Pride in one’s nation is one of the weakest and most pathetic types of pride because a nation’s greatness is a result of so many different people’s contribution. Unless you are FDR level, you contributed very little.
But American pride in being American is ridiculous.
Americans have nothing to be proud of, not today’s Americans anyway. The people who made America great are all dead. The people in power today are those who threw away the greatness their predecessors: their betters, created. The same is true of the English. Victorians or even Regency English would despise their descendants pathetic weakness, foolishness and stupidity.
What are you proud of, exactly? Getting you asses whipped by Iran? Impoverishing 60% of your own population? Helping Israel commit genocide? Killing millions in Iraq for no goddamn reason, since Iraq never attacked America? Gutting the Bill of Rights? Having the most corrupt President in American history?
One can criticize FDR and the post-war liberals of the 40s and 50s and 60s for various reasons: but they built an America which was great in many ways: that worked for more and more people, that delivered a good life for many, and which became more fair over time (civil liberties, for example, and increased rights for women.)
Americans were given the best hand in the world: the industrial and tech lead, and they pissed it away. They literally, voluntarily, shipped their industry to China acting as if making a an extra percentage point more profit was all that mattered.
America’s always been evil. All Empires are, and so are all settler colonial states. It’s just the way it is. But Americans of previous generations were competent, and starting with FDR, they at least took care of their own people. They were an American Athens, where immigrants were welcome, where people could make something of themselves, where the world’s great scholars and scientists wanted to be.
America had it all, and pissed it away.
No country, like no person, is of a piece. There is always good and evil, things to be proud of and things to be ashamed of.
But everything great in America was created by people who are dead or old, or are downstream of the post-war liberal period. The tech for the internet was created by post-war government agencies. The world wide web was invented by a government scientist working in an agency created by post-war liberals. Modern GUI interfaces were created in the early 70s and everything that flows from all this, including cell and smart phones is a result of technologies created by government or Bell Labs.
The great tech revolutions of the 80s, 90s and 2000s were all matters of exploiting fundamental discoveries and work done in the post-war era and the cupboard is now bare. America is cutting spending on research, burning its seed corn, even as China ramps up research. America is impoverishing its own people, even as China forces housing prices lower and works to improve wages and living standards for the majority.
To be proud of being American today is pathetic. What is there to be proud of? Destroying the bill of rights? Having a president who openly takes bribes in office? Losing the the tech and industrial lead? Making most of the population poor? Being the attack dog of Israel, with most politicians doing the bidding of a foreign country to the detriment of their own people?
Everything great about America is a legacy of the past, not a product of the present and being proud of being American is like being proud your parents left you a billion dollars, and you’re now worth a hundred million.
What I write here is for the benefit of everyone, but alas, I live in capitalism and I, and the site, take money to keep running. If you value the writing here and can, please subscribe or donate.
mago
Nice rant and oh so accurate.
Nationalism is a primitive emotion.
GrimJim
Nationalism is merely tribalism writ large.
Tribalism is nothing more than gestalt solipsism among inbred humans.
Humans are just apes with delusions of grandeur.
Dermot O Connor
Even a very drunk Doug Stanhope can see nationalism for what it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsPDT5qHtZ4
j
Stumbled upon this interesting read on China, if you haven’t seen it already:
https://sinocities.substack.com/p/you-dont-understand-china
Eclair
Seems like rabid patriotism affects two groups: those who see only profit in the current state of corruption and greed in the US, and those who are so low they have nothing left to be proud of but their country. Well, except in Western New York State, the tip of Appalachia and part of the Rust Belt, where pride in the Buffalo Bills football team approaches a mania. The countryside turns from green to Bills Red and Blue each autumn.
Like & Subscribe
We have plenty to be proud about. For example, our leader, despite it being all the fault of Carter and Bill and Hillary Clinton according to spud in his campaign to get Trump elected a fourth time, is the dumest (his spelling, not mine), most despicable and deplorable human being ever to grace the planet and yet America remains and will remain the most powerful nation ever in history until human is no more and in fact, America will ensure human is no more. I mean, you have to admit, it is quite a feat to maintain this power position with a moronic, insane, grifting, demented buffoon at the helm. This freak of nature has his finger on the button and every day I wake, I wait anxiously for the bomb sirens and the EMP before the earth-shattering booms of the nuclear detonations. If that doesn’t inspire overwhelming pride, nothing will. Human’s ultimate crowning achievement — it’s self-extinction. The end game of progress.
In other news, I saw a commercial last night for the University of Phoenix. What will come of such scams if the nightmares about AI and jobs turn out to be correct? Think about the medical profession and the impact crap AI will have upon it. We have always been guinea pigs in regard to the health industry (see the excellent series The Knick) to one degree or another, but this will take us back to the days of The Knick. AI will double down or organ harvesting for example by recommending a rash of kidney removals based on false kidney disease diagnoses. The permutations are as extensive, or more so, as you or I can imagine. It is going to be such fun and yet another source of immense pride and prejudice.
Jan Wiklund
The cardinal sin of Americans is moralizing. They treat shit as the “fault” of somebody that has to be whipped for that. But mostly it’s just structural weaknesses that maybe could have been mended but weren’t, because people couldn’t see them.
All empires, at least the last thousand-odd years, crumbled because their leading capitalists got tired of production and preferred easy living with their money. At least that is what Charles Kindleberger thought, in World Economic Primacy 1500-1990, and Bas van Bavel agreed and drew it back to the Abbasid caliphate in the eight century in The Visible Hand? – How Market Economies Have Emerged And Declined Since AD500. They were all impoverished because their leading class got a too easy life and lost their drive.
And that is a structural weakness. There shouldn’t be any “leading class”! Businesses should be led by the people who work there, because they have an interest in keeping them up to date. I suppose most peoples have tried to achieve that, but made themselves comfortable with some easy compromise – not just the Americans.
