Socialism vs. Capitalism

Post Reply New Topic

A perfect nation is impossible, then; pantheism is incompatible with ethno-nationalism.

NO.



NO.

WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE INCOMPATIBLE?

Pantheism is the belief that everything that exists is sacred; ethno-nationalism is the belief that one nation and one ethnicity are superior to all others.
Therefore, they are mutually incompatible unless one or the other is watered down or altered into meaninglessness.

HOW DOES ETHNONATIONALISM ENTAIL DISDAIN TOWARD AND FEELING OF SUPREMACY OVER OTHER ETHNICITIES/RACES, ACCORDING TO YOU?

APPARENTLY, YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT ETHNONATIONALISM MEANS.

ZHKND, why do you keep your capslock active?

I first I thought you meant hyper-capitalism, since that would also entail free movement of labor and hyper individualism, both of which is has a problematic relation with ethno-nationalism at best. However pantheism at the very least means the belief that the divine is immanent and omnipresent, or that the universe = divine.



Ethno-nationalism is the ideology that defines nation on the grounds of ethnicity and/or race. And does not necessarily have to include notions of supremacy.

@GGP:
Someone is wrong on the internet

@ZHKND:
http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/1999/1/02/ ... alism.html

The definition alone does not imply superiority, only separation; however, in practice, ethno-nationalism pretty much always is accompanied by a sense of superiority of the ethnicity in question, if not outright bigotry: Japan, Korea (especially North Korea), Germany before the 2nd world war, the Balkans, Israel, Iraq, Turkey, Myanmar, etc etc etc

Don't think I can agree with that, the majority of the contemporary countries that make up our international system were generated during a sustained period where national self-determination, often along ethnic lines, was highly emphasized. Ethnic nationalism has often been the driving force for creating places where minorities have a space for themselves. It only becomes a problem when, for example in the case of Pakistan, a state for Muslims is converted in a Muslim state.

28% Capitalist, 72% Socialist

You tend to be quite wary of businesses, especially big business.
While you know that corporations have their place, you tend to support small, locally owned shops.
As far as the rich go, you think they're usually corrupt and immoral.

I don't actually think the rich are corrupt and immoral, but I am sure some of them are, as are others.

the people who would thrive living in a socialist nation, are TOTALLY incompatible with those who would thrive living in a capitalist nation.

91, populations are not static. Ethnonationalism only works as an organizing principle where populations start out unmixed, and do not mix in the future; Ethnonationalism in Myanmar has been playing out in the last year with assaults, fire bombings, etc of the minority Muslim population there in an attempt to drive them out and make a 'pure' Buddhist Myanmar; It is playing out in the US now with bigotry against South and Central American immigrants, in Japan against Koreans and Chinese, In China against the Uyghur and the Tibetans, in North Korea against pretty much the rest of the world; it has been playing out in Iraq for the last decade with divisions between the Sunnis, Shias, and Kurds, and Turkey with the Kurds likewise; It is playing out in Greece with right-wing, nearly Nazi-esque political parties blaming that country's woes on 'foreigners,' It's playing out right now in Kashmir, it's playing out right now in Israel. It played out in Rawanda with the Hutu and the Tutsi.

For goodness' sake, look at history. This is NOT a benign concept. If you want to have a 'pure' homeland for a 'pure' people, you have to start with purification. 'Ethnic cleansing.' An ethnocultural purge.

The states you list here, aside from Greece and Turkey were not created through a process of national self-determination. Real ethnic tensions occur when the borders of a state pay no heed to the ethnic/religious mix of the state. Iraq and Burma were both created to suit outsider interests moreso than to reflect internal composition. China would experience less ethnic tension if a process of national self determination had been allowed to occur there, the Tibetan ethnic/religious nationalism there is about self-determination, not purity. In Bangladesh the separation from Pakistan was an effort to end their marginalization within another entity. It is the fact that China has managed to essentially keep its colonies that has allowed the rampant Han Chinese majoritarianism to occur. Conversely states like Sweeden, Norway, Finland, Italy and many others for example Lesotho came about through this process. The states where the largest amounts of ethnic tensions occur are those where significant groups struggle for primacy within the same state. You might argue that ethnic mixes within states change the balance of power of time and that is certainly true but states where this process has not occurred experience the same shifts and they fracture the social contracts there and the results are devastating. Such shifts are far more likely to occur in states where the balance of identity is uneven. I agree that it would be much better if we could all just get along but treating ethnic identity as a universal negative is totally short sighted from an Poli-Sci perspective.

I haven't denied textbook definitions of logical laws in doing comical apologetics, so no.



It could also so that there's multiple channels for achieving "economic freedom" that's worked in the west is to soften the rough edges of job loss, especially since thread-users sorta were talking about that very subset of countries in the "super capitalist vs super socialist" discussion.

Hong Kong is not that economically individualist, either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_in_Hong_Kong

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yE6oLnIrxk[/youtube]

Socialism and Capitalism are not mutually exclusive concepts

Ad hominem and also nonsense.



Could be but it is not evident from the dataset you were drawing your conclusion from. There are many interesting possibilities that sort of a list encourages us to explore.



I love HK, its my favourite place in China that I have spent time in, so far. Have you ever been there? What are they not economically individualist in comparison to? Anarchy? They have a government, health care and when I was last there they were making serious efforts with regards to public housing. However, any walk through Kowloon will convince you that you are in a mostly self-help town.