The liberal theorist who imagines he can free himself from the reality of belonging to a specific nation is fooling himself. He may deny the significance of his birth, but the world knows who he is by the language he speaks, by his accent and his customs. If some foreign power decides to wipe his tribe from the face of the earth, his dismissive attitude toward tribal identity won’t necessarily save him."Political Philosophy 101." By J.R. Nyquist, Financial Sense Online, 11/30/07.
A blog about Islamic intolerance and fanaticism; socialism; communism; government stupidity; and lying weasels everywhere, hopefully couched in vibrant and literate English and foreign words that make us look good.
December 8, 2007
Denying one's tribal identity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting statement...
I can understand and even agree to that in most cases. I personally don't think that Americans can really be defined as a tribe in the traditional sense. I've been reading alot of people's thoughts about how we are a white christian nation, or we were at one point anyway.
The thing to remember about all of this, We may have mostly been white immigrants, but even that doesn't make for a tribal indentity. Are Germans and Irish from the same tribe? Or how about the Polish? The only place this comes even close to making sense is here in America...which is where they cease to be Irish or German or Polish...they become Americans....How about Italians and Spaniards? Many of whom are only tokenmly white because many have very dark complexions. However, they also are Americans.
The tribe of America is not one color...no matter how you look at it, that is reality. Yes we were founded on the morality and tachings of Christianity...There's nothing wrong with that, but look at the wide variance of Christian denominations and spleinter religions, some of which are pretty scary. Most of which are ok though.
Now I happen to feel QUITE strongly about immigration. I happen to live within 20 miles of the Mexican/American border. I think we need a fence, or more appropriately a true border fence, something akin to the borders I saw between Egypt and Israel or Jordan and Israel. Concertina wire, no man's land with AP mines and machine gun nests. I'm all for border enforcement. As are all the Americans of Mexican descent that live around me.
I'm not trying to be antagonistic, I just am very concerned with the racially based comments I see becoming more prevalent. We're all human beings and come from different backgrounds and experiences. What makes us a great nation is our UNITY in our conviction to live the American dream. To be free men and women not beholden to theocracy or dictatorship...tyranny in any form. I am a nationalist, but I'm not a racist. There is a distinct difference...that seems to becoming more fuzzy with many of the poeple whose blogs I frequent and who I have great respect for. It concerns me. I think we need to unify as a nation of Americans and cut the crap with identifying with one color. several generations of Americans whose parents were immigrants have been born here and are Americans...of all nationalities and colors. You can't deny that these patriotic Americans are nothing less simply because the are not white. To deny them that is to be as bad as the fervent racists and the islamofascists.
I've perused your site and I find that so far I have nothing to disagree with here. This comment is motivated by your reply to my comment over at Gunslinger's page where you referenced Pat Buchanan.
I welcome any comments as I am continually learning from the multitude of bloggers out here.
If I am way off base, I would encourage you to enlighten me.
my 2 cents.
Those are interesting points. I agree that we have no "tribal" identity, which I take to mean the narrowest way of looking at who one is just one step above one's immediate family.
That said, it's possible for me to enjoy a cup of coffee outside Naples or in Amsterdam or in Edinburgh or in Moscow and feel that I am not on unfamiliar territory.
Those people there are "my" tribe or group in the broadest sense but I still feel it to be very real indeed.
Someday I could describe the great pleasure I have had to enjoy Thanksgiving (yes, that Thanksgiving) dinner with some Chinese friends. The father was an interpreter for my unit in Nam and was born in Hanoi. Few finer men exist and his wife and family all hung the moon as far as I am concerned. It was my lucky day that I met him and our disparate backgrounds have made no difference at all in our friendship. (OK, it probably made a difference somewhere along the way that I speak some Chinese and so it might be more accurate to say that we may have met each other half way.)
That said, broad tribal identity still matters where sheer numbers are concerned. To grant visas to 90,000,000 Zulus would probably change the character of the U.S. in a major way -- though my opinion of Zulus, btw, is a good one, dating from the times of Mr. Buthelizi's leadership of that nation. Still my impression is not well founded in extensive study or contact and I might be more critical if it were. (See my thoughts on the Nigerian woman in my other response to you elsewhere here.)
The preent official U.S. immigration policy appears to be that any number of people from just anywhere can come here and everthing will be fine. Rate of arrival means nothing.
The pro-immigration faction in the U.S. tries to make the antis' position into one of being anti immigrant. Antis such as myself acknowledge the fact and the possibility of assimilation in the case of non-Muslim immigrants but object only to innundation.
And inundation is what the pros advocate and actively advance.
Post a Comment