Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    I am not sure about that. I used to believe it was a healthy natural feeling but then I realised that the feeling was not there untill it was put there by authority. What I felt was not a feeling that came from within but a feeling that was instilled in me by authority.

    No nation can endure by itself; alone. Governments and authorities thinks it can but it cannot. Today we are on the verge of globalism and the National boundaries are already bluring. This is natural in a global world, but the feeling of belonging to one nation I don't think is very natural at all; natural as in that it didn't come from within but rather from authority (i.e. governments).

    And you are right. I cannot understand anyone who would want to join the army unless their lives immediately depended upon it. This is not the case, and young boys are recruited into the army in preparation not for war but for government service. The army is a brainwashing regime.

    The First World War cost 323,000 American deaths (I don't know how many Brits were killed) but they didn't need to enter the war but they chose to because they knew there was something in it for them. How did America get people to to join their army and to join a war which they never needed to get involved with?

    Brainwashing!

    You see this is were we disagree.... I argue that this loyalty is pre-political. It is a sense of the first-person plural, the 'we' who already belong together, and who share some common destinty.

    If you look at all social contract theory is assumes that there is already a 'we' who belong together and are able to enter into this agreement, that is a prior assumption. This is pre-political loyalty, as sense of belonging with a group of people, and is something we did not choose.

    No I'm not talking about Americans in first world war, I'm talking about the English. As I said many English willingly volunteered, and the army were in fact initially taken aback by the number of volunteers.

    And this is the loyalty I am talking about, these men wanted to defend what belonged to them, their homeland.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Time Tourist)
    You see this is were we disagree.... I argue that this loyalty is pre-political. It is a sense of the first-person plural, the 'we' who already belong together, and who share some common destinty.

    If you look at all social contract theory is assumes that there is already a 'we' who belong together and are able to enter into this agreement, that is a prior assumption. This is pre-political loyalty, as sense of belonging with a group of people, and is something we did not choose.

    No I'm not talking about Americans in first world war, I'm talking about the English. As I said many English willingly volunteered, and the army were in fact initially taken aback by the number of volunteers.

    And this is the loyalty I am talking about, these men wanted to defend what belonged to them, their homeland.
    You think this can only be applied on the small scale. I could easily argue that the 'we' has up to this point in history only been so localised because the human race has been scattered around the world seperated by vast distances and impenatrable natural phenomena. What exactly, in this day and age and beyond is preventing the 'we' as being the entire human race?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    You think this can only be applied on the small scale. I could easily argue that the 'we' has up to this point in history only been so localised because the human race has been scattered around the world seperated by vast distances and impenatrable natural phenomena. What exactly, in this day and age and beyond is preventing the 'we' as being the entire human race?
    Precisely because (thank goodness) human life exists in a plurality of ways...

    It really is very hard for me, and most people I should think, to feel exactly same affinity with someone living on the other side of the world, whose culture I shall never fully know or understand, as I do a fellow countryman (sorry should I say countryperson?). I don't think this is down to me not trying hard enough to understand. It just so happens that me and my fellow countrypersons happen to share a common culture, and that our way of life and seeing the world, and our interests are more alike then someone on the other side of the world. And I expect it is no different for that person on the other side of the world.

    Now if course I know this answer is not an acceptable one to the socialists or liberals, whose outlook and agenda is inherently global, whilst the conservative attitude is inherently local, preferring the trusted and long-term commitments of historic loyalties.

    Liberals and socialists do not like it when you say you're proud of being a northerner, or proud of being from the West country, or proud of being English. It is often said to be "irrational" to be proud of were you are from (unless you happen to be from a minority group - then it is never irrational, for some reason), but it seems to me that pride in where you are from is perfectly natural and understanbdable. You can be proud of your town when it heroically defeats the neighbouring town at a football match, just as as a northerner you can be proud of the norths industrial heritage, as the birthplace of the modern world, and your families role in it, for example. You can be proud of your countries victory in two world wars, and your families role in that. You can be proud of were you are from, and be proud of your cultural inheritance.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Time Tourist)
    It really is very hard for me, and most people I should think, to feel exactly same affinity with someone living on the other side of the world, whose culture I shall never fully know or understand,
    Again you could say that was an archaic throwback to the days of massive distances and impenatrable barriers. We now live in a world where these barriers are being stripped away and distances shrunk, culture is no longer the exclusive claim of seperate ethnicities or colours. It already begins to transcend race or birthplace. New cultures are springing up in the most remarkable of places, the internet being the best example, music, film and art being others.

    as I do a fellow countryman (sorry should I say countryperson?).

    oh I see what you did there really ace really funny haha good one mate excellent fair play son top banter really great

    Liberals and socialists do not like it when you say you're proud of being a northerner, or proud of being from the West country, or proud of being English. It is often said to be "irrational" to be proud of were you are from (unless you happen to be from a minority group - then it is never irrational, for some reason), but it seems to me that pride in where you are from is perfectly natural and understanbdable. You can be proud of your town when it heroically defeats the neighbouring town at a football match, just as as a northerner you can be proud of the norths industrial heritage, as the birthplace of the modern world, and your families role in it, for example. You can be proud of your countries victory in two world wars, and your families role in that. You can be proud of were you are from, and be proud of your cultural inheritance.
    Why can't a modern Japanese or Chinese or Indian person be proud of the UK's victory in the world war? How in any way do you have a superior claim on that historic victory. The same goes for anything done by a human being in history. Why must any other human be prevented from looking back with pride by imaginary lines in the dirt? Why do you believe you have a greater claim over something which you had as much a part in than someone your age living in the wastes of Siberia?
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.