Is it wrong to be proud of your race?

[symtoms_of_humanity]

I mean like proud to be Irish, or German, or Polish, or w/e it may be, becuase personally I don't think its wrong but I would like your opinions and reasons why

[LSD]

Firstly, you need to differentiate between nationality and race. There is no Irish "race" or Polish "race".

From a sociological perspective (biologically, of course, there's no such thing) race is a much broader and much less geographic phenonmenon. One's "race" is usually completely unrelated to ones nationality, although, as always, there can be significant overlap.

Nationality is determined by country, "race" is determined, primarily, by features. How you "look". So no matter what country you're from if you "look" a certain race, then pretty much by default, you're a member of it. It's a ludicrous system, but then it's a ludicrous concept to begin with.

And so to answer your question; yes.

Because race is such an artifical construct, "racial" pride is undesirable. Feeling "proud" for what is, ultimately, nothing but a social relic of brabaric precapitalism is reactionary and counterproductive.

If we have learnt anything from biology over the past few decades it's that there is nothing "special" about any "racial" group, whether you happen to be a member or not. And prioritizing your miniscule association with others of similar facial structure only serves to keep the proletariat devided.

Furthermore, on the question of nationality, I would have to say that the answer is yes again. Modern capitalists states do nothing for you. They are nothing but tools for your oppression. Feeling "proud" of them only plays into the bourgeoisie's hands. They want you to feel responsible to their state, they want you to "care" about it. It's just one of the many tools in their massive arsenal.

Well, don't let them use it!

As communists we want to smash the bourgeois state, no matter which one. It doesn't matter if its Irish or Polish or British or Chinese. If you want to be "proud" of something, be proud of that.

We're fighting for a better world and a freeer future. Certainly that's more impressive then the stamp on your passport.

[Des]

what about culture?

i live in ireland.. and we have a rich culture.. in the arts etc...

[More Fire for the People]

While I generally agree with LSD on this, this statement here is the most stupidiest thing I have ever read:

From a sociological perspective (biologically, of course, there's no such thing) Of course race exists biologically. Race didn't happen by some mystic voodoo it happened out of evolution of the need of change in how the human body handles its environment.

What is more important though, is that we don't "need" races any more and we should tear down these walls of prejudice and "nationalism".

[symtoms_of_humanity]

thanks LSD, that is good explanation, and also I'd like to know how it is in Ireland Des, I am Irish and have wanted to visit, and I also am interested in the culture question

[LSD]

what about culture?

But what is culture?

Do you mean the culture of people that are ethnically Irish or the culture of the area now known as Ireland?

Either way, we're dealing with either nationalism or ethnicism, neither of which is a desirable trait.

Putting one ethnic group or one nationality above others, even it it's only in the glorification of a single "culture", plays into the hands of the rulling classes which desperately want to keep us divided.

Now, am I saying that being proud of Irish culture is implicitly bourgeois? Of course not. What I am saying, however, is that it is a step in the wrong direction and it should be identified as such.

We should be trying to move away from such regionalist ways of thinking and towards true proletarian internationalism. It will undoubtably take time, but we'll never get there if we don't start somewhere.


i live in ireland.. and we have a rich culture.. in the arts etc...

Indeed you do, and it's one that should be studied and honoured. But you should no more feel "proud" of that culture than for anything else that you had no part in creating.

Irish culture may be impressive, but it is no "better" then other cultures and feeling especially "proud" of it because you happened to be born there is just geographism with a tinge of nationalism.

You should be impressed with Irish culture, but you shouldn't be "proud".


Of course race exists biologically.

No it doesn't. Certainly there are "racial" differences, but not to any degree even approaching the standard for a biological race.

Minor superficial physiological changes do not constitute a race, they consitute minor superficial physiological changes, caused, indeed, by differing climates and regions. That's micro-evolution, not macro.

In order for human "races" to be biologically valid, they would have to have significant genetic differences, not just superficial physical ones.

