noam Chomsky may be talking all very fine in _theory_, but I am more interested in the _practical_ outcomes for those states that claimed to be socialist (and it was not only the Soviet Union, but many various countries across the globe, from Cuba to Korea) than in the ideological intricacies. None of these states has ever been successful. And, yes, the Nazis persecuted their political opponents the same way the Soviets, Cubans, Chinese and others persecuted everyone who did not agree with them. It seems, killing the freedom of opinion is necessary for a socialist government to survive. A socialist party can exist and pursue its agenda in a capitalist state, but not the other way around.


----------



## violadude

SiegendesLicht said:


> Oops, I meant, from national-_socialism_.


I have to step in and say that regardless of how you feel about communism and socialism, what was established by Hitler was definitely not socialism by any definition of the term.

EDIT: I didn't see Crudblud's longer and better response before posting mine. And he cites one of my favorite people of all time


----------



## violadude

SiegendesLicht said:


> Noam Chomsky may be talking all very fine in _theory_, but I am more interested in the _practical_ outcomes for those states that claimed to be socialist (and it was not only the Soviet Union, but many various countries across the globe, from Cuba to Korea) than in the ideological intricacies. *None of these states has ever been successful*. And, yes, the Nazis persecuted their political opponents the same way the Soviets, Cubans, Chinese and others persecuted everyone who did not agree with them. It seems, killing the freedom of opinion is necessary for a socialist government to survive. A socialist party can exist and pursue its agenda in a capitalist state, but not the other way around.


It depends on how you define success...


----------



## jani

violadude said:


> I have to step in and say that regardless of how you feel about communism and socialism, what was established by Hitler was definitely not socialism by any definition of the term.
> 
> EDIT: I didn't see Crudblud's longer and better response before posting mine. And he cites one of my favorite people of all time


If you like socialism so much you should move to Sweden or Finland ( or at least for an american those countries can look very socialistic)

Imagine i can't remember a time when i paid more than 15€ from medication etc...


----------



## violadude

jani said:


> If you like socialism so much you should move to Sweden or Finland ( or at least for an american those countries can look very socialistic)


I get this question a lot. The truth is, it wouldn't satisfy me just to move to someplace I think is a socialist state (which Sweden and Finland aren't by the strictest definition of socialism, they are what are called social democracies). If I think a political/economic system is better then I want to fight to bring it to the people I care about, not simply be selfish and move somewhere where it already is.


----------



## jani

violadude said:


> I get this question a lot. The truth is, it wouldn't satisfy me just to move to someplace I think is a socialist state (which Sweden and Finland aren't by the strictest definition of socialism, they are what are called social democracies). If I think a political/economic system is better then I want to fight to bring it to the people I care about, not simply be selfish and move somewhere where it already is.


What if the people you care about don' want it?


----------



## EricABQ

jani said:


> What if the people you care about don' want it?


That's what the re-education camps will be for.


----------



## violadude

jani said:


> What if the people you care about don' want it?


Everyone fights for what they believe will be best. I don't see how my situation is any different.


----------



## deggial

jani said:


> We did a test with lost of questions and from 20 only three were right wingers ( one of them was me


do you really consider yourself a right winger?


----------



## Head_case

deggial said:


> do you really consider yourself a right winger?


Oh dear.

If he does, over here, that's considered an admission of low IQ; bald prejudices and brain damage from trying to listen to heavy metal to blend in. 'Over there', it might be an attempt to be 'rebellious' or 'different', but it still has the same outcome.

Extremists don't particularly welcome dialogue; they usually prefer to assert their position, and then tell it in capitals very loudly, oblivious to the implications that others in society, might take affront.

Frankly, that seems to be a function of their lack of capacity for empathy: that compassion based principle which makes society compassionately human. Not to say, that I equate a socialist state with compassion.

We've seen for example through history, how socialism can be completely devoid of compassion, however this is no surprise, given that socialism can be as extreme as 'right wingers'.

The hardest position to hold, is neither right wing nor left wing; it's in the third way (before even this principle was annexed by British politics and completed screwed up).


----------



## Head_case

> But we must not forget that it was the soviet who stopped Japan in the second world war.
> 
> If i remember correctly, that is..


Eh?

In my ignorance, I thought it was Hiroshima and the detonation of the world's first nuclear bomb which finally forced the Japanese right wing militia to acquiesce.

Western 'right wingers' often don't realise, that countries beyond their narrow little perspective, have their own 'right wingers' who equally can't stand them. Japanese xenophobia was phenemonal during the second world war: had it not been precisely that - a world war with multiple allegiances and tensions between countries - a Jewish holocaust in Japan would have been inevitable.


----------



## Ravndal

Yes, i'm sorry for the terrible phrasing. My point was that Soviet played a big role in defeating the Japanese army. the nuclear bomb was just the top of the iceberg.



> The Soviet-Japanese War of 1945 (Russian: Советско-японская война, lit. Soviet-Japanese War), began on August 9, 1945, with the Soviet invasion of the Japanese puppet state of Manchukuo. The Soviets terminated Japanese control of Manchukuo, Mengjiang (inner Mongolia), northern Korea, southern Sakhalin, and the Kuril Islands. The rapid defeat of Japan's Kwantung Army was a significant factor in the Japanese surrender and the termination of World War II.[6][7


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet–Japanese_War_(1945)


----------



## SiegendesLicht

*Head_case*, why should every right-winger necessarily be an extremist? There are a lot of people, especially in the US who would fall under definition of right-winger (though I much prefer the term "conservative"), but are in no way radical or extremist, myself included.

*Violadude*, I mean first of all economic success. No country that claimed to be socialist has ever reached the level of economic prosperity of capitalist Europe and America. And the socialist East Germany fared much worse economically than its western neighbor.

Edit: sometimes I forget I do not reside in the USA or in Europe... yet


----------



## Guest

Biting my tongue. I swear, mods, that I will be good.


----------



## elgar's ghost

The USSR only officially entered into conflict with Japan after the bombing of Hiroshima, and only once Stalin was happy that there was absolutely no direct threat in the East (the war in Europe was already over). Apart from a few relatively minor engagements in the late 1930s which had nothing to do with WWII, Japan and the USSR hadn't actually been at war with each other, which allowed most of the Red Army divisions hitherto stationed in the East to be reassigned to Europe once it was obvious that Japan would need nearly all of her manpower elsewhere.

EDIT: just seen Ravndal's post - I didn't realise that there were so many involved in that campaign. Nevertheless, Stalin still chose a time and place to suit him.


----------



## Head_case

I won't bite mine....I'd rather bite someone else's ooooooh!! 



> The Soviet-Japanese War of 1945 (Russian: Советско-японская война, lit. Soviet-Japanese War), began on August 9, 1945, with the Soviet invasion of the Japanese puppet state of Manchukuo. The Soviets terminated Japanese control of Manchukuo, Mengjiang (inner Mongolia), northern Korea, southern Sakhalin, and the Kuril Islands. The rapid defeat of Japan's Kwantung Army was a significant factor in the Japanese surrender and the termination of World War II.


Hmm. I'm definitely not a fan of quoting wikipedia, nor do I trust its references particularly.

Emmanuel Hsu's epic scholarship on 'The Rise of Modern China' does not date the end of the second world war neatly - nor does he credit it to the Soviet forces.

The Soviet invasion of Manchukuo, was flanked from the south by the chinese nationalists under Chiang Kai Shek, who held them off from the southern cities: he had lost control of Manchukuo to the Japanese and the chinese communists under other leadership, before Mao Tse Tung usurped them one by one, resorted to turning to Stalin for a deal broker.