PS. Youtube is full of films with Americans who have left and are happy for that. I know personally a Boeing engineer who discovered that Boeing can’t make a new state of the art aircraft any longer because they have outsourced the competence. So he quit and moved to France. He thinks America is shit.
Like & Subscribe
Jan, stop. There is no such thing as “Americans”, or what that implies. What it implies is a monolithic group or hive mind. America, despite the criticism, is quite diverse, more so than most places on the planet.
The weak structures you excoriate were created by people — powerful people. By a small, diminutive subset of the American population that is not at all representative of the whole if anything could be. Those weaknesses are strengths for the ruling elite, or in the least the ruling elite take advantage of and exploit any weaknesses in the structures erected by their ruling elite forbearers.
Point being, there is blame, but it’s complex and can’t be blamed on any one person as you say, but it can be blamed on those who erected the weak faulty structures and those who exploit any and all weaknesses in said structures to their vast economic benefit. Power groups that emanate from the ruling elite come and go and yes, they are to blame and no, they are not “Americans” in the sense they represent the whole.
Mark Level
From your keyboard to the ears of God and the populace, Ian. The ReThuglicans are less hypocritical and practice their rapine, theft, and con-games openly. The political class enjoy complete impunity, think Rick Scott stealing billion$ from Florida’s elderly in Medicare fraud, paying a billion in fines, and still having an elected political position. The DimmieCraps pretend they’ll do “something” positive for dumb Normie voters, oh say “The Green New Deal,” but it’s just a shiny object to distract. Remember when Kamala was in favor of M4A, Medicare for All? If not, no shame, she was for it at one debate where the rest of them (not Biden though, not Bullock if he wasn’t yet eliminated) were for it, until less that 24 hours later when her staffers told her what it was. No affordable healthcare for you, not a Soup Nazi but a Healthcare Nazi Political Class. I’ll say 1 “positive” thing for the Ruling Class, they have a very clear class consciousness, know who is in “the Club” (see George Carlin) & who isn’t. No mercy, no kindness, no temperance or moderation, Crush the Lessers!! Enslave, rape, kill, torture. And the Donald is so filthy that even the likes of Jeffrey Epstein called him toxic and utterly without ANY redeeming value.
Remember in the 80s when the Newt was going after Bill for his sexual “degeneracy”, oh and he was a goddamn Hippie subversive too, once smoked a joint!! But no, Bill clarified, it was phony posturing, “I didn’t inhale.” As to sex with Monica, 21 years old (not 17 or 18 as Fox News claimed), “It depends what the meaning of is is” (sic). You’re living thru one of the great Youth Revolts of the 20th century, but your eye remains firmly on the $ Signs, and Power’s levers.
Okay, this is the perfect place to add to my On Topic Open Thread shares, move beyond the 90’s into the Aughts. My main source for this is Dan Piepenbring in the Jan. 2025 Harper’s book review section, covering Colette Shade’s “Y2K: How the 2000s Became Everything” (Everything bad and corrupt). D.P. was born within 6 days of Shia LaBeouf, successful child star then young adult actor who costar Harrison Ford called a “fucking idiot,” on the Red Carpet at the Berlin Film Festival promenaded with a paper bag over his head, repeatedly arrested for public drunkenness, at a Wallgreens, at a Broadway “Cabaret” showing, etc.
The Aughts were every bit as degraded and degenerate, or moreso, than the Aughts. (PS– beginning of the 90’s book by Klosterman brilliant, but some of it pretty rote, no real interest. His coverage of the 90s Tech boom nearly put me to sleep, I lived thru it, conclusion obvious, huge hype about “Liberation” thru tech platforms, just bullshit to enrich a few.) Piepenbring notes Nancy Kerrigan bawling once her knee broken by a paid thug; “O.J’s slow-speed chase,” the Taco Bell Chihuaha. We can all recall the rest.
A rise in Celebrity among those Famous for being Famous. Paris Hilton’s Sex Tape, then multiple DUI and drug arrests. Mentally ill Britney Spears breaking down in public, having babies and losing custody, under the legal care of her Father for 2 decades. “The President told us to fight terrorism by vacationing in Orlando.”
The Culture moves further toward Idiocracy, a 2006 film which hit the nail on the head. Freedom fries, low-rise jeans, “inflatable furniture, and back issues of Maxim.” American Pie 2 a giant hit. (Okay, I’m no prude, films like this fine for children in their mid- to late-teens, gotta learn about sex somewhere, no worse, actually better than Bible Bangers’ “Keep your legs crossed, no birth control, ignorance is bliss.”) But for adults to play those parts (adults playing teens) or any adults in the theater audience, you are pathetic. Ms. Shade quoted as noting of ‘Muricans of the Aughts, “we became meaner, stupider, more violent, more conformist, more childish, more materialistic, more racist, and more vindictive.” A fish rotting from the head down. Girls Gone Wild video-streaming (will lead to Only Fans 2 decades later.) Francis Fukuyama’s idiotic “End of History”, derived out of Karl Rove’s “We are an Empire now and we create our own reality” bullshit, magnified to USA and the West are God, we will have permanent Hegemony and will exterminate the Palestinians, rule Afghanistan, etc. We will smugly lecture RoW about a “rules-based order” and Human Rights, but only THEY must bow to those immutable Rules, they don’t apply to “US.”
By a decade later, 2016 election, Wikileaks and Julian Assange reveal Jake Sullivan gleefully emailing Hillary, “Al-Qaeda is on our side in Syria,” something to be proud of, collaborating with head-choppers and people who throw acid in girls’ and women’s faces. Any blowback? Only to Assange, set-up on ridiculous false charges (finger-banging a girlfriend consensually, slow to agree to take an AIDs test after, “victim” later says it was all bullshit), takes refuge in an Embassy, a prisoner of the British Zionists for 8 years, first there, then in Bellmarsh prison, tortured and degraded until it gets TOO boring and TOO untenable legally.
