Nick Szabo  🔑

I have been touring Europe and especially Easter Europe. There is only one thing about their history that is common to all and true always. Extreme nationalism leads to war. EVERY SINGLE TIME.

US style wars, nationalism st home, leads to war on the others side of the globe

Wrong. Nationalists worthy of that name are generally opposed to foreign intervention. As nationalists we respect other nation's borders as we expect our own to be respected. And we prefer our national security resources to be focused on protecting our own borders.

That is a very different definition and only if everyone went by this definition. There is a very thin line when it comes to <defending what is yours> to <taking something that you think is your>

Those lines are called national boundaries, and they are generally quite well defined. With proper security they are thick and solid, not thin and porous.

True but: 1. Not entirely the case everywhere 2. Nation states tend to go back in history and choose a national boundary that they like 3. Sometime wars are not for the boundaries but for some past rivalry over something done a 1000 years back and many more...

I think that's the joke, right. This is a joke, right?

I hope so.

How did you like seeing the Colorado video footage of the American flag being lowered and subsequently seeing the Mexican flag being raised in its place?

It's the behavior of invaders and traitors.

More like our nation should be united by opposition to globalism.

Opposition to globalization leads to enforcement of nationalistic sentiments. Are we required to hit a balance?

It's very simple: Localism > Nationalism > Globalism Globalism is a sick, perverse ideology that destroys the basic fabric of human organization. Not to mention it makes the whole world bland and grey.

Tendencies to colour unknown culture, religion, sentiments and people in black/white are much more prominent in localism and nationslism. Holocaust could not have happened without massive nationalistic boost. Globalism keeps a bar on such tendencies.

Globalism is confused with tolerance, understanding, and appreciation of other culture; all of which don’t need globalism. Globalism as it stands aims for some kind of homogenous gloop of a collective race of snowflakes.

I am sorry. But i dont see how appreciation for unknown can be achieved without free flow of information. May be thats not globalism per se. But i have seen first hand restriction to free flow, or even skewed flow of information in high degree of nationalistic sentiments.

So i cant see why we should move towards more concentrated nationalism or even extended that towards localism as an ethical objective. Nationalism corrupts sense of ethics faster than individuals can aquire them.