Society/Culture So what is so wrong with 'Nationalism'?

[Malifice]

So not Japanese nationalism.

No, Indian (and Pakistani) Nationalism caused that War.

The crap that fuels this sort of shit:

Not sure that door was ever going to slide far enough towards a version of liberalism to deem it a "sliding doors moment".

Wut?

The Tiananmen massacre was literally a mass student uprising and a nascent liberal revolution, seeking to overthrow the Communist party and reform China into a liberal democracy.

The PRC responded with tanks and bullets quashing the liberal revolution in its tracks.

It was a sliding doors movement for liberalism in China (as the famous 'Tank man' image so clearly highlights).

The Tiananmen Square protests or the Tiananmen Square Incident, commonly known as the June Fourth Incident (Chinese: 六四事件; pinyin: liùsì shìjiàn, literally the six-four incident) in mainland China, were student-led demonstrations held in Tiananmen Square in Beijing during 1989. The popular national movement inspired by the Beijing protests is sometimes called the '89 Democracy Movement (Chinese: 八九民运; pinyin: Bājiǔ mínyùn). The protests started on April 15 and were forcibly suppressed on June 4 when the government declared martial law and sent the People's Liberation Army to occupy central parts of Beijing.

In what became known as the Tiananmen Square Massacre (Chinese: 天安门大屠杀; pinyin: Tiān'ānmén dà túshā), troops armed with assault rifles and accompanied by tanks fired at the demonstrators and those trying to block the military's advance into Tiananmen Square. Estimates of the death toll vary from several hundred to several thousand, with thousands more wounded.

1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Just ask yourself 'What if on the 14th of July 1789 at the Bastille in Paris, Louis XVI had tanks.'

Lady Liberty would be waving her French Tricolor alone in front of a T-72.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

No, Indian (and Pakistani) Nationalism caused that War.

The crap that fuels this sort of sh*t:

Yes, thanks. I'm aware.

You suggested Japanese nationalism kicked off the last war in Asia. I was just clarifying that.

Wut?

The Tiananmen massacre was literally a mass student uprising and a nascent liberal revolution, seeking to overthrow the Communist party and reform China into a liberal democracy.

The PRC responded with tanks and bullets quashing the liberal revolution in its tracks.

It was a sliding doors movement for liberalism in China (as the famous 'Tank man' image so clearly highlights).

Yes, I know what Tiananmen Square is. I live in Hong Kong. People bring it up from time to time over here. What chance do you think this "liberal revolution" had of succeeding? I think calling it a "sliding doors moment" probably overstates those chances.

 

[Seeds]

grammer
grammar

How do u cope with text messaging?

 

[Malifice]

You suggested Japanese nationalism kicked off the last war in Asia. I was just clarifying that.

I was more referring to major wars. But that said, you can pretty much blame every war on nationalism.

What chance do you think this "liberal revolution" had of succeeding? I think calling it a "sliding doors moment" probably overstates those chances.

I didnt expect the PRC to crush it with tanks and massacre their own people, that's for sure. No-one expected that, not even the Americans.

The whole point of the USA and others encouraging the economic reforms in China were to encourage just such a transition from a Communist shit-hole dictatorship to a liberal democracy. Those economic reforms led to a million people in the Square demanding liberal reforms.

The protests were set off by the death of pro-reform Communist general secretary Hu Yaobang in April 1989 amid the backdrop of rapid economic development and social changes in post-Mao China, reflecting anxieties about the country's future in the popular consciousness and among the political elite. The reforms of the 1980s had led to a nascent market economy that benefited some people but seriously disadvantaged others, and the one-party political system also faced a challenge of legitimacy. Common grievances at the time included inflation, corruption, limited preparedness of graduates for the new economy, and restrictions on political participation. Although they were highly disorganized and their goals varied, the students called for greater accountability, constitutional due process, democracy, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech. At the height of the protests, about one million people assembled in the Square.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests

Imagine the might of China now if the liberal protestors won, and the nationalists were defeated? Hong Kong and Taiwan are examples of what a China that embraced liberalism to a greater extent might look like; apply that to the entire China.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I was more referring to major wars.

Vietnam?

I didnt expect the PRC to crush it with tanks and massacre their own people, that's for sure. No-one expected that, not even the Americans.