I’ll flash back to 1999, when SCotUS allowed the Bush people, after the “Brooks Brothers Riot” which included wannabe teen rapist & anti-abortion fanatic, “I love beer” Bret Kavanaugh, led behind the scenes by Daddy’s Guy, the highly competent and respected James Baker, succeeds in open theft of an election. I was completing my Single Subject credential in 2 areas in California at the time, recall the anger and disgust myself and my classmates felt as the news broke. But doesn’t matter, it’s an Iron Oligarchy and there is no way to escape it except emigration or suicide.
T-Bone Burnett wrote a song at the time that wasn’t particularly musically good, but as a journalistic comment on the increasing degeneracy was spot-on: “Keep all the Bad, Reject all the Good,” something like that (can’t find it, dropped out of circulation), yep.
PS– LAS the gift of laughter that keeps on giving. Wow, spud accidentally omitted one letter from a word in a previous post, thus he is a “Moran” (Tea Party era put-down) and nothing he said has any value. Uhhm, no. You could try to rebut some point you disagree with from him, but too lazy, resort to a sloppy ad hominem.
Mark Level
Oops, “The Aughts were every bit as degraded and degenerate as the Nineties” [corrected], not a momentary brain-fart comparison of the thing to itself. Most of us have the occasional typo. Ian wrote “reigned in” for “reined in”. In an excellent post on the banality of Post-modernism, Sean P. Kelly misspelled the first 2 sages he mentioned, Sartre (2 rs) and Deleuze. Doesn’t mean that the post was worthless, the thinking is solid, a typo doesn’t mean the person has had a stroke or suddenly lost 30 points of IQ.
Rebut a point by responding to it with a counter-argument. Sloppy smears don’t cut it.
bruce wilder
Nothing?
I can understand the charge that I should feel shame and regret about my country’s recent conduct, because I do feel shame.
I feel shame, precisely because I am an American, I am of this place and share in it as a common enterprise, as a shared achievement or a shared failure. The failure is painful to me as a betrayal of history and legacy and principle. Yes, principle because the U.S.A. is among the ideological states brought forth in modern times. I honor those liberal and idealistic principles as deserving my loyalty as much or more than any geographic or linguistic claim that may center some other People.
I don’t hold with this fashion on the left for rejecting nationalism. The critique Ian embraces of settler-colonialism as inherently “evil” and wholly regrettable seems too precious and ahistorical to me; it is the moral outlook of college sophomores doing ceremonial land acknowledgments before football games — more about asserting class status and provoking the rubes than any good thing. To me, it is a political pathology, part of the self-defeating dynamic among the left and neoliberal-centre that rejects every grievance and resentment of the lower orders as racism and emergent fascism. The neoliberal-centre is hiding from its responsibility for strip-mining the economic foundations of the country by blaming the deplorables for being losers, but what excuse does the left have for recoiling from making populist appeals? Or embracing anew the ideals of the past?
Too much effort involved to hold intervening hypocrisies to account and correction, is it? The kaleidoscope of human ambivalence blinds you, does it?
I suspect that the wealthy subvent the more academic and useless political philosophies of the left with purpose, but that’s a whole other province of political paranoia.
bruce wilder
call social solidarity and common purpose, asabiyyah, if “nationalism” is too rancid for you.
nihilism seems a cheap luxury, I guess
Edmund
I agree with nearly all of this, and yet the “greatness” of the past in the west was built by those in power exploiting a) the earth’s natural resources, b) the people of other nations and c) the local underclass. At some points resources were abundant enough that they could be shared with the local underclass, for example the golden post-war age, but the story has always been about those with power and those without power.
Now the earth has run out of cheap resources and attempts to exploit other nations are less effective. All that remains for the powerful to exploit is their own population, hence the asset-stripping of the American economy by its current leaders, nothing to be proud of for sure.
spud
Like & Subscribe:
shooting the messenger is a age old attack on the truth. in 1993, i could see where this was going, its easy if you know a little history, especially economic history.
i predicted we would go fascist, just as FDR said if nothing is done, its either fascism, or communism.
so shooting the messenger ignores reality. the reality is, the neo-liberal bill clinton, destroyed the democratic party, which used to garner the support of over 50% of the voting population, down to under 30%.
that means elections so tight, that they can be easily stolen like what happened to gore, who was stupid enough not to campaign on reversing what bill clinton did. so i predicted he would lose, and he did.
i got the boot from the democratic party for speaking up back then. i was read the riot act by the head of the state house, and told the democrats did not need nor want smelly blue collar workers. that the democrats were the future professionals for the american economy.
we see how well that worked, and before clinton left office, she was escorted out of the capital in cuffs, she was involved in some financial shenanigans.
after i got the boot, i received a phone call from a elderly lady from philly. who was canvassing all of the people that got the boot, she told me she did to.
we talked for a while. she was a black lady that went through the civil rights era, and fought.
her advice was very good. in order to secure social rights, economic rights for all must be secured.
today’s neo-liberal democrats, fight hard for bathroom rights, whilst millions live in cars and the streets because of bill clintons polices.
and the pathetic attempt to reverse even a tiny bit of what clinton did with bidens so called industrial policy, failed like any attempt that the tree stooges make on the job, or at home.
sherrod brown knows full well why he lost in ohio in 2024, he still heard about what bill clinton did, and nafta.
thomas frank has documented this well.
when people get radicalized, its because of governing policies. not someone who points out the obvious.
so if you did not want trump the first time, it was time to rid the democrats of the neo-liberals who rigged against bernie for hillary.
if you did not want trump second run, surely bidens rigging against bernie, should have told you what the democrats had become.
and of course, harris, a solid clintonite should have woken you up as to why a trump was handed a door wide open to power.