The difference between "racial" groups is so miniscule as to make it biologically insignificant. The only way that "race" exists is sociologically. We have invented "races" to "explain" superficial features and have kept it as a pseudo-scientific justification for colonialism and oppression.


Race didn't happen by some mystic voodoo

No it was deliberately and specifically invented by us. It has no basis in biological reality.

[Red Power!!!]

It is not really WRONG to be proud. Its just if you say that you're home country, is better than other people's is what makes me mad. We're all the same. It doesn't matter where we were born.... (Unless its Sweden. :P ;) )

[Hachi-Go]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 25 2005, 09:07 PM
Furthermore, on the question of nationality, I would have to say that the answer is yes again. Modern capitalists states do nothing for you. They are nothing but tools for your oppression. Feeling "proud" of them only plays into the bourgeoisie's hands. They want you to feel responsible to their state, they want you to "care" about it. It's just one of the many tools in their massive arsenal.
Ah but the nation was not the capitalists creation. Just another tool they exploit. The capitalists use the food supply to control the people, but you wouldn't want to destroy the food supply. Nationalism is not compatible with capitalism, as much as the capitalists want you to believe. There is the lie you're falling for. The capitalists like bush feel no loyalty to America, its people or its way of life, only their own wallets.

[guerillablack]

As long as there's forces trying to make you not proud of your ethnicity by subjecting you to degrading stereotypes, and other methods, there has to be a force to balance that out. I'm proud to be black. My kids will be proud to be black. Every school i goto for volunteering and mentoring, i will instill in them black pride.

[LSD]

Ah but the nation was not the capitalists creation. Just another tool they exploit.

Absolutely, just like sexism and racism.

Capitalists are more than happy to exploit pre-capitalist beliefs in order to help themselves. Often, in fact, they themselves believe them. Capitalists aren't "superhuman", after all, they fall victim to the same kind of crap as the rest of us.

But so what?

Does it matter what the historical origins of the nation-state are? Does it matter whether it emerged from one opppressive ideology or another; whether it built up from presidents and CEOS or kings and emperors? It is still intrinsically oppressive and divisive.

Dividing the working class into seperate "nations" based on geographic location is in and of itself a bad idead. The fact that this is used by the bourgoisie to affect working class oppression is simply more justification ....but it really isn't needed.

Even if nationalism was entirely class-neutral, it would still have to be abolished.

And it isn't even that.


Nationalism is not compatible with capitalism, as much as the capitalists want you to believe.

You need to differentiate between capitalism and capitalists. Capitalism as an abstract ideology may be state-less, but real-life capitalists are more than happy to utilize nationalism to their bennefit -- and quite effectively too!

Ask yourself, if the nation is a "tool they exploit", how can it be "not compatible" with their ideology?


As long as there's forces trying to make you not proud of your ethnicity by subjecting you to degrading stereotypes, and other methods, there has to be a force to balance that out.

And that force should be humanism, not racism.

Fighting ignorance with ignorance is counterproductive. You cannot defeat a bankrupt theory like "racism" by promoting a racist ideology of your own. The only way to ensure that race oppression ends is to end race. That means finally dispelling the lingering myth that race exists.

Surely you must understand that racial "pride" does not accomplish this.

[MoscowFarewell]

I'm fine with proud as long as it doesn't turn to discrimination. As in enjoy and embrace, love your own culture, as long as you can be just as open to others if that makes any sense.

[Kez]

I wouldnt know what to be proud of, because whatever development i see in the culture of my home country of Britain, there are historical reasons as to why it is so great.

For example, we can say that Literature was very well developed in Britain, but it was so because of the comfortable position of British poets due to British Imperialism

Or to take an even more specific example, Tolstoy was a recognised great writer, but it is also true he was a land owner who exploited (be it at a lesser extent to his ohter landowners) his workers and was able to write such works.

So there are reasons to why specific areas of ones culture are so good, but i dont see how one can be proud of it, because it isnt theres.

Personally, if you want to live a fuller life, we should take advantage of the fact that we live in a smaller world and enjoy the best parts of all cultures and work towards a society where we can enjoy them more with a longer amount of time to enjoy and from parts of the world weve never researched, and this can only be done under socialism.

