ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Suggested Deviants
Suggested Collections
You Might Like…
Featured in Groups
Comments26
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Agree with this post below.
From my experience the failings of schools has very little to do with the actual ideology of nationalism, take the modern school with it's preachings about globalism, human rights, feminism and cultural diversity for example they would fit in perfectly with the above quotation and there is nothing they despise more than ''fascists, racists, nationalists and male chauvinism''. To the degree that many people are starting to think more and more that the governments of Europe and the US are ''anti-white''. So whilst I maintain my respect for Goldman, I don't see the connection to nationalism, as a matter of fact she just mentions patriotism which is something completely different so perhaps it would be in place to change the name of the picture? I would even like to argue that true nationalism, not the kind of precariat neonazism reaction to post-modernism, in many ways humbles a person for how does one define their unique culture and nationality without comparing it to other unique cultures and nationalities? One could argue along the lines of some philosophers that one can not think of something without thinking of the exact opposite, how would you define justice without having known of injustice? Would Siddhartha Gautama changed his ways if he never got to see the lives of the underclass? Can you call someone fat without at the same time having skinny in mind? The core feature of nationalism has always been the sovereignity of nations, as much self-ruling as possible and the right to embrace their own heritage and live in accordance with the traditions and values of ones ancestry and volk, in actuality the whole ordeal is quite empirical and in accordance with evolution. In the ''New Right'' movements in Europe the study of different civilisations, the different indo-european ones , their interaction and comparison to African and Asian ones, a general love for history and often politically incorrect history, comparative religion is fluorishing in this milieu and a grande part of the movement are Traditionalists, meaning that they think all the major religions share the same origin( in God) which makes them in both theory and practice more tolerant of different customs than the ''enlightened'' internationalists. Also quite remarkable that she critizes the arrogance of youth, and is quoted by socialists and other lefties, when they have been in charge of the whole ''self-esteem movement'', ''Don't trust in the power of the adults'' and the sexual revolution. And I do implore an example where nationalism has deadened the spirit of youth, on the contrary such movements have seen massive youth outbursts of creativity and a general joy of living, whilst it is under the advocates of individualism, ''freedom'', sexual revolutions, feminism and multi-culturalism that a feeling of emptiness, indifference and meaninglessness breeds. I suppose in the end such big words never mean much in reality, such tokens are not enough to spurr one into life. But rather the thought of a biological and cultural collectivism and creating a community as such gives ease, meaning and true rejoice to the every day person and also breeds leaders with a link to the people, instead of solemnly swearing on a God they don't believe in, for a people they don't acknowledge and sugar-coated ideals made up by PR-experts.
So, to conclude: It is more probable that this kind of history-teaching should be connected to a greedy elitist and individualistic moral, they will encourage and control however they see fit, and sell it to the public through the accidental good sides it has or just whip up fear as incentive. It is a flaw in character not in ideology, whilst granted some are more prone to encouraging selfishness, but it is my firmest belief that such behaviour is not larger in anarchism or nationalism compared to neoliberalism and marxism. Take for example the liberation of the woman, as such a noble goal, but what has been in it for the elite? They have successfully stripped her of any dignity, turned her into a cog in the labourmarket, creating 100% more wage-slaves, depression and chewing-pills is at an all time high, self-harming, having abusive relationships and creating an obsessive sexual identity, and selling herself like a whore to be liked on facebook and garner self-validation, buying even more of their ''beauty products''. Often marrige and monogamy has stood under attacks for being a patriarchal and oppressive instituation, oddly it is by abolishing these ideals that women has become truly objectified, seen like something you conquer sexually and cynically playing along with her insecurites and paying for her things as to get sexual favors.
We witched to the exact opposite and nothing has really changed. Globalism has been a failure and more often then not has lead to exploitation of workers and people. Every nation has the right to defend its culture and as a species we naturally collectivize. Even if you were to destroy all countries people would form new tribes that would become new countries. You simply hit a re-set button.
