Is Nationalism The Exact Opposite Of Patriotism?

[ladsin]

https://nyti.ms/2z7PoaV

Yes, It Really Is

No, That's Nonsensical

Other

Haha, that's why your people are staging a coup.

[0112358]

In theory, no, in practice, it sort of can be. If one of the elements of national pride is a national commitment to diversity, tolerance, a global worldview, and being a global leader of the world, then insular nationalism is in some ways a reversal of that.

I'd guess that for some who consider themselves French patriots, they both wish to preserve the open tolerance they see as a core part of the French ideal, and they also view nationalists as cowards, who seem terrified French culture and values will vanish in contact with the world. This must seem very strange to those who think back of France's global influence and how directly and indirectly French values have spread to so much of the world, to suddenly be afraid that immigrants will mean the end of it.

[englisc]

Definitions:

Patriotism:
"the quality of being patriotic; vigorous support for one's country."

Nationalism:
"patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts."

"advocacy of political independence for a particular country."

They mean the same thing. There are different forms of nationalism however:

Ethno-nationalism: nation defined in terms of ethnicity

Civic nationalism: nation defined in terms of shared values, not based on ethnicity

[LittleBird_]

Nope, actually they are on the same side but nationalism is a lot more extreme.
Macron is talking bs.

[Guanfei]

He always is. I still don't know why people around the world think he's a good president.

[RachelleDraws]

No, Nationalism is an extension of patriotism, albeit, a more extreme, and in my opinion, more negative.

[madhatters4]

not necessarily but it could be. they aren't really comparable in terms of being opposites. the antonym of nationalism is more closely related to globalism

patriotism can be characteristic of those who support either nationalism or globalism

[Stoner710]

No Nationalism is a more extreme form of patriotism.

Example
Think of a guy named Jim and he says I love my country and I will do anything to defend it. Patriotism

Now think Phil say I love my country I will do anything for it this is the best nation on earth and if you not from_____________(insert country here) your not as good as me. That’s nationalism

Now everyone would agree that patriotism Is a good thing. There is debt about nationalism being a good thing. I would say it would depend on the situation

Nationalism can be a good thing. E. g look at back in the late 1700s in Greece. A wave of nationalism, the Greek started educating themselves about there national history and a wave of nationalism swept over the country and a war started against the ottomans so that Greece could become a country. It’s the same for Serbia Bulgaria Romania and other Balkan countries. With out that nationalism they would never have gained there freedom from the Turkish empire. Serbia nationalism didn’t die down which culminated into WW1.

Where it’s bad is in the case of Nazi germany nationalism took over when Hitler was in power and it could have been beneficial had Hitler not been war hungry. That’s when nationalism is a bad thing.

[Investigator]

"When talking about nationalism and patriotism, one cannot avoid the famous quotation by George Orwell, who said that nationalism is ‘the worst enemy of peace’. According to him, nationalism is a feeling that one’s country is superior to another in all respects, while patriotism is merely a feeling of admiration for a way of life. These concepts show that patriotism is passive by nature and nationalism can be a little aggressive."

Nationalism: Identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations

Patriotism: The quality of being patriotic; devotion to and vigorous support for one's country

I actually didn't think it was possible for someone to be THIS wrong. There are dictionaries in France, right? Did no one advise Macron to look up these terms before giving his speech or did they just want to enjoy watching him make a fool of himself?

Source (s):

1http://www. differencebetween. net/language/difference-between-nationalism-and-patriotism/

en. oxforddictionaries. com

[WalterRadio]

No, but the question is why one feels patriotic towards their country?

Is it because they share the ideals of the nation's founders, or is it because one is born where one's ancestors have always been through history?

Nations come about by one of a few ways. One common in Europe is that they are family holdings that are no longer totally controlled by the family. The US and a few other countries were formed by a compact of ideas. Others were formed because their colonial masters drew the lines on a map.

