No country or government has a "right" to exist. They're given that ability to exist by the people they're supposed to serve. If the system is not serving the people, it shouldn't exist.
Agreed. The United States is doing a piss-poor job serving the people, and while that may be due how the country was shaped during colonialism, it is not due to its ongoing colonialism. It's a totally different situation than Israel.
I was watching the falcon and winter soldier and I was thinking the flag smashers had a good point and were doing good for the world. They wanted no borders and no more nationalism. At one point they randomly had the flagsmashers kill some innocents to make them the antagonists
No I'm not. Anarchism keeps getting stupider and less likely to ever be a workable solution to anything the more I look into it. It's at best a nice thought experiment.
It's the state that has no right to exist, not the people or the place.
Now what is a state?
Look it up, but it's basically a formalized group of people who believe themselves entitled to power and claim they can use violence to get their way and you are not allowed to defend yourself against it.
The state is a cultural pandemic, this is the real mind virus, our species existed for like 200,000 years in complex societies without the state, 500 years with ubiquitous state (look up enclosure acts that forced everyone into a state) is all it's taken to destroy the entire planet.
Uh, no, just because whites can't make a country without colonialism doesn't mean there aren't non-colonial countries. Iran, India, China and Egypt have had historical settlement for a good 5,000 years, their people are indigenous to the land. (Or have very close and long term migrations)
There are even indigenous populations in fucking Europe too, thinking of it
EDIT: For the 0 IQ blood and soil idiots in the comments, I'm referring to the indigenous people of these countries that have very long historical settlements
Iran, India, China and Egypt have had historical settlement for a good 5,000 years
I think that's kind of a common misconception that occurs when you're implementing ideas like race, nationality, or ethnicity to historical people who didn't really know them or understand them in the same way.
In regards to China, are we talking about the ethnic han? Well they displaced and settled land from other Chinese ethnicities. If we're just talking about the ethnicity held within a single nationality. Well, see there's a place in China called Inner Mongolia.....
In regards to Egypt, it's not an ethnicity, it's a nationality. You obviously have the ptolemeic dynasty, who were just some Greeks. You had the Persian dynasty for a while, then the nubian, then the meshwesh(Libyan), you even had the Hyksos who were proposed to be from the Levant. It's all over the place.
My point being that the ancient world was more connected than most people originally think, and ethnicities tended not to stay in one place for thousands and thousands of years.
You think that having an indigenous population means that everything was sunshine and roses, and no group of humans was killing other groups of humans over that particular chunk of land? You might need to brush up on your history lessons.
All those countries came about by conquering tribes. They were all empires at one time or another. China never stopped being an empire. Tibet & Taiwan would like a word with you...
I recently got banned from [email protected] because I called out the moderator for crying about black people in God of War. The reason given? Racism, apparently, for telling the mod to stop being racist.
They deleted their account and locked the community, lol
Edit: to add on, a hexbear user saw that I got banned for "racism" after calling out the racist mod, and they also got banned, lmao. It's really funny, the mod edited their post and pretended they were a victim for "being called a bigot for standing against DEI in video games."
This logic is what got me, for a brief period in my teens, to identify as an antisemite, because I genuinely thought that was just the word for people who think genocide is fucked and 'never again' sounds like a pretty good guideline.
And I'm terrified how many other kids bought into the Zionist propaganda since, and how many of them are going to be less willing to admit they made an oopsie than my dumb ass was. I'm terrified how many people are going to be hurt by second order Zionist violence, all over the world. I think when they start attacking language, a nuclear response is warranted.
Here, "nation states" does not refer to the actual landmass their borders engulf, but rather to the abstract concept of differentiating between human populations on the basis of laws that merely exist within our minds and areas of land based on virtual lines that equally only exist in our minds
what exactly is your point? the fact that korea suffers inhumane sanctions imposed by the us empire with the goal of punishing the korean people for resisting their imperialism?
Sure, we didn't invade these countries but we maintain the colonial power structures and continue to benefit from colonisation as indigenous people continue to be dispossessed.
It's easy and convenient to point your finger at the past and say thats where all the responsibility lies
I mean, depends on your definition of invasion. I have no problem calling British and French colonization of North America "invasion" but my main point is, Israel is actively doing it right now and all of the other countries listed did it hundreds of years ago where we can't reach them.
Sure, no state has a right to exist. Rights don't really exist either, for that matter.
The issue with Israel isn't just being a colonist state, though. NZ is a colonial state. Awful things happened and continue to happen due to NZ colonisation. There is a pretty stark difference between race relations in NZ and Israel, however. When people rail against Israel it isn't solely on the basis of colonisation
Get outta here with this false equivalence. The marginal human suffering inflicted per year caused by Israeli's colonialism is incomparably greater than any other country's in the modern era.
Okay granted. From this perspective, sure, American colonialism is strictly broader than Israel's. I don't think this really changes anything about what I'm saying here.
Just because it isn't overtly genocidal(anymore) doesnt mean the US hasnt done incredible harm to the entire world. What israel is doing right now if horrific yes but the US is responsible for even greater suffering. Neither should exist
Really? The data says otherwise. Under american hegemony birth rates are up, life expectancy is up, infant mortality is down, and poverty has fallen across the entire world. Bitch and moan all you want but america has had a massive impact on improving thr world.
You might think that no country has any right to exist but that belief wont protect you from someone who thinks their country should control the entire world.
Nationalism is a basic and maybe outdated mechanism that protects against foreign invasions. You need to understand its purpose and function if you want to abolish it. At some point, i think everyone would agree that some populations share certain moral values and priorities. And those values deserve to be defended.
You can call those values "Germany" or "EU" or "Europe" or "lemmy" or "lgbtq people of earth and nearby planets", but in the end you will have an entity that encapsulates values that are worth being defended. I dont give a fuck about my country and i wish daily that somehow it gets nuked out of existence. But fuck anyone who wants to take it over by force.
Why is all this important? We are entering an age where information warfare is crucial. If an entity can shield its population from enemy informational warfare(great firewall of China) while being free to use informational warfare against its enemies(tik tok or any social media), then you(in the West) will just become a useful idiot.
The enemy is trying to persuade that a thing is bad(countries/nationalism), while at the same time is preaching how great that same thing is on his own population. When the shit hits the fan, which side do you think will win? The one who thinks that nations are bullshit and no war is justified, or the country which thinks that its nation is the greatest and war is a moral necessity in order to "liberate" the rest of the world?
This is nothing new. Japanese imperialism was disguised as anti-western/anti-imperialistic. Japan was the sign that asian people can be equal/superior to europeans and they just wanted to spread their values and liberate other asian nations from the european/american shackles. You dont need to be a historian to realize how utterly bullshit this lie was. The germans did the same with the whole "honorary aryan" thing.
TLDR : Ask yourself, if you apply your belief, will the rest of the world follow? If not, who benefits from you applying your beliefs? Sometimes it is fine to have noble beliefs and realizing that they arent realistically applicable to the current world.
But sadly we live in reality and have to accept that talking about how the israeli people have just the same right to live as the palestinians is way more effective than outright demanding the abolishment of all nation states, a thing that, even if ever, is only going to become even fathomable to most humans in at least a few centuries
it's such a pleasant feeling having these "spells" break in your head. they shatter to the floor when you realize a state "not having a right to exist" makes no fucking sense to begin with.
I mean sure, no country technically has an inherent right to exist. But the difference is in the details. The US, Canada, etc, simply don't have that inherent right. Israel, in addition to that, only exists because of pity to a bunch of whiners and a (in retrospective bad) decision of everyone else to throw them a bone.