Why is nationalism decreasing...

Morocco is in Africa. ಠ_ಠ

And yeah, knowing about your origins is pretty cool, except when you find out all those lines tracing you back to Muhammad were probably made up by your ancestors as they emigrated from the East into Morocco. In my family we make a point about not caring about our ancestors. Anyway, Muslim genealogies of welathy families are really troublesome to follow: we didn't have a rule that the firstborn inherit everything, like with Western nobles, nor of sending the second to the military and the third to the clergy, so all of them inherited and had children. Furthermore, Islamic culture encourages rich families to make lots and lots of kids, under pain of public ridicule ("cheapskate!" "impotent!"). AND the fact that rich men also tend to marry as many women as the local culture and their status allows them to get away with (in some regions it was very shameful to divorce or remarry or whatever, while in others it means you're a Bad Ass) so you can guess the status and composition of families fluctuated in a very Kudzu way.

@Raw Power: I think you might have misunderstood what I meant. Culture isn't inherently relevant in and of itself. We make it relevant. Indeed, the whole notion of being a civilized human being is a matter of self-imposed significance, but that issue might derail us into a debate about free will and the human condition. And yes, I understand tribalism very well. I have quite a few Nigerian and Liberian colleagues who insist on reminding of it. Sub-Saharan Africans establish themselves in more microscopic terms than people from other regions, and there is some significance to distinguishing and tracing these tribes because it can answer anthropological questions about how diasporas are established in the first place.

@Barkey: I suppose it is the silver lining, but I have mixed feelings about that since activities such as slavery and colonialism are what made Africa such an unstable place to begin with. But I get your humor and I agree.

Edit: "In my family we make a point about not caring about our ancestors"

Raw Power, this is a good point, and it's actually what I meant earlier in this post. You choose to make it either significant or insignificant. And yes, I was referring primarily to black Africans. No offense, but that should go without saying.

edited 29th Dec '10 10:15:30 AM by Aprilla

Heh, it's kind of like how I always give my roomate shit, he's a very dark shade of black, and his roots are actually from Jamaica, so I purposely make jokes about him being from Africa to annoy him.

If I were him I would be annoyed.

I have nothing to be proud of, my family were farmers for as long as records have existed for Britain, there are no murders, no-one going off and marrying a duke, just farming farming and farming for about 400 years in various areas around Cheshire.

Why should I be Proud of that? My family have simply kept the thing ticking over, and my nation has asked nothing of them and needed nothing back. I have not a shred of mystery or depth in my family tree, because its a family that has done nothing and would have most likely done exactly the same in any nation on earth.

So, tell me, why should I be proud of this nation or my ancestry?

edited 29th Dec '10 10:41:27 AM by JosefBugman

You know, that reminds me of something one of my Nigerian friends said the other day. His country, like many others, may have gone through epidemics, famine, and civil wars, but he's still proud to be Nigerian. I've been told that this attitude can be found in many other dangerous countries.

It seems strange to hear someone say that, but I think it implies the capacity for resilience and never giving up in spite of overwhelming adversity. Speaking very philosophically and somewhat literally, he went so far as to say that the spirit of the nation is what you make it, and if you give up on your nation, you give up on yourself. There's a good deal of truth behind that statement, and you don't have to be a black African to understand that.

That was actually one of the points of the negro spirituals sung by slaves in the fields. The overseers thought they were singing about happiness and trivia, but they were actually codifying their dialogue on the plight of their people and how they would resolve the situation. The theme "I now know why the caged bird sings" runs along this concept. Bruce Springsteen's song "Born in the USA" is often mistaken for a cry to patriotism when it's actually a narrative about the trauma of being a Vietnam veteran. However, it's worth noting that the song does not condemn the United States as a nation but rather its apathy and mishandling of the subject matter.

You can criticize your nation without outright hating it, and I very strongly feel that a large part of being a patriot means calling attention to your nation's problems rather than staying quiet about that. Some political parties that shall not be named have taken that idea too far, but that's another argument for another day.