[Led Zeppelin]

It's childish, I don't care about my "nationality" or "culture" because I know that one day it will be replaced by proletarian culture.

Nationalism is a threat to the movement.

[RedAnarchist]

Seeing as there have always been migrations across the world, none of us is 'racially pure', so it is ludicrous to be proud of your 'race'.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 09:17 PM
thanks LSD, that is good explanation, and also I'd like to know how it is in Ireland Des, I am Irish and have wanted to visit, and I also am interested in the culture question
anti-imperialists in Ireland have long valued Irish and its culture alongside English. Now many republicans and anti-imperialists are recognising that similar respect and appreciation must be extended to Ireland's relatively new and growing immigrant community.

Have a healthy appreciation for your heritage and the heritage of those living around you. ;)

[redstar2000]

I think it is always a little depressing to find people proud of (or, for that matter, ashamed of) things that they had nothing to do with.

I might be proud of something I did or ashamed of something I did...but how can I possibly feel that way about things other people did?

My only connection with the United States is that I was born here...and we don't get a choice in where we are born.

I cannot be proud of a book that someone else wrote, can I?

So how can I be proud of a nation that other people created?

Or a nationality that was (like all nationalities) invented by other people?

All ethnic/cultural groups boast (implicitly or explicitly) of their "superiority" to other groups of humans...and all such claims are baseless on their face. It wasn't "English culture" or "Anglo-Saxon genius" that wrote Hamlet or Macbeth -- it was one particular guy that wrote those plays.

It was not German culture's "philosophic greatness" that wrote Das Kapital...it was one guy who did it and who is the only one entitled to be proud of what he did.

I think the urge to be proud of the ethnic/cultural/national group that you happened (by sheer chance!) to be born in is, at least in part, a consequence of not having done anything to be proud of yourself.

So...do something that's fit to be proud of -- and, if you're so inclined, learn to appreciate the best that individual humans have produced in every culture.

Marx once boasted, "I am human and therefore nothing human is alien to me."

That was laying it on a little thick...but it points in the right direction.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Karl Marx's Camel]

NWOG can't find pride in the country he lives in. He does not find any reason to be proud in a fictive creation.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

In our empty, monotoneous, draining prole lives we have very little time or energy to achieve anything at all. We long to adventure and pleasure. The government and bosses use this, so that we identify ourselves with those who had a moment of achievement, pride and joy to let us forget our own miserable lives and keep in line to achieve such "great" achievements in the future too.

Not only this, but as a highschoolbully who needs to torment others to feel some self-worth. The government bullies the workingclass of other countries and let's us, in that moment of "joy" to let us feel some pride aka "self-worth" as a nation. Well . . . there is nothing to be proud of.

[symtoms_of_humanity]

I may have phrased it wrong, I meant it like heratige(sp) but I could not think of the word so I used race, and I don't mean you look down on others heritage or w/e, just being proud of being whats in you, your blood, w/e else, nto looking down on others or tormenting them

[Mujer Libre]

Seeing as how my faimly was displaced (around 150years ago), and then I migrated, I've realised that I don't belong to any one "nation" or race or anything of the sort. Pretty much everywhere I go I'm a foreigner, which just points out how constructed the system of racial or national identity is.

And, just in support of what LSD said, race as a biological concept is dead. The Human Genome Project put the final nail in that coffin. I guess race can go to heaven with phrenology now. <_<

[slim]

Updating the argument.

I feel that had my ancestors not fought and died for the cause of freedom against imperialit rule in Ireland; i would not have been born. Therefore it is arguable that i owe my existance to their actions. Should i feel proud that they did this?

[Enragé]

not exceptionally proud that they are your ancestors.

You are not responsible for what your ancestors did, good or bad.

[Carmen]

I&#39;m proud of my heritage, and i have a very mixed heritage. Be proud of who you are and where you came from. Learn about your country&#39;s history and respect others. No one can ask more than that.

