Just asking the question.
Do not post until the poll shows up.
Yes, because both ideologies seek answers to the same problems.
Yes, because both are about freedom and independence.
No, because Democracy allows too much freedom for non-nationalists to spoil everything.
No, because Democracy is about equality, while Nationalism is "My country first!"
Other (please elaborate in a post)
Are Nationalism and Democracy compatible?
Just asking the question.
Do not post until the poll shows up.
In Europe most nationalist movements have been liberal and democratic, attempting to free a people from a more authoritarian empire. It took fascism to associate nationalism with dictatorship.
So the answer is that nationalism is probably more associated with democracy than anything else.
A American Jew gives his expert opinion about nationalism in Europe..
"In Europe most nationalist movements have been liberal and democratic". Well, i think we have a nominee for todays most false statement. Joew, i would like to see you back up this that most of the nationalist movements today and in history are/were liberal and democratic.
My answer is yes, nationalism and democracy - to to a curtain limit is compatible. Democracy is a slow system were the cannots could overrun those who can. Therefor, a well working society no matter what ideology should promote elitism with the right person in the right place. Joews view that non-democracy equal tyranny is just so... american....ignorant.....and false.
Originally Posted by Joe McCarthy
Well, I get a bit hesitant when some Swedish brownshirt starts off by calling me a 'Jew', but this is easy enough...
French Revolution - democratic.
Revolutions of 1848 in the German states, Austria, Hungary, France, Italy - democratic.
Greek war of independence from the Ottoman Empire - democratic.
Irish republicanism - democratic.
The Risorgimento - democratic.
Czechoslovakia, at its inception from 1918-1938 was also a democratic state, and odd as it may seem now it was borne of a nationalist movement. In general national self-determination movements post-WW1 were democratic.
I doubt I need to go on...
As for modern nationalist parties, most of the relevant ones are democratic. Neo-Nazis aren't, but then only neo-Nazis care about them.
Isn't Nazism (National Socialism) simply a mix between Nationalism and Socialism?
Socialism can go in two directions... it can be either Democratic (Social Democracy), and it can be also Authorial (Communism, Marxism, Bolshevism).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bolshevism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Communism
I voted No, because Democracy allows too much freedom for non-nationalists to spoil everything.
Its too slow and too inefficient. The Germans achieved phenomenal success in the 30s without any BS.
Also look at this
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/upshot/c...-just-six.html
The chinese built a 15 story hotel hotel in 6 days, they could have never done that under democracy.
The Germans took power because they had a majority.
The German people elected the Nazi Party, Hitler took over by democratic and legal means.
But at what cost? Workers with broken backs and serious health problems, extremely low wages/salary, etc.
China is a perfect example of how nasty things can turn if the human life is undervalued. Just remember the Great Chinese Famine.
Yes, socialism and nationalism with a lot of stupid ideas about Jews, finance, militarism, economics, and contempt for free institutions. The fuehrer prinzip seems to have been an innovation of Hitler himself as the ancient Germanic chiefs were not tyrants. It's been said that Nazism is Western Shinto. That may be its most 'Western' trait.
In Communism a human being is treated like a tally on a piece of paper, while in National Socialism, the person is treated like a Human being.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks