Nationalism

[fredtoast]

(11-06-2018, 07:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Despite Fred protesting his ignorance, the underlined is what he added that he now claims he has no idea what was added.  Not part of my original statement, not my point of view, nothing to do with what I said.  typical Fred adding things no one but he said to try and paint his opponents as something they are not.

I have posted a direct quote of the question you are refuse to answer.  It does not include anything that you underlined.  Everyone can see that.

(11-06-2018, 07:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I showed above exactly why you're considering the biggest word twister and spreader of blatant falsehoods.  You're dishonest even for a lawyer.  It boggles the mind that anyone actually defends this type of behavior from you.

I am not going to play this name calling game with you.  All I am going to do is DARE you to post a direct quote of the question I asked and underline the part of it that was not a part of the definition you provided.

I know you won't do it.  Instead you will just start insulting me again.  That is all you are capable of doing.  

[*bfine32*]

Are folks saying it is "wrong" to think my country is superior to others in the world?

[fredtoast]

(11-06-2018, 11:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Are folks saying it is "wrong" to think my country is superior to others in the world?

Are you unable to figure this out for yourself?

Pretty much everyone here agrees there is no problem in just thinking your country is better than others.  The problem arises when these feeling of superiority blind people to faults in their on country.  Or when "promoting the culture" leads to wars to impose that culture on others.  Or when "promoting the culture" leads to discrimination against citizens with different cultures and backgrounds.

Anyone else want to pitch in and help explain what we have been saying to Bfine32.  He is apparently having a hard time understanding the different aspects of "nationalism".

[*bfine32*]

(11-07-2018, 12:38 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Are you unable to figure this out for yourself?

Pretty much everyone here agrees there is no problem in just thinking your country is better than others.  The problem arises when these feeling of superiority blind people to faults in their on country.  Or when "promoting the culture" leads to wars to impose that culture on others.  Or when "promoting the culture" leads to discrimination against citizens with different cultures and backgrounds.

Anyone else want to pitch in and help explain what we have been saying to Bfine32.  He is apparently having a hard time understanding the different aspects of "nationalism".

Thanks, just asking if folks were suggesting your Nation was superior to others was a bad thing. You cleared in it up. We all agree thinking we are superior is not a bad thing. 

[fredtoast]

(11-07-2018, 01:21 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Thanks, just asking if folks were suggesting your Nation was superior to others was a bad thing. You cleared in it up. We all agree thinking we are superior is not a bad thing. 

I am not sure if I did "clear it up".  It is not as "black and white" as you seem to imply by your comments.  Thinking we are superior can sometimes be a bad thing that cause problems.

Maybe you should go back and read the entire thread.  Lots of good discussion on this.  It is not a simple "yes/no" question.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-06-2018, 11:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have posted a direct quote of the question you are refuse to answer.  It does not include anything that you underlined.  Everyone can see that.

No, you deliberately misstated my position with an added statement.  Peddle your garbage elsewhere.

Quote:I am not going to play this name calling game with you.  All I am going to do is DARE you to post a direct quote of the question I asked and underline the part of it that was not a part of the definition you provided.

I'm going to DARE you to actually answer a position without deliberately twisting or misrepresenting it.

Quote:I know you won't do it.  Instead you will just start insulting me again.  That is all you are capable of doing.  

Perhaps (but really no, LOL!), but I'm apparently better at knowing the law then a defense attorney.  Things that make you go hmm.

[fredtoast]

(11-06-2018, 11:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not going to play this name calling game with you.  All I am going to do is DARE you to post a direct quote of the question I asked and underline the part of it that was not a part of the definition you provided.

I know you won't do it.  Instead you will just start insulting me again.  That is all you are capable of doing.  

And he proves me right again

(11-07-2018, 01:44 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, you deliberately misstated my position with an added statement.  Peddle your garbage elsewhere.



I'm going to DARE you to actually answer a position without deliberately twisting or misrepresenting it.


Perhaps (but really no, LOL!), but I'm apparently better at knowing the law then a defense attorney.  Things that make you go hmm.