[Aynsof]

It is not the opposite no
But I understand the point that he is trying to make with what he is saying
He is trying to differentiate between different expressions of love of country so to speak define one as being positive and one being negative and he does arguably have a point in that regard
People don't often realise that the whole nationalism patriotism whatever thing was a concept that came up in the romance era it was actually originally a stance adopted by the higher social strata and spread downwards from there

[Steve_Case]

They are not exactly the same but they are pretty close. They both are in support of your own country and want their country to be the best. The one major difference as far as I am concerned is that Patriotism includes the act of sacrificing for ones own country. This does not mean that you have to serve in the armed forces to sacrifice for our country. The signers of the Declaration of Independence sacrificed just by signing it. They were mostly very rich individuals that put it all on the line when they signed it. Signing it was an act of treason against England at the time. John Hancock signed it in very large writing because he wanted to make sure they could read his name if it came down to it.

[Dargil]

Utter nonsense. Patriotism and Nationalism are virtually the same.
How can a globalist EU supporter understand either?
The Poles and Hungarians get it. The Italians are beginning to get it. Trump gets it. And, bless her radical heart, Marine LePen gets it.

[Calebng123]

No I would identify as either. My view is that we need separate countries because a globalist government would have too much control. Nobody elected the U. N. But they're slowly taking control. I'm Canadian by the way. But at the same time individual countries need to be kind and inclusive of taking in other people from other countries while still not sacrificing the culture.

[Sixgun77]

I agree with you up until your last point. There's no reason any country needs to be inclusive nor is any country under any kind of obligation to let ANYONE in.

[Calebng123]

I'm not saying there is any obligation to bring people in. I'm saying that those who are brought in ought to be treated well.

[Sixgun77]

That I can agree with. But the people being let in ought to assimilate, not attempt to change the country they enter.

[Calebng123]

That's why I said not sacrificing the culture. That's Canada's current problem. The amount of sexual assault has gone up like crazy in the last year. And the majority is Muslims. I'm not attacking Muslim people. I can respect them. But the ones coming from other countries where that type of stuff is okay need to be taught.

[Sixgun77]

Sorry to hear that. Best of luck up there

[Calebng123]

Yea it's getting quite rough. The prime minister promised he wouldn't accept any adult male Muslims into the country. But ended up doing so anyways. And one of these men killed a 13 year old in BC

[Exterminatore]

@Sixgun77

Well said.

[jacquesvol]

[ladsin]

Cool, thanks

[Anonymous]

Nationalism is only "bad" and the "opposite of patriotism" these days because Trump said something about being a Nationalist. The NPC's will go along with it too. People ignore facts and context so that they can believe what they want to believe, just so they can hate Trump, or whoever. I wish these people would get a grip. If everyone wasn't so devoted to a party and could think for themselves, and RESPECT other's political leanings and differences of opinion, we'd be doing a lot better.

The Democrats actually supported border security a few years ago, but now because Trump wants to actually do something about it, and he isn't one of them (or a traditional president for that matter), they flip flop and oppose it, and the government remains shut down. Completely asinine.

Sometimes you have to call it for what it is.

[tartaarsaus]

It's an extreme version of patriotism but politically it would make sense to define them as opposites. What Macron would be doing, if he says nationalism is the opposite of patriotism, is basically saying that Le Pen is opposite to the patriotism that the French love.

[Deathraider]

Nationalism is just an extreme form of patriotism.

I wonder, why do politicians have to play the patriotism bell to get voters? It's unfortunate that we as a society only vote for people that during the campaign, tell us that we're great, not make us reflect.

[Dems314]

Nationalism is a better word for kinda racist/xenophibic-ish
it means "hey i used to like it when everyone in france was white and wore a suit all day"
patriotism depends on the person, you can be both a nationalist (kinda racist) and a patriot.
to be a patriot is to like a country as is, and want to better it (if needed) or guard it (if perfect) the moment there's a change, maybe in the values of that country, your patriotism might fade and become nationalism.
but then you're called racist because you want it to go back before it got "better".

in short nationalism is what comes after patriotism fades.

[MarkRet]

Nationalism is usually the same as patriotism, but in some cases, it's a matter of perspective. If Kurds were patriotic, they'd be with the Turks, but the Kurds look after themselves, so they'd be nationalist.

[i3vestri]

By definition alone they are the same, but in the real world one is a LOT more extreme than the other. Patriotism is a love for your country and passion to improve upon it or see it improve. Nationalism is more extreme. They still love their country but they essentially want it to crush every other country in existence along with anyone who isn't as obsessed with their country as they are, like patriots.

[Anonymous]

They used to be very similar to each other two hundred years ago.

Use of the term in the 20th century tainted nationalism with negative associations.

