(Original post by Higgy)
No i didnt fight in any colonial wars but both my great grandads did but thats besides the point. Im proud of our history, what we achieved, if someone abroad asks me where am i from i say proudly Britain! Im sorry but i think our tradition our history and the way of life somany of us lead should make us feel proud of out nation.
Why are you proud of British history (as a detached phenomenon)? 'We' necessarily didn't achieve anything (hence it is history), THEY did. To the best of our knowlege, we had absolutely no influence in such events. I think we should be proud of our nation, but because of
way of life, not the way of life of our ancestors.
(Original post by Not_Dead_Yet)
I'll start by admitting I haven't actually read quite a lot of this thread, so sorry if I'm repeating points or whatever. My excuse is it's 6:46 am. Anywho, I agree with whoever thinks patriotism is pointless. It really doesn't make much sense if you think about it; you were born in a certain place, therefore you love that certain place? Why? Because of the great things other people who just happen to be from the same place have done? Shakespeare was a pretty good writer, but he would've been just as good if he was born in Brussels. 'The Romans' didn't give us central heating and roads, specific Roman people did. If you are proud of your country, are you also proud of your town? And your street? And your house? And your room? The entire concept of nationality is all *******s really. There is no such thing as 'The American Way' or 'The British Wit'. If someone speaks a different language that's because that's what they were taught. Any notion of nationality is artificial, a product of your surroundings. If a German child was raised in complete isolation from the outside world, but still within the German border, do you think it would have any idea about being German? A Mancunian might think that Manchester is better than London, and a Londoner might disagree, but they would both agree that they are both English. Why can't everyone apply that philosophy on a grander scale? We are all just people. Don't define each other by geography.
I have a quote I was going to use here but I just remembered how obnoxious it is when people use quotes, so I'll just finish with: I'm hungry.
Patriotism is not completely pointless, just obsecenly overrated. It is certainly useful if you are a political leader (because it has beneficial effects). It should not be a case of being born somewhere and loving it because of this; the place must be loved for and in itself.
The concept of nationality may be *******s, but it is very useful *******s. It has ensured competition has devloped and thus helped to advance humans as a whole (you can look at nationality as either a cause of this or a result of basic 'human nature' and evolutionaty genetics). Certainly it is contributed to in part by surroundings, but then what isn't?
I agree we must not define people by geography but contend that people are partially defined (for want of a better word) by their nationality (not necessarily 'geography'). I wish that this sort of thinking was applied on a grander scale as well. Much of the conflict arising from these issues does so, in my opinion, because too many people focus exclusively on the past. Just as people did not decide to be born in Britain, they did not choose to be born elsewhere. Partially as a result of their ancestors, their own country may not be as rich (or whatever) as Britain, and people judge them on this, even though they may be contributing to a rapidly developing society.
(Original post by Nuheen)
And Higgy, learn about the British empire to a greater extent before you are feeling proud about it. Did you know this fact, that the british in the Asian subcontinent forced the farmers to grow a specific tree that made the soil infertile? Do you have any idea about the torture they carried out on people? I think you should be regretful about that, not proud. You want another example, then read on. The british stole Kohinoor from the subcontinent, and it is only a small fortune compared to what they stole from us.
The inhabitanbts of the subcontinent were/are not all angels. Both points are irrelevant really. Too much 'Whig-history' for my liking as well.