Prior to the Second World War, the Soviet leadership had planned to carve up China and extend her own power down to the Liaoning Peninsula, across Manchukuo and down to Inner Mongolia. This power hungry Soviet superpower, waited for the civil war in China between the nationalists and the communists to kill off any unified defence, however was pre-empted by the Japanese invasion of China following the initial skirmish, deliberately triggered by the Japanese right wing militia to invade China.

Not all the Japanese military officers were in agreement: the respectable ones who believed in honour and valour were terminated as the pig-headed right wingers dominated the military using the deification myth of the emperor to reap nationalist support in Japan for invasion into China for Manchuria's mineral rich fields.

The reasons given by Hsu and other biographers of China (like Fairbank & Goldman) that the Soviets did not terminate the second world war in China, is linked to their historical perspective: they saw the Soviet leadership invade a civil war torn China to fight the Japanese in Manchukuo, on a deal-breaker with Mao Tse Tung, to plan for Chiang Kai Shek's elimination. After Chiang had held off the Japanese for years. Let's not forget that the Japanese invasion of China started well before the official western date of the second world war, triggered by the invasion of Poland by the Nazis.

This plan came to fruition 4 years after the end of World War II: the consequence is that Chiang fled to Taiwan taking the country's gold bullion and assets: the weakened and massively impoverished China was then left in the wake of the power vacuum, susceptible to communist influence. Chiang took his American alliance with him to Taiwan; China was left with no friends and turned back to Stalin for support, and for this 'support', he screwed the country on unfair terms for wheat grain and food exports and minerals - the only materials worthy of export - in exchange for modernisation of China. This alliance between the USSR and China, further alienated China and extended the second world war into Vietnam; Cambodia; Burma and anywhere that communist' support might take root.

From this kind of historical lens, I find it convincing to trace the path of the communist invasion of Manchukuo, as being inherently greedy for Soviet power (against a weakened invader; and a defenceless country in civil war), with a view to retaining the extended boundaries of the Soviet country, much like it had in the 19th century against a weakened Ching Dynasty. This kind of false 'help' is hardly help at all: had the USA not bombed Hiroshima, the Soviet power under Stalin would not have stopped at Manchukuo. China already had countless Soviet spies operating under chinese nationality; both recruited and endemic.

Anyway, that's the limited bit I know from reading those sources by Emmanuel Hsu and Fairbank & Goldman's New History of China.


----------



## Ravndal

I didn't search it up on wiki to find a argument, I searched up to confirm what i already knew (Discussed this same subject with a history teacher some weeks ago). Il bring it up next time i meet him. Which actually is tomorrow i think.. 

because i clearly remember discussing the important role of soviet at the end of ww2. i wont say anything more until i have discussed with him.


----------



## Head_case

> Head_case, why should every right-winger necessarily be an extremist? There are a lot of people, especially in the US who would fall under definition of right-winger (though I much prefer the term "conservative"), but are in no way radical or extremist, myself included.


It's not necessary ... which is why I've made a distinction between right wingers 'over here' and right wingers 'over there'. 'Over here', "right wing" politics is particularly offensive against a democratic state. Perhaps in the USA or elsewhere, it is tolerated and the democratic state is taken as a given?

Our terms are indeed relative and often lost in translation. 'Socialised healthcare' equating the National Health Service is one of those principles which is easily confounded.

Although conservatives can be labelled within the umbrella term of 'right wingers', there are far more dominant extremes who give 'right wingers' their justly deserved reputation through history in Europe like the right wing Nazis and off-shoot neo-nazis in Poland today; in contemporary France, where the LePen and his daughter have taken on the mantel to discriminate against the poor and foreigners, like the Romany and immigrants who have come in under the open EU principles of a boundary free state; to Burma where right wing politics has determined the suppression of the democratically elected; or Africa where right wing parties determine the genocide of complete tribes.

The dominant examples of inhumane left wing philosophy lies with Soviet communism ...however that is not socialism. Or is it?


----------



## Mahlerian

Head_case said:


> Not all the Japanese military officers were in agreement: the respectable ones who believed in honour and valour were terminated as the pig-headed right wingers dominated the military using the deification myth of the emperor to reap nationalist support in Japan for invasion into China for Manchuria's mineral rich fields.


This had been building up for some time before. Nationalism in Japan had been gaining ground ever since the US forced them to open up to the West. They felt they needed ways to affirm their national/ethnic superiority in the face of a world where it was impossible to be isolationist any longer, and the divinity of the emperor was one way to do this. During the shogunate, the emperor didn't really have as much power as the shogun or territorial leaders, and it had been this way, more or less, throughout the country's history. Racial theories were also prominent. Today, there is a conservative streak throughout the country's politics, but the far right wing that wants to reinstate the emperor as actual head of state and have an actual army is relatively small. Japan remains to this day relatively inhospitable to non-ethnic Japanese who decide to settle there.


----------



## Head_case

Ravndal said:


> I didn't search it up on wiki to find a argument, I searched up to confirm what i already knew (Discussed this same subject with a history teacher some weeks ago). Il bring it up next time i meet him. Which actually is tomorrow i think..
> 
> because i clearly remember discussing the important role of soviet at the end of ww2. i wont say anything more until i have discussed with him.


The problem with interpreting the events of the second world war .... is that the moral 'right or wrong' disappeared along with the war.

Seeing elements of the Second World War as right or wrong is indeed possible: for example - the Holocaust and the murder of innocent people (the Jewish people) is indeed wrong.

The rest of its history (not the Holocaust: this should not be denied on humanitarian and factual grounds) about who started what or who finished what depends on its interpretation.

I guess from a Norwegian perspective, your version of history, will be different from the education I received in England. Norway was officially neutral; although later allied with the German forces, it is highly likely, that the lens which your teacher uses to teach history, will be shaped by his own country's official version of events. It is very hard to teach history without it being reduced to provincialism.

Being in one of the countries of the Allied Forces, the UK education system pretty much has taught us that Germany started the second world war; and that it ended because Steve McQueen single handedly defeated the Germans using his leather jacket to repel machine gun bullets until they ran out.

If you were schooled in Japan, you would find huge chunks of such history missing: there is no reference to the Japanese invasion of China; nor of the Philipines; nor Burma; nor Korea. There is certainly no mention of the Nanjing Massacre of 300,000 innocent civilians.

The Soviet defence against the Germans indeed contributed to the breakdown of the German morale, and its subsequent defeat in Europe. This is one of the reasons why the Soviet leader never invaded Manchukuo until the Japanese were already turning their tail: Stalin's own telegrams to Mao Tse Tung revealed that he personally expressed that he could not afford to respond to Mao's wishes to attack the Japanese front at Manchukuo due to his hands being tied in Stalingrad. Instead, he had counselled Mao, to allow Chiang Kai Shek and the chinese nationalists to become the bodybags for the Japanese, and then to stab the nationalists in the back, after they had defeated the Japanese.

This kind of cold calculation is very much a character trait of both Stalin and Mao; goal focussed to the point of abject cruelty, regardless of who gets in the way.


----------



## Ravndal

I was actually at a Japan seminar today listening to some from the japanese embassy.. Japan is getting more and more influenced by Europe & USA. The younger generation is going more and more away from the conservative nationalism you are talking about, Mahlerian. Though, its still pretty bad - but, getting "better".