Jan Wiklund
@Like & Subscribe: Obviously, people don’t have equal power. But, as Susan Strange argued (States and Markets) the outcome is always a compromise – between the interest that are mobilized, that is.
Roughly between the late 1800s and, say, the sixties, labour movements of different kinds were quite mobilized in the industrial world. And national/anti-colonial movements were mobilized in the non-industrial world. Between them, they could achieve some rather impressive things that were favourable to them. But they compromized too much, particularly in that they permitted themselves to be demobilized so that their enemies got the upper hand. And what they had achieved melted away.
It’s intellectual laziness to blame your adversary. Adversaries are always your enemies, that’s the definition. But they are sometimes possible to defeat on important points – provided you mobilize the people who gain from that.
Not otherwise.
And what is “mobilize”. Well, look at how the early 20th century movement did, and make some abstractions. The trick they played was to obstruct the rules, or let’s rather say the routines of their opposites. Routines are there to make life smooth, and when they are upset everything will be more expensive for them. Which will make them willing to deal.
But upsetting routines must be done in a mass scale, not only some tiny riot here and there.
StewartM
Mago
Nationalism is a disease.
Its point seems to be that you root for the “USian” against “the other”, regardless of the specific character traits. I recall the hoopla over Fischer-Spassky in 1972, but from everything I have read, Spassky (the ‘enemy’) was a generally nice guy, a well-read guy, and of course, a great chess player (you don’t get to be world champion if you’re not damned good). Bobby Fischer?–not so much. If you were to be stranded on an island with someone, you’d defintely want to be stranded with Spassky rather than Fischer.
A turning point in my life was my reaction to what later came to be called “Christian Nationalism” but in fact predated since the birth of the Republic. It’s Stephen Decatur’s “My country right or wrong”—if you jettison fundamental moral principles for ‘the team’, then you have jettisoned morality and also ironically jettisoned Christianity. You cannot be “Christian” and cheer rah-rah-rah despite what monstrosity your country is committing. It’s why I ended up jettisoning both nationalism and what passes for flag-waving “Christianity” (I still respect the few Christians who do try to do the part, however).
different clue
Al Gore . . . Al Gore . . . hmmmm . . .
I keep trying to forget that Al Gore was pro NAFTA and pro Forcey-FreeTrade and other such things. But I keep getting reminders. But at least he was well-intendedly stupid about things like that rather than ill-intendedly evil like Bill Clinton was. The neoliberal koolaid was in the air at that time. Everybody inhaled the koolaid.
Slicky Bill’s statements on his college-age relationship with marijuana were an example of his magician’s mastery of telling big lies with masterfully cherry-picked small irrelevant diversionary facts. I remember a BBC news presenter on an interview once who had gone to Oxford with Bill Clinton. His name was Robin ‘something’. If I saw a photograph of his face I would recognize it. Anyway, in the interview the subject of Bill and Marijuana came up and he said he remembered that Bill was able to eat lots of hash brownies and so he did. So it is perfectly possible that he tried to smoke it once and couldn’t inhale the smoke. As General Võ Nguyên Giáp once said to Colonel Larry Summers once in a totally different context, ” That may be correct. But it is also irrelevant.”
America’s large multi-component diversity is part of what leads me to say from time to time that various Activist and Change-Maker groups should leave eachother alone and not try to poach members from eachother or force-convert eachother to any one particular Theory Of Change (TOC). Rather, each different Theory Action Group ( TAG) should pursue its own TOC. A toc for every tag and a tag for every toc. And let the successful ones prove their successfulness by succeeding.
And which ones will that be? Let Darwin decide.
mago
@bruce wilder
I didn’t know branding nationalism a primitive emotion was a lefty thing or anti populist. I’ve been saying that since my mid twenties when I did consider myself a lefty, but not no more. Buncha milquetoasts these days, and I’m far left of the ‘left’ which I’ve left behind, but never mind.
dc mentions the bumper sticker slogan my country right or wrong, which I’m old enough to remember. I was surrounded by that red neck mentality growing up along with their shit kicking music, neither of which I appreciated. That doesn’t make me anti populist, but I’m not into shit kicking culture. That’s what us young radicals called it in Idaho where I grew up.
Then, if I read you correctly, you conflate rejecting nationalism with embracing nihilism. That’s a leap too far for me. Many times I’ve lamented the nihilistic hijacking of Western culture in this space. Don’t know where you’re coming from with that, but we all have our own points of view.
Paz y amor bro.
Frank
Yup. Capitalism at its finest.
spud
there is nothing wrong with nationalism. china, russia, iran, north korea, cuba etc. are all nationalist.
fascism is what the west has practiced since 1993. the world is revolting, and its nationalist, not globalist, globalism is fascism.
the only countries that practice fascism, is the west, but the west are the masters, and have their sovereignty, the rest of the world must be global with no sovereignty.
hopefully the E.U. collapses, and nationalism can rise, along with the collapse of the rest of the west.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nationalism-is-rising-not_b_10281138
“George Friedman
,
Contributor
Geopolitical Forecaster and Strategist
Nationalism Is Rising, Not Fascism
06/03/2016 02:18 pm ET Updated Jun 04, 2017
Recently, there have been a number of articles and statements asserting that fascism is rising in Europe, and that Donald Trump is an American example of fascism. This is a misrepresentation of a very real phenomenon.
The nation-state is reasserting itself as the primary vehicle of political life. Multinational institutions like the European Union and multilateral trade treaties are being challenged because they are seen by some as not being in the national interest.
The charge of a rise in fascism comes from a profound misunderstanding of fascism. It is also an attempt to discredit the resurgence of nationalism and to defend the multinational systems that have dominated the West since World War II.
