General News Thread

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Stevosevic said:

Interested to know more on your thoughts of your definition of nationalism, genuinely.

 

Is it wrong for any country for its people to be proud of their nation and at the same time want their nation to remain that way? As opposed to inviting people in who dislike you - people can pretend all they want that this isn’t the case. 

 

We are seeing a wave across Europe of people wanting to protect their countries culture and traditions. Why do the left smear this? I’m sure they wouldn’t if it was an African or Asian country wanting the same.

 

They are also fine with the same nationalism being shown by Pakistanis waving their flag across cities in the UK. 

Certainly:

 

My own definition of nationalism is to believe ones country to be superior, culturally and/or otherwise, to other countries and as a result of that (at least sometimes) are prepared to accept acts of violence and oppression against "other" groups in order to maintain that superiority. 

 

The Oxford definition apparently reads "identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations". (The second part of that is the important bit imo.)

 

What you describe there in your second paragraph sounds a lot more like patriotism, which is (mostly) benign in a way nationalism is not. 

 

I believe, with good reason I hope, that Reform and their policy platform represents nationalism much more than patriotism and their exacted policies will as such will lead to a lot of pain and misery for a great many people, just so another group of people can bask in that superiority. 

 

6 minutes ago, danny. said:

As a rule - is the country majority white? Then nationalism is wrong. Otherwise, it's good.

Feelings of national superiority are bad no matter which nation is spouting them (a reason why Yoon getting his just desserts in Korea recently was great). 

 

But, the last time I checked, it was the Anglosphere nations that had the most power to actually cause the pain and misery that nationalism results in, and that perhaps should mean something in terms of level of concern. If other places (like China) get that level of power and look like using it on as broad a scale, they should be equally challenged. 

 

The sentiment of national superiority itself cannot survive the next few decades. Not if we want to as well. This is obvious and apparently keeps needing to be said. 

[DJW1]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly14vppym2o

 

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said India and Israel would deepen cooperation in defence and artificial intelligence as he concluded a two-day visit to Israel.

Modi and his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu said in a joint statement, external on Thursday that their countries would work towards pursuing a free trade agreement.

"We've taken a historic decision to elevate our time-tested partnership to a Special Strategic Partnership," Modi said in a post on X.

Modi's second visit to Israel since 2017 has been seen as a test of India's foreign policy as it tries to balance its ties with Israel and other Middle Eastern countries.

 

Religious nationalists with a penchant for treating certain demographics as subhuman flock together, clearly. 

Also, India has greatly increased it's imports of Russian oil in the last 2 years

[danny.]

17 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Certainly:

 

My own definition of nationalism is to believe ones country to be superior, culturally and/or otherwise, to other countries and as a result of that (at least sometimes) are prepared to accept acts of violence and oppression against "other" groups in order to maintain that superiority. 

 

The Oxford definition apparently reads "identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations". (The second part of that is the important bit imo.)

 

What you describe there in your second paragraph sounds a lot more like patriotism, which is (mostly) benign in a way nationalism is not. 

 

I believe, with good reason I hope, that Reform and their policy platform represents nationalism much more than patriotism and their exacted policies will as such will lead to a lot of pain and misery for a great many people, just so another group of people can bask in that superiority. 

 

Feelings of national superiority are bad no matter which nation is spouting them (a reason why Yoon getting his just desserts in Korea recently was great). 

 

But, the last time I checked, it was the Anglosphere nations that had the most power to actually cause the pain and misery that nationalism results in, and that perhaps should mean something in terms of level of concern. If other places (like China) get that level of power and look like using it on as broad a scale, they should be equally challenged. 

 

The sentiment of national superiority itself cannot survive the next few decades. Not if we want to as well. This is obvious and apparently keeps needing to be said. 

You know China is a global superpower, right? They have crazy levels of power in terms of their military and economy - they are the second most powerful nation on earth by any metric.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, DJW1 said:

Also, India has greatly increased it's imports of Russian oil in the last 2 years

... which of course the international community will do naff all about because the biggest player thinks both the Indian and Russian brand of Might Makes Right isn't a problem. 

 

Another example of how the sentiments described above can be so damaging. 

[st albans fox]

19 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Certainly:

 

My own definition of nationalism is to believe ones country to be superior, culturally and/or otherwise, to other countries and as a result of that (at least sometimes) are prepared to accept acts of violence and oppression against "other" groups in order to maintain that superiority. 

 

The Oxford definition apparently reads "identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations". (The second part of that is the important bit imo.)

 

What you describe there in your second paragraph sounds a lot more like patriotism, which is (mostly) benign in a way nationalism is not. 

 

I believe, with good reason I hope, that Reform and their policy platform represents nationalism much more than patriotism and their exacted policies will as such will lead to a lot of pain and misery for a great many people, just so another group of people can bask in that superiority. 