----------



## SiegendesLicht

By "over here" you understand Europe, am I right? Well, right now I am reading a German right-wing/conservative blog. The people who write and comment there are mostly pro-American, pro-Israel (!), support Christianity, capitalist economics and conservative family values and are opposed to massive immigration from muslim countries, multiculturalism, socialism, growth of government and government spending and the EU. 

The right-wingers "over there" in America are also mostly conservative, less-government, family-values- and Christianity-oriented people (an interesting statistic: the majority of unmarried women voted Democrat in the last election and the majority of married ones voted Republican). 

Those are the types of folks I meant by "right-wingers" and the types of folks I would ally myself with if I ever move to the West permanently. Here there is no left and right wing anyway, just one direction - where the potatoes are growing


----------



## Ravndal

Head_case said:


> The problem with interpreting the events of the second world war .... is that the moral 'right or wrong' disappeared along with the war.
> 
> Seeing elements of the Second World War as right or wrong is indeed possible: for example - the Holocaust and the murder of innocent people (the Jewish people) is indeed wrong.
> 
> *The rest of its history* (not the Holocaust: this should not be denied on humanitarian and factual grounds) about who started what or who finished what depends on its interpretation.
> 
> I guess from a Norwegian perspective, your version of history, will be different from the education I received in England. Norway was officially neutral; although later allied with the German forces, it is highly likely, that the lens which your teacher uses to teach history, will be shaped by his own country's official version of events. It is very hard to teach history without it being reduced to provincialism.
> 
> Being in one of the countries of the Allied Forces, the UK education system pretty much has taught us that Germany started the second world war; and that it ended because Steve McQueen single handedly defeated the Germans using his leather jacket to repel machine gun bullets until they ran out.
> 
> If you were schooled in Japan, you would find huge chunks of such history missing: there is no reference to the Japanese invasion of China; nor of the Philipines; nor Burma; nor Korea. There is certainly no mention of the Nanjing Massacre of 300,000 innocent civilians.
> 
> The Soviet defence against the Germans indeed contributed to the breakdown of the German morale, and its subsequent defeat in Europe. This is one of the reasons why the Soviet leader never invaded Manchukuo until the Japanese were already turning their tail: Stalin's own telegrams to Mao Tse Tung revealed that he personally expressed that he could not afford to respond to Mao's wishes to attack the Japanese front at Manchukuo due to his hands being tied in Stalingrad. Instead, he had counselled Mao, to allow Chiang Kai Shek and the chinese nationalists to become the bodybags for the Japanese, and then to stab the nationalists in the back, after they had defeated the Japanese.
> 
> This kind of cold calculation is very much a character trait of both Stalin and Mao; goal focussed to the point of abject cruelty, regardless of who gets in the way.


I hope not, hehe! Communist leaders during the 20th century slaughtered approximately 100 million people. And how Lenin ruled Russia, can be reminded of how Hitler ruled Germany. The difference was holocaust - which was slaughter, only industrialized.

But, I see your point.


----------



## Mahlerian

Ravndal said:


> I was actually at a Japan seminar today listening to some from the japanese embassy.. Japan is getting more and more influenced by Europe & USA. The younger generation is going more and more away from the conservative nationalism you are talking about, Mahlerian. Though, its still pretty bad - but, getting "better".


True. There is still a sense, though, that anyone who is not ethnically Japanese, even if that person was _born and raised_ in Japan, is not a true Japanese.

Entering Narita airport from the international arrivals area, there is a sign overhead written in Japanese and English. The English says "Welcome to Japan!", and the Japanese says "Welcome home."


----------



## deggial

Head_case said:


> The dominant examples of inhumane left wing philosophy lies with Soviet communism ...however that is not socialism. Or is it?


socialism is the economical bit, communism is the political bit of the whole shebang - as far as I understand it. Either way, socialism as Marx wanted it has not happened yet, because the conditions have not been right. I think right about now would be a good time (after the fall of capitalism, whatever that means, but I think capitalism is going through a particularly rough patch right now and seems a bit depleted of the energies that have initially powered it - like proper competition which has pretty much been killed by multinational corps.). Then again, I might be talking ******** :tiphat:


----------



## Head_case

SiegendesLicht said:


> By "over here" you understand Europe, am I right?


Err...'over here' is England 

We're slightly different from the rest of Yurop.

We certainly aren't pro-American (although we do like being pro-Canadian and pro-holidays as well as pro-sunshine). American conservatism like gun ownership and the First Amendment makes us think anachronistically of cowboy movies and defending your turf, when turf equated to a 100 acre of cowpat ranches, and not applicable to densely packed cities and towns with schools where innocent schoolkids need a gun totting soccermom to defend them.

Equally, England & The UK hardly support Israel's recent years of counterviolence, any more than it supports Palestinian incursions into civilian lives by murdering innocents with a rocket launcher now and then. Mostly we tend to be polarised in this conflict, seeing it as a loss for both sides ...ones which our forebearers had a hand in carving out for the Sunday roast when we meddled in the Middle East a century ago during the era of the Empire.

Again we do not support Christianity very well or much at all; some backward towns like it for its nominalism and 'quaintness', and it is always far nicer to get married in a church than a state registry office (appearances are more important than conviction): recent stats suggest that the UK is one of the two most secular countries in Europe.

The inaccuracy in this view of course ... is that most of us still do not believe we are situated in Europe lol. We have also been forced to migrate from permissive economics to less fiscal promiscuity and donning on the corset of economic recession. The consequence is that crime goes up - mostly under the eyes of the law, as government ministers have been discovered, charging the tax payers for their double houses; or for chauffeur driven transport and other wealthy excesses, like a duck pond. Of course, those in public office have to step down and then continue cheating the public purse in a different way. The average Joe Blogs is too busy sticking his head in the sand watching X Factor or American Idol on satellite to care for the country's direction.

This kind of hypocrisy is what we do best. Don't even think that any other European country can beat us at it! However unlike the Americans and Lance Armstrong, we don't do phoney sentiment and prefer to seal our lips when caught out, rather than making massive evangelically rehearsed apologies.

I've met American conservatives before. One of the guys I knew from university was a very gregarious loudmouth called Hank. We pretended he was from the Waltons and referred to him as Johnboy and he was really funny to have around - a bit like having a baby pitbull terrier with no teeth whilst you're having a horsemeat steak. I mean, beef steak. The other was a quiet guy from Virginia who was really pleasant. He only ever smiled when we talked politics, and behaved like a real gentleman. That was before we realised he just didn't understand our accents and nodded in agreement with everything we bantered over :lol:

Fundamentally perhaps, to us it seems that the United States tends to polarise people into either right or left wing: if you care about a sick person, that's because you must be a friggin' democrat underneath. If you want guns, it's because you must be from Colorado and have a few cattle skulls on your mantlepiece. Those are terrible stereotypes, however mostly 'over here', politics neither comes into dialogue, just as religion does not. We just don't talk about politics or religion, nor do we reduce people to such categories, because ultimately we are indifferent to politics and just want to have another beer ...hic!! and we really don't care for religion except for atheism.

Maybe it depends on which lens each of us uses to define 'over here', or 'over there'?


----------



## Head_case

Mahlerian said:


> True. There is still a sense, though, that anyone who is not ethnically Japanese, even if that person was _born and raised_ in Japan, is not a true Japanese.