Nationalism is the core of the Enlightenment’s notion of liberal democracy. It asserts that the multinational dynasties that ruled autocratically denied basic human rights. Among these was the right to national self-determination and the right of citizens to decide what was in the national interest.
The Enlightenment feared tyranny and saw the multinational empires dominating Europe as the essence of tyranny. Destroying them meant replacing them with nation-states. The American and French revolutions were both nationalist risings, as were the risings that swept Europe in 1848. Liberal revolutions were by definition nationalist because they were risings against multinational empires.
Fascism differs from nationalism in two profound ways. First, fascists did not consider self-determination a universal right. Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Francisco Franco, to mention three obvious fascists, only endorsed nationalism for Germany, Italy and Spain. The rights of other nations to a nation-state of their own was, at best, unclear to the fascists.
In a very real sense, Hitler and Mussolini believed in multinationalism, albeit with other nations submitting to their will. Fascism was an assault on the right of nations to pursue their self-interest, and an elevation of the fascists’ right to pursue it based on an assertion of their nations’ inherent superiority and right to rule.”
mago
Nationalism = dualism
Defend it as you will.
StewartM
Spud
there is nothing wrong with nationalism. china, russia, iran, north korea, cuba etc. are all nationalist.
The countries you list aren’t particularly great examples.
Once you start thinking that “we’re special”, then that’s not too far removed from the notion of “I’m special”, which is the root of all our evils. As a co-worker once opined in his parting speech to us, “yes, everyone is special. But you’re not THAT special.”
True equalitarianism means you see everyone has moral equals.
Dan Kelly
The suffix ‘ism’ added to any root word turns said root word into a noun.
This instantly transforms the magnificent subtleties and intricacies of life into ‘hardened’ belief systems and ideologies – even if those espousing them purport to be flexible on the individual level.
Concision in language is every bit as dangerous as the concision of a monoculture ‘lush’ green grass lawn.
This is why China pushed Mandarin in order to ‘standardize’ as much life as possible in the interest of big business-big state power.
Let’s try communicating sans the isms.
Let’s ‘return’ to the wondrous world.
Please, for the love of god.
Half my soul is dying.
—
All our lives we learn
Of the rise and the progress of man
How he rolls out of his sleep
Into the light of reason
We learn how we will conquer the world
With just the power of our mind
How all myth and superstition
Were left far behind
Of all the lies that I’ve heard
Of all the cruel, cruel tricks that have been played
Of all the plagues sent down upon this earth
This could be the worst
Now the sun takes its turn
While the moon is hidden and the spring is capped
And thе beast of the ocean is ignorеd
Half of my soul is dying
Apollo God reigns unchecked
While the earth man slaves in the heat
But in the night, I can’t help it
God, I dream of freedom
Of all the lies that I’ve heard
Of all the cruel, cruel tricks that have been played
Of all the plagues sent down upon this earth
This could be the worst
Now that reason in its glory
Has finally shown us what is real
The few visions that arise
Are just called illusions
The asylums are overflowing
With those who can’t face what they see
But out here on the street
We just smile and keep on walking
Of all the lies that I’ve heard
Of all the cruel, cruel tricks that have been played
Of all the plagues sent down upon this earth
This could be the worst
https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=cK94bd5PWXw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK94bd5PWXw
different clue
@StewartM,
Any particular nationalism need not think its own nationalism to be specially special. Nationalist country-nations could acknowledge that every special nation is equally special. ( Though perhaps we should consider George Orwell’s technical difference between “Patriotism” and “Nationalism” which I read about in a George Orwell essay once).
Charles deGaulle wanted Europe to be a ” Europe of Fatherlands” . . sovereign nation-state nations, working together AS sovereign nations and not oppressed by any transnational Greater European overlayed authority, covering and smothering Europe like a painter’s dropcloth.
http://en.euabc.com/word/262
That link is what came up by search-engining ” de Gaulle Europe of Fatherlands”. It gives a thumbnail clipping sketch of what de Gaulle meant by that. Don’t click on “share” at the bottom of the screen which that link opens up. “Share” takes you to a corporate Oracle website, which I backed out of as soon as I saw it was Oracle.
It does also offer a link to the ” Fondation Charles de Gaulle” which probably explains all that in a deeper way. It’s in French, but translation is choosable, I think.
https://www.charles-de-gaulle.org/lhomme/
spud
basically 911 was all about bill clintons murdering over 500,000 iraq children.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFeRGT1l5c4
The rest of the world feels fine. America hasn’t won a war since World War Two, says Gerald Celente. Pantless Slick Willie and the Nobel Piece of Crap Prize. History before it happens. More tangled tales than the Kama Sutra
Like & Subscribe
… basically 911 was all about bill clintons murdering over 500,000 iraq children.
I think 9/11 was about much more than that and it was many times more complex than a simple explanation. However, for the sake of argument and using your logic, I suppose the next 9/11 will perhaps be about the following. I was going to say the tens of thousands of deaths of Iranians due to Trump’s and Israel’s criminal war of aggression against Iran but my guess is you would argue that the body count will never approach Clinton’s 500,000 in Iraq. Despite some valid criticisms of the Food Aid program, the following implication is undeniable and inevitable and it’s on the beneficent and benevolent, never a fascist, nationalist hero, Donald Trump, the greatest human being of all time.
Models estimate that ending global food aid and humanitarian assistance could lead to over 14 million preventable deaths worldwide by 2030, with roughly 4.5 million of those being children. When U.S. funding for the UN World Food Programme (WFP) was terminated, the agency warned that it could amount to a “death sentence for millions”.