Fundamentally, it’s just just loving your nation vs thinking that living in nations is good.

I think it’s starting to change in perception a bit recently. I think most people understand that liking that you’re living a nation state doesn’t mean you want to dominate other nations.

[name_is_eric]

Nationalism is the purest form of patriotism; loyalty and devotion to a nation, exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.

[Jackpot1977]

No it is the exact same thing as patriotism. Liberals today try to make people think nationalism means Nazi or racist but it doesn't it just simply means you care about your country and countrymen above all else and there is nothing wrong with that.

[CuChullan]

The difference between patriotism and nationalism is that the patriot is proud of his country for what it does , and the nationalist is proud of his country no matter what it does ; the first attitude creates a feeling of responsibility while the second a feeling of blind arrogance that leads to a war

[front2back]

Nationalism is the final form of patriotism. It is the logical conclusion.
Also, Nationalism is not inherently evil, it can be a very powerful tool to bring a nation's people together in times of war or crisis to keep carrying on.
European Union puppets such as Macron despise nationalism because it brings control back into the hands of a country's people rather than unelected officials in Brussels.

[russomakesmusic]

there nothing wrong with wanting people of the same race, religion, color, language living in one country exclusively. whoever spread this idea that diversity is good is an idiot. go to an African country and try being white and let me know how that goes. so if french people want only french people living in their country there's nothing wrong with that

[Daechir]

Nationalism is an excellent thing, as is patriotism.

[grega239]

no. im from slovenia. i never heard anyone call themselves a patriot. only nationalist. so it seem that these 2 words have the same meaning here

[princessfromjupiter]

Are mandarins the exact opposite of oranges?

[NYCQuestions1976]

Life... is so much more... transparent now. Thank you. 👍😂

[mrkdvsn]

The opposite of Nationalism is Globalism. Nationalism corresponds to Patriotism.

[mrkdvsn]

... and there's nothing "extreme" about Nationalism. It's just the NORM for the people of ANY country

[Phanta]

Nationalism is a patriotism, but many patriots reject nationalism. I go into depth on such issues on my website: www.thezap.net

[goaded]

If you're going to argue semantics, Nationalism and Jingoism are both forms of Patriotism, but they're the undesirable forms that want to exclude "others" and divide nations and people.

[ladsin]

How do you figure? How are you defining nationalism? Based on the definitions I see no way that they’re incompatible, but I also don’t see why you think nationalism is undesirable. Perhaps you have a more specific definition than I’m aware of.

[goaded]

Obviously, there's no clear-cut difference, but there's a hint at what I think Macron was trying to get at (I watched the speech at the time, I probably missed or forgot stuff) at the wiktionary pages for patriotism and nationalism:

"nationalism (countable and uncountable, plural nationalisms)

1. Patriotism; the idea of supporting one's country, people or culture. "

"patriotism (countable and uncountable, plural patriotisms)
[...]
3. The desire to compete with other nations; nationalism.
[...]
Synonyms

(love of country): nationalism
(nationalism): jingoism, chauvinism, superpatriotism, ultranationalism"

So, my take on it is:
Patriotism: "We're great!",
Nationalism: "We're better than them/you",
Jingoism: "We'll crush anyone who says we're not the greatest".

[ladsin]

Mm that's where we disagree. I just see nationalism as the recognition that the duty of the nation is to provide for and defend its' citizens. For example the duty of Germany is to protect Germans, not N Africans.

[goaded]

OK, but I don't think that was the meaning Macron was thinking of.

And part of the constitution of Germany calls for them to harbour asylum seekers, wherever they come from.

[ladsin]

The UN has mandated that we accept Asylee seekers in the aftermath of WWII where the Jews simply couldn't escape the Nazis. The problem is that they're now calling economic migrants Asylum Seekers and not integrating these migrants. This is why it takes 12 Germans to accommodate one migrant. Asylum seekers also have to stop in the first country that it is safe to do so, but they aren't they're essentially shopping for the countries with the most social programs which leads to them staying in countries like Germany.

[Jackpot1977]

Some Nationalists are extreme but most are not we just want secure borders and want our countrymen put first.

[Nadim171]

I don't care what that fool said. But apparently he transformed France into a Muslim African shithole.

[MarketData]

The Muslims were there before Macron was President. I'm just saying.

