tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7689571.post111627481033451267..comments2023-11-05T12:59:29.404+02:00Comments on CsĂkszereda musings: Our pilgrimageAndyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11294221123964774524noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7689571.post-1136029706112148602005-12-31T13:48:00.000+02:002005-12-31T13:48:00.000+02:00A rather stupid definition, and clearly one you ch...<I>A rather stupid definition, and clearly one you chose to cherry pick </I><BR/><BR/>Well, I did say that i chose it out of a number of others <I> to reflect my understanding of what natioanlism is</I> and coinsequently the way I used it (and what I meant by it in the original article).<BR/><BR/>Now, to you it may be a "stupid definition" but it's the one I';ve grwon up understainding nationalism to mean. Frankly I was surprised how many other definitions of nationalism there were out there when I looked it up for this comment. So, anyway, to get back to my point - there was a slight unpleasant whiff of this "bad nationalism" at the pilgrimage. By which I mean on toip of the people celebrating and expressing their culture there was a hint (in the background) of anti-Romanian feeling.<BR/><BR/>I don't think anything I have written can be misinterpreted to mean anything else.<BR/><BR/>The rest of your comment contains so many straw men that I suspect it constitutes a fire risk.Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11294221123964774524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7689571.post-1135984181243514322005-12-31T01:09:00.000+02:002005-12-31T01:09:00.000+02:00" "Nationalism" to me means "the doctrine that you..." "Nationalism" to me means "the doctrine that your national culture and interests are superior to any other" (this came from the dictionary definition at WordNet quoted at dictionary.com). That site also gives a number of other definitions which are less bad. I think that at least under that definition (the one I quote) it is a bad word. Wouldn't you agree?"<BR/><BR/>A rather stupid definition, and clearly one you chose to cherry pick ( typing define:nationalism into google gets the more normative description).<BR/><BR/>Nationalism is merely the belief that national, or ethnic groups exist, and have a right to self determination. The palestinians are nationalists, as are the people of the Native American reservations, and most anti-imperialistic struggles were nationalist. The imperialists, however, were anti-nationalistic and internationalist : that includes German fascism which was an open borders movement for Germans , the British and other European empires, and the "internationalism" of the Sovietization of Eastern Europe, which was in reality a Russification. The nationalists around world defended themselves against such depredations.<BR/><BR/>All you saw here was people celebrating their culture, and accused them of claiming that their culture was superior to the world, which is not their claim at all, merely that it is different. It is, however, your claim.<BR/><BR/>The spurious "internationalism" of the Anglo-sphere is no more neutral than the Soviet version. A person, or people. who dont see themselves as nationalistic are part and parcel of the hegemonic culture ( in your case the Anglo-Sphere). This culture is in no way neutral, nor anti-nationalist: indeed, quite the reverse. One can imagine a different world where the Americans spoke Hungarian and English minorities, ( or American English speakers) march to preserve their culture: earning the guffaws of the Hungarian "international" elite. There is no such thing as no culture, no such thing as no laws, and no such thing as no nationalism. <BR/><BR/>The next time you hear the turgid lyrics of Imagine, ask yourself: if there is to be no country what country would it be? what laws would it hold? what culture would it express? The answer is in he question: the laws, culture, and nationalism of the writer and singer. Only the most powerful cultural forces see themselves as neutral.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7689571.post-1135984121212942842005-12-31T01:08:00.000+02:002005-12-31T01:08:00.000+02:00" "Nationalism" to me means "the doctrine that you..." "Nationalism" to me means "the doctrine that your national culture and interests are superior to any other" (this came from the dictionary definition at WordNet quoted at dictionary.com). That site also gives a number of other definitions which are less bad. I think that at least under that definition (the one I quote) it is a bad word. Wouldn't you agree?"<BR/><BR/>A rather stupid definition, and clearly one you chose to cherry pick ( typing define:nationalism into google gets the more normative description).