Fyi, I agree with your criticism of Clinton and the Dem party, but unlike you, I can see that it’s just one part of this mess. Trump, and all he entails, is the devil we have now no matter how we got to this point and yes, he’s a fascist and so much more.
spud
Like & Subscribe:
the job of a opposition party is to point out and water down or eliminate polices that they see as illegitimate.
if the opposition party does that, and they increase their presence in the legislative body, then their grievances are viewed as correct by enough of the voters.
but if they cannot gain seats, or even lose seats, then they are not viewed in a positive manner by the voters.
the GOP was not viewed well at all by 1992, and faced some heavy losses.
in steps bill clinton, who turned the opposition party, into the party that was in power, and went further than the party that was in power.
with no opposition, its what the rich prayed for, now you got a ruling oligarchy.
https://ifp.nyu.edu/2025/news/its-time-for-the-democrats-to-throw-off-the-dead-hand-of-clintonism/
It’s time for the Democrats to throw off the dead hand of Clintonism
The Nation
The Nation
[From early 2025, still relevant today]
Clintonism fundamentally changed the Democratic Party. With its determined rejection of old liberal commitments, it established a new paradigm for the party’s politics and, with it, a new way of doing business that has persisted even as Clinton himself has faded into the background… It saturated the Obama years, seeping into both policy and electoral strategy through the coterie of Clintonites who shaped so much of his administration’s ethos; it underpinned Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 presidential bid; and it reasserted itself in 2020 through the party insiders who were so fixated on resisting challenges from within their ranks that they abruptly shut down the Democratic primary field in order to guarantee that Joe Biden would be the nominee—thereby quashing a class-based insurgency in the party—and then propped up a cognitively challenged Biden long past any conceivable electoral viability.
Most recently, the dead hand of Clintonism forged the foundations of Kamala Harris’s difference-trimming campaign pitch, which targeted the same elusive moderate suburban voters in swing states.
—————
spud
StewartM:
The countries you cite are free from international(globalist free traders)parasites, and can chart their own course. Nationalism is simply international borders.
As the founders and FDR pointed out that national borders mean something, and that is of course national self determination.
It can be good or bad. But that’s up to the people within those national boundaries.
The rich hate nationalism, because it gets in their way of plunder. We can see that plain as day, as African countries are reclaiming their nationalism to chart their own destinies, and the rich sending in endless mercenary armies to try to stomp out nationalism.
What Clinton wanted was for a world wide E.U. the E.U. was a nazi/fascist wet dream that gutted nationalism and sovereignty. That’s why Clinton smashed down our throats, the W.T.O., a non democratic governing institution run by the rich, that over road our sovereignty and constitution. Obama even had a worse one, that was defeated for now.
So as FDR stated, if nothing is done, you get either fascism or communism. From 1993 onwards, because of the hatred of sovereignty, self governance, and nationalism by the rich, nothing has been done except for what the rich want.
At least some have the power to chart their own course, and that’s the countries I mentioned, good or bad. Let them sort it out, as we did at one time.
———————
Bill Clinton believed that American preeminence was temporary and supported the idea of global cooperation and interdependence, which suggests a preference for multilateralism over strict nationalism and sovereignty.
 Claremont Review of Books Wikipedia
Bill Clinton’s Views on Nationalism and Sovereignty
Beliefs on American Preeminence
• Bill Clinton believed that American preeminence was temporary.
• He expressed concerns about the sustainability of U.S. dominance in global affairs.
Support for Global Cooperation
• Clinton advocated for global cooperation and interdependence.
• He favored multilateralism, which emphasizes collaboration among nations rather than strict nationalism.
Approach to Foreign Policy
• Clinton’s foreign policy was characterized by a desire for a transnational order.
• He believed that pooling sovereignty could enhance American political leadership globally.
Summary of Perspectives
Aspect
Clinton’s View
American Preeminence
Temporary and not guaranteed
Global Cooperation
Strongly supported
Multilateralism
Preferred over nationalism
Sovereignty
Willing to consider pooling for cooperation
Clinton’s approach indicates a preference for international collaboration over strict adherence to national sovereignty, reflecting a broader vision for global governance.
 Claremont Review of Books Wikipedia
Bill Clinton’s presidency was characterized by a centrist approach that emphasized international cooperation and globalization, rather than strict nationalism. He supported initiatives like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which aimed to enhance economic ties between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, reflecting a belief in shared sovereignty for economic benefits.
 ebsco.com Wikipedia
Bill Clinton’s policies promoted global cooperation and interdependence primarily through the establishment of free trade agreements like NAFTA and GATT, which facilitated economic integration among nations. His administration also focused on diplomatic efforts that aimed to resolve international conflicts, such as the Dayton Accords in Bosnia and the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland, enhancing global partnerships.
 Wikipedia Miller Center
Multilateralism emphasizes cooperation among three or more countries to address global challenges like climate change and pandemics, while nationalism prioritizes national interests and sovereignty. The rise of populism and protectionism has challenged multilateral institutions such as the UN and WTO, raising concerns about their effectiveness in maintaining global stability.
 Wikipedia United Nations
—————
Franklin D. Roosevelt’s approach to nationalism emphasized American sovereignty, particularly during his presidency, as he sought to balance domestic economic issues with international responsibilities. He believed that U.S. participation in global agreements was an exercise of sovereignty, not a violation of it.
 Miller Center Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Nationalism and Sovereignty
Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) approached nationalism with a focus on American sovereignty. His presidency was marked by a commitment to both domestic economic recovery and international engagement. FDR believed that the United States had a significant role to play on the global stage, especially during the challenges of the Great Depression and World War II.
Key Aspects of FDR’s Nationalism
• Sovereignty and Global Participation: FDR viewed U.S. involvement in international agreements as an exercise of sovereignty. He argued that participating in global institutions was essential for addressing transnational issues and enhancing national interests.
• Balancing Domestic and International Needs: While FDR prioritized solving domestic economic problems, he also recognized the importance of international cooperation. His policies reflected a blend of economic nationalism and internationalism.
