|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
| Level 225 Comments: Mind Blower |
OfflineSend mail to devilshairpiecetwo Block devilshairpiecetwo Invite devilshairpiecetwo to be your friend
- Views: 2563Blackout
28 5 Total: +23
- Views: 1028What the shit did I just watch.
9 2 Total: +7
latest user's comments
|#36 - I'll have to disagree. If a German wore a ******** … [+] (11 new replies)||02/09/2013 on What If She Sneezed With...||+6|
#74 - thechurchchurch (02/09/2013) [-]
I'll have to disagree with your disagreement. Every nation on this earth has skeletons in its closet,especially the USA. The internment of the japanese during ww2,the Mai Lai massacare in vietnam,the continued persecution of the indians and genocide committed upon them,yet no one in america would call an american flag "racist". Do you know why? Because history is written by the victors. The north made sure the south was a "racist evil boogeyman" and anyone who reveres it is a klan member. So no,me being proud of my southern heritage does not mean im a racist.simply because some northeners would call me so.
#94 - lakerman (02/09/2013) [-]
There is a difference between being proud of your heritage, and endorsing a society that enslaved tens of thousands of people, initiated one of the bloodiest conflicts in history, and continued to treat african-americans horribly with sharecropping and jim crow laws
Every people has skeleton's in their closet, the point is that you should learn from them rather than trying to glorify them, also sectarianism just further divides humanity (nationalism has caused the deaths of tens of millions) so rather than black pride, southern pride, american exceptionalism, pax britania we should all be proud of our common humanity and embrace that as opposed to artificially created divisions that hinder us as a species
#99 - thechurchchurch (02/09/2013) [-]
Explain to me how you decide if someone is being proud of their heritage and "endorsing a society that enslaved tens of thousands of people",because if waving a flag is your only example then most of the modern world is endorsing slavery and murder. And how is waving a flag glorifying the slavery aspect of the confederacy? Does the american flag represent guantanamo bay,and if someone waves that flag do they automatically support guantanamo bay?Of course not,theres a deeper meaning involved,filled with both cultural and history. The reason people have national pride is because they have a common bond and aligning opinions. As long as large groups of people are different,there will always be nations and national pride,and we shouldn't discourage that because if we didnt have that then the whole world would be filled with like minded robots.
#124 - junter (02/09/2013) [-]
The difference here is that the Confederacy was founded because the didn't agree with Lincoln limiting slavery. Literally the entire point of the confederacy, and everything that flag represents, boils down to wanting to be able to own other human beings, and the belief that they are inferior to you just because their skin is a different color. That's why we think it's racist to fly that flag, because it represents a society built only to glorify racism.
#129 - thechurchchurch (02/09/2013) [-]
thats such a simplistic version of the confederacy,it was so much more than that. The confederacy was about the rights of states,lincolnh increased federal power drastically,he even suspended Habeas corpus.If the south would have won,he would have been called a tyrant. And how was the USA not founded on slavery and genoicide?The colonials were angry at the british for refusing to allow them to colonize anymore native land,which they did anyway. Its such a farce to call the USA founded on freedom and liberty but call the confederacy,which had similar reasons to rebel as the original colonials,a strickly race based movement.
#135 - lakerman (02/10/2013) [-]
Suspending the habaes corpus was suspended after secession was an issue so you can't say that it caused the confederacy when the confederacy predates the action
And the Confederacy=Colonial separatism are two completely different things because the Colonial people at first were very peaceful however this changed drastically with King Philip's War which spread the idea that Native American's were savages, and the Puritans and Native American's treated each other as equals so you can't say the Colonists didn't try to be at peace with the Native Americans (although i concede that western expansion was a gross overstep of American power)
The Confederacy and the south had never tried to reach out and create equality between African slaves and the slave owners; Slaves were taken and continually taken for decades with only profit in mind (further exacerbated by the creation of the Cotton Gin) and it would have continued had the separatists decided to outlaw the importation of slaves after 20 years
#105 - lakerman (02/09/2013) [-]
Of course national pride should be discouraged, national pride has always resulted in a feeling of superiority towards those who are different from you and ultimately leads to conflicts
Case in point is World War I and how European Nationalism ultimately destroyed the continent and caused furthering of nationalism in Germany and Italy which lead to another conflict
The only way these cyclical wars were ended (Before WWI it was Crimean War, before that it was Napoleonic War, before that the Wars of Succession, before that the 7 Years War, before that Wars of Religion, also known as the 30 Years War which spans a series of 400 years) was the creation of the European Union and DISREGARDING national barriers for the overall good of society
Pride in your society is endorsing both good and bad aspects of your culture, the confederate flag does endorse that but also endorses the fact that the south has traditionally depended on an agrarian lifestyle. The flag also symbolizes states rights and, truthfully, i do not want this to devolve on a semantic argument on the vexillogical nature of the Confederate Flag, rather i would like it to highlight that ANY national pride holds back societies and ultimately dooms them to infighting and ignorant squabbling and with the rise of nuclear weapons it will lead to a nuclear holocaust
The prime example of this is Kashmir, being torn apart by Indian and Pakistani Nationalists who wish to claim a barren mountainous wasteland and are willing to use nuclear weapons to undermine the other. The Koreas are another great example and examples of the destructive nature of nationalism is evident in society
Lastly, national pride does not result in robotic people because, arguably, the Delian League formed by Athens was during the golden age of Ancient Greek Culture, when the warring polises of Greece came together for a common goal (defense against Persia) and had a revolution in culture, math, and science
TLDR: Nationalism is dangerous
#116 - thechurchchurch (02/09/2013) [-]
I really just wanted to defend the confederate flag as more than a racial symbol,a morality of nationalism argument doesn't interest me that much right now,but to avoid being rude I'll state this rebuttal. WW1 and indeed all wars are a matter of differing opinions and goals. Its not like a blood vs crip gang war fueled only by colors and geographical locations. If nationalism was indeed the root cause of all the wars of the world than no two nations who have national pride would be allied with each other,as their nations were different. But because these two groups of people(and in the end thats whats all nations are,groups of people) had common interests,they allied with each other to achieve their goals. If everyone thought the same,if everyone had the same beliefs,and if everyone decided to form a world government where everyone thinks alike and has the same background,then maybe nationalism will vanish(even then i imagine there will be an earth first movement when we inevitably make contact with alien life) but until those parameters are met,nationalism can,and indeed must exist,to preserve differences of opinion and avoid worldwide group think.
