Monkey Tennis Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I've heard both terms used in a derisory way for independence supporters. Based on the definitions that have been given, I don't see anything wrong with either being a patriot or a nationalist! I don't think the talk of independence is going to go away. 'No' voters may have won the referendum, but how they won it only seems to have energised independence supporters and boosted support for the SNP. The way in which they won the referendum, with this 'vow' that the 3 party leaders came out with late in the day (which I understand broke the rules of the referendum, since postal votes had already been counted), the fact that nearly all the newspapers were biased towards No, and the BBC was biased too, has only created a sense of injustice and a desire to continue the fight for freedom. Since the referendum we've had Milliband starting to backtrack on the vow within 24 hours and we've had Gordon Brown asking us to sign a petition to ensure that the promises he made to us would actually be kept! We also found out that postal votes were allegedly opened before they should have been. No wonder Yes supporters plan to keep going. As for the topic of this thread, I don't understand how any No voter can continue to sing the national anthem. They voted against Scotland becoming a nation again! As a Yes voter, I don't know how I can sing it when my fellow Scots voted against what the song says. Listen son, there has been a Scotland team for literally as long as there has been international football. This has been the case throughout spells when there has been virtually no interest in political independence and during the current spell when there's plenty. Please take your stupid infantile interpretation of the political complexities of this elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul193745 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Listen son, there has been a Scotland team for literally as long as there has been international football. This has been the case throughout spells when there has been virtually no interest in political independence and during the current spell when there's plenty. Please take your stupid infantile interpretation of the political complexities of this elsewhere. Thanks 'dad' but the independence debate isn't going away. Refuse to accept that if you want, it's up to you. If you don't want to discuss it, don't post on this thread. I hope there will always be a Scotland team, but since Scotland voted against being a nation, who's to say that won't be taken away one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Thanks 'dad' but the independence debate isn't going away. Refuse to accept that if you want, it's up to you. If you don't want to discuss it, don't post on this thread. I hope there will always be a Scotland team, but since Scotland voted against being a nation, who's to say that won't be taken away one day. Grow up. I voted the same way as I'm guessing you did. It's utterly unrelated to football - a sphere in which we've always enjoyed total autonomy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul193745 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Grow up. I voted the same way as I'm guessing you did. It's utterly unrelated to football - a sphere in which we've always enjoyed total autonomy. What's with the cheap insults? If you've got nothing useful to say and you can't discuss things in a reasonable manner then you're the one with the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roverthemoon Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I thought there was now a politics forum where this shite can be discussed without bothering the rest of us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 What's with the cheap insults? If you've got nothing useful to say and you can't discuss things in a reasonable manner then you're the one with the problem. Because it's tiresome and silly. This desire to link the referendum to something, that always has, and continues to exist entirely outside of it, is nuts and supremely dull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul193745 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 Because it's tiresome and silly. This desire to link the referendum to something, that always has, and continues to exist entirely outside of it, is nuts and supremely dull. 380 replies to this topic would say different. No one is forcing you to read this thread. Just ignore it if you find it tiresome and silly and don't insult those who want to talk about it. There's plenty of topics of debate on this message board. Find one that interests you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 380 replies to this topic would say different. No one is forcing you to read this thread. Just ignore it if you find it tiresome and silly and don't insult those who want to talk about it. There's plenty of topics of debate on this message board. Find one that interests you. It's a discussion forum mate. If I think some of the views being expressed are stupid and bear no scrutiny, then if I can be arsed, I might say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Thanks 'dad' but the independence debate isn't going away. It is the minority irrelevance it's always been. Unlucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fraser_smfc Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 I'd love to hear a definition of these two terms. I hear them bandied about as being a bad thing, or being a good thing, but I wonder whether people are all using them to mean the same thing. How would you define them? Is it a good thing or a bad thing to be a patriot or a nationalist? George Orwell sums it up pretty well: “Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 George Orwell sums it up pretty well: “Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.” Seriously? Orwell writing in what, the 1940s? So much has happened since then that would have undoubtedly changed Orwell's definition. I'm convinced a good left winger like him would've realised that the Yes campaign was so far removed from the national socialism that he was familiar with that it almost makes these terms meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 It is the minority irrelevance it's always been. Unlucky. Obvious troll is obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 George Orwell sums it up pretty well: “Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.” George Orwell, that well-known academic voice of authority on the origins of nationalism. Stick to using Orwell to try and sound edgy in Starbucks and leave political distinctions to those qualified to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordopolis Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 George Orwell sums it up pretty well: “Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.” Well done him for his subjective (and plainly anti-nationalist) definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.