You don't have to be proud of your heritage Josef, but there's no reason to think nobody else should be either.

@Raw Power; That's just how Vitriolic Best Buds work man. ;)

edited 29th Dec '10 10:50:32 AM by Barkey

If it were me I'd be insulted by my however distant grandnephew deigning to be proud of me like He's my goddamn parent. I lived, I died and thats the end to it, I fail to see why whatever they do is worthy of note beyond acknowledgement, thanks if neccesary and then using what they did.

Its why I don't "get" nationalism of any stripe, it seems like you are trying to claim membership of a group that has so many better people in it whilst ignoring, downplaying or insulting the bad parts of it. You just happened to be born there, it shouldn't mean all that much to you.

edited 29th Dec '10 10:54:59 AM by JosefBugman

Like I said, personally, it doesn't mean much to me, until someone from somewhere else starts insulting where I come from. Then I start to take it personally.

For my ancestors, I more or less look back at some of their lives in awe more than anything. I guess my line of thought is sort of "Wow, hard to live up to" for several of them. Yeah, there's several that led normal lives with nothing terribly amazing to speak of, several who endured lots of hardship and bad turns of luck, but it's like one big storybook, and you write the next chapter.

As a literary scholar, I will say that humans' fascination with lineage, allegiance, and a sense of belonging has much to do with a intrinsic desire to tell and hear stories. Storytelling is probably at the crux of language propagation and, by proxy, fundamental human experiences. Some people like having a sense of ownership for their place of origin because they can talk about it. The narratives of our ancestors become our personal narratives, and in turn, our stories shape our identity.

But why? Its just a population centre. I mean I am sure that you have noticed things that you think needs improovement. Why are people who have any investment the only ones allowed to criticise?

I just don't get it. I don't hate my nation, its just not something I want to die for.

I wouldn't die for my nation because I like my nation, though I know through my occupation I run the risk of that happening to me.

I'm not too far in either direction, I just like living in America, and there aren't really any other places I would rather live. It'd be a tossup between Canada and the UK. Canada is too cold, UK I can't have my guns. This means that I get to live in America and tolerate it's eccentricities and occasional embarassments.

Josef: "I mean I am sure that you have noticed things that you think needs improovement. Why are people who have any investment the only ones allowed to criticise?"

No, this is an important question worth exploring. To clarify my previous post, narratives aren't just about the good. They're about the bad and everything in between, as Barkey expressed earlier. I do think people from other countries have a right to criticize...to a certain extent. I don't have a huge problem with foreigners complaining about the United States of America so long as they back up what they say. I think cyclical criticism is a necessary part of globalization, and although I have certain issues with globalization, one of its virtues is that it promotes an atmosphere of dialogue, however negative that dialogue may be.

For example, take the United States. We predominantly drive Japanese cars. Our clothing, toys, appliances, and crops are made in Mexico and China. Our communications technology is manufactured by the Koreans, our information technology is largely supported by India, and our system of democracy is arguably based on a format designed for us by the French. All of these countries have at least somewhat of a right to provide some commentary of how we are as a nation because we consume their products. However, there must be due respect that comes with that commentary so as to ensure stability in the international community.

I don't like Japan's revisionist tendencies. I don't like a lot of the bigotry that goes on in France. I don't like Israel's or Pakistan's occasional self-righteousness, nor do I like OUR self-righteousness. National identity is somewhat important, but I have to side with Barkey in saying that it's not the end-all be-all of human identity. A nation is only as strong as its individual citizens, regardless of ideology or style of governance. With that said, I can also see your side of the argument, Josef. I'm very suspicious of hardcore nationalism because it tends to lead to jingoism and sheepish peer pressure. But I also get annoyed with people who act as forces of disagreement for the sake of disagreement against any national cause (and I'm not saying you're doing that). The divisive nature of the situation regarding Wikileaks is a clear indication of how imbalanced patriotism and individual virtue can become.

I just don't see a point to it. Have an allgience to a system, an ideal and to your friends, not to a nation.