thank you for your time.
#119 - lakerman (02/09/2013) [-]
But now if i may ask, what is the danger of a worldwide group think, is that not what the internet we know and love is? People from disparate regions of the world coming together and voicing opinions in this great and mighty forum we call the internet. This mighty machine that has brought humanity closer together, destroyed geographic barriers that prevented people from very distinct places like South Africa, Japan and the United States together.
And yes World War I was exactly like a blood vs crip gang war; the Entante (U.S, U.K, France, Russia) vs the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, The Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria) in that these groups came together due to common heritage (German speaking peoples of Germany and Austria-Hungary; the Colony-Mother country relationship of the U.K and U.S) common ethnic ties (Slavic nationalism drove Russia to support the Serbs, The resentment of Slavic peoples in the Austro-Hungarian Empire) or for national pride (The french were still very angry with the German occupation of Alsace-Lorraine and tried to create an alliance with Russia and the U.K to gain support in a future war with Germany, The Germans and British were further divided into different camps with the Algericas Conference)
TLDR: What's wrong with a global think group, the internet is a good example of people coming together and WWI and countless other wars are almost identical to gang wars and should not be considered any different
#127 - thechurchchurch (02/09/2013) [-]
No,the internet isnt group think,in fact its one of the finest examples of nationalism and pseudo nationalism. Take funnyjunk for example.You have conservatives who dominate the politics board,liberals who dominate the comments section on most of the political content,atheists who dominate the religious board,religious people who really dont dominate anything but oppose the atheists,bronies who can basically dominate everything when they get tired of jacking off at hoof pics, americans getting angry at europeans,europeans trolling americans. Everybody has a cause behind them,an unofficial banner which other likewise people share. They fight,alot. There is no harmony,no magical consensus. If funnyjunk was the world than the boards would be countries,if we all had similar interests than there wouldnt be a need for boards. The only real difference i can find is that we cant kill each other for obvious reasons. Worldwide group think isnt at all individuals speaking their minds together,it means exactly what it sounds like,a world of people who think alike.
As far as WW1 goes,nationalism was only the result of the differing poltical opinions of the governments,look up how the structure of the fighting governments changed before the war.
But like i said,i dont really want to debate nationalism
#132 - lakerman (02/09/2013) [-]
Well it seems we have reached an impasse, i could come up with an example and you would state a rebuttal and this would continue ad nauseum and i will leave you to your beliefs on nationalism
However, it has been acknowledged universally by historians that World War I was fundamentally caused by nationalism, militarism, competition for colonies, and overall tension in the region and you say to look at the structure of governments in the pre-war era and I shall bring up the example of the Franco-Prussian War (1870s) in which the French state felt threatened by growing German Nationalism in which the micro-states of modern day Germany were being united by Bismark's Realpolitik and Bismark used this war to his advantage to showcase a new unified Germany and use German nationalism to drive a wedge between the Southern German Confederation and their supporter France.
Then there is the Austro-Prussian War 4 years prior in which Bismark denied the Austrians the right of access to Schleiswig-Hollenstein in Denmark (a spoil of war from a prior mini war with Denmark) AND this too was used by Bismark for nationalistic purposes to drive a wedge between German kingdoms and principalities that sided with Austria
Then there is the Italian unification movement which i feel needs no elaboration because i have made my point with the examples above
(I studied European History all last year in school and got a 5 on the AP European History test so i can do this all day)
TLDR: Pretty obvious nationalism was key to politics in the late 19th and early 20th centuries
|#263 - So this **** gets front page nowadays. … [+] (2 new replies)||01/10/2013 on I have one like this||+2|
|#5 - Children of Hurin I believe [+] (1 new reply)||12/21/2012 on Santa Feels||+1|
|#170 - HAIL SITHIS||12/21/2012 on Dragonborn||0|
|#865 - But they'll be dead soon. ******* …||12/21/2012 on If the World Ends On Friday||+5|
|#124 - So ****** ! He wore a MASK to rob a BANK! … [+] (1 new reply)||12/20/2012 on Smart thief||-2|
|#131 - Picture||12/16/2012 on Bro, do you even jump?||+18|
|#47 - Feed me chickens!||12/15/2012 on Cannot unsee....||+6|
|#228 - Estonia is like the Idaho of the world, nobody gives two …||12/15/2012 on Batman and Robin know...||+4|
|#20 - "Guys, I have an idea. Let's make a giant ******* … [+] (1 new reply)||12/13/2012 on Yes.||-13|