I don't really know.....what I do know is that most places I go are very welcoming of me. If however I turned around and told them I liked it so much that I decided to stay, they would get the stake out to drive me away. I used to work overseas a lot - and whereas most communities were very welcoming of me, it was more like a freak show curiosity: 'come and observe the foreigner!' rather than a 'Oh no!! The foreigner is going to settle and steal OUR jobs!' :lol:

Tourism and hospitality is fascinating particularly in rural areas - like in rural Japan or China where people are very welcoming. In some places, I've been treated better than the locals get treated, although perhaps (cynically), it's because I must have more money - obviously being a bit of a myth 

The last time I was at Narita airport, there was no English - that was over 15 years ago. I went around the world and it was the least favourite destination of mine. I couldn't wait to get out. No one spoke English; my Japanese was pathetic and I couldn't communicate.

Now, everything's changed.

But it's still better than a country which has a welcome banner like Libya: "Foreigners Out".


----------



## lostid

Is this forum run by communists? I meant they control tightly what you want to post at the forum. Boy I guess they enjoy the "power" of controlling your bowel movement.


----------



## Mahlerian

Head_case said:


> I don't really know.....what I do know is that most places I go are very welcoming of me.  If however I turned around and told them I liked it so much that I decided to stay, they would get the stake out to drive me away. I used to work overseas a lot - and whereas most communities were very welcoming of me, it was more like a freak show curiosity: 'come and observe the foreigner!' rather than a 'Oh no!! The foreigner is going to settle and steal OUR jobs!' :lol:
> 
> Tourism and hospitality is fascinating particularly in rural areas - like in rural Japan or China where people are very welcoming. In some places, I've been treated better than the locals get treated, although perhaps (cynically), it's because I must have more money - obviously being a bit of a myth


Somehow, last year I ended up talking to a farmer in rural Japan, and the subject he brought up was socialized healthcare. Granted, it only got as far as: "We have it, and you don't. Right?" "Right."



> The last time I was at Narita airport, there was no English - that was over 15 years ago. I went around the world and it was the least favourite destination of mine. I couldn't wait to get out. No one spoke English; my Japanese was pathetic and I couldn't communicate.


Pretty much everything is bilingual there now. Every attendant knows English very well, too, save perhaps for some in out of the way locations.


----------



## Head_case

You learnt Japanese?

Yes, it seems to be a popular holiday destination - Mt Fuji in particular. I've always wanted to see the Kyoto light festival although going into my local sushi bar is hard enough :lol:

I tried learning Mandarin for work. Whereas I can manage to says words and phrases, the regional accents are so confusing. China's not like Japan in this respect: Japan has really adopted English as a second language. In China, only the major cities have English (and these are usually the worse tourist traps, like the Bund areas). During the 2008 Olympics taxi drivers were forced to learn English for business and had free government lessons. They were also taught by a taxi radio station. One of the funniest comedies I heard was in Mandarin in a taxi. It pitted a northerner against a southerner arguing about the price of a cake on sale. 

The southerner was portrayed as thick and slow with an inarticulate speech, often mumbling and rambling, whereas the northerner was cutting and articulate. It was a hilarious comedy sketch - you didn't even need Mandarin to understand it. Much more amusing than Daniel Tosh (and much less vulgar).


----------



## SiegendesLicht

*Head_case*, well, thank you for telling about your country. Sorry I did not realize you were English. It seems, though, that our experience with American conservatives is quite opposite, the ones I met were among some of the nicest and most caring people I ever got to meet.


----------



## Mahlerian

Head_case said:


> You learnt Japanese?
> 
> Yes, it seems to be a popular holiday destination - Mt Fuji in particular. I've always wanted to see the Kyoto light festival although going into my local sushi bar is hard enough :lol:


I can speak reasonably well, although I do have problems with some of the dialects (which are not nearly as separate as those of China, but far apart in pronunciation nonetheless). My reading is good enough to get through a newspaper (not necessarily as quickly as I might like).



> I tried learning Mandarin for work. Whereas I can manage to says words and phrases, the regional accents are so confusing. China's not like Japan in this respect: Japan has really adopted English as a second language. In China, only the major cities have English (and these are usually the worse tourist traps, like the Bund areas). During the 2008 Olympics taxi drivers were forced to learn English for business and had free government lessons. They were also taught by a taxi radio station. One of the funniest comedies I heard was in Mandarin in a taxi. It pitted a northerner against a southerner arguing about the price of a cake on sale.
> 
> The southerner was portrayed as thick and slow with an inarticulate speech, often mumbling and rambling, whereas the northerner was cutting and articulate. It was a hilarious comedy sketch - you didn't even need Mandarin to understand it. Much more amusing than Daniel Tosh (and much less vulgar).


English may be the default second language in Japan, and it's taught in all schools, but most don't feel comfortable with it. They can understand reading it, but are not confident enough to have a full conversation.

Japanese comedy continues to elude me to some degree. It's very broad humor, full of puns and exaggeration. Then again, if my native language had as many homophones as Japanese does, I would base my humor on puns as well!


----------



## Head_case

That's sooooo cool! I'd love to read a paper in a foreign language which doesn't use the roman alphabet. All those snoop snoop commuters on the metro can find something else to entertain them with instead 

I find Europeans - particularly the Scandinavian and the Benelux countries tend to be particularly strong with English as a second/third/fourth language. Former colonies where English was enforced, never developed fluent English without its own patois.

Especially America roflmao :lol:









(j/k)


----------



## Head_case

lostid said:


> Is this forum run by communists? I meant they control tightly what you want to post at the forum. Boy I guess they enjoy the "power" of controlling your bowel movement.


Eh?

I don't think so. Or perhaps you're on the wrong forum?

But talking about controlling bowel movement, you cannot underestimate the power of good bowel movements. When you produce a well-formed stool, the movement releases natural neuro-endorphins which react to natural opioid receptors in the brain.

This gives you a natural high.

Go go go! Go enjoy! :lol:


----------



## jani

deggial said:


> do you really consider yourself a right winger?


Not extreme one but i was more at that side, just a little.
I was also a liberal, not conservative.
Also the reason i mentioned it is because i was really surprised about the result.
Also i was 16 when i did the test, who knows how much different result i would get today or when i am older.
I really need to learn to think twice before i say anything.


----------



## violadude

SiegendesLicht said:


> *Violadude*, I mean first of all economic success. No country that claimed to be socialist has ever reached the level of economic prosperity of capitalist Europe and America. And the socialist East Germany fared much worse economically than its western neighbor.
> 
> Edit: sometimes I forget I do not reside in the USA or in Europe... yet


Well part of the economic problems in, say, Cuba have to do with "capitalist America and Europe" putting tons of economic sanctions on it. I'm sure the country could be a bit more wealthy if it gave up its principles and accumulated profit off the backs of desperate citizens in third world nations and went to war to steal their resources. But eh...whatever you value I guess.

Also, what exactly are "family values"? I've never figured that one out.


----------



## Mahlerian

Head_case said:


> That's sooooo cool! I'd love to read a paper in a foreign language which doesn't use the roman alphabet. All those snoop snoop commuters on the metro can find something else to entertain them with instead


The weird part is that even when you know no one around you can read what you're looking at, your mind still tells you that they can. Because it naturally makes sense to you, you can't imagine it not making sense to the people around you.


----------



## Guest

I'll try to contribute without fanning flames.

The critique of American "conservatism" or "right-wingers" was, in part, fueled by a misunderstanding of our history. The issue of gun rights is actually tied to the 2nd, not the 1st, Amendment to our Constitution. And the Constitution in no way says that the right to keep and bear arms is about self-defense, or as many people try to imply, hunting. The historical context is that when the colonies started to rebel against the mother country (Great Britain), one of the first things the British tried to do was confiscate weapons. The founders understood that disarming the people was a critical measure for a government to exert ultimate control over citizens, and so they wanted to ensure that such a thing could not be perpetrated in this country. And so many colonies held out until they were promised this right would be protected in the Constitution. 