FDR’s National Policies
Policy Area
Description
Economic Recovery
Implemented the New Deal to address the Great Depression and stimulate the economy.
International Relations
Advocated for the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act to enhance trade relations.
War Efforts
Mobilized the economy for World War II, emphasizing the need for American involvement in global conflicts.
Conclusion
FDR’s approach to nationalism was characterized by a strong belief in American sovereignty, which he saw as compatible with active participation in global affairs. His policies aimed to strengthen the nation both at home and abroad, reflecting a nuanced understanding of the interconnectedness of domestic and international challenges.
 Miller Center Wikipedia
——————
———————
commons.wikimedia.org
Joseph-Siffred Duplessis / Public domain
Benjamin Franklin emphasized that Americans were “subjects of the British King” but not British subjects, framing the Revolution as a defense of rights already theirs rather than rebellion.
 The Raab Collection hoover.org
Benjamin Franklin’s Views on Nationalism and Sovereignty
Concept of National Identity
• Franklin viewed Americans as “subjects of the British King” but not as British subjects.
• He framed the American Revolution as a struggle to reclaim rights that were inherently theirs, rather than a rebellion against British rule.
Sovereignty in the Context of the Revolution
• Franklin’s perspective highlighted the idea of sovereignty as a natural right.
• He believed that the colonies were justified in seeking independence to establish their own governance and protect their liberties.
Legacy of Franklin’s Nationalism
• Franklin’s thoughts contributed to the foundation of American nationalism, emphasizing self-governance and the importance of a unified national identity.
• His articulation of these ideas helped shape the political discourse during the Revolutionary period and influenced the formation of the United States.
Franklin’s insights into nationalism and sovereignty reflect a deep understanding of the complexities of identity and governance during a pivotal time in American history.
 Wikipedia The Raab Collection
——————————
commons.wikimedia.org
Rembrandt Peale / Public domain
Thomas Jefferson emphasized nationalism and sovereignty rooted in the people’s will and limited federal power, as expressed in his First Inaugural Address of March 4, 1801, which framed government as deriving from the people’s consent and serving their common good. He believed in a union of states under a federal system that restrained government to prevent tyranny while protecting individual rights.
 Miller Center acton.org
Nationalism and Sovereignty in Jefferson’s Thought
Core Beliefs
Thomas Jefferson’s views on nationalism and sovereignty were deeply intertwined with his belief in the people’s will and limited government. He articulated these principles in his First Inaugural Address on March 4, 1801, emphasizing that:
• Government derives from the people’s consent: Jefferson believed that legitimate government must reflect the will of the people.
• Common good: The purpose of government is to serve the common good, ensuring that individual rights are protected.
Federalism and Limited Power
Jefferson advocated for a federal system that balanced power between the national and state governments. His key ideas included:
• Restraint on government: He argued for a limited federal government to prevent tyranny and protect individual freedoms.
• Union of states: Jefferson envisioned a strong union of states, where each state retained significant autonomy while cooperating under a central government.
Implications for Governance
Jefferson’s approach to nationalism and sovereignty had lasting implications for American governance:
• Protection of rights: His emphasis on individual rights and limited government influenced the development of American political philosophy.
• Political legacy: Jefferson’s ideas contributed to the foundation of the Democratic-Republican Party and shaped the political landscape of the early United States.
In summary, Jefferson’s nationalism and sovereignty were rooted in the belief that government should be a reflection of the people’s will, operating within a framework that protects individual rights and prevents the concentration of power.
 Miller Center acton.org
————————
commons.wikimedia.org
Laurent Dabos / Public domain
Thomas Paine argued that sovereignty belongs to the living generation rather than being inherited or held by past generations, emphasizing that each generation must govern itself and cannot be bound by the decisions of those who came before it.
 US History Cambridge University Press
Thomas Paine’s Views on Nationalism and Sovereignty
Concept of Sovereignty
• Living Generation: Paine believed that sovereignty should belong to the current generation. He argued that each generation has the right to govern itself without being bound by the decisions of previous generations.
• Rejection of Inheritance: He emphasized that sovereignty is not inherited or held by past generations, which means that the authority to make decisions lies with those who are alive and affected by those decisions.
Nationalism in Paine’s Thought
• Independence and Self-Governance: Paine’s writings, particularly in “Common Sense,” advocated for American independence from British rule. He argued that a government should be formed by the people for the people, reflecting the interests and rights of the current population.
• Collective Action: He called for unified action among the colonists to achieve independence, suggesting that a national identity should be built on shared values and the collective will of the people.
Implications of Paine’s Ideas
• Political Philosophy: Paine’s ideas contributed significantly to the development of modern political thought regarding democracy and individual rights. His assertion that each generation must determine its own governance laid the groundwork for contemporary discussions on intergenerational rights and responsibilities.
• Influence on Revolutionary Movements: His arguments resonated not only in America but also influenced revolutionary movements in other parts of the world, promoting the idea that nations should be self-determined and governed by their current citizens.
 Wikipedia Cambridge University Press
Thomas Paine’s views on nationalism emphasize the importance of popular sovereignty and the idea that government should be based on the consent of the governed. He argued that true governance arises from the collective will of the people rather than hereditary rule, which has significant implications for democratic principles and national identity.
 Bill of Rights Institute Cambridge University Press
spud
a case study in sovereignty and nationalism, which is a national boundary, giving the people sovereignty and self determination inside of those international borders, vs. global rule by the rich.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXKXvmRZpsA
In this Think BRICS news video, we explore how Cuba is emerging as a critical laboratory for the BRICS de-dollarization strategy and financial sovereignty. Faced with the Cuba crisis 2026 and intensified western sanctions, the island is bypassing the US dollar to secure its future. This documentary breaks down the shift toward a multipolar world through economic warfare resistance and the rise of a multipolarity framework. We analyze how Russia Cuba relations and China Cuba investment are reshaping the global financial system, providing an anti-hegemony blueprint for the Global South.
