Nationalism vs. Internationalism

Are you a Nationalist or an Internationalist?

  • I live in the U.S. and I am a Nationalist.

    Votes: 11 21.6%
  • I live in the U.S. and I am an Internationalist.

    Votes: 14 27.5%
  • I live in the E.U. and I am a Nationalist.

    Votes: 3 5.9%
  • I live in the E.U. and I am an Internationalist.

    Votes: 14 27.5%
  • I live somewhere else and I am a Nationalist.

    Votes: 3 5.9%
  • I live somewhere else and I am an Internationalist.

    Votes: 6 11.8%

  • Total voters
    51
their is often massive civilian casualties. The situation can often end up worse after the invasion then before.

So it is better to be alive under an oppressive dictator, than to be free and have the chance of dying? Lord knows that dictators do not guarantee their citizens' well-being, ask the Kurds.
 
I will repeat what I just said. Almost all common people, who are not rich politicians, care about liberty and freedom. However the state, which is made up of rich, greedy, politicians, does not care about freedom and liberty of people. They care only about profit.
That doesn't answer the question. In your theorhetical world, people should be caring just as much for a person 10,000 miles away as the person 10,000 feet away.

So how should a world community act in such a case?
 
So it is better to be alive under an oppressive dictator, than to be free and have the chance of dying? Lord knows that dictators do not guarantee their citizens' well-being, ask the Kurds.

It is not just the chance of dying. It is a good chance of dying, and in some areas a much greater chance of dying than when they were living under Sadaam. Just ask the many civilians that die from suicide bombings every day.
 
That doesn't answer the question. In your theorhetical world, people should be caring just as much for a person 10,000 miles away as the person 10,000 feet away.

So how should a world community act in such a case?

That is not what I am saying. It is obvious that people will care more for people they know than people they don't. But it is not natural for people to care more for one group of people over another if they do not know either.

The world community is run by people who love power. That is why people who have so much power decided to gain those positions. These people are selfish and care only about themselves and their profits. They do not represent the average person who does care about liberty and freedom for all people.
 
From Iraq Body Count - an anti-war website: 69,000-75,000 dead. - Under the United States

From Killers of the 20th century: Approached 2,000,000 - Under Saddam

There goes your argument. :)

Directly from Iraq Body Count, the source you quoted, the number of deaths per day has more than doubled after the invasion. Of course their are many more deaths under Saddam because he was in power for so long, but the deaths per day has gone up since the invasion.

Their goes your argument. :)
 
Directly from Iraq Body Count, the source you quoted, the number of deaths per day has more than doubled after the invasion. Of course their are many more deaths under Saddam because he was in power for so long, but the deaths per day has gone up since the invasion.

So would you rather live under Saddam Hussein or in Iraq today? Think carefully.

Their goes your argument. :)

I'm afraid not. :)
 
So would you rather live under Saddam Hussein or in Iraq today? Think carefully.

That is an extremely loaded question. Obviously I would rather not live in either. However, the yearly death toll per year in Iraq today is higher than before the invasion.

I'm afraid not. :)

I'm afraid so. :)
 
That is an extremely loaded question. Obviously I would rather not live in either. However, the yearly death toll per year in Iraq today is higher than before the invasion.

You won't answer it because you know you are stuck either way. You may not want to live in either, but there are humans that live there. Do you help them or not? If you don't, then you must not care about the freedom of other people, there goes internationalism. If you do, you must support the use of force to depose dictators world wide, thereby linking you to *gasp* George W. Bush.
 
You won't answer it because you know you are stuck either way. You may not want to live in either, but there are humans that live there. Do you help them or not? If you don't, then you must not care about the freedom of other people, there goes internationalism. If you do, you must support the use of force to depose dictators world wide, thereby linking you to *gasp* George W. Bush.

Of course I support helping those people and of course I support removing dictatorships. However, George W. Bush's invasion was not motivated by empathy for the people. It is because of this that when he invaded, he did not do any planning to make sure that things would be better for civilians. It is exactly because of the fact that the motive to remove the dictator was profit that mroe civilians are dying per year now than before the invasion. However, things like uprisings, for example, are motivated by the want for liberty and freedom, and almost always end in greater living conditions. When removing dictators is motivated by the want for freedom and liberty and not the want for profit, things do not end up degenerating into a worse situation like they have in Iraq.

I remember reading an article that Iraq was on the verge of a revolution immidiately before the U.S. invaded. If that had happened instead of a U.S. invasion motivated by oil profits, things would be much better in Iraq than they are now.
 
Of course I support helping those people and of course I support removing dictatorships. However, George W. Bush's invasion was not motivated by empathy for the people. It is because of this that when he invaded, he did not do any planning to make sure that things would be better for civilians. It is exactly because of the fact that the motive to remove the dictator was profit that mroe civilians are dying per year now than before the invasion. However, things like uprisings, for example, are motivated by the want for liberty and freedom, and almost always end in greater living conditions. When removing dictators is motivated by the want for freedom and liberty and not the want for profit, things do not end up degenerating into a worse situation like they have in Iraq.

I remember reading an article that Iraq was on the verge of a revolution immidiately before the U.S. invaded. If that had happened instead of a U.S. invasion motivated by oil profits, things would be much better in Iraq than they are now.