[Nadim171]

Yes that's true they were there decades before. But they weren't as much. And I'm not just talking about him I'm talking about most liberal leftist politicians and the European union in general

[danielmeegan]

Nationalists Take care of Domestic. Problems Globalists world problems by usually creating them under the guise its Good

[CuriousMufuxka]

They are both pride! Where the fuck is my yellow vest at?

[Anonymous]

Patriotism is positive, nationalism is negative.
The same difference like between feminism and feminazism (I apologize in advance to ignorant and bigoted people who can't tell the difference).

[malegender]

thanks for the apology

[Exterminatore]

Nationalism is not negative. It’s supporting your nation to the exclusion of others, which one must be a patriot to do.

Globalism is negative not nationalism.

Also all feminism is negative as it is about dominating men and making them subservient to women or

[Exterminatore]

Or about the wants of women over what’s good for the populous as a whole.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore As I said, I apologize to ignorant people, because feminism is not about dominating men, it's about equality. Feminazism is about female supremacy.

[Opinion Owner]

@malegender You're welcome.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore Nationalism leads to nazism. Only patriotism is good.

[Exterminatore]

If it was about equality you’d be storming the government demanding to be drafted for war and equal punishment for equal crimes for women... but that doesn’t benefit you.

Nationalism doesn’t necessarily lead to Nazism.

I’m a fascist, but NOT a Nazi and I favor nationalism but despise globalism.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore Haha, nope, I'm against any kind of army draft, for both males and females, military service should not be compulsory... that's not democratic.

It's a common knowledge that patriotism is good and nationalism is bad:

Oh good, we have something in common, I despise globalism too :)

[Exterminatore]

Then let’s stick with despising globalism. I don’t have time to show the faults of feminism the women who proclaim it know are there as it’s all a big manipulation.

I also don’t have time to argue a draft. Anyone who loves their country should serve it and if they are not a patriot, then leave it.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore I agree, let's stick to despizing globalism, cause lots of people mistake feminazis for feminists, and I think people can be patriotic even without a draft (professional army is more efficient than conscripts).
Exactly, no point in arguing.

[Exterminatore]

Yeah but there’s no difference between a feminist and feminazi.

You’re going to try to tell me a feminist simply believes men and women are equal.

And the feninazi is obvious, no explanation needed.

Except we’re not equals because we’re not the same. The numbers 2 and 5 aren’t equal. Know why? They’re not the same. You and I are not equal. There are some things females generally do better, same with males. That’s not equality.

And that’s the problem. If you perceive yourself to be my equal, then you have grounds to debate your husband. You’d be equals and you don’t have to do what your husband says. You have equal say. Except the sexes are not equals and men and women shouldn’t have the same rights. Sorry.

Respond if you want I really don’t want to argue. There’s not point. You believe what you do, I won’t change you and I’ll be disgusted by what you believe and are because of your beliefs and we can leave it to that and you can feel the same about me.

I believe in patriarchy. I wish for feminism to be obliterated with globalism, and liberalism and communism and all leftist doctrines.

I’m alt right dear. A fascist to be precise. I believe in patriarchy. I don’t believe in women having equal say in anything, sorry, and to me both feminist and feminazi are the same as they want power only men should have. The stand for the same thing. I say we’re not equals, and you should not have the rights you do as women on the whole have demonstrated extreme irresponsibility with the granted rights and have not been given equal responsibility for said rights.

Go ahead and say your peace and after that let’s just agree to hate globalism for now.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore There is a big difference between feminist and feminazi. Feminist are for gender equality, feminazis are for female supremacy, they are misandrists and they don't follow the main ideal of feminism, that's why they are not feminists.
Of course, number 2 and 5 are not the same, just like feminism and feminazism are not the same.
I don't have a husband yet, I have a boyfriend and we are equals.
Of course there is no point in arguing, yeah, you're right, I'm disgusted by patriarchy,
I wish nazism & fascism to be obliterated with globalism, liberalism, capitalism and all rightist doctrines.
I believe in equality, not supremacy.
Ok, I guess the only thing we have in common is that we hate globalism :)

[Exterminatore]

I wish Nazism be obliterated. I despise Nazism.