Explore how Cuba is overcoming the 2026 fuel shortage through a massive shift to renewable energy, supported by the New Development Bank and BRICS Plus partners. While mainstream media focuses on blackouts, the real story is Cuba’s rapid transition to energy independence. Within 12 months, China has installed 75 solar parks, adding 1,000 megawatts to the Cuban grid—a direct challenge to the end of dollar dominance.
We dive into Yaroslav Lissovolik’s vision of the “integration of integrations,” where Cuba serves as the bridge between the Eurasian Economic Union and the Latin American market. This video details the three pillars of the BRICS strategy: infrastructure funding via the NDB, a contingent reserve arrangement for food and medicine, and the export of Cuban human capital and medical expertise as a global public good. Witness how the dedollarization strategy and financial independence are being stress-tested in real-time, proving that the BRICS 2026 agenda is about building a parallel world economy that Washington cannot stop.
This analysis focuses strictly on the geopolitical shift and the structural response to economic warfare; it does not provide specific personal investment advice or detailed day-trading strategies for local Cuban markets. While we discuss Russia Cuba relations, we do not cover the internal military logistics of the region or provide a exhaustive history of the 20th-century Cold War beyond its impact on modern sanctions evasion.
This video is not a travel guide for Havana, nor does it delve into the specific domestic political reforms within the Cuban government. We focus on the macro-level impact of the BRICS Plus framework and the New Development Bank’s role in securing energy and financial sovereignty against the global financial system’s hegemony. For those looking for technical engineering blueprints of the solar parks or specific pharmaceutical formulas of Cuban vaccines, those details are outside the scope of this documentary.
———
here is what happens when you lose your sovereignty, national identity, and self determination.
the international rich rule you, and the prices you pay, are unsustainable till the inevitable collapse.
—–
Bill Clinton’s trade policies, particularly the signing of NAFTA and the removal of tariffs on imported rice, significantly harmed U.S. agriculture by undermining local farming and contributing to the loss of agricultural surpluses.
Democracy Now! Wikipedia
NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement): Signed into law in 1993, this agreement aimed to eliminate trade barriers between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. However, it led to significant challenges for local farmers by increasing competition from imported goods.
Removal of Tariffs on Imported Rice: Clinton’s administration removed tariffs on subsidized U.S. rice, which devastated Haitian rice farming. This policy was intended to promote trade but resulted in a loss of self-sufficiency for local farmers.
Consequences for Agriculture
Aspect Effect
Local Farming Undermined local agricultural production, leading to reliance on imports.
Agricultural Surpluses Contributed to the decline of agricultural surpluses in the U.S.
Economic Impact Increased competition from imports negatively affected domestic prices.
Clinton’s trade policies, particularly through NAFTA and tariff removals, significantly harmed U.S. agriculture. They undermined local farming capabilities and contributed to the loss of agricultural surpluses, leading to a reliance on imported goods and impacting the economic stability of local farmers.
Wikipedia Democracy Now!
—————-
nationalism can promote the common good,
Nationalism often seeks to control and utilize material surpluses within a country to promote economic independence and political power. This can manifest in policies that prioritize domestic resource management and restrict foreign exploitation.
Wikipedia circulareconomy.earth
Nationalism often emphasizes the importance of controlling and utilizing material surpluses within a country. This approach aims to enhance economic independence and bolster political power.
Economic Independence: Nationalism seeks to reduce reliance on foreign resources and industries. By managing domestic resources, countries aim to strengthen their economies.
Political Power: Control over material surpluses can enhance a nation’s political leverage both domestically and internationally. This can lead to policies that prioritize national interests over global market demands.
Manifestations of Nationalism
Nationalism can manifest in various ways, including:
Resource Management Policies: Governments may implement policies that prioritize the extraction and use of domestic resources.
Restrictions on Foreign Exploitation: This includes imposing regulations or taxes on foreign companies to limit their access to local resources.
Promotion of Local Industries: Encouraging the development of local industries that utilize domestic materials can create jobs and stimulate economic growth.
In summary, nationalism’s demand for material surpluses is a strategy to promote self-sufficiency and enhance a nation’s economic and political standing. By focusing on domestic resource management, countries can assert greater control over their economic futures.
circulareconomy.earth Nature
Resource nationalism is implemented by governments to assert control over domestic resources and manage surpluses through policies like export taxes, local content requirements, and state support for recycling industries, often framed as circular economy strategies to reduce reliance on foreign supplies and prioritize domestic industries.
circulareconomy.earth lawliberty.org
somecomputerguy
Nationalism is one basis for social solidarity; that we should care for each other.
Neoliberalism is repudiation of that.
Yet 40 years of continuous neoliberal indoctrination still sees ordinary Americans standing up for people they don’t know.
Queer Eye, rocketing rates of “interacial” marriage, those make me proud of my country.
The knowledge that most foriegn policy attrocities are possible because the American people arn’t paying attention.
spud
somecomputerguy:
correct, well said. and the destruction of caring about each others, is the goal of the international rich.
by limiting the representation of the american people in the house of representatives. you now have huge geographically gerrymandered districts, with massive populations with little in common, means you have 435 people with basically the same controlling ideology, instead of a large diverse representation. making it easy to dominate and get outrages like nafta, the w.t.o., and hyper wars for free trade passed, with little resistance.
the opposite of sovereignty and nationalism, is the world trade organization and the world economic forum.
they say kill the social safety net, and the 435 snap to attention. they say privatize the post office, and the 435 snap to attention.
by limiting representation to 435, it eliminated a wide broad, out in the open competing views, down to the lowest common denominator.
that’s how the international oligarchs got away with it.