Anti-Nationalism speech - need advice

Users who are viewing this thread

Alien Allen

Froggy the Prick
Messages
16,633
Reaction score
22
Tokenz
1,206.36z
Yes. Bring my age into it. That justifies your arguement. Wow. Sorry, I cannot debate this with you becasue I obviously haven't the maturity to understand the extent of what i'm saying.

You win
I knew that would piss you off :D

It always does. I remember when I was that age and thought I had all the answers. :D

With age comes wisdom and knowledge. This does not mean a young person is dumb. ;)

There is a reason you know why teenagers can not be President. :nod:
 
  • 52
    Replies
  • 1K
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

Strauss

Active Member
Messages
718
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
The problem is that the major problems facing us today are not simply national issues. They are global; from pollution to deforestation. From confiction to Aids. Nations need to come together as a whole in order to snuff these issues out. When have you ever seen the entire world come together and agree on something?

With a virtous world leader, he or she could face these problems directly. :surrender

Wasn't this the same theory of:

1. Genghis Kahn(sp?)

2. The Roman Empire

3. Napoleon Bonaparte

4. The British Empire

5. Hitler

(And various others before and between)
 

Minor Axis

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,294
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.02z
Yes, I agree 100%

Specially with religion today. Even the thought of having a world leader has half the world running in circles screaming anti-christ at the top of their lungs.

We have a long ways to go as humanity, but it doesn't hurt to attempt to give the idea some thought. It has to start somewhere.


Can you give some example of what would be problematic in your oppinion. My essay doesn't really address any problems, so I think it would be good to hear some, so that I can try to address them.

For instance, the anti-christ one is a major concern.

Lack of sovereignty, the loss of ability to call the shots in your own country. That's it. I don't think most people would want to depend on political forces around the world of different political and religious views to give them fair shake whether it be Christian or Muslim.
 

All Else Failed

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,205
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
Sounds like the USA to me. ;)
we feed the world


in humanities history, we have taken massive steps not only intellectually, but socially as well.

10 thousand years ago humans lived in small nomadic group called band societies.


6 thousand years ago, agriculture developed and with this came the 1st proto states.


Around 2,000–3,000 years ago, some states, such as Persia, India, China, Rome, and Greece, developed through conquest into the first expansive empires. Today we our bound together as nations.
Here you can see China when it began 3000 years ago up until today.



the problem is.. these nations do not celebrate nor do they care about the wellbeing of humanity. there attention never strays past that of their own nation's wellbeing.


When america 1st went to the moon, there was a lot of controversy over which flag should be flown. some people thought the flag of earth should be flown to represent all of humanities 1st steps on terresterial soil. Some people thought the European union flag





its time for society to take the next step. its proven through history that when we band together, we achieve more.
nationalism is no long necessary. we should not care exclusively about our own nations. we should care about humanity as a whole. we should take into concideration our actions affects on all of society, not just what they can contribute to our own nation.
all this suffering in the world that is caused by nationalism. by selfishness. with a virtous world leader, we can get over this. we can end alot of suffering and put that labor to good use. instead of war we can contribute that energy to science, we can put those resources into research to fight aids, or ageing, we can come together as humanity to fight pollution, deforestation.
with a virtous world leader, he or she could promote a truely socialist society where the desires and needs of humanity come 1st.



we base our life decisions off of our desires and needs weather those desires are intellectual, materialistic, spiritual, or even the desire not to desire. the results of these desires are what pushes mankind above all the rest.
when we strive for greatness and knoledge, when we strive for wealth and power. we push foward humanity. the only question is, is how much of that desire is going to be used to push humanity foward and how much will be used to bring us down with war and fighting


the boundaries of nationalism is what holds us down. we cannot combine our power as humanity when our nations turn us against each other.









This is a rough sketch of what I want my speach to consist of. I want to try and show my class that nationalism is limiting humanity. That we can do much more if we come together.

Can you please give suggestions to improve my speach?
There is nothing inherently wrong with nationalism. If anything, there's too little of it these days. Globalism and the selling out of nations by their leaders is the main cause for the problems we are having today. There NEEDS to be more focus on individual countries.

A "world leader"? Do you know how dangerous that would be?


Lern to use the correct form of "there". If you're referring to a group of people it is "Their" when talking about possession and "They're" when you're describing. Never use "1st", use the word "first".

Overall your argument is weak and presents little intellectual merit.
 

boombala

Active Member
Messages
3,082
Reaction score
619
Tokenz
0.00z
Snip:

Can you give some example of what would be problematic in your oppinion. My essay doesn't really address any problems, so I think it would be good to hear some, so that I can try to address them.

For instance, the anti-christ one is a major concern.

Your essay seems to be addressing just the idology connected to the word -- nationalism. Its a nice thot but I agree with Minor A -- the divertieis within nations seems to make this idea one of wishful thinking but totally unworkable; especially now when the global economy is wavering and tensions of war are ongoing.

All these are problematic:

One tye of leadership
One political system
One God concept
One flag
One economy
One culture
One currency -- We seem to be headed in that direction but if it happens at all, it won't be in our lifetime.

I'm not sure that your paper would be well received without any ideas pointing out how to achieve the goals you would like to see.

I think you need to put a lot more thot into it, unless this is just a wishlist of what-you- would-like-to-see type assignment.

Just my two cents worth.
 

siasl

Member
Messages
224
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
The problem is that the major problems facing us today are not simply national issues. They are global; from pollution to deforestation. From confiction to Aids. Nations need to come together as a whole in order to snuff these issues out. When have you ever seen the entire world come together and agree on something?

With a virtous world leader, he or she could face these problems directly. :surrender

we base our life decisions off of our desires and needs weather those desires are intellectual, materialistic, spiritual, or even the desire not to desire. the results of these desires are what pushes mankind above all the rest.
when we strive for greatness and knoledge, when we strive for wealth and power. we push foward humanity. the only question is, is how much of that desire is going to be used to push humanity foward and how much will be used to bring us down with war and fighting


imo, the thought behind your premise is noble....vital to our future, even
but you seem to me making an arguement for a "benevolent dictator": someone to channel our desires towards a vision of global well-being.

who determines that vision?
how is it enforced?...particularly how is it enforced without war and fighting?

seems to me you're talking about either
(scientifically) about the evolution of man -as demonstrated through human nature.....the move from a society based on our competitive nature to one based on our co-operative nature
or
(religiously) about the transformation of man based on our understanding of desire and will​
both of these are the province of the individual, imo....."state" solutions to visionary ideas have proven to be disasterous to freedom and opprotunity, creating the need for a society of sheep.
 

Alien Allen

Froggy the Prick
Messages
16,633
Reaction score
22
Tokenz
1,206.36z
imo, the thought behind your premise is noble....vital to our future, even
but you seem to me making an arguement for a "benevolent dictator": someone to channel our desires towards a vision of global well-being.

who determines that vision?
how is it enforced?...particularly how is it enforced without war and fighting?

seems to me you're talking about either
(scientifically) about the evolution of man -as demonstrated through human nature.....the move from a society based on our competitive nature to one based on our co-operative nature
or
(religiously) about the transformation of man based on our understanding of desire and will​
both of these are the province of the individual, imo....."state" solutions to visionary ideas have proven to be disasterous to freedom and opprotunity, creating the need for a society of sheep.

we chased her off after the first day :24:
 
78,875Threads
2,185,392Messages
4,959Members
Back
Top