I’m a very moderate fascist. Very moderate, but none the less a fascist. The nonsense going on in society needs to be stop. In truth I love freedom, but if half the population can’t discern right from wrong and promotes every vile doctrine because they lack the discipline to use self control and good judgement with the freedom, then maybe we need to reduce some freedoms. That’s why I’m a fascist. I’m tired of watching my country ripped apart by degenerates and those lacking a conscience.

I fear more gov’t authority is the only solution.

[Exterminatore]

Globalism and liberalism are leftist doctrines.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore LOL, but fascists and nazis were allies 😂
Well, I also can't stand degenerates and those lacking a conscience, but I'm not a fascist.
I agree, authoritarian goverment is the best solution for now.
Globalism is not lefttist, it's right-wing capitalism/imperialism. Communism/Utopia is leftist.
Liberalism is "leftist" but they support things most leftist don't like (lgbt for example).

[Exterminatore]

You lack understanding. The Nazis WERE fascist, they were allied to fascist Italy.

Globalism, diversity and multiculturism are left wing.
wing. Nationalism is right wing.

Although the Nazis were fascists, I’m a different type of fascist. I’m a Clerical Fascist. I support a type of fascism similar to Spain under Franco, which was also a clerical fascist government. The closest individual who embodies my political stance would be Oswald Mosley, though he was British.

I do not support genocide, death squads, murdering political rivals, or racism in any form. I do not support government corruption, nor waging wars of aggression and conquest of territory.

I do however despise globalism, multiculturalism, feminism, LGBT, social justice warriors, welfare in almost all cases, abortion, illegal immigration and open boarders, anti gun legislation, transgenderism, socialism, communism, and Islam.

I’m American. My issue is I can see leftists who would undermine this country are using our liberty as a vehicle to do exactly that. So I see no way to stop that aside from cutting back on the liberty to a degree where it enables no leftists or liberal doctrines. I see them as dangerous and immoral. In truth I love liberty, but liberty is for people who can manage self control otherwise liberty becomes hedonism and that’s exactly what we’ve seen sweeping this nation with traditionalism being pushed aside.

If things were 1950 America minus the racism and with modern technology I’d be very happy.

[Exterminatore]

I do fully support the Constitution and am fiercely loyal to my country but I believe we need to revise a few things. Leftists love to say how the founding fathers never could have imagined modern military rifles and therefore the 2nd Amendment ought to be nullified. That’s a bunch of BS. What they couldn’t have imagined is a society with men turning their penis inside out and claiming to be a woman, a society in which one can say things that undermine the country. Sure I support the right to disagree with the government and voice that opinion. I don’t support vocally supporting things which we can see are literally eating away at the building blocks of our nation at the most basic level nor openly proclaiming to be a socialist which is little different from a communist. The founding fathers never could have imagined a society full of degenerates. They did not want free speech or right to assembly for such things.

So the only way I see to fix this is authoritarianism. Can’t fight liberalism with more liberalism. So the things I listed above I think go beyond personal choice into the dangerous. How can one support ones country and open borders at the same time? That literally goes against the best interest of the nation. It’s treason. So, for free speech I’d like to see it illegal to even speak of open boarders as that is very literally treason. I’d like to see assembling in the name of women’s rights as illegal as that supports only one gender and women have more rights than men. That is unfair to at least half the country. It’s also dangerous as EVERYONE but the straight white male is somehow a victim and having a nation full of false victims is not good for the nation and doesn’t promote unity. It separates us instead. Anyone thinking it’s so bad here should leave. Let the feminists and black lives matter people move to Iran if they’re so oppressed here in America. The idea of making everyone a “victim” is dangerous and undermines the nation.

[Exterminatore]

So I think fascism could help. Eliminating such options is the only hope for this country. Maybe a one party system would be better. Maybe having unrestrained capitalism isn’t such a good thing when wealthy industrialists support illegal immigration to exploit them against the American worker. That is sedition as I see it. So is destroying a city like Baltimore because for mass hysteria regarding racism. Telling people to invert their penis and live as a woman is clearly not a good thing. Especially in light of the fact that there is a lot of evidence these people regret the decision and it’s irreversible really. Maybe promoting that ought to be illegal as its harmful. If someone were promoting ingesting rat poison that would be illegal, yet seriously maming yourself is promoted as choice and brave, yet if someone were cutting themself with a knife their liberty would be taken away and they’d be but on a psyche hold.