The whole point of the USA and others encouraging the economic reforms in China were to encourage just such a transition from a Communist sh*t-hole dictatorship to a liberal democracy. Those economic reforms led to a million people in the Square demanding liberal reforms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests

Imagine the might of China now if the liberal protestors won, and the nationalists were defeated? Hong Kong and Taiwan are examples of what a China that embraced liberalism to a greater extent might look like; apply that to the entire China.

Good luck with that.

HK is the way it is because it was a British colony for 99 years.

 

[Malifice]

Vietnam?

The Pacific theatre of WW2 has it pipped I'm afraid.

Even then, the war in Vietnam (and Korea before it) was Nationalist in nature. Ditto the Communist uprising in Cambodia. And the Malayan confrontation.

Pretty much all of them really.

Same bullshit in Europe. After Nations formed in earnest in around the 18th century, it was one massive war after another. Napoleon, WW1, WW2 etc. With the atrocities caused by ultra nationalists in the 20th century, the Europeans finally learned, and formed the EU to get rid of those problems.

Relative peace has now ensued in Europe for 70 years as a consequence.

If the EU fails, and the nationalists gain power again, Europe goes to war with itself again.

HK is the way it is because it was a a liberal capitalist democracy and not a unitary party communist shithole.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

The Pacific theatre of WW2 has it pipped I'm afraid.

Even then, the war in Vietnam (and Korea before it) was Nationalist in nature. Ditto the Communist uprising in Cambodia. And the Malayan confrontation.

Pretty much all of them really.

The point is, you don't consider Vietnam a major war?

Fixed that for you.

It was those things because it was a British colony. It wouldn't have been that way otherwise.

 

[Malifice]

The point is, you don't consider Vietnam a major war?

No, I do. Just not on the scale of World War 2.

It was those things because it was a British colony. It wouldn't have been that way otherwise.

Because Chinese people are incapable on their own of embracing a liberal capitalist democracy?

Explain Taiwan.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

No, I do. Just not on the scale of World War 2.

So the last major war in Asia wasn't caused by Japanese nationalism, was it?

Because Chinese people are incapable on their own of embracing a liberal capitalist democracy?

Is that your claim?

I'm simply stating a fact that Hk was governed a certain way because it was a British colony. It didn't happen independently of that.

 

[Malifice]

So the last major war in Asia wasn't caused by Japanese nationalism, was it?

Depends on your definition of major. The one I'm referring to was an existential war, fought between all of the worlds major powers, and involved the use of nuclear weapons.

I'm simply stating a fact that Hk was governed a certain way because it was a British colony. It didn't happen independently of that.

No, you stated Hong Kong could not have happened 'but for' the British. My point is there was (and is) nothing stopping the Chinese from embracing similar liberal capitalist democratic reforms.

Other than the Communists of course.

 

[Frank Bunn]

No, Indian (and Pakistani) Nationalism caused that War.

The crap that fuels this sort of sh*t:

You have a problem with your priorities if you get panties in a bunch about military synchronised dancing.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Depends on your definition of major.

You just said you consider Vietnam a major war.

No, you stated Hong Kong could not have happened but for the British.

It wouldn't have. That is a fact of history.

It was governed a certain way because it was a British colony.

My point is there was (and is) nothing stopping the Chinese from embracing similar liberal capitalist democratic reforms.

Other than the Communists of course.

Oh, so you're indulging in far-fetched counterfactuals in which all of China becomes like HK without any foreign intervention. Good luck with that. Carry on then.

 

[Malifice]

You just said you consider Vietnam a major war.

And I still do. Just not of the same level of magnitude as World War 2.

And not that it matters. Nationalism played a key role in both conflicts.

It wouldn't have. That is a fact of history.

History doesn't work that way. Just because something happened, doesn't mean it was pre-ordained and couldn't have happened differently otherwise.

 

[Malifice]

You have a problem with your priorities if you get panties in a bunch about military synchronised dancing.

Its not the dancing that worries me. The dancing is symbolic of the real problem of nationalist tensions between two nuclear armed powers.

Kashmir is a freaking joke. There is nothing there even worth fighting over other than pride and nationalist stupidity, and it could kick off a literal nuclear war.

Instead of ridiculous peacocking, how about the two countries put aside nationalist bullshit and resolve the ****ing issue.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

And I still do.

Right.

History doesn't work that way.

Pretentious undergraduate rubbish.

Just because something happened, doesn't mean it was pre-ordained and couldn't have happened differently otherwise.

No one said anything was "preordained".

But you are talking about a fundamental remaking of China. It's a far-fetched counterfactual that underplays the enormity of the change you are suggesting.