[OleMarxco]

Oh? Certainly I have no problem with &#39;rat, but - I still gotta ask - IS THAT SO, huh&#33;? Then why, and how, and even MORE importantly - can y&#39;say that it can&#39;t corrupt? And does it really matter to bond y&#39;rself to a country, and not to international worker&#39;s? All that shit &#39;bout heritage...necessary to&#39;re struggle&#33;? Think &#39;bout it. I am, &#39;bout my place, &#39;s Norway...but it&#39;s not gonna stop me from doin&#39; revolution against my own "land", as I realize, border&#39;s are artifical ;)

[Wiesty]

there are Irish Cultures etc.
that u can be proud of or w/e u are

[Rissen]

Well, we are all affected by our place of birth. Culture is different even between towns. Therefore we can all feel connected to the actions of our ancestors because we are, partially, products of their actions. However being proud that you come from any society that exists today is rather foolish - there are more things to be ashamed of than to be proud of, wherever you come from...

[Morpheus]

Ah but the nation was not the capitalists creation.
Yes it was. Well, it was the creation of capitalists, nobles, bureaucrats & military officers. They created it in 1648 when they signed the Treaty of Westphalia. That treaty established the modern system of nation-states, doing away with the older religious/feudal system of international relations. It took centuries for national conscioussness to spread from the elite to the rest of the population, it was predominantly an elite thing until the late 18th century. Until then most people continued to identify in terms of religion or family (or other non-national identity) not in terms of what country they came from. Before the 17th century so did most of Europe&#39;s elite. Some contemporary "history" books - especially the poorly written propaganda used in public schools - project the concept of "nations" onto past societies and attempt to portray pre-Westphalian events in terms of battling nation-states but that&#39;s not how the people living at the time say things. For them, it wasn&#39;t France vs. England vs. Spain etc. it was Catholic vs. Protestant vs. Muslims etc. or Habsburgs vs. Tudors vs. Bourbons etc.

[Arca]

I completely back what redstar said.

Those are my views exactly.

[Redmau5]

Im proud to be Irish, and im proud of our history and culture. Im also proud of the men and women who have died for the cause of Irish freedom. But I would never put my nationality above the working class cause.

[guerillablack]

At trial in Brown&#39;s consolidated case Briggs v. Elliott, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) presented dramatic testimony by Professor Kenneth Clark of the City College of New York.Professor Clark performed innovative psychological tests utilizing dolls to identify harms inflicted on the plaintiff children due to segregation. Professor Clark described the tests and his conclusion in response to questioning by Robert Carter of the NAACP:

A. I made these tests on Thursday and Friday of this past week at your request, and I presented it to children in the Scott&#39;s Branch Elementary school, concentrating particularly on the elementary group. I used these methods which I told you about--the Negro and White dolls--which were identical in every respect save skin color. And, I presented them with a sheet of paper on which there were these drawings of dolls, and I asked them to show me the doll--May I read from these notes? JUDGE WARING: You may refresh your recollection. THE WITNESS: Thank you. I presented these dolls to them and I asked them the following questions in the following order: "Show me the doll that you like best or that you&#39;d like to play with," "Show me the doll that is the &#39;nice&#39; doll," "Show me the doll that looks &#39;bad&#39;," and then the following questions also: "Give me the doll that looks like a white child," "Give me the doll that looks like a colored child," "Give me the doll that looks like a Negro child," and "Give me the doll that looks like you." By Mr. Carter: Q. "Like you?" A. "Like you." That was the final question, and you can see why. I wanted to get the child&#39;s free expression of his opinions and feelings before I had him identified with one of these two dolls. I found that of the children between the ages of six and nine whom I tested, which were a total of sixteen in number, that ten of those children chose the white doll as their preference; the doll which they liked best. Ten of them also considered the white doll a "Nice" doll. And, I think you have to keep in mind that these two dolls are absolutely identical in every respect except skin color. Eleven of these sixteen children chose the brown doll as the doll which looked "bad." This is consistent with previous results which we have obtained testing over three hundred children, and we interpret it to mean that the Negro child accepts as early as six, seven or eight the negative stereotypes about his own group. . . . Q. Well, as a result of your tests, what conclusions have you reached, Mr. Clark, with respect to the infant plaintiffs involved in this case? A. The conclusion which I was forced to reach was that these children in Clarendon County, like other human beings who are subjected to an obviously inferior status in the society in which they live, have been definitely harmed in the development of their personalities; that the signs of instability in their personalities are clear, and I think that every psychologist would accept and interpret these signs as such. Q. Is that the type of injury which in your opinion would be enduring or lasting? A. I think it is the kind of injury which would be as enduring or lasting as the situation endured, changing only in its form and in the way it manifests itself. MR. CARTER: Thank you. Your witness.

