https://x.com/arctanno/status/2069255531886170610?s=46
Someone posted how Norway celebrating Norway is nationalistic, of course this caused eurocucks to come out screeching gems like
“Patriotism not nationalism”
“Funny how Americans can't digest embracing their country without it having to be "nationalism" and ideological”
“nationalism is cool when you actually have a culture and history, americans think nationalism is having white skin. lost creatures.”
Wtf happened to Europe to make them this mentally broken? Is this all just post WW2 propaganda run rampant?
It's WW1 propaganda, which is blamed on nationalism.
Just explaining, not saying it's right: 'nationalism' is regarded as denigrating other peoples in a mean way or unironically hating them (unless it's Germans whom it's OK to hate).
Europeans also have no idea what America is like (same as the other way around), they tend to think that America is very 'racist', and that it has 0 social welfare systems.
It’s an odd rewriting on history. I saw even Wikipedia blamed WW1 on nationalism which is insane, imperialism caused WW1, “nationalism” is the natural response to a country conquered by imperialism.
It's weaponised reductive logic. Obviously if everyone lived under a globalist one-world government, then there would be no wars between nations... because nations wouldn't exist. Under this logic, human violence only exists because people are free-thinking individuals rather than members of a literal hivemind.
People only maintain and protect things they care about. A nation without nationalism is an economic zone. Anyone advocating for economic zones is either an enemy of certain (white) nations or an enemy of mankind in general (globalist).
WW1 is notoriously complicated - it's like the Schleswig-Holstein issue and quantum mechanics rolled into one. The best explanation I know is that WW1 was caused by German fear of rising Russian power - the infamous Thucydides trap that came up a while back. England joined for balance of power reasons, and France and Italy joined for irredentism, while Austria was trying to stave off imperial collapse by a revolt of the so called submerged nations. Undoubtedly an oversimplification on all counts, but it ought to be close enough.
Obviously, ruling classes use nationalism, they don't go to war for nationalistic reasons as opposed to raison d'etat. You could argue that people would have refused to fight in such a stupid war if it were not for nationalism. But nationalism is not incompatible with refusing to fight for the stupid wars of the ruling classes, in fact, these days in Europe it is incompatible with fighting for them.
But in a time of the EU, demonizing nationalism works well. However, if you don't like nationalism, wait till you see anti-nationalism.
At this point I'm comfortable saying: it was the banks.
Like all the wars before it an after it. Always playing both sides.
Yes the banks. The Bankmans. The Bankman-Frieds.
Lmao I wish America was racist with no social welfare systems (at least the way the current systems are designed). We would have so fewer problems if we weren't raised to be colorblind and pay for all the problems the colors cause.