So you don't support the liberation of Iraqi people by the current U.S. administration? You think they were better off under Saddam Hussein than they are now?
 
You read an article? Okay . . .

Anyways, the OP did not provide a clear unbiased definition of the terms. Saying "an internationalist is someone who is concerned for all people and a nationalist only cares about their own country" doesn't cut it. I have a duty to all members of the human race (although taken to its logical conclusion, that does imply interference by one nation in the affairs of another) but I am also an American, and darned proud of it.
 
So you don't support the liberation of Iraqi people by the current U.S. administration? You think they were better off under Saddam Hussein than they are now?

I do not support the U.S. invasion into Iraq. However bad it was, it only made the situation worse. I would support an Iraqui Revolution, as was coming.

How about I turn this question around on you, but I'll add in a few facts this time. So you don't support an increased death rate brought about by the current U.S. administration? You think they were better off when the death rate was lower?

I also do not support the U.S. giving Sadam Huessein bioliogical weapons including nerve gase. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm
 
You read an article? Okay . . .

Anyways, the OP did not provide a clear unbiased definition of the terms. Saying "an internationalist is someone who is concerned for all people and a nationalist only cares about their own country" doesn't cut it. I have a duty to all members of the human race (although taken to its logical conclusion, that does imply interference by one nation in the affairs of another) but I am also an American, and darned proud of it.

I'll try to find the article in a second. When you say you are a proud American, what exactly are you proud of? You were not their during many events in the past 300 years of U.S. history. You had no influence on them, just as I had no influence.
 
I do not support the U.S. invasion into Iraq. However bad it was, it only made the situation worse. I would support an Iraqui Revolution, as was coming.

That's not what I was asking. Would you rather live in Iraq pre-2003 or today?

How about I turn this question around on you, but I'll add in a few facts this time. So you don't support an increased death rate brought about by the current U.S. administration? You think they were better off when the death rate was lower?

The Iraqi people? I could care less either way.

I also do not support the U.S. giving Sadam Huessein bioliogical weapons including nerve gase. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm

I do not support the U.S. giving him biological weapons either, glad we can agree.
 
The Iraqi people? I could care less either way.

This is exactly why I started this thread. I want to understand what drives people like you to be so sociopathic to most of the world. Why does the geographic location of birth of an individual determine whether or not they deserve to be cared about?
 
You still have not answered my question

Would you rather live in Iraq pre-2003 or today?

I am starting to feel like you are avoiding it.

This is exactly why I started this thread. I want to understand what drives people like you to be so sociopathic to most of the world. Why does the geographic location of birth of an individual determine whether or not they deserve to be cared about?

I doubt the people in Iraq care about me. Why should I? What difference would it make? If I started caring about them, would they all of a suddenly be saved?
 
You still have not answered my question

Would you rather live in Iraq pre-2003 or today?

I am starting to feel like you are avoiding it.
I am not answering that question because it is a set up question that it completely arbitrary! I've got a good idea, how about just as your asking me a completely pointless hypothetical question, I'll ask you one: Would you rather be shot to death or hung by gallows?

I doubt the people in Iraq care about me. Why should I? What difference would it make? If I started caring about them, would they all of a suddenly be saved?

You should care about them because theoretically it could influence who you vote for, thereby changing the foreign policy regarding them, and changing the condition of their lives a considerable amount. But the main reason you should care about them is the same reason you should care about people in your own country. If you do not care about them, then you are essentially dehumanizing them. And when you dehumanize them, well then all sorts of bad things happen. Just remember all of those who were killed in the Nazi concentration camps. Extreme nationalism and only caring about the people in your country is one of the conditionals for facism.
 
I am not answering that question because it is a set up question that it completely arbitrary! I've got a good idea, how about just as your asking me a completely pointless hypothetical question, I'll ask you one: Would you rather be shot to death or hung by gallows?

It is not arbitrary. I want you on the record. You cannot say you are for freedom and liberty equally for all people and think they are better off under Saddam Hussein.

You should care about them because theoretically it could influence who you vote for, thereby changing the foreign policy regarding them, and changing the condition of their lives a considerable amount. But the main reason you should care about them is the same reason you should care about people in your own country. If you do not care about them, then you are essentially dehumanizing them.

I do not care about them, so they become non-humans? :lol: Does that make them monkey, a parrot, or a horse?

And when you dehumanize them, well then all sorts of bad things happen. Just remember all of those who were killed in the Nazi concentration camps.

I assume you supported the USA in liberating Nazi Germany and saving the Jews? Why not the Kurds in Iraq?

Extreme nationalism and only caring about the people in your country is one of the conditionals for facism.

That does not mean it will become fascism. Rest assured, whether I am extremely nationalist or not will have no influence on the American government becoming fascist.
 
I'll try to find the article in a second. When you say you are a proud American, what exactly are you proud of? You were not their during many events in the past 300 years of U.S. history. You had no influence on them, just as I had no influence.

I am proud to belong to this nation, which does in a way make me part of its great accomplishments (and in a way, its less-than-great ones as well). Now, the fact that I am American does not tell you much about my character, and of course I cannot take credit or receive blame for anything anyone else did, but it is one of the ways (although not the main one) I identify myself.
 
Top Bottom