Conservatives don't think that sick people should just fend for themselves - we just disagree with liberals as to how the problem should be solved. The problem is not that conservatives and liberals don't see the same things as problems - they just disagree on the solutions. To stereotype a bit myself - liberals think the answer is to always grant the government new power to solve the problems, usually resulting in more tax money to pay for it. Conservatives prefer solutions that are based more on free-market principles and trending more towards individual liberty, not more government. We view expansions in government as coinciding with more liberties taken from people. For example, more government programs mean more revenues to fund them. This means property confiscation in the form of taxes. Or it may mean taking more of our own power away to do for ourselves. The current healthcare law is a case in point - to solve the healthcare crisis, the new law forces everybody into a system all for the purposes of helping a few who needed help. Now everybody is forced into this system, and government has more power, and in some ways people see it as infringing upon their liberties and rights, such as with the debate over funding birth control in health insurance by religious entities that are philosophically opposed to it.

Liberals don't mind surrendering more liberties and property if it means government takes care of more of the problems. Conservatives would rather not surrender more of their liberties and property and prefer non-governmental solutions to problems.


----------



## EricABQ

That's a very good, succinct description of the conservative/liberal divide here in the U.S. 

I actually tend more towards the conservative thought as laid out in that post. The problem is, the party that supports those economic ideas has also been largely taken over by the evangelicals and their social policy.


----------



## Head_case

Mahlerian said:


> The weird part is that even when you know no one around you can read what you're looking at, your mind still tells you that they can. Because it naturally makes sense to you, you can't imagine it not making sense to the people around you.


I've been on the opposite of this receiving end with German speakers who speak to me as if I should understand their language. Apparently I have a very convincing accent. Never mind the limited 300 word vocabulary lol.


----------



## Ravndal

Very proud of my nationality! And I'm sure no one will invade us again. We got a pretty strong defence line.






:lol:


----------



## Mahlerian

Head_case said:


> I've been on the opposite of this receiving end with German speakers who speak to me as if I should understand their language. Apparently I have a very convincing accent. Never mind the limited 300 word vocabulary lol.


If I try to speak German (I've picked up some odd vocabulary through opera and lieder...), my mind tries to fill in the blanks with Japanese words. I guess they're both filed away in that "foreign language" part of the brain.


----------



## AndreasFink

I live in Germany, the country of Richard Wagner. My place of birth is Sweden, what is rather well-known for its popular music like ABBA. And I have two citizenships.
But actually I feel myself as a human of the whole Western World, whose achievement is not only material wealth, but also music and other culture. Practically all the great componists come from Europe and America. And the modern theory of music is based on the one of Pythagoras.


----------



## Head_case

Mahlerian said:


> If I try to speak German (I've picked up some odd vocabulary through opera and lieder...), my mind tries to fill in the blanks with Japanese words. I guess they're both filed away in that "foreign language" part of the brain.


It must be very hard being Belgian lol


----------



## violadude

I don't get nationalism.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

violadude said:


> I don't get nationalism.


Of course! A true communist's loyalty should be to the Party and to the worldwide class struggle of proletariat against capitalists, not to some outdated notion of _homeland_.

For me nationalism (I prefer a more neutral term "patriotism") is mostly about love and respect for one's native culture and way of life, acknowledgement of their worth and desire to preserve all that is good about it.

PS. I think Wagner and I would see eye to eye on this issue. He was a proud German, and I respect him all the more for it.


----------



## violadude

SiegendesLicht said:


> Of course! A true communist's loyalty should be to the Party and to the worldwide class struggle of proletariat against capitalists, not to some outdated notion of _homeland_.


 Hey, you're getting this!


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Let me guess... you would probably like to do away with all borders (except those for reeducation camps for the former capitalists), citizenships and nationalities, introduce some sort of a single world government and turn the world into a global melting pot where everyone would supposedly love one another, right?


----------



## violadude

SiegendesLicht said:


> Let me guess... you would probably like to do away with all borders (except those for reeducation camps for the former capitalists), citizenships and nationalities, introduce some sort of a single world government and turn the world into a global melting pot where everyone would supposedly love one another, right?


Except for the one world government part. Communism in its final stage has no government.


----------



## Head_case

SiegendesLicht said:


> Let me guess... you would probably like to do away with all borders (except those for reeducation camps for the former capitalists), citizenships and nationalities, introduce some sort of a single world government and turn the world into a global melting pot where everyone would supposedly love one another, right?


Well, the bit I do like, is driving through France into Switzerland and into Italy without getting stopped by some jobsworth


----------



## EricABQ

violadude said:


> Except for the one world government part. Communism in its final stage has no government.


Who would keep all the left over libertarians from starting the free market back up?


----------



## violadude

EricABQ said:


> Who would keep all the left over libertarians from starting the free market back up?


I suppose the ultimate goal of communism to be a stateless, classless and moneyless world is far enough in the future that there wouldn't be any libertarians left over anymore.


----------



## Guest

Head_case said:


> Well, the bit I do like, is driving through France into Switzerland and into Italy without getting stopped by some jobsworth


Switzerland doesn't participate in that. They still stop you at the border and check your passport. They aren't part of the EU.


----------



## Guest

violadude said:


> I suppose the ultimate goal of communism to be a stateless, classless and moneyless world is far enough in the future that there wouldn't be any libertarians left over anymore.


Never going to be the case. Restriction of liberties and trying to force some unrealistic "equality" upon all tends to spur people to fight more for their liberties. And what would be the impetus for anybody to do anything? What would you do with those who wouldn't participate? Would you force them to, or shun them from your society? Too many problems with this system.


----------



## violadude

DrMike said:


> Never going to be the case. Restriction of liberties and trying to force some unrealistic "equality" upon all tends to spur people to fight more for their liberties. And what would be the impetus for anybody to do anything? What would you do with those who wouldn't participate? Would you force them to, or shun them from your society? Too many problems with this system.


Capitalism's effect on people's ideas about why one should work reminds me of religions effect on people's ideas about why one should be moral.

In the former's case, the reason one should work has been convoluted to be that, one should work to make money. Instead, one should just understand that if no one worked, we wouldn't live in a civilization. Therefore, the direct consequences of non-work is the motivating factor for people to "do anything" rather than some abstract concept of working to obtain pieces of paper that allow you to obtain resources that you actually need.

It's seems a similar way that religion places god as the motivating factor for people to be moral rather than the direct consequences of immoral behavior being the motivating factor.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

DrMike said:


> Switzerland doesn't participate in that. They still stop you at the border and check your passport. They aren't part of the EU.


It does participate in the Schengen agreement though, so a foreigner needs only one visa for Germany, Switzerland and most of EU countries anyway.

Well, violadude, count me out of your plans. I'd rather pay those $80-100 that a visa costs and go through a bit of bureaucracy every time I want to visit any country to the west of Belarus, than see Europe turn into a second China... or a second Somali... or a second Turkey, Iran, Iraq (complete with all the poverty and islamic oppression), depending on which people will stream like a flood into Europe as soon as the borders are gone.

Besides, I like various nations, cultures and languages and I think they should be preserved.