So with the laws as they stand there’s no way to stop open sedition and promotion of harmful things, which is why maybe cutting back on the liberty slightly is the only thing that can be done.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore Oh I understand perfectly, but there were some differences between fascists and nazis.
Globalism is diversity and multiculturism for the purpose of a free global market, in order to accumulate capital, therefore, it's definitely not left-wing, it's just camouflaged to appear so.
It's kinda weird for a fascist not to support genocide and racism, but ok.
I also don't support government corruption, waging wars of aggression and conquest of territory.
I as well dislike globalism, LGBT, social justice warriors, illegal immigration & open boarders and transgenderism.
Your leftists are insane if they support all of those things. Here in East Europe, no leftist ever would support that.
Yup, authoritarianism is the best way to stop liberalism.

[Exterminatore]

I’m not entirely sure the purpose is to acquire capital. That’s easily done via imperialism and simply taking what non industrialized countries have.

Glad we can agree that authoritarianism is the best way to stop liberalism. I hear so many answers for conservatives saying that we don’t need more authority, but you can’t fight liberalism with more liberalism.

So you seem to be rather right wing. Since that is the case and I’m enjoying this conversation I’d like to know why then you’re a feminist.

I’m a spiritual sense I’m a feminist. See scripture says this:

“And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1:27‬ ‭ASV‬

So certainly man and woman are equal in terms of both being eligible for salvation and eternal punishment.

However the equality stops there as God orders things with the man as the leader and authority in the family. Therefore, equality as feminists speak of it doesn’t exist as it equal rights that are really being referred to.

My boss tells me what to do. Does it mean he’s better than me? No. More valuable than me No. Spiritually are we equal, yes. Yet there is no equality there in terms of rights. He’s the superior I’m the subordinate. God too established this order and both the boss and husband have answer to God.

So I’m really curious to know and not interested in being argumentative as to exactly your views on feminism and why you believe in equality between the sexes. You’re rational enough minded and have gained my respect through your intellectual points so I’m willing to hear you out and examine your position. Please share it with me.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore They must pretend to be "fair" and "democratic", that's why they are patronizing the non industrialized countries, in order to take what they have, in a seemingly honest way.
Exactly, liberalism has already made too much damage to entire society.
Well, I'm a feminist because I support gender equality, and as for the abortion, every woman has a right to terminate pregnancy (within the first trimester ) in cases like rape, incest, for the sake of the mother's health (and life), and if a child would have serious physical handicaps, genetic problems or mental defects (unacceptable quality of life & burden for the state).
I kinda support eugenics, but not in some racial-nazi way... only as a tool for improving humanity (geting rid of certain genetic & hormonal disorders, inborn diseases, psycho-physical defects etc).
I don't support patriarchal religions, women need to achieve all the rights men have, most of these rights we already have, but only in developed countries. We still need to solve the problems in regions like Africa, Middle East and Latin America.
Religion is often a problem for female rights, especially judeo-christian-islamic religion.
Obviously, Muslims are violating female rights more than others, but even some Christians and Judaists behave just like them, at least when it comes to family life.
That's why I prefer secular society, without religious interference - Let's say that an ideal society in my opinion would be Authoritarian Technocracy.

[Exterminatore]

So do you believe then if women need to achieve the same rights as men they should have the same responsibility for the rights?

Since you feel feminism is about equality and not domination can you explain the following:

1. Why is it a crime in the UK to approach a woman on the street with the intent of sexual or romantic interest, but not the same?
2. Why do women receive lesser sentences for the same crimes than men?
3. Why does feminism only support women’s issues and not that of the entire race if it’s about equality?
4. Why are all women regardless of race given affirmative action (preferential hiring treatment) over men?
5. Why is gold digging and using sex and romance to fleece a man of his money and utility not a crime, but not paying child support or alimony a crime?
6. Why aren’t women drafted for war and often not mandated the same physical fitness standards for jobs in the police, military, fire departments ect?
7. Why aren’t men and women of the same weight doing the same sport together? Ex: boxing, MMA?
8. Why aren’t false rape claims and sexual harassment claims treated as criminal offenses?
9. Why is there complete no fault divorce? Unless agreeed upon, marriages are mutually exclusive, if a woman violates that contract by infidelity why if divorce results is she not held responsible for violation of the contract and the often awarded alimony, child support and other concessions.
10. Why are assets and debts divided 50/50 in marriage that ends in divorce. Isn’t it fairer to to divide assets based on income contribution?
11. If feminism is about equality why are no feminists, moderate or otherwise bringing these issues to the foreground and fighting for equality in these issues?