 

Feelings of national superiority are bad no matter which nation is spouting them (a reason why Yoon getting his just desserts in Korea recently was great). 

 

But, the last time I checked, it was the Anglosphere nations that had the most power to actually cause the pain and misery that nationalism results in, and that perhaps should mean something in terms of level of concern. If other places (like China) get that level of power and look like using it on as broad a scale, they should be equally challenged. 

 

The sentiment of national superiority itself cannot survive the next few decades. Not if we want to as well. This is obvious and apparently keeps needing to be said. 

But, the last time I checked, it was the Anglosphere nations that had the most power to actually cause the pain and misery that nationalism results in, and that perhaps should mean something in terms of level of concern. If other places (like China) get that level of power and look like using it on as broad a scale, they should be equally challenged. 
 

I’d say that there are plenty of nationalist countries outside of the anglospheric ones that are causing pain and misery. 

we’re talking UK, Australia, Canada, NZ, USA as the core - we’ve had our day in the sun some time ago. The USA are doing a sterling job of bringing it back into fashion. 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, danny. said:

You know China is a global superpower, right? They have crazy levels of power in terms of their military and economy - they are the second most powerful nation on earth by any metric.

Let me know when they have roughly 800 different military bases in around 80 different nations to project their power. 

 

They're absolutely the second biggest player at the table by far, but there's still a pretty damn big gap to the top dog and they don't seem anxious to throw their weight around in the way that top dog does. Of course, once again, should that balance of power change, that will be a problem in the same way there is a problem now. 

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

But, the last time I checked, it was the Anglosphere nations that had the most power to actually cause the pain and misery that nationalism results in, and that perhaps should mean something in terms of level of concern. If other places (like China) get that level of power and look like using it on as broad a scale, they should be equally challenged. 
 

I’d say that there are plenty of nationalist countries outside of the anglospheric ones that are causing pain and misery. 

we’re talking UK, Australia, Canada, NZ, USA as the core - we’ve had our day in the sun some time ago. The USA are doing a sterling job of bringing it back into fashion. 

Which is causing more than enough trouble on its own, and I'm not sure there's a reason for the UK and others to follow suit. 

 

Modi and Putin, to name but two, are certainly examples of which you speak of.

[Foxdiamond]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

Let me know when they have roughly 800 different military bases in around 80 different nations to project their power. 

 

They're absolutely the second biggest player at the table by far, but there's still a pretty damn big gap to the top dog and they don't seem anxious to throw their weight around in the way that top dog does. Of course, once again, should that balance of power change, that will be a problem in the same way there is a problem now. 

No mention of Russia here. Obviously things didn't go as Putin expected but surely an example of a non Anglo power causing a lot of pain and misery. 

[danny.]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Let me know when they have roughly 800 different military bases in around 80 different nations to project their power. 

 

They're absolutely the second biggest player at the table by far, but there's still a pretty damn big gap to the top dog and they don't seem anxious to throw their weight around in the way that top dog does. Of course, once again, should that balance of power change, that will be a problem in the same way there is a problem now. 

But that's your metric and you've segwayed from nationalism to measuring military bases and how that somehow means it's OK for China to be nationalistic.

[Robo61]

5 hours ago, Stevosevic said:

Well said.

There is only 15 majority Muslim countries in the world where being gay is legal. So are all the other 40 or so radical and extremist?  
 

Trumpet is right in their post above. 

Its barely five minutes since this country legalised homesexuality,  and there are still many majority christian countries that still have bans. Many are commonnwealth countries. It is as much a culteral issue as it is a religious one.

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

No mention of Russia here. Obviously things didn't go as Putin expected but surely an example of a non Anglo power causing a lot of pain and misery. 

Mentioned in the following post. 

 

But again, degrees of power matter. 

 

6 minutes ago, danny. said:

But that's your metric and you've segwayed from nationalism to measuring military bases and how that somehow means it's OK for China to be nationalistic.

If you want to use another metric to measure military power and the compunction to use it, then by all means do so. 

 

I have no idea why it's somehow controversial to say that the most powerful player in the world is both Anglosphere and uses that power to cause a great deal of problems at the present time, and is also inciting other nationalist movements in other places to do similarly. 

 

I've also no idea why the very clear point about nationalism being a bad thing but the degrees of power to impose it are important somehow got interpreted as me being OK with Chinese nationalism (such as the sentiment is). 

[StanSP]

2 hours ago, BlueSi13 said:

If you want devastating, look at Labour who lost the seat for the first time in nearly a 100 years and the Conservatives who had their worst by-election of all time.  

Did you even read the 6 words after the bit you quoted? 

[StanSP]

1 hour ago, Stevosevic said:

Is it wrong for any country for its people to be proud of their nation and at the same time want their nation to remain that way? As opposed to inviting people in who dislike you - people can pretend all they want that this isn’t the case

Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? 

 

You can be proud of your nation but also be welcoming to others from people not originally from here .