[RedAnarchist]

Noone nowadays is &#39;pure&#39; anyway. When i was at high school, i had friends who were part Irish, part Polish, part German, part-Manx, part-Welsh and part-Scottish, including some who were actually Welsh, Scottish and Irish. And this was in a high school in a medium-sized Lancashire town.

I myself am English, Irish and Scottish, and even possible Eastern European ancestry as well.


We should celebrate diversity in humanity. :)

[LSD]

guerillablack, what was your point?

No one here is denying that racism is a real and serious problem, nor that it can have devastating and longlasting effects. The question being asked here is what should be done about it. Whether racism should be combatted with more racism, or with truth.

And, honestly, the answer seems pretty plain. Racial "pride" can never be the answer to racial hate. Artificial subdivisions are divisive by definition, they cannot be fought by reinforcing their underpinning preconceptions. The only way to defeat the myth of "race" is to fight the myth of "race"&#33;

That means championing humanism, it means abandoning made-up fairy tales and putting aside ones "pride" in an inherently oppressive system.

Race itself is paradigmatically a tool of oppression. Buying into it, even in an "empowering" way, is ultimately self-defeating.

[symtoms_of_humanity]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 04:39 AM
Noone nowadays is &#39;pure&#39; anyway. When i was at high school, i had friends who were part Irish, part Polish, part German, part-Manx, part-Welsh and part-Scottish, including some who were actually Welsh, Scottish and Irish. And this was in a high school in a medium-sized Lancashire town.

I myself am English, Irish and Scottish, and even possible Eastern European ancestry as well.


We should celebrate diversity in humanity. :)
Thats not ture, I have a friend who is 100 percent german, she can trace her tree all the way back to the 1640&#39;s and its all german, its rare, but it is still there

[symtoms_of_humanity]

so LSD do you disagree or agree with the Black Panthers?

[Des]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 10:17 PM
There&#39;s not much that I can add that LSD and Redstar didn&#39;t already say..
yeah they summed it up fairly well... good stuff...

i learnt and took on board..

[LSD]

so LSD do you disagree or agree with the Black Panthers?

I think that the Black Panther party was a useful and nescessary political force, but that many of its efforts were mischanneled.

"Black Nationalism" and all like "pride" movements were essential to fight institutionalized racism. There really was no other way to combat such an entrentched system.

The first step in any mass liberation is empowerment and that&#39;s what early "pride" movements did. They gave oppressed peoples self-confidence; they turned those characteristics that for centuries minorities had been socialized to be ashamed of into objects of pride, and that was good ...for the time.

Racial pride was a nescessary reaction to racial socialization. It "leveled the playing field" if you will, at least in terms of psychological preconceptions. As long as minorities believed their inferiority (which tragically many did, even if only unconsciously), there was no way for them to effectively fight back. Racial pride movements allowed them to retake their power.

But, today, their usefullness has expired.

For one thing, racism has gotten a whole lot more subtle and a lot more clever. In an age of "racialism" and covert neo-segregationalism, racial pride movments only empower the racists. They reinforce the modern racist declaration of seperate and seperate.

Furthermore, racial pride movements were only ever useful in combating institutionalized racism and its social effects. No individual racist was ever convinced by the Black Panthers to "change his ways".