Gee, imagine if China was a liberal democracy! I mean, why not!?

 

[Frank Bunn]

Its not the dancing that worries me. The dancing is symbolic of the real problem of nationalist tensions between two nuclear armed powers.

Kashmir is a freaking joke. There is nothing there even worth fighting over other than pride and nationalist stupidity, and it could kick off a literal nuclear war.

Instead of ridiculous peacocking, how about the two countries put aside nationalist bullshit and resolve the ******* issue.

I know you love Wikipedia.

A daily ceremony carried out for decades that celebrates the brotherhood and cooperation between the two nations.

The lowering of the flags ceremony at the Attari-Wagah border is a daily military practice that the security forces of India (Border Security Force, BSF) and Pakistan (Pakistan Rangers) have jointly followed since 1959. The drill is characterized by elaborate and rapid dance like manoeuvres and raising legs as high as possible, which have been described as "colourful". It is alternatively a symbol of the two countries’ rivalry, as well as brotherhood and cooperation between the two nations. Similar parades are organised at Mahavir/Sadqi border near Fazilka and Hussainiwala/Ganda Singh Wala border near Firozpur.​

 

[Malifice]

A daily ceremony carried out for decades that celebrates the brotherhood and cooperation between the two nations.

You honestly think that?

Here, I also have this fine bridge to sell you.

 

[Malifice]

Pretentious undergraduate rubbish.

Typical response of the uneducated or stupid but thinks they're smarter than they actually are.

We can do this forever if you want? I prefer intelligent debate personally.

But you are talking about a fundamental remaking of China. It's a far-fetched counterfactual that underplays the enormity of the change you are suggesting.

Bullshit.

If the Nationalist Party defeated the Commies in the War, you'd likely end up with Taiwan, just on a bigger scale (i.e all of China).

I mean those very same Nationalists who were defeated by the Commies are one of the two major parties in Taiwan, and within that system a Liberal social democratic party formed and created a stable multiple party liberal capitalist democracy.

You're asserting a stable liberal capitalist democracy is impossible in mainland China, or alternatively such a thing could not have happened, simply because it didn't happen.

I disagree with both assertions.

 

[Frank Bunn]

You honestly think that?

Here, I also have this fine bridge to sell you.

It's based on military ceremony but there's decades of mutual respect and understanding that allows this daily event to continue. It's nationalistic but in terms of real aggression you will see more in a game of cricket between England and Australia.

 

[Malifice]

It's based on military ceremony but there's decades of mutual respect and understanding that allows this daily event to continue.

No seriously, I have this really fine bridge in Sydney. Its going cheap.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Typical response of the uneducated or stupid but thinks they're smarter than they actually are.

We can do this forever if you want? I prefer intelligent debate personally.

Coming from the guy who couldn't decide whether Vietnam was a major war or not.

You're living in fantasyland.

Bullshit.

If the Nationalist Party defeated the Commies in the War, you'd likely end up with Taiwan, just on a bigger scale (i.e all of China).

I mean those very same Nationalists who were defeated by the Commies are one of the two major parties in Taiwan, and within that system a Liberal social democratic party formed and created a stable multiple party liberal capitalist democracy.

You're asserting a stable liberal capitalist democracy is impossible in mainland China, or alternatively such a thing could not have happened, simply because it didn't happen.

I disagree with both assertions.

Imagine if dogs were our masters!

Look how casually you assert a fundamental remaking of modern China.

Enjoy your far-fetched counterfactual. Tell yourself that constitutes "intelligent debate".

 

[twotooto]

How do u cope with text messaging?

textspeak > not grasping the basics(you)

 

[medusala]

No, Indian (and Pakistani) Nationalism caused that War.

What a train wreck of ignorance this thread is.

That was over religion.

 

[Malifice]

What a train wreck of ignorance this thread is.

That was over religion.

So was the troubles.

Religion is but one aspect of nationalistic bullshit. 'Our' country. 'Our' God. Blah blah blah ****ing blah.

 

[Frank Bunn]

You honestly think that?

Here, I also have this fine bridge to sell you.

Interesting that you have abandoned your main source of evidence now it doesn't suit you.

The mutual silly hats, dancing and handshakes at the Kashmir border reflects the posturing between the two countries rather than real military conflict for many years.

What would have been your idealistic solution to Indian and Pakistani nationalist uprisings to end the British Raj?

Would you have denied the Jewish people their homeland? Or the Palestinians their own state? How about the Scots, or the Catalans?