 

Who has said it's wrong for people to be proud of your nation? 

 

It's just a huge generalisation that you think anyone invited here dislikes you. 

[leicsmac]

18 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Why do they have to be mutually exclusive? 

 

You can be proud of your nation but also be welcoming to others from people not originally from here .

 

Who has said it's wrong for people to be proud of your nation? 

 

It's just a huge generalisation that you think anyone invited here dislikes you. 

And therein lies the difference in thinking between a patriot and a nationalist. The former thinks they don't have to be mutually exclusive, the latter believes they must be. 

[CosbehFox]

2 hours ago, RowlattsFox said:

Is it simple as usual left wing votes go to greens and usual right wing votes go to reform.

 

Just a sign of how untrusted the traditional main 2 parties are. Whether that continues when it's a general election is a different matter. 

Yeah, that’s it.
 

In a seat which has a nuanced context. The accusation of sectarianism is simply electioneering to fit the constituencies demographic. Green Party spoke to that better. Worth mentioning that non Muslims in the constituency represent 68% or similar. 
 

The only unique trend youth vote going towards Greens is going something anticipated to occur. Green’s attitude towards housing probably the vote winner there. 

Edited 27 February by CosbehFox

[StanSP]

Out of a country of 70m (?) people, so many are fretting about 30k people... 

 

Wake up! 

 

 

[Salisbury Fox]

3 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Out of a country of 70m (?) people, so many are fretting about 30k people... 

 

Wake up! 

 

 

To be fair, there were 107k receiving asylum support in Dec 2025 with 28k of these spread across 6000 HMOs.The use of hotels is certainly going down, but that’s because they are being housed elsewhere.

[Stevosevic]

36 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Out of a country of 70m (?) people, so many are fretting about 30k people... 

 

Wake up! 

 

 

That’s 30k in the hotels currently.

 

There has been a constant stream over recent years that are now in the community and housed elsewhere 

[Lionator]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Certainly:

 

My own definition of nationalism is to believe ones country to be superior, culturally and/or otherwise, to other countries and as a result of that (at least sometimes) are prepared to accept acts of violence and oppression against "other" groups in order to maintain that superiority. 

 

The Oxford definition apparently reads "identification with one's own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations". (The second part of that is the important bit imo.)

 

What you describe there in your second paragraph sounds a lot more like patriotism, which is (mostly) benign in a way nationalism is not. 

 

I believe, with good reason I hope, that Reform and their policy platform represents nationalism much more than patriotism and their exacted policies will as such will lead to a lot of pain and misery for a great many people, just so another group of people can bask in that superiority. 

 

Feelings of national superiority are bad no matter which nation is spouting them (a reason why Yoon getting his just desserts in Korea recently was great). 

 

But, the last time I checked, it was the Anglosphere nations that had the most power to actually cause the pain and misery that nationalism results in, and that perhaps should mean something in terms of level of concern. If other places (like China) get that level of power and look like using it on as broad a scale, they should be equally challenged. 

 

The sentiment of national superiority itself cannot survive the next few decades. Not if we want to as well. This is obvious and apparently keeps needing to be said. 

I always divert to ‘Jerusalem’ when people ask me what English nationalism is. People always assume it’s some patriotic nationalist song then you read the words and realise it’s probably the most socialist song ever written lol. Embrace the working man and the countryside and you’ll be sound. 

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

Out of a country of 70m (?) people, so many are fretting about 30k people... 

 

Wake up! 

 

 

30k is the number in hotels, not the number awaiting asylum claim decisions 

 

AI says there are 65k cases not yet adjudicated with 50k appeals 

 

so that’s approx 115k. 
 

Still not a huge number as a proportion of the entire population 

 

Edited 27 February by st albans fox

[StanSP]

22 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

30k is the number in hotels, not the number awaiting asylum claim decisions 

 

AI says there are 65k cases not yet adjudicated with 50k appeals 

 

so that’s approx 115k. 
 

Still not a huge number as a proportion of the entire population 

 

Generally it's a tiny proportion with those figures too. 

[Lionator]

Why have politicians started using the word sectarian again btw? Are we in 1970’s Belfast??

[splinterdream]

16 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Why have politicians started using the word sectarian again btw? Are we in 1970’s Belfast??

Because political agendas are being led by religious groups 

[Foxdiamond]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

Out of a country of 70m (?) people, so many are fretting about 30k people... 

 

Wake up! 

 

 

To be fair that is only part of the picture. How much has the population grown in say the last 25 years and how much driven by migration. You of course can take a view if this is good or bad etc but don't look at a smaller sum in isolation. I read a BBC report that there was a rise of 700000 in a year to 2024.

[foxes1988]

1 hour ago, danny. said:

As a rule - is the country majority white? Then nationalism is wrong. Otherwise, it's good.

I mean only if you ignore the criticism other countries have gotten for pushing their nationalism too far. India / Pakistan / China / Japan.