This is very simple.  

Post a direct quote of the question I asked you.

Underline the part that was not taken directly from your own definition.

In other words post the proof of what you claim.  

Or else keep dancing around and throwing out insults. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-07-2018, 01:56 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Post a direct quote of the question I asked you.

Will do, as soon as you admit your deliberate falsehood.

Quote:Underline the part that was not taken directly from your own definition.

You mean for the third time?  I tire of engaging in your playground level inanity.

Quote:In other words post the proof of what you claim.

Already done, Matlock. 

Quote:Or else keep dancing around and throwing out insults. 

Insults are only insults if they aren't true.  Mull that one over. 

[fredtoast]

(11-07-2018, 02:05 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Will do, as soon as you admit your deliberate falsehood.

I will never admit a falsehood that never existed.  If it existed then you would post proof of it and you can't.

(11-07-2018, 02:05 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You mean for the third time?  I tire of engaging in your playground level inanity.

No.  I mean for the first time.  If you have already posted the question I asked you with the part underlined that was not from your own definition of nationalism give me the number of those posts.

I do not tire of proving you wrong.  I did it by posting direct quotes from you in post #9 and #31.  Those posts prove that I mnever twisted your words in the question I asked you.

(11-07-2018, 02:05 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Already done, Matlock. 

What post number?

(11-07-2018, 02:05 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Insults are only insults if they aren't true.  Mull that one over. 

This is not true at all.  In fact it is complete gibberish.

[Dill]

(11-06-2018, 11:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Are folks saying it is "wrong" to think my country is superior to others in the world?

One folk said it might depend on how you gloss "superior."  And where you go beyond "think."

Generally speaking, some people just prefer their own country to others because it is what they know.  If you ask if their country is "superior" they'll say it is for them. They don't necessarily think others are inferior. A Swiss who likes mountains thinks Switzerland is superior to Denmark. But he doesn't get upset if a Dane who likes the seacoast thinks Denmark is superior. He agrees that for a person who likes the seacoast it IS superior.

This is not to say such determinations are all just preference.  An Afghan who thought Afghanistan was a superior country 50 years ago might think it is not at all superior now. Most outside the country would agree.

But others may think their country better in some transcendent sense--"really" superior--making others really inferior by definition. Necessarily. For them, "wrong" consists in denying that superiority. 

So some question where that assumption of "real" superiority leads, perhaps to questions like-- Should inferior (e.g. shithole) countries have equal legal standing with superior? Should their citizens?

They think about where those questions have lead in the past. Where do you think they lead? Can you think your country superior but espouse an international legal order which defines all as equal? If so, then you are more like our Swiss mountaineer than someone who thinks his country is "really" superior. If you cannot, then maybe you are a nationalist.


 

[Dill]

More today on the "uproar over Trump describing himself as a nationalist."

Trump accuses reporter of asking 'racist' question after she presses him on nationalism
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/07/election-results-donald-trump-accuses-reporter-asking-racist-question/1920331002/

Yamiche Alcindor, a White House correspondent for PBS NewsHour, questioned whether the president's use of the word "nationalism" at several rallies ahead of the midterm was a dog whistle for "white nationalism," as many of his critics have suggested.

"That's such a racist question," Trump said. "What you just said is so insulting to me. It's a very terrible thing that you said."

The "reverse-charges-rather-than-answer-the-question" tactic is well displayed here. (It was used two days ago on a reporter asking if Trump's rhetoric incited violence; Trump insisted the media was guilty of that.) He closes the session telling a CNN reporter to run CNN and let him (Trump) run the country. Enemy of the people.
Kellyanne for damage control:

Kellyanne Conway defends Trump after he calls black reporter’s question ‘racist’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/kellyanne-conway-defends-trump-after-he-calls-black-reporters-question-racist/2018/11/07/c63ba1ee-e2f0-11e8-ab2c-b31dcd53ca6b_story.html?utm_term=.ba1d462259c0

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway on Wednesday defended President Trump for calling a black reporter’s question about his self-professed nationalism “racist,” arguing that “there’s a difference between nationalism and white nationalism.”