In that case, Josef, you don't have to have pride in your country. But that doesn't mean others shouldn't either.

But I like to know why people have these ideas. I mean, why people feel a sense of pride in a "nation" is clearly an important thing that I don't understand.

My country has been better to me than any other country has, and my country has raised me from the beginning. I like her, and I feel proud to have been with her my whole life. As my own example, I am an American, so America is a part of me just as much as I am a part of America.

I like to think of it in a way similar to Scrye. America is a country, a group, if you will. I am part of this group, and thus I represent it and it sort of represents me. This means I take pride in things done by America that I agree with, and I feel ashamed of it when it does things I disapprove of.

Your country hasn't raised you, your parents did that (presumably) and unless they were civil servants they were working for None governmental organisations, it was probably that and not tax money that got you through education and into university. You may owe a debt to your nation, but that does not mean that you should have much loyalty to it, anymore than you have a loyalty to your bank just because you happen to be in the overdraft.

Your nation is not the place you grew up, that was your street, your school, your neighbourhood. Just because it was inside a larger conglomerate entity doesn't mean you should have any loyalty to the larger.

My country has been better to me than any other country has, and my country has raised me from the beginning. I like her, and I feel proud to have been with her my whole life. As my own example, I am an American, so America is a part of me just as much as I am a part of America.

He even gave "her" a gendered personal pronoun. Excuse me, I'll be back This the point where I burst out laughing, but why bother typing it?

edited 29th Dec '10 5:47:24 PM by RawPower

I just don't see a point to it. Have an allgience to a system, an ideal and to your friends, not to a nation.

Many people are patriotic because they see the country they live in as closely entwined with a system or ideal.

They need to read The Wave.

Really? Because I don't. Other than the very basics of "keep people alive" I don't think any nation does any system very well.

^

You don't, but each country is different in that respect. A big part of American culture, for instance, is this ideal that we have a unique way of life based on our ideals regarding freedom, which are intertwined with our highly bureaucratic government that is too busy fighting itself to take said freedom away.

Your country hasn't raised you, your parents did that (presumably) and unless they were civil servants they were working for None governmental organisations, it was probably that and not tax money that got you through education and into university. You may owe a debt to your nation, but that does not mean that you should have much loyalty to it, anymore than you have a loyalty to your bank just because you happen to be in the overdraft.

Your nation is not the place you grew up, that was your street, your school, your neighbourhood. Just because it was inside a larger conglomerate entity doesn't mean you should have any loyalty to the larger.

Yes, my parents did raise me. I'm sure the surrounding culture I absorbed that contributed to a lot of the ways I think, go about things, and value had no effect on my upbringing whatsoever. As may surprise you, I was raised in a very social environment filled with lots of different people, and not in a cave with nobody else but my parents. An absurd notion, I know.

Actually, I went to public school, which is funded by tax dollars, so yeah, tax dollars actually did have something to do with providing me an education. Tax dollars don't fund universities by default, and I didn't go to one anyways, so that doesn't really matter.

I do owe a debt to my country, but not much in the way that I owe a bank. A bank is a place you go to to get money when you have none. A guardian who pays for your upbringing is someone who's earned your loyalty, so in that sense, my country has been more like a legal guardian to me than it has a bank.

Yes, and guess where my street, school, and neighborhood are. They're all in my country. I don't have a street, school, or neighborhood that I belong to in Britain, Germany, Thailand, Italy, China, Russia, Venezuela, Finland, Canada, Zimbabwe, or any other country. But I do have one in my country. And without my country providing them for me, I wouldn't have one at all.

My point stands. I'm not asking you to have loyalty to your country. I'm standing by myself in that I have every right to have loyalty to mine.

You have loyalty to your friends, right? They've provided for you and you like them, right? You like it when they're not in a bad situation, right? Why should you be able to have loyalty to your friends and I not be allowed to have loyalty to my country?

edited 29th Dec '10 8:48:31 PM by Scrye