[Exterminatore]

Please bear in mind the nature of my questions are not for intent of argumentation but knowledge seeking.

I see these things and more and note they do not about equality between the sexes and note they give advantages to females. Which doesn’t look like equality to me and further note no feminists are fighting for equality In these issues which to me looks like feminism is not about equality. That is the reasoning behind my inquiry.

[InTimoreDei]

You're projecting your feelings onto the word "nationalism", pink anon. I'm an Irish-Nationalist and it doesn't make me a person with negativity at all. The Irish have faced decades of hurt from the British so to be a Nationalist is a necessary prerogative for me to smite all those that have harmed and continue to do harm to my land.

[Exterminatore]

@InTimoreDei

I’m very familiar with Western European history, particularly medieval history.

I have a good amount of Irish linage, though I’m American. A close friend of mine when I was in the U. S. Marine Corps was from Cork. He was not American. He joined for training to use against the British. He wanted to join the IRA. He never made it back to Ireland. He was a brave Marine.

All this said I’m well familiar with how the English have impacted Ireland.

I wanted to know, in regards to the Normans who invaded from England as well as Strongbow from Wales, if you view them as Norman invaders or English invaders? At that point in the 1100’s. Or was it 1200’s?

Later during the time of Cromwell, certainly those were English, but I hold the opinion Strongbow, and the invaders out of England were really Norman and not English until after King John (Lackland) lost Normandy and England due to his mismanagement which also resulted in the Magna Carta.

I was curious how an Irish nationalist views these events.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore Exactly, the same rights and the same responsibility., that's what I support.

1. I don't live in the UK, but I know that some of the British laws are unfair to men. For example, according to UK law, "men can't be raped by women", which is preposterous... if an ugly or fat woman forces you to have sex with her, that's definitely rape.
2. Because lawmakers are patronizing women, thinking that a female is less likely to repeat the crime, which is also ridiculous. Some of the cruelest criminals in history were Hitler's furies (female guards in concentration camps).
3. Because female rights were jeopardized in many countries during the history, all over the world, while no country ever had men deprived of their rights.
4. Not in my country, in here, men usually have the advantage in getting most of the jobs.
5. Gold digging is disgusting, but men have something out of it (sex). Without the gold diggers, some older, obese or unattractive men would never have sex. Child is an obligation, and it costs a lot, that's why not paying child support is a crime.
6. Because patriarchal society considers women unfit for direct war situations, and they patronize female police officers and fire fighters.
7. Because males usually have a higher percentage of lean muscle mass than women.
8. I wonder the same thing.
9. I agree, the one who violates the marriage by infidelity is responsible for the divorce.
10. My thoughts exactly, percentage is important, unless there are children involved (because children are costly) - depends on who has the custody.
11. Majority of the present-day feminists are silent because most of the female rights were achieved in modern world (except in undeveloped countries). However, feminazis are ruining the good name of feminism by spreading hatred.
But you know this old proverb: "Those who whine the loudest are usually the ones who contribute the least" ;)

[Opinion Owner]

@InTimoreDei I'm avare of your situation with the British, your nation was jeopardized by the Anglo-Saxon assimilation, and you had to preserve your culture & tradition by nationalism. In such cases, it's completely understandable.
I support the restauration of all Celtic languages (Irish, Scottish, Welsh, Cornish, Breton and Manx). Every ethnicity should have rights in preserving their cultural identity.
Our South-Slavic culture had similar problems, with the Austrian, Hungarian, Venetian, Byzantine and Turkish invaders.

[Exterminatore]

@Opinion owner

Fair enough. You, personally seem to want exact same responsibility for equal rights. I find that to be acceptable generally speaking, though given my religious views I think that doesn’t mean the man is no longer head of the house.

I don’t agree with all your answers but most.

I also agree that equality and then some has been achieved in the modern world. Since this is true, if the feminists.. moderate ones such as yourself believe in true equality, why are they not trying to fix any of these issues? Literally not one is concerned about these.