From my experience the failings of schools has very little to do with the actual ideology of nationalism, take the modern school with it's preachings about globalism, human rights, feminism and cultural diversity for example they would fit in perfectly with the above quotation and there is nothing they despise more than ''fascists, racists, nationalists and male chauvinism''. To the degree that many people are starting to think more and more that the governments of Europe and the US are ''anti-white''. So whilst I maintain my respect for Goldman, I don't see the connection to nationalism, as a matter of fact she just mentions patriotism which is something completely different so perhaps it would be in place to change the name of the picture? I would even like to argue that true nationalism, not the kind of precariat neonazism reaction to post-modernism, in many ways humbles a person for how does one define their unique culture and nationality without comparing it to other unique cultures and nationalities? One could argue along the lines of some philosophers that one can not think of something without thinking of the exact opposite, how would you define justice without having known of injustice? Would Siddhartha Gautama changed his ways if he never got to see the lives of the underclass? Can you call someone fat without at the same time having skinny in mind? The core feature of nationalism has always been the sovereignity of nations, as much self-ruling as possible and the right to embrace their own heritage and live in accordance with the traditions and values of ones ancestry and volk, in actuality the whole ordeal is quite empirical and in accordance with evolution. In the ''New Right'' movements in Europe the study of different civilisations, the different indo-european ones , their interaction and comparison to African and Asian ones, a general love for history and often politically incorrect history, comparative religion is fluorishing in this milieu and a grande part of the movement are Traditionalists, meaning that they think all the major religions share the same origin( in God) which makes them in both theory and practice more tolerant of different customs than the ''enlightened'' internationalists. Also quite remarkable that she critizes the arrogance of youth, and is quoted by socialists and other lefties, when they have been in charge of the whole ''self-esteem movement'', ''Don't trust in the power of the adults'' and the sexual revolution. And I do implore an example where nationalism has deadened the spirit of youth, on the contrary such movements have seen massive youth outbursts of creativity and a general joy of living, whilst it is under the advocates of individualism, ''freedom'', sexual revolutions, feminism and multi-culturalism that a feeling of emptiness, indifference and meaninglessness breeds. I suppose in the end such big words never mean much in reality, such tokens are not enough to spurr one into life. But rather the thought of a biological and cultural collectivism and creating a community as such gives ease, meaning and true rejoice to the every day person and also breeds leaders with a link to the people, instead of solemnly swearing on a God they don't believe in, for a people they don't acknowledge and sugar-coated ideals made up by PR-experts.
So, to conclude: It is more probable that this kind of history-teaching should be connected to a greedy elitist and individualistic moral, they will encourage and control however they see fit, and sell it to the public through the accidental good sides it has or just whip up fear as incentive. It is a flaw in character not in ideology, whilst granted some are more prone to encouraging selfishness, but it is my firmest belief that such behaviour is not larger in anarchism or nationalism compared to neoliberalism and marxism. Take for example the liberation of the woman, as such a noble goal, but what has been in it for the elite? They have successfully stripped her of any dignity, turned her into a cog in the labourmarket, creating 100% more wage-slaves, depression and chewing-pills is at an all time high, self-harming, having abusive relationships and creating an obsessive sexual identity, and selling herself like a whore to be liked on facebook and garner self-validation, buying even more of their ''beauty products''. Often marrige and monogamy has stood under attacks for being a patriarchal and oppressive instituation, oddly it is by abolishing these ideals that women has become truly objectified, seen like something you conquer sexually and cynically playing along with her insecurites and paying for her things as to get sexual favors.
We witched to the exact opposite and nothing has really changed. Globalism has been a failure and more often then not has lead to exploitation of workers and people. Every nation has the right to defend its culture and as a species we naturally collectivize. Even if you were to destroy all countries people would form new tribes that would become new countries. You simply hit a re-set button.