----------



## EricABQ

violadude said:


> Capitalism's effect on people's ideas about why one should work reminds me of religions effect on people's ideas about why one should be moral.
> 
> In the former's case, the reason one should work has been convoluted to be that, one should work to make money. Instead, one should just understand that if no one worked, we wouldn't live in a civilization. Therefore, the direct consequences of non-work is the motivating factor for people to "do anything" rather than some abstract concept of working to obtain pieces of paper that allow you to obtain resources that you actually need.
> 
> It's seems a similar way that religion places god as the motivating factor for people to be moral rather than the direct consequences of immoral behavior being the motivating factor.


O.K, but DrMike asked what you will do with the people who don't buy in.


----------



## violadude

EricABQ said:


> O.K, but DrMike asked what you will do with the people who don't buy in.


The question is, what will they do?


----------



## EricABQ

violadude said:


> The question is, what will they do?


Hopefully succeed in overthrowing their communist oppressors and re-establishing the free market.


----------



## violadude

EricABQ said:


> Hopefully succeed in overthrowing their communist oppressors and re-establishing the free market.


Then any government who is in threat of being overthrown is going to repress their overtakers somehow, no matter what system it is.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

EricABQ said:


> Who would keep all the left over libertarians from starting the free market back up?


In the Soviet Union the free market existed in the form of black market where a pair of jeans smuggled into the country cost an average worker's monthly wages.


----------



## EricABQ

violadude said:


> Then any government who is in threat of being overthrown is going to repress their overtakers somehow, no matter what system it is.


I'm not sure what that has to do with anything, but fine.

Back to the more relevent topic. Classlessness is impossible. There will always be certain luxuries that are of limited quantity, and some people are going to want them. Take homes on the beach for example. Someone will want to live in those homes, but there won't be enough for everyone, so there will have to be some deciding factor that establishes who gets them. Once those factors are decided, you have established a class (the class being "people who get to live at the beach.")


----------



## violadude

EricABQ said:


> I'm not sure what that has to do with anything, but fine.
> 
> Back to the more relevent topic. Classlessness is impossible. There will always be certain luxuries that are of limited quantity, and some people are going to want them. Take homes on the beach for example. Someone will want to live in those homes, but there won't be enough for everyone, so there will have to be some deciding factor that establishes who gets them. Once those factors are decided, you have established a class (the class being "people who get to live at the beach.")


That's not how I'm defining class.


----------



## EricABQ

violadude said:


> That's not how I'm defining class.


Well, perhaps you could go ahead and say how you are defining it then.


----------



## Guest

I just don't believe equality, in its absolute sense, is a natural condition that any person aspires to. And there are definitely those who will always look to do the absolute minimum that is expected of them, while others will strive to do their best. Take money out of the equation, and that would still be the case. And in that circumstance, why would the individual who has put his best effort into what he is doing want to deal with the individual who does the bare minimum? The monetary system allows you to assign value to things, and then choose how you want to use the value of your goods or labor. Are you going to go on the assumption that all labor and all products of labor is of equal value? Is one unit of effort from one person equal to a unit of effort of any other person? What if their is a much greater hazard for one person in their job than for another? A plumber versus a firefighter?

Humans require motivation. Whether it is money, or something else, most people don't want to be the same as everybody else. If you are not currently employed, I can imagine at some point you will be, and I doubt you will negotiate for a salary that only provides for your basic needs. You will probably look for the best pay that your level of training commands. We need people to work more. They need to work for more than their own basic needs - because otherwise we would all need to be able to farm, produce our own food, and whatever else. 

With communism, I actually don't think that it will be the slackers we will need to worry about. It is the people who don't want to have anything to do with such an unrewarding system. Then those who depend on those overachievers will need to force them into their money-free, workers paradise "utopia."


----------



## EricABQ

I think if I were going to adopt a contrarian political identity here in the U.S I would become a monarchist.


----------



## Rapide

In practice, absolute equality and human freedom have never gone together in harmony. Imposing equality on humans inevitably led to dictatorships and or wars within. Only the naive would think that society is better off in some utopian egalitarian state.


----------



## Bone

American by birth, Southern by the grace of God (not entirely untrue, btw). Yes, proud to be American and fortunate to have lived on both coasts and the Midwest long enough to appreciate living in the South (but the pace and attitudes down here are definitely not for everyone).
If I could be any other nationality, I'd probably go with something Western European, probably Austrian.
Not sure I'd change anything about U.S. other than to encourage a bit more relaxation without the need to plug into a television show - I simply can't carry on a conversation in most places without having to admit ignorance about the latest episode of whatever is popular.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

SiegendesLicht said:


> In the Soviet Union the free market existed in the form of black market where a pair of jeans smuggled into the country cost an average worker's monthly wages.


Yea and you could swap that for a gram of coke in the US..........


----------



## Guest

Bone said:


> American by birth, Southern by the grace of God (not entirely untrue, btw). Yes, proud to be American and fortunate to have lived on both coasts and the Midwest long enough to appreciate living in the South (but the pace and attitudes down here are definitely not for everyone).
> If I could be any other nationality, I'd probably go with something Western European, probably Austrian.
> Not sure I'd change anything about U.S. other than to encourage a bit more relaxation without the need to plug into a television show - I simply can't carry on a conversation in most places without having to admit ignorance about the latest episode of whatever is popular.


I am a transplanted Southerner, and loving it. Originally from California, went to school in the South, married a Southern girl, and now settled down in the South. Best place to live!


----------



## EricABQ

When I was in the Navy my two best friends were southerners. We butted heads on a few cultural issues but they were both solidly good dudes. 

The thing about the south I can't tolerate is the weather. The summers are unfit for human habitation in my opinion. Give me a nice western desert any day.


----------



## Guest

EricABQ said:


> When I was in the Navy my two best friends were southerners. We butted heads on a few cultural issues but they were both solidly good dudes.
> 
> The thing about the south I can't tolerate is the weather. The summers are unfit for human habitation in my opinion. Give me a nice western desert any day.


Ah, you just need air conditioning. Besides, I had a lot hotter summers in California. The only things you have to get used to are the hurricanes, the tornadoes, and the monsoon-like rains! But hey, we have a lot less snow.


----------



## moody

EricABQ said:


> I think if I were going to adopt a contrarian political identity here in the U.S I would become a monarchist.


Good for you !


----------



## Flamme

My dad is from Montenegro by origins but considers himself a a Serb just like i do and my mom is Czech by origins but considers herself a Croat...I think combinations and mixing are good not bad...


----------



## Kieran

Irish, from Dublin, neither proud of it nor ashamed of it, it's an accident of birth.

Do I love my country? 

Often...


----------



## Flamme

About a question what would i like to be...Dunno...American Canadian Brit German Irish...I kinda believe in ''multiple previous lives'' theory so our preferences are maybe distant memories of what we ve already been in the past...


----------



## peeyaj

I like to be an Austrian.. How can I become one?


----------



## aleazk

Yes, combinations are good. I'm a combination of Basque, Spanish (non-basque), Italian from the north, and Italian from the south. In fact, because of my genealogy, I can request the Italian citizenship. Maybe I will, although I don't have plans about going to Italy in the near future.


----------



## deggial

peeyaj said:


> I like to be an Austrian.. How can I become one?


find an Austrian beauty and woo her (or him, whichever you prefer) with wonderful music. Austrians are all highly musical, aren't they? hehe.


----------



## jani

deggial said:


> find an Austrian beauty and woo her (or him, whichever you prefer) with wonderful music. Austrians are all highly musical, aren't they? hehe.