Today, while institutionalized racism is still a problem, legal reform and state action are no longer the solution. Racism today is largely a social phenonmenon, and one that is predicated on sterotype and preconception rather then on direction and class interest as it was a century ago.

Racism has passed from the textbook to the street corner and there it festers unchallanged and largely unmolested. You see, racism as a political force has been dying for decades, perhaps even centuries. Racism itself has been dying for nearly as long, constantly being further marginalized by objective material forces. It&#39;s just taking a long time. Slow as it is, however, it remains an inevitable death, the only question is exactly how long the death rattle will sound. Simply put, capitalism is inherently anti-racist. All workers are equal before the bourgeoisie and all that. Or at least that&#39;s the theory. But, of course, theory isn&#39;t the same thing as practice and as we see in practice, racism does survive in capitalism.

It does this largely because the racial paradigm survives, that is the conception of race itself. It&#39;s a pre-capitalist paradigm and its a faulty one at that, but superstition has a way of perpetuating itself, whether or not it has long outlived its usefulness. "Race" is one of these "survivors". The idea is so ingrained in our social history and so little real effort has gone into eliminating it that it has manged to remain in only slightly varying guises. Today we are taught about "multiculturalism" and "tolerance", but all the while we are still deluged with "racial" theory. This means that no matter how much we are taught that races are "equal" we will always see them as different and difference inevitable leads to comparison and judgment.

When we are told that there are fundamental groups of people and that we are in one group and "black" people, "white" people, "asian" people, "hispanic" people, "indian" people, etc... in others, we assume, rather understandably, that these differences matter.

Well they don&#39;t. And organizations like the Black Panthers don&#39;t appreciate this. Unfortunately they themselves are trapped within the same tired racial paradigm. They come at it from a different perspective, buy they&#39;re playing the same tune.

It was a tune that was needed 50 years ago, it isn&#39;t needed any more. What we need today is cold truth, nothing more glorious than that. Unfortunately, the Black Panthers, and their ilk, do not provide this ...and they neve can. They are organizations that are predicated on a faulty premise, a bad solution to a bad idea. It&#39;s sad to say, but the Black Panthers will never again be a part of the solution

The only solace here is that it is more than likely that they will replaced by an organization that will. A group that understands that to finally defeat racism we must finally defeat race.

And that defeat will come. Even "race" itself, you see, is ultimately doomed. It&#39;s one of the few "good things" about superstition; it&#39;s always mortal.

[Hate Is Art]

Basically if you&#39;re born into something (Nationality, History Associated With Said Nationality, Race) it&#39;s &#39;wrong&#39; to be proud of it. You can&#39;t choose it so what the point? It just so happens that you happened to be born where you were born. You owe to allegiance to it, it owes nothing to you.

To feel proud of an area of land inside a set of imaginery lines, whether it be their culture, history, football team etc is outdated, moronic and pointless.

We should have outgrown this by now.

[rachstev]

Can one be proud of being an American? Of course. Our society has produced great leaders, doctors and engineers. Our people compete and win in many areas.

Someone above wrote they are proud of being Irish, so I suppose it&#39;s the same thing.


Rachstev

[TheReadMenace]

Good stuff.

I like what LSD said, about being &#39;impressed&#39; with a culture or ethnic group. It&#39;s about appreciation.

I could say that I&#39;m &#39;proud&#39; of my Irish heritage, but, as it has been said, I had nothing to do with it, so how can I say I&#39;m proud of it? I appreciate it; I&#39;m impressed with it. I love the Irish culture: the food, the arts, the music, the language, the customs; but it isn&#39;t any better than any other culture, and should only be appreciated.

But I guess I&#39;m not really adding anything new, heh.

Andrew

[James]

i&#39;m proud of my village and fellow villagers. We all have ginger hair, and a similar limp.
The village on the other side of the hill is inferior.
My mothers sisters mothers dad, who was also her lover, fought them.
Is it right that i should be proud?
I&#39;m confused.

