What's the point of being conservative?

[Norstal]

For some tribes? Yes. Fine, I won't say the whole continent never changed, but hunter-gatherers should be left alone.

So, we should have never crawled out of the woods and jungles and built cities and grown our own crops?

After all, the old ways worked for thousands of years.

Why should everyone be forced to modernize? Hunting and gathering obviously haven't worked for some civilizations, but that doesn't mean that everyone should stop doing it.

[Raeyh]

It does, since you equal more freedom with less harm, while the opposite is true. If you have less freedom, you have less chances to harm yourself. People in solitary confinement or an insane asylum are perfectly safe, for example.

Would you rather live in a totalitarian state or in a democratic state? Or to use your own example, would you rather be in solitary confinement, or free?

What you prefer is not the same as what is good for you.

[Ad Nihilo]

I view it as better than having center-right mean something very close to nationalism.

What's wrong with nationalism? It seems to be one of those words that's thrown around as pejorative without really considering its meaning; I don't identify as "white", or "Polish" or what have you, I identify as a citizen of the United States. The well-being of my country and my fellow Americans is much more important to me than the well-being of people who share my ethnicity. If anything, nationalism is a good thing because it helps break down ethnic and cultural barriers in favor of a mutual identity independent of the past.

French-style republicanism, which is what you have described, is very different from nationalism, as it is ordinarily understood. "The Nation" is a term with very strong ethnic connotations, and always have been, from the first attested nations, like the nation of Israel in biblical times, to the nation-state system of post-WWI Europe.

Being a good citizen of your country is great. Being nationalistic is basically the same as being tribal, and that's why the word has acquired such negative connotations.

[Norstal]

Let me restate that: what exactly is the problem with being a Nationalist?

This explains my view on that.

That's absurd. In fact, if anything, what America needs is national unity as everyone keeps talking about secession and states rights.

[Samuraikoku]

What you prefer is not the same as what is good for you.

So would solitary confinement be good for you? Or in my example, a totalitarian state?

[Vareiln]

This explains my view on that.

That's absurd. In fact, if anything, what America needs is national unity as everyone keeps talking about secession and states rights.

Eh. I guess.

[Conserative Morality]

I currently only have a high school education, and when I do study things outside of that, it is often fish. Actually, almost always fish.

That's not really an answer to my question.

Why should everyone be forced to modernize?

Why shouldn't everyone be forced to modernize?

Hunting and gathering obviously haven't worked for some civilizations, but that doesn't mean that everyone should stop doing it.

Actually, hunting and gathering hasn't worked for any civilization. It's worked for some small societies, but no civilizations. Furthermore, 'worked' is a wonderfully vague term. What is 'worked'? Is 'worked' simply enabling the continued existence of the society? If so, one may argue that everyone shouldn't stop stealing from their neighbors in night time raids, because it enabled the existence of some societies, and they should be allowed to continue it. Oppression of minorities or murder of those outside a particular clan may allow the continued existence of the society as-is, free of outside influence. Should we allow that?

[Norstal]

My statement in no way contradicts that.

It does, since you equal more freedom with less harm, while the opposite is true. If you have less freedom, you have less chances to harm yourself. People in solitary confinement or an insane asylum are perfectly safe, for example.

Because these people can't hurt themselves. Uhuh.

[Vareiln]

I currently only have a high school education, and when I do study things outside of that, it is often fish. Actually, almost always fish.

That's not really an answer to my question.

Why should everyone be forced to modernize?

Why shouldn't everyone be forced to modernize?

Hunting and gathering obviously haven't worked for some civilizations, but that doesn't mean that everyone should stop doing it.

Actually, hunting and gathering hasn't worked for any civilization. It's worked for some small societies, but no civilizations. Furthermore, 'worked' is a wonderfully vague term. What is 'worked'? Is 'worked' simply enabling the continued existence of the society? If so, one may argue that everyone shouldn't stop stealing from their neighbors in night time raids, because it enabled the existence of some societies, and they should be allowed to continue it. Oppression of minorities or murder of those outside a particular clan may allow the continued existence of the society as-is, free of outside influence. Should we allow that?