Is it reasonable to then say they’re not concerned about equality? If they were wouldn’t they be seeking to address these? Actions speak louder than words. When I don’t see actions that match words I become suspicious.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore Okay, let's compare males and females with Yin and Yang. Most females are Yin (passive), most males are Yang (active), however, some females are Yang (dominant), and some males are Yin (submissive).
The head of the house should be the one who is Yang, whether it's a male or a female.

Good, I'm glad you agree with most of my answers.
I'm also concerned about the problems you've mentioned, but I don't have any political power to change that, however, if I had the opportunity, I would definitely try to fix those problems.

I think there are lost of other feminists who are concerned about equality, I'd even say they are a silent majority - But they are too passive to make their views known... Probably because the reputation of feminism was besmirched by the actions of notorious feminazis, who falsely present themselves as the "feminists" (for example Andrea Dworkin, Susan Brownmiller, Jill Johnston etc) - None of them support the main ideal of feminism, all of them are misandrists and female supremacists.
That's why original feminist are silent, because they think that nobody would take their words seriously. Basically, the problem is the lack of action on their behalf - We agree on that.

[Opinion Owner]

*lots of other feminists* (typo).

[Exterminatore]

Ok. Fair enough but had no issues mobilizing in the U. S. in the 60’s I strongly doubt anyone would criticize them if they made it clear they wanted to balance things out.

If they oppose the “feminazis” how come they’re not actively fighting against that as well. If the majority of feminists believe as you, surely there’s more than enough to combat the supposed small minority.

However is it possible something darker is at work and maybe they are more interested in having and maintaining the upper hand as opposed to being in favor of true equality or is it possible that maybe they got what they wanted and don’t care about men having inequality. If equality was the real issue, wouldn’t they be concerned for both sexes? I’m not seeing that. I see the opposite. I here feminists like you say one thing, yet the actions I see are exactly opposite.

[Opinion Owner]

@Exterminatore Of course, balance is very important when it comes to preserving peace.
I agree, they should fight, I wish I were their leader, I'd definitely start the anti-feminazi movement.
Well, as I said, the problem is in the lack of action, they achieved most of the things they wanted, but now they've lost the edge, they need a charismatic leader who will inspire them to repair the injustice.
I have the will, but I don't have the influence, I hope someone within the movement will start to change things for the better.

[Anonymous]

Sadly a wasted question... those who are Nationalists are too dumb and/or too bigoted to care about the obvious difference.
The type who really want the Statue of Liberty either taken down or have a "whites only" sign added.

[MarketData]

Macron is a phoney lying scumbag. Whatever he said I don't agree with it.

[menina]

This makes no sense to me. I think they're the same. I don't understand him.

[DollySummers]

I believe it to be a controversial topic in such a undeterred belief

[Anonymous]

Nationalism is far more extreme. Europe knows far more about that meaning.

[OddBeMe]

I’d argue it’s extreme patriotism…to the destruction of everyone else.

[YHL6965]

Nationalism is patriotism put into action, into actual measures. Macron is full of shit anyway.

[Sixgun77]

No, it's the opposite of globalism.

[NYCQuestions1976]

They're basically the same.

[Anonymous]

I'd say they're closer to being synonyms than antonyms. I suppose it may help to check a definition.

[Casus_Angelus]

We already know the definitions of both, unless we want to redefine it

[RedThread]

Nationalism is extreme patriotism

[Exterminatore]

They’re synonyms.

[rjroy3]

Can't take his face seriously

[Waffles731]

Nationalism is poisoned patriotism

[ladsin]

How is that?

[Waffles731]

Nationalism is patriotism fueled by hate or fear. Patriotism itself is not bad and is often good, but nationalism takes it to an undesirable extreme

[ladsin]

How are you defining nationalism? I presume you must be adding some qualifiers that I don’t add.

[Jackpot1977]

It is the same exact thing it is just these days to be a nationalist and want secure borders is something the liberals are against so now they try to make it sound like nationalists are a bunch of racists which they aren't although there are racists who are nationalists but that doesn't define all nationalists

[Dargil]

I'll allow radical but poisoned is nonsense.

[Kiran04]

No, that's asinine.

[Browneye57]

Sure. If you're in France. ;)

[CoffeeWC]

Kind of

[ladsin]

How so?

[BellumEtPacem]

No. Nationalism is patriotism to the extreme.