this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2025
852 points (100.0% liked)
Political Memes
7306 readers
2758 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think a tiny bit of nationalism is okay when your country is literally under attack and you have to come together to survive. Nationalism spurred on by imaginary threats is the kind that divides us. I don't mind saying "go Ukraine go!" at a time like this.
I disagree and it's hardly a "tiny bit" when you're literally doing the salute of a literal Nazi Germany collaborator. Also a bit iffy, considering far right nationalists were infiltrating the army, the police and the secret police in Ukraine, torturing communists.
... and even if that all were ok: could we at least not reproduce that stuff when we're not Ukrainian?
I've never been a (Canadian) patriot, but I'm quite happy to see "buy Canadian" these days -- am I wrong to? It's a way of signalling we don't take $%^& from Trump.
Not what this is about, homie.
I'd call that a tiny bit of nationalism though.
And it's not what I'm talking about.
If your logic can't be applied to more than one scenario then your logic is flawed.
I'm not claiming that it's not applicable. I don't want to talk about a different topic.
No you don't want to talk about it because it completely undermines your point. When you make a logical argument the logic of said argument is certainly not a different topic.
There were two points intsoduced:
So, to answer both points:
I don't mean to drag this out, but when you said you disagree, what was it that I said that you disagreed with?
I disagree with nationalism and I think it's beside the point, which is why I didn't want to get into it.
Bu, if you insinst: Nationalism is the belief that the interests of the national state align with your personal interests. I think that belief is wrong (at least in a dapitalist nation). One example in how it is wrong is that it dilutes/negates class antagonisms. E.g.: if you "buy canadian", you're actually helping the Canadian bourgeoisie.
Nationalism is also the reason why people believe in killing and/or dying for their nation in a war. I don't agree with nationalism. Not even a "tiny bit".
Well sure, buying Canadian helps the Canadian bourgeoisie. But the point is that it sends a message to Trump. We have to buy food from somewhere -- so surely it's better to buy Canadian?