American high school education in history.

[Conserative Morality]

American. High school. Education. In history.

Yes, I went through history in high school and found nothing seriously wrong with it.

[TaQud]

American. High school. Education. In history.

Yes, I went through history in high school and found nothing seriously wrong with it.

but aren't we suppose to learn from our past on the mistakes mankind has make or else we are bound to repeat it...

[Vareiln]

American. High school. Education. In history.

Yes, I went through history in high school and found nothing seriously wrong with it.

It's incomplete, isn't it?
Or... Oh...

[Raeyh]

What you prefer is not the same as what is good for you.

So would solitary confinement be good for you? Or in my example, a totalitarian state?

It's not really my place to say if solitary confinement is right for me or not. That should be left to the justice system. However, if I am a threat to myself or others for whatever reason, I belong in jail for my own safety in addition to the safety of others. It would be a good thing.

Totalitarianism worked for Italy, didn't it? At least during the war.

[Ad Nihilo]

I think you think on too short a time line. You wish to judge by 20 years. I think in longer terms.

The reason I only appealed to the last 20 years is because I'm only aware of the statistics for the last 20 years, and I have a certain aversion to talking out of my arse. I don't even know if anyone bothered with these kinds of statistics before then, or whether they would be internationally comparable as they are now.

And I suspect that the lot of the Irishmen in question - over that longer term - has been better on the Western board of the Atlantic than on the Eastern board.

And once again, that is rather irrelevant. Your Irishman, like any other Briton, WASP, Frenchman, German or whatever you like... if any of these random "average hypothetical individuals" were dropped into any Western Country right now and we looked to see how they fared with regards to upwards social mobility, we know that they would do the worse in the US. Potatoes, or lack thereof, in C19th are simply irrelevant to that simple statistical, empirical fact.

[Norsklow]

Let me restate that: what exactly is the problem with being a Nationalist?

This explains my view on that.

Oh I see. Shame on the Chinese for kicking the foreign oppressor out of his Imperial seat.
And likewise, the Irish Nationalists in the Irish Republic should also be ashamed.

[Conserative Morality]

but aren't we suppose to learn from our past on the mistakes mankind has make or else we are bound to repeat it...

That's why we have history classes in high school. That's what we're discussing.

It's incomplete, isn't it?
Or... Oh...

...

No?

I'm not aware of any major era or region that was skipped over. What state were you educated in?

[Vareiln]

but aren't we suppose to learn from our past on the mistakes mankind has make or else we are bound to repeat it...

That's why we have history classes in high school. That's what we're discussing.

It's incomplete, isn't it?
Or... Oh...

...

No?

I'm not aware of any major era or region that was skipped over. What state were you educated in?

Florida.

[Samuraikoku]

It's not really my place to say if solitary confinement is right for me or not. That should be left to the justice system. However, if I am a threat to myself or others for whatever reason, I belong in jail for my own safety in addition to the safety of others. It would be a good thing.

So it would be a good thing to live in a totalitarian society?

Totalitarianism worked for Italy, didn't it? At least during the war.

Ask Giacomo Matteotti. Too bad the fascists killed him.

Also, if you would want that claim to be a little more credible, I'd say "before the war".

[Conserative Morality]

Florida.

Mm, I didn't think that Florida's education system was in bad condition.

[Vareiln]

Florida.

Mm, I didn't think that Florida's education system was in bad condition.

I don't know. Guess it's just Broward county's way of doing things, or... No. I'm wrong.

[Vetalia]

French-style republicanism, which is what you have described, is very different from nationalism, as it is ordinarily understood. "The Nation" is a term with very strong ethnic connotations, and always have been, from the first attested nations, like the nation of Israel in biblical times, to the nation-state system of post-WWI Europe.

Being a good citizen of your country is great. Being nationalistic is basically the same as being tribal, and that's why the word has acquired such negative connotations.