May i suggest trying wooing with this song


----------



## cmudave

I am American/Korean - American father and Korean mother. My actual status is US Citizen/Overseas Korean. From time to time I have thought about moving my residency to Korea and claiming citizenship but that is not really likely to happen anymore since I got married a few years ago(to a Hong Kong born Chinese).

Because of my dual ethnic and dual cultural background, any discussion of changing nationalities forces the unfortunate choice not to keep part of my heritage. I value both sides of my family, but If I had to make the choice to be born a different nationality, I think I would choose to be born to my same (Korean) clan & family but several centuries ago - maybe during middle to late 1700s. This was a relatively good time for my family and preceded the end of dynasty and the occupation & oppression by the Japanese, and the subsequent division of the nation at the hands of the US & Soviet Union. I am only aware of my family history on my father's side of the family to my great grandparents. On my mother's side of the family we have genealogical record going back 500 years so I have much better basis to know what I would be getting myself into there.


----------



## peeyaj

Darn it. I want to be Luxembourgian.. How can I become one?


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Darnit I want to be a Frenchman, born in Paris about December 22, 1883 and then move the to US after living for a period in Turin, Italy- what's my chances ...............


----------



## neoshredder

I am an American and proud of it.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

And are you proud of Turtleman............

He is infesting on TV sets here - do you have a cure?


----------



## Crystal

I'm Malaysian Chinese...and I'm quite ashamed of it... I would like to be German


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Wow are you sure, for one they invaded Poland and can be very serious about most things- I would reconsider....... but they did come up with Beethoven and Mozart (Austria) I guess, oh and Bach....


----------



## Phil loves classical

Crystal said:


> I'm Malaysian Chinese...and I'm quite ashamed of it... I would like to be German


Huh? Why are you ashamed to be Malaysian Chinese?


----------



## Animal the Drummer

I'm of decidedly mongrel descent but have always had a British passport, love it here and would take a LOT of persuading to live (as opposed to visit) anywhere else.


----------



## cwarchc

Crystal said:


> I'm Malaysian Chinese...and I'm quite ashamed of it... I would like to be German


You have nothing to be ashamed of
You didn't chose your place of birth
You are a national of the world, all human (at least I think so?)


----------



## Bulldog

It's easy to be a little ashamed of one's own country - you know all the little crummy details.


----------



## Kjetil Heggelund

I'm Norwegian and that's ok, but I'm not as proud as many other Norwegians. I'm more importantly from the universe


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Bulldog said:


> It's easy to be a little ashamed of one's own country - you know all the little crummy details.


Before my emigration I used to be sometimes ashamed of (or rather angry and disgusted at) my place of birth. Now that I have left Belarus, I am not ashamed in the least. And of course I enjoy and am proud of my newfound Germanness :cheers:


----------



## SiegendesLicht

Kjetil Heggelund said:


> I'm Norwegian and that's ok, but I'm not as proud as many other Norwegians. I'm more importantly from the universe


There is only one Norway in the universe though


----------



## Granate

Pride is not a word that I agree a lot with, but I must say I wouldn't ever change the place I was born in: the south of Spain. The clear weather, the summer heat and the relative lack of dense population and industries. Furthermore, living just by the Mediterranean sea is a joy I'm sure not many people have experienced. I couldn't choose the place I was born in, my noisy summer-party neighbors, plus the left neighbor with their aggresive German Shepherd, or either the children that bothered me in Primary school. Luckily, I could choose the music I wanted to listen to because of my comprehensive and respectful parents that wouldn't just throw me the Top 40 CHR (that doesn't mean that I like the Beatles, Café Quijano or Joaquín Sabina).


----------



## Krummhorn

I started out as a child. I had absolutely no input on when or where I would be born. I am of Danish ancestry and have living relatives in Denmark.

I was born in the USA - I am a proud American. And I stand up when our national anthem is played.


----------



## Pugg

peeyaj said:


> Darn it. I want to be Luxembourgian.. How can I become one?


Try being a asylum seeker.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

^Not touching that one.............


----------



## Pugg

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> ^Not touching that one.............


Luxembourg is very broad minded, just saying. 
( They have even a gay prime minister)


----------



## Anankasmo

I'm German and woulnt want to choose another country as my homeland. The reason for this is that i owe my country a great deal of gratitude and im privileged to have access to Germanys well known and great healthcare without which my live would have been rather difficult. Besides that i think every nation has an own mentality something really unique which can only be found in the country. Much has been written about the german Mentalität and its certainly true. My mind feels only at home in Germany where the people show the same menality. E.g when i visit another country after a few weeks i feel that i am a foreign. It doesnt have to do with pride in ones country but rather with feeling at home with a certain kind of mentality which the general public of the country shares. But since i am rather young and was born into the blooming EU i most of all feel as an European. Without borders or the need to chance currency one just gets the feeling of an united Europe which imo is such a great thing. Considering Europes history i think it is adequate to say that the Europeans are one people with many different yet conjunct cultures. I mean classical music for example is a mostly European achievement where all countries influenced each other.q


----------



## Pat Fairlea

British by birth; Irish by heritage.
Never felt 'proud' of being British, and these days I feel as if the land of my birth is moving away from me. 
Sad, really, but that's the way it is.


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

My father is Italian and mother Irish but I take after my uncle who is Spanish. Yes, I'm very proud of my heritage - I worked very hard at it.


----------



## Larkenfield

Not being serious at the moment, I feel I'm full German from the neck up, half French below the waist, English in my right leg and left arm. Perhaps that why I'm good at navigating traffic circles. In other words...

_I.am.not.of.this.Earth._

For some unknown reason I'm also irresistibly drawn to Strauss waltzes but have an irrational fear of liederhosen.

_I am a proud member of planet Earth, except perhaps on weekends and holidays, and a non-denominational purveyor of Earthling music. _ :cheers:


----------



## hpowders

Proud to be American

Long live the red, white and blue!!! :tiphat:


----------



## hpowders

SiegendesLicht said:


> There is only one Norway in the universe though


How would you know that? The possibilities are practically limitless.


----------



## znapschatz

American born and raised, son of an immigrant father, and my mother a first generation daughter born to an immigrant mother. 
I consider myself a citizen and patriot, lucky to be here, and take my citizenship responsibilities seriously. Musically, I'm a Russian, or at least it feels that way. Although I love classical music from everywhere, Russian music touches me deeply like no other.


----------



## scratchgolf

When I was young, I understood myself to be 50/50 Italian/Irish.
When I understood less, I became 50/25/25 Italian/Irish/Polish
When I understood less still, I became and odd mixture of Italian/Irish/Polish/French/Native American/Maybe some Jewish/I am darker than my mother/father/sisters/brother. Darker to the point they are closer to each other than me. 
When I understood nothing I became 100% American
When my eyes started opening again I continued my father's work and found out I was Germanic, and even my father didn't realize. You see, he had a picture in that book that had a dead man in it. He thought this very dark man was sleeping, and this picture was hanging on his kitchen wall as well. But I knew what he was, and who my family was then. They were posing for a picture, with children, and the "prize of the hunt" way lying in full display. American flags waving in the background. Black and White photo. 

Now I know I am truly like every other man, if only divided by degrees of self honesty. When you know who you truly are, you realize the pain in explaining to others who they truly are. The futility. You may assist them but you can not make them see. This they must earn.


----------



## Flamme

I cant really say becasue Im a MIXTURE but I feel Montenegrian and Slavic the most.


----------



## SixFootScowl

I don't see where there is much cause for pride in nationality since we are born where we are born. It was not our choice. I was born in the United States and really don't have any connection to my nationality of origin but ring in about 3/4 German if one looks at the ancestry.