She suggested that it was unfair to ask the president about his use of the term.
“I resent tremendously always being put into this toxic stew of racism and sexism and misogynism and xenophobia. It’s a lot on our shoulders, because it’s not fair,” Conway said.

NOT FAIR! Like its the press spinning all this out of thin air as Mexican rapists and MS 13 "animals" swarm our borders.

Some interesting questions still remain if one separates "nationalism" from "white nationalism." Among them--is Trump saying nationalism is just putting the U.S. first on balance of trade issues and the like? I am curious what the gain is here. He has already said he wants to put America first and "make it great." Why add that one is "nationalist" though? And as a contrast to "globalist"?
He speaks as if he has just picked up these terms. But his previous adviser Bannon was using them for years.

[treee]

(11-08-2018, 02:46 AM)Dill Wrote: More today on the "uproar over Trump describing himself as a nationalist."

Trump accuses reporter of asking 'racist' question after she presses him on nationalism
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/07/election-results-donald-trump-accuses-reporter-asking-racist-question/1920331002/

Yamiche Alcindor, a White House correspondent for PBS NewsHour, questioned whether the president's use of the word "nationalism" at several rallies ahead of the midterm was a dog whistle for "white nationalism," as many of his critics have suggested.

"That's such a racist question," Trump said. "What you just said is so insulting to me. It's a very terrible thing that you said."

The "reverse-charges-rather-than-answer-the-question" tactic is well displayed here. (It was used two days ago on a reporter asking if Trump's rhetoric incited violence; Trump insisted the media was guilty of that.) He closes the session telling a CNN reporter to run CNN and let him (Trump) run the country. Enemy of the people.
Kellyanne for damage control:

Kellyanne Conway defends Trump after he calls black reporter’s question ‘racist’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/kellyanne-conway-defends-trump-after-he-calls-black-reporters-question-racist/2018/11/07/c63ba1ee-e2f0-11e8-ab2c-b31dcd53ca6b_story.html?utm_term=.ba1d462259c0

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway on Wednesday defended President Trump for calling a black reporter’s question about his self-professed nationalism “racist,” arguing that “there’s a difference between nationalism and white nationalism.”

She suggested that it was unfair to ask the president about his use of the term.
“I resent tremendously always being put into this toxic stew of racism and sexism and misogynism and xenophobia. It’s a lot on our shoulders, because it’s not fair,” Conway said.

NOT FAIR! Like its the press spinning all this out of thin air as Mexican rapists and MS 13 "animals" swarm our borders.

Some interesting questions still remain if one separates "nationalism" from "white nationalism."  Among them--is Trump saying nationalism is just putting the U.S. first on balance of trade issues and the like?  I am curious what the gain is here. He has already said he wants to put America first and "make it great." Why add that one is "nationalist" though? And as a contrast to "globalist"?
He speaks as if he has just picked up these terms.  But his previous adviser Bannon was using them for years.

It seems like he was just trolling the media, using the term on purpose (probably distracting from something else that was getting coverage).

[Dill]

(11-08-2018, 02:57 AM)treee Wrote: It seems like he was just trolling the media, using the term on purpose (probably distracting from something else that was getting coverage).

Maybe. It's also possible that he just wanders into those moments. Feels (rightly) that at that moment the crowd would respond to something "anti-globalist" and framed as "saying words we aren't supposed to say anymore." Then he's not really ready for the fallout. Didn't expect people would continue to call him on it. Feels "attacked" unfairly by the enemy of the people and so on.

It's also possible he knew exactly what the term meant, that it was at once a dogwhistle for a proportion of the base AND plausibly deniable as such.

[GMDino]

(11-08-2018, 02:46 AM)Dill Wrote: More today on the "uproar over Trump describing himself as a nationalist."