Yeah, that's the tough part; civic nationalism is technically a form of nationalism but it's completely divorced from what the term means these days. It's not the Carl Schurz "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right", but instead they lop off everything but "my country, right or wrong" with all the devastating consequences that sentiment holds.

[Norstal]

Why shouldn't everyone be forced to modernize?

Because maybe they don't want to.

I don't see, for example, why we should try so hard to bring the Sentinelese to the modern world if they don't want to. As much as I want to see them fend off attack choppers with bows and arrows.

They are lucky they live in an island, which means minimal resource competitions with others. Other groups, like the Hadza or the Bushmen aren't so lucky.

Actually, hunting and gathering hasn't worked for any civilization. It's worked for some small societies, but no civilizations. Furthermore, 'worked' is a wonderfully vague term. What is 'worked'? Is 'worked' simply enabling the continued existence of the society?

Yes. Desertification is one of the issues with modernizing the Sahara. Nomads like the Tuaregs who used to be able to manage their own resources are forced to settle down to farm. Farming requires more resources to do than nomadic herding. The result is desertification. Is that better? It just doesn't affect them either. It affects the entire world.

I used to have a link to a scholarly article when I was still in anthropology class linking the two things together, but I lost it since I'm not in the class anymore. However, this should satisfy you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuaregs#Post-colonial_era

If so, one may argue that everyone shouldn't stop stealing from their neighbors in night time raids, because it enabled the existence of some societies, and they should be allowed to continue it. Oppression of minorities or murder of those outside a particular clan may allow the continued existence of the society as-is, free of outside influence. Should we allow that?

So, what, you want us to gallantly ride into battle as a knight in shining armor to stop all conflicts?

To the eyes of Canadians and Europeans, we were oppressing minorities by not letting gays serve in the military. To the eyes of anarchists, the federal government is stealing property through taxes. That doesn't mean they have to force us to conform to their ways. It's a problem, but it's not their problem. The same principle applies to these groups.

Now if it's something big like genocides, then I would have a problem about it as that tends to affect the world than just a local group.

[Norstal]

Yes, I went through history in high school and found nothing seriously wrong with it.

It's incomplete, isn't it?
Or... Oh...

God CM just get to the point.

Nationalism wasn't the main cause for the 20th century Great Wars. It might be for the Balkans, but...they're Balkans. For countries like France, Prussia/Germany, etc., nationalism is really irrelevant. It's more about economic and political issues such as wanting more land.

[Norsklow]

I think you think on too short a time line. You wish to judge by 20 years. I think in longer terms.

The reason I only appealed to the last 20 years is because I'm only aware of the statistics for the last 20 years, and I have a certain aversion to talking out of my arse. I don't even know if anyone bothered with these kinds of statistics before then, or whether they would be internationally comparable as they are now.

And I suspect that the lot of the Irishmen in question - over that longer term - has been better on the Western board of the Atlantic than on the Eastern board.

And once again, that is rather irrelevant. Your Irishman, like any other Briton, WASP, Frenchman, German or whatever you like... if any of these random "average hypothetical individuals" were dropped into any Western Country right now and we looked to see how they fared with regards to upwards social mobility, we know that they would do the worse in the US. Potatoes, or lack thereof, in C19th are simply irrelevant to that simple statistical, empirical fact.

That is an assessment based on a very brief reading of time - a rather selective one even.
It is the whole timeline that is relevant. Not the part that you find useful. The American Dream did not begin 20 years ago.

The reason I only appealed to the last 20 years is because I'm only aware of the statistics for the last 20 years, and I have a certain aversion to talking out of my arse.

In other words, when it comes to assessing the American Dream, except for possibly 20 years, you are

talking out of my arse

[Anarchists communists and other pinkos]

My statement in no way contradicts that.

It does, since you equal more freedom with less harm, while the opposite is true. If you have less freedom, you have less chances to harm yourself. People in solitary confinement or an insane asylum are perfectly safe, for example.

but we're adults we don't need to be kept safe.