----------



## Flamme

I was born in in Serbia but I dont feel serb at all...Im a mixture of serbian, croatian, czech and montengrian genetics...


----------



## aleazk




----------



## HenryPenfold

Good grief, the Germans had a guilty conscience, even in Schopenhauer's day!


----------



## HenryPenfold

15 characters ...


----------



## HenryPenfold

My mother is Italian and my father was from London.

I was born in London and I consider myself British, even though I have spent long periods in Italy and have had far more contact with the Italian side of my family than my British family. I also support the Italian football team, not England and my household is more influenced by Italian family-culture than British.

I'm very proud of my nationality because the many great things that have emanated from the British Isles far outweigh the negatives. 

But my nationality does not define me.


----------



## Room2201974

HenryPenfold said:


> I'm very proud of my nationality because the many great things that have emanated from the British Isles far outweigh the negatives.


That's a matter of perspective. I know many folks who would disagree, from direct experience.


----------



## DaveM

Room2201974 said:


> That's a matter of perspective. I know many folks who would disagree, from direct experience.


'Many folks' eh? Well that settles that.


----------



## Room2201974

DaveM said:


> 'Many folks' eh? Well that settles that.


Yeah

I can't believe the news today
Oh, I can't close my eyes
And make it go away


----------



## Musicaterina

I'm half Slovak, half Carparthian German. I'm not really proud of it. My favourite country is neither Slovakia, nor Germany but Italy.
I was born in Kosice, Slovakia, but have been living in Germany now for 42 years. Since 2008 I have been living in Cologne, which is sometimes considered as the "most Northern Italian city". And in fact, here are really a lot of Italians (and really good Italian restaurants  ). I'm always happy when Italian musicians come to Cologne or when here is played music made by Italian composers like Vivaldi and Boccherini. It isn't a coincidence that these composers are two of my favourite.

There seem to be only a few Slovaks in Cologne, and unfortunately there are only a few Slovak composers. Johann Nepomuk Hummel can be (more or less) considered as a Slovak composer, at least he was born in Bratislava. He has composed a Cello Sonata which I really like.


----------



## Caesura

Born in Canada and proud of it (not overwhelmingly so though). My dad was also born here, but my mom was born in former Yugoslavia (currently Serbia) and came to Canada when she was a child. I do like being here, but if I could move to a different country I wouldn't know where to go because I have only travelled to another province in Canada and the US.


----------



## Totenfeier

I am a citizen of the United States of America, and one of the deepest, fondest wishes of my heart is that my Ulster Scots ancestors had never gotten on the damn boat.

Them, and a few Germans.


----------



## HenryPenfold

HenryPenfold said:


> My mother is Italian and my father was from London.
> 
> I was born in London and I consider myself British, even though I have spent long periods in Italy and have had far more contact with the Italian side of my family than my British family. I also support the Italian football team, not England and my household is more influenced by Italian family-culture than British.
> 
> I'm very proud of my nationality because the many great things that have emanated from the British Isles far outweigh the negatives.
> 
> But my nationality does not define me.


A depressing World Cup for me. Italy didn't send a team in protest against the Qatari regime's racism, sexism homophobia and corruption and England underperformed and got eliminated by a suspiciously untalented French team.

I'm rooting for Argentina. The deal is, the trophy rotates between Europe and South America - what are the Moroccan upstarts thinking of?


----------



## Nate Miller

I'm an American musician. Yes, I am proud to be an American. That is why I play jazz and why I play rock and roll and the blues and blue grass. They are all American music forms and if I were to travel to your country, I would gladly be an ambassador of American music styles and be glad to bring that music to you so you can see first hand how our music is supposed to be played.

But music aside, America rocks. Say what you want haters, but I get to live in the States where we have fast cars, hot chicks, and the best of everything, so get ya some of that


----------



## TwoFlutesOneTrumpet

I don't understand why I should feel pride for something I didn't do.


----------



## Bulldog

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> I don't understand why I should feel pride for something I didn't do.


Haven't you contributed to your country's prosperity and moral/ethical character?


----------



## HenryPenfold

TwoFlutesOneTrumpet said:


> I don't understand why I should feel pride for something I didn't do.


It's not about what you have done, it's about what you are by birth. I am a proud Anglo-Italian British subject, all by birth. I have done nothing, to cause this. However, I can go along with it, or reject it, as you can.


----------



## Chilham

My heritage is as British as it comes, as far back as I can trace (16th C on my Mother's side, 18th C. on my Father's). For 58 of my 64 years, as Kipling suggested, I felt that in the great lottery of life, I won first prize. I was proud.

Not any more.


----------



## FrankE

I'm British.
Yes of course I'm proud of my nationality, my country the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the first world ('the West') in general.
Unfortunately there is less British culture around to be proud of since the late 1990s, say 1997.
I haven't got used to the wetter colder climate since moving back up north and my city is becoming unrecognisable.



> If you were given a chance to change your nationality, what would be the top of your list ? The bottom?


Top

Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Republik Österreich, _Schweiz _
I was thinking about this yesterday as I took a call from an agent about a 5G position in Germany (various locations). I asked Bayreuth, München, Leipzig, Frankfurt am Main, Darmstadt but I'd need to think about Berlin. The job wasn't suitable.
Getting nationality and a passport would be straightforward but, honestly, I can't be bothered going into town, let alone moving.
Poland (I could get citizenship, some Prussian and Austro-Hungarian heritage, (not slav)) and Hungary both politically suitable at this time.
Israel was top of the list but Yerushalayim is too cold in winter, the coastal plain too liberal and they won't put on Wagner performances
USA (FL, TX, 2A red states)
Czechia (gun rights)

Neither country needs another immigrant so I'll put it down to a thought experiment and live out my twilight years at home.
East, West Home's best.

Bottom
Sweden though I could get a passport on my mother's side), paradoxically probably Germany because of what has become of it the last several years.
A couple of months backl I met a Swedish bloke outside the pub. He basically apologised for being white and Swedish without any prompt and it was quite pathetic.
Anywhere socialist; Cuba, Venezuela, Africa, the vast majority of majority-muslim countries.


----------



## FrankE

Salix said:


> A bit late to post but I am half Y'upik Eskimo from Central Alaska. I like the term "half-breed" and find it entertaining when non-Natives get insulted or even offended when they hear me use it. It's so homogenized now I don't even say if I'm native or not - people don't care as much as they used to and I like that.


The anthropology department at my local university study the Y'upik people, village of Quinhagak, Nunalleq archeological site. I went to a couple of talks on it. Very interesting.


----------



## Forster

I'm not sure pride is relevant, as I can inly be held responsible for what I do, not who I am. I have a UK passport, where I was born and have always lived. I'm not interested in living anywhere else.

Having said that, I most enjoyed holidays in Finland, Sweden and The Netherlands...and the Outer Hebrides.


----------



## composingmusic

It’s complicated – I’m from the US and Finland (one parent from each, dual nationality), but I’m living and studying in the UK currently. Specifically studying music composition, and I’m also a freelance professional composer.


----------



## Waehnen

I am 100% of Eastern Finnish heritage (done a DNA analysis) and if you have a look at the diagram and search for the green line symbols in the right hand up corner and compare the position to the other Europeans, you might understand why I am a bit weirdo. (Just joking, but these things sure are interesting!)










I am a proud citizen of the European Union. I love Finland and Europe.


----------



## JessieJim

I've German Jewish roots and I'm proud of it.


----------

