It makes sense to me that a moderate/sensible nationalistic individual is likely or even by definition also a patriot. But as your definitions of both show there's a subtle difference. A sensible nationalistic individual could be someone who puts the interests of its own country first, but not above ALL else, like lets say the cost of a civil war (or declaring a certain ethnic minority in their country as scum and free game, etc.)
I get what you mean but if you're australian, becoming more loyal to islam cannot be described as patriotic. But i acknowledge this is even more clear a semantics argument
"Multicultural cities functioning". Where? Cities don't function they merely exist. Multiculturalism being that fatal choice. Detroit , London , Chicago , Frankfort , Stockhom being glaring examples. Rape much?
Rape is such a multicultural issue lol. And although a terrible thing which im not trying to trivialize with this; does a city suddenly not function after one or several rape cases?
I also want to emphasize again: a person can be nationalistic AND have no issue with their multicultural society. They're not mutually exclusive. Imo, they're different things that just often intertwine: nationalism just easily caters to anti-multiculti folks. It can even be put it gets abused by such folks. 'Hey im just taking pride in my country and culture!' Uhm yeah, you know you can do/be that without being anti diversity? One can also be critical on immigration without being anti-diversity. So really, people who can't nuance about these issues are often the real problem. Not nearly always their nationalistic tendencies or patriotic pride; but since it suits them to connect it to their nationalistic or patriotic pride they will, and in the process give nationalism as a whole and also patriotism a bad name.
Which could be the destruction of all western civilisation nations, and the rise of Sharia Law. Which no one wants to admit could be a possibility.
This is really a grossly inappropriate conclusion. I live in the USA and our history has a sordid litany of persecuting and disenfranchising minorities and indigenous peoples. As if there is some spiritual superiority to those who came from some mythical corner of Northern Europe. Sounds a lot like the malarkey peddled by that Hitler guy.
Which may very well be the destruction of western civilisation in favour of a "peaceful" religion. People are very, very gullible. Especially when it comes to democracy.
Sharia Law. Its that simple. Trojan Horse of Troy has had absolute and utter zero influence on human civilisation advancement. Absolute and utter nothing whatsoever on some people. If or when such an alliance falls, its ALL gone, 100% totally. No British Empire, commonwealth, SWEET FA, nothing. Just a EU group trying to be something... a bunch of lefties trying to kill off the heroes of WW2.
How do you mean this exactly? I don't get it as it is put now. Which heroes and how are they trying to kill them off? Thanks in advance for clarifying!
Yups. But I hope you always keep in mind (hopefully also by experience) its only a part of the aussie people. Not all of them in a long shot It's not just your perspective It's a fact that nationalism often attracts and suits the intolerant and chauvinistic. Not just in Australia. It's a pity because one can of course put their own country first without discriminating and excluding ethnic or cultural minorities. Lol, really? Only since 1994? Sounds like a good example indeed
Yeah, don't get me wrong I love Australia, but why are you guys still part of the commonwealth? Are there member perks? I think you need a little Brexit of your own. Get that old bat off your currency.