Trump accuses reporter of asking 'racist' question after she presses him on nationalism
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/11/07/election-results-donald-trump-accuses-reporter-asking-racist-question/1920331002/

Yamiche Alcindor, a White House correspondent for PBS NewsHour, questioned whether the president's use of the word "nationalism" at several rallies ahead of the midterm was a dog whistle for "white nationalism," as many of his critics have suggested.

"That's such a racist question," Trump said. "What you just said is so insulting to me. It's a very terrible thing that you said."

The "reverse-charges-rather-than-answer-the-question" tactic is well displayed here. (It was used two days ago on a reporter asking if Trump's rhetoric incited violence; Trump insisted the media was guilty of that.) He closes the session telling a CNN reporter to run CNN and let him (Trump) run the country. Enemy of the people.
Kellyanne for damage control:

Kellyanne Conway defends Trump after he calls black reporter’s question ‘racist’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/kellyanne-conway-defends-trump-after-he-calls-black-reporters-question-racist/2018/11/07/c63ba1ee-e2f0-11e8-ab2c-b31dcd53ca6b_story.html?utm_term=.ba1d462259c0

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway on Wednesday defended President Trump for calling a black reporter’s question about his self-professed nationalism “racist,” arguing that “there’s a difference between nationalism and white nationalism.”

She suggested that it was unfair to ask the president about his use of the term.
“I resent tremendously always being put into this toxic stew of racism and sexism and misogynism and xenophobia. It’s a lot on our shoulders, because it’s not fair,” Conway said.

NOT FAIR! Like its the press spinning all this out of thin air as Mexican rapists and MS 13 "animals" swarm our borders.

Some interesting questions still remain if one separates "nationalism" from "white nationalism."  Among them--is Trump saying nationalism is just putting the U.S. first on balance of trade issues and the like?  I am curious what the gain is here. He has already said he wants to put America first and "make it great." Why add that one is "nationalist" though? And as a contrast to "globalist"?
He speaks as if he has just picked up these terms.  But his previous adviser Bannon was using them for years.

This is the age of Trump.

He says something and when asked to clarify or told that *some* people think he meant something maybe other than he really meant he gets defensive because:

A) He can't imagine he can be wrong
B) He can't imagine EVERYONE doesn't think he's right

So he attacks rather than clarifies.

The issue with Trump is that while another, more well spoken person (not just politician) could answer the question (even if they didn't answer it) Trump is a bully.  He's lived his entire life as the guy who thinks if he yells and threatens he'll get his way because he was sheltered and protected.  

When people complain about participation trophies I like to bring up Trump.  A guy who never had to "lose".  Daddy just gave him more money, lawyers just sued and bailed him out, the real workers did the hard stuff that he could put his shiny name on.

Now, when confronted with being "the man" (where the buck is supposed to stop) he doesn't know what to do but attack and blame others.

[GMDino]

(11-07-2018, 01:43 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not sure if I did "clear it up".  It is not as "black and white" as you seem to imply by your comments.  Thinking we are superior can sometimes be a bad thing that cause problems.

Maybe you should go back and read the entire thread.  Lots of good discussion on this.  It is not a simple "yes/no" question.

That's the issue.

How deep is Trump's "nationalism"?

Give the shallowness of his other thoughts and public statements it probably doesn't go much deeper than chanting "USA" and a WWE event.

[GMDino]

BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK BARK https://t.co/TpT3zOMYVt

— Racism WatchDog (@RacismDog) November 23, 2018

His supporters are even better if you have the stomach to read the replies.

And this is why I put it in this thread:

I am a "Nationalist"

I am white
I believe in God (not Allah)
I love people of every color
I believe in our constitution
I believe in the rule of law
I believe USA comes 1st
Pro choice is murder
Illegals should be deported

Don't ever confuse that with a "white supremacists"

— Clinton Michael (@ThinBlueLine614) November 11, 2018

Here's his bio too:

Quote:Clinton Michael
@ThinBlueLine614
FMR. LEO 614 special weapons and tactics operator. Legend, now living rent free in the minds of liberals world wide. On Gab- @ ClintonMichael

Just in case anyone wondered what Nationalism means to these "people".