<BR/><BR/>Nationalism is merely the belief that national, or ethnic groups exist, and have a right to self determination. The palestinians are nationalists, as are the people of the Native American reservations, and most anti-imperialistic struggles were nationalist. The imperialists, however, were anti-nationalistic and internationalist : that includes German fascism which was an open borders movement for Germans , the British and other European empires, and the "internationalism" of the Sovietization of Eastern Europe, which was in reality a Russification. The nationalists around world defended themselves against such depredations.<BR/><BR/>All you saw here was people celebrating their culture, and accused them of claiming that their culture was superior to the world, which is not their claim at all, merely that it is different. It is, however, your claim.<BR/><BR/>The spurious "internationalism" of the Anglo-sphere is no more neutral than the Soviet version. A person, or people. who dont see themselves as nationalistic are part and parcel of the hegemonic culture ( in your case the Anglo-Sphere). This culture is in no way neutral, nor anti-nationalist: indeed, quite the reverse. One can imagine a different world where the Americans spoke Hungarian and English minorities, ( or American English speakers) march to preserve their culture: earning the guffaws of the Hungarian "international" elite. There is no such thing as no culture, no such thing as no laws, and no such thing as no nationalism. <BR/><BR/>The next time you hear the turgid lyrics of Imagine, ask yourself: if there is to be no country what country would it be? what laws would it hold? and what culture would it express? The answer is int he question: the laws, culture, and nationalism of the writer and singer. Only the most powerful cultural forces see themselves as neutral.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7689571.post-1116445317469767932005-05-18T22:41:00.000+03:002005-05-18T22:41:00.000+03:00Very interesting piece Andy.Coming from N.Ireland ...Very interesting piece Andy.<BR/><BR/>Coming from N.Ireland originally, the mixture of religion and nationalism/patriotism also makes me uneasy. <BR/><BR/>I don't know if you seen in Budapest on Felvonulasi Ter, the monument to the church that Rakosi pulled down in the 1950s. A wooden cross has been placed on the site and has been draped in the Hungarian flag. That to me is a sacrilegious act and one that is not in line with Jesus' teachings in the New Testament.<BR/><BR/>The affirmation of your national identity be it Irish, British, Hungarian or Romanian should not be mixed with your religious beliefs.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13810172654957557381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7689571.post-1116404426468289222005-05-18T11:20:00.000+03:002005-05-18T11:20:00.000+03:00Hmm that's three questions. I'll answer them in o...Hmm that's three questions. I'll answer them in order.<BR/><BR/>Q. 1: "Nationalism" to me means "the doctrine that your national culture and interests are superior to any other" (this came from the dictionary definition at WordNet quoted at dictionary.com). That site also gives a number of other definitions which are less bad. I think that at least under that definition (the one I quote) it <I>is</I> a bad word. Wouldn't you agree?<BR/><BR/>Question 2: Well, I don't equate it with patriotism. Patriotism is much more accpetable to me (from the same site: "n : love of country and willingness to sacrifice for it") I don't object to people loving their country, merely when they start thinking their country is inherently better than any other.<BR/><BR/>Third question is trickier. There's no reason why people shouldn't demonstrate their love for their country, and I don't object to it. My problem is with nationalism, not patriotism as I've said. And in the text I said that their was a "whiff" of nationalism. Not that it was a nationalistic event, merely that there was a hint of nationalism (Dictionary.com again "Whiff: A minute trace")<BR/><BR/>I have a feeling I haven't fully answered your last question, do you want to rephrase it so I can better answer it?<BR/><BR/>Thanks<BR/>andyAndyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11294221123964774524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7689571.post-1116374878672773682005-05-18T03:07:00.000+03:002005-05-18T03:07:00.000+03:00Andy, Why is 'nationalism' is a bad word?Why do yo...Andy, <BR/><BR/>Why is 'nationalism' is a bad word?<BR/><BR/>Why do you equate nationalism with patriotism?<BR/><BR/>These people ARE Hungarians. Why shouldn't they love, and moreover, demonstrate their love for their country --- not Romania, but rather Hungary.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com