[bunk]

I admit that i fell a tinge of patriotism when i watch England play football but other than that nothing

[Black Dagger]

I think sport really counts as nationalism, in terms of &#39;i support England&#39; etc. In oz, i support the Brisbane Broncoes in Rugby League, except i&#39;m not from Brisbane. They&#39;re just a &#39;team&#39; that i follow, they play a game, i like their team, i watch, i like when they win. I watch Cricket, follow the aussie team, because i grew up supporting them, just as i was brought up support local and non-local sports teams. But i will not fight for &#39;my country&#39;, nor do i support its government, and so forth.

I know my analogy is pretty shit :P But sports are games, they sure as hell can foster racism etc between nations playing, but i dont think &#39;supporting&#39; a national sports team necessarily makes you a &#39;bad communist&#39;.

[slim]

The real question is, instead of would you fight for your country on nationalistic grounds, it is:

Would you fight for the ideas that set your nation apart from others?

In a way this is not nationalism. It is choosing an ideology that your people also follow. For example, the ideology of Britain is different from the USA. They are both capitalist but they both have different brands of capitalism, ie. america is more patriotic and imperialistic with more authoritarianism. Although, its not a very good example now Britain is like a mini America.

[destroyauthority]

There is nothing wrong with being "proud" of your race. Race and nationality are two seperate things, however. Being proud of your nation&#39;s heritage is perfectly fine. The problem is that often times, part of being proud of your nation brings disdain for others. If you can hold yourself and your heritage in moderation, you&#39;re fine.

[Black Dagger]

But why should you be &#39;proud&#39; of your race/nation? You were simply born into both.

[slim]

If your father did something good for society like inventing the lightbulb, would you be proud of him for saving lives? Same principle.

[LSD]

If your father did something good for society like inventing the lightbulb, would you be proud of him for saving lives?

Sure, but, in context, you&#39;re actually proud for him.

Because you, presumably, know and love him, you&#39;re glad for him that he contributed as he did. You feel good for him, but you certainly don&#39;t feel responsible or participatory&#33;

The "pride" that you feel is about the relationship. You&#39;re proud to know him. It&#39;s the same as when a parent is proud of their child, they are not proud of the acts that their child do, per se, they are proud of the child beause of the relationship.

Indeed, feeling "proud" in the abstract for something that your ancestors or descendents did or do is just as ridiculous as feeling it for something that your "race" did.

When you do it with your children it&#39;s called overinvestment and living vicariously, when you do it with your "nation", it&#39;s called patriotism.


Same principle.

No it isn&#39;t.

For one thing, you actually know your father, you don&#39;t know your "cultural ancestors"

You see, your "culture" is such a nebulous non-concept that, in the end, feeling proud of it really comes down to feeling superior for it.

Race and culture and nationality are all made-up ideas. They are all precapitalist sociali creations that needlessly and carelessly divide us into arbitrary subgroups. Feeling "proud" for ones having been born into one of those artificial categories is very different from feeling proud of ones father.

[HoorayForTheRedBlackandGreen]

anti-imperialism isn&#39;t pride, its having the land for those who live on the land instead of others. Pride is a very selfish emotion. Culture is not soemthing to be proud of, but to preserve and appreciate. Race and nationality pride are capitalist fabrications.

[bcbm]

The "pride" that you feel is about the relationship. You&#39;re proud to know him. It&#39;s the same as when a parent is proud of their child, they are not proud of the acts that their child do, per se, they are proud of the child beause of the relationship.

You can&#39;t have a relationship with your culture?

[LSD]

You can&#39;t have a relationship with your culture?

No.

[Zero]

Hell, as long as you don&#39;t put people down, or try to say that your race is better then someone elses. I don&#39;t see whats wrong with having pride.

As long as you don&#39;t take it as far as those pissant aryans do.

[tambourine_man]

You see, your "culture" is such a nebulous non-concept that, in the end, feeling proud of it really comes down to feeling superior for it.

i agree completely.

does anybody know of any books or essays i can read that discuss, more in-depth, race as a social construct?
thanks