Randomly knocked out-Russians!

[Grelf]

Err, no it is not. Politics and warfare were matters of the nobility back then, it did not concern the commoners at all, no matter how movies make it seem otherwise.

You say it as if it is different now.

There is no nobility today where I live. So yeah, it is. The general population has a voice on politics, and warfare is not a mere sport of the nobles either.

They couldn't care less about who their lord was, or if his claims would increase in size or not, the only thing that they probably cared about concerning this was how heavily their lord was willing to tax them.

LoL. You totally ignore cultural and religious aspects, kin relations, etc, etc.

Nationalism is basically identification with one's own country or political entity. Why is that important if people didn't identify themselves with their country and didn't dabble in politics? If you study some more history you'll realize that lords swapped territory as often as people move to new homes today, and the lives of the people who lived there didn't change at all. And why would they identify themselves with every single random new territory they belong to, when matters such as war or politics don't even affect their lives? From one day to another people suddenly belonged to different kingdoms and empires, and it mattered not, because for commoners life outside of their villages or towns mattered very little. They could barely even know about what happened outside very well.

There were concepts of people, country, nation and even race long before XIX. And there are thousands examples of how people (as an ethnic group) were trying to unite themselves under one state or to remove foreign rule from their country, while initiative came from both nobility and commoners.

"People", "country" or "race" are concepts much different from nationalism. The Russian Empire certainly was a nation-state, right? Even though they cared little to annex people from completely different cultures, ethinicity and religions.

[Canaris]

I swear to god, Grelf can't make a post that doesn't cause me to laugh.

Detail for me the ways in which Rome was not a nation state, please, I'd love to poke holes in your logic.

While we're at it, 13th century France. Or even the Kievan Rus.

[Grelf]

I swear to god, Grelf can't make a post that doesn't cause me to laugh.

Detail for me the ways in which Rome was not a nation state, please, I'd love to poke holes in your logic.

While we're at it, 13th century France. Or even the Kievan Rus.

Rome, a nation-state? LOL. Certainly, an empire that covers Germanic peoples, Latin peoples, Celtic peoples, Berbers, Semites among others is a nation-state, yeah! Do you even know what a nation-state is? And trust me, your little rage to my posts certainly is what is most amusing about all of this.

Also, please, now YOU tell me why it is a nation-state, since you're affirming such.

13th century France wasn't even unified. Give me a break.

[GreenScape]

I swear to god, Grelf can't make a post that doesn't cause me to laugh.

Detail for me the ways in which Rome was not a nation state, please, I'd love to poke holes in your logic.

While we're at it, 13th century France. Or even the Kievan Rus.

Rome, a nation-state? LOL. Certainly, an empire that covers Germanic peoples, Latin peoples, Celtic peoples, Berbers, Semites among others is a nation-state, yeah! Do you even know what a nation-state is? And trust me, your little rage to my posts certainly is what is most amusing about all of this.

Also, please, now YOU tell me why it is a nation-state, since you're affirming such.

13th century France wasn't even unified. Give me a break.

dude, don't even bother. russians wont understand u, since currenly russia nothing but empire.

[al]

Detail for me the ways in which Rome was not a nation state, please, I'd love to poke holes in your logic.

+1

There is no nobility today where I live. So yeah, it is. The general population has a voice on politics, and warfare is not a mere sport of the nobles either.

There's always a privileged elite class.

Or... Do you live in a communist state ?

Nationalism is basically identification with one's own country or political entity. Why is that important if people didn't identify themselves with their country and didn't dabble in politics?

Identification with one's own country is natural and given. Identification with a political entity is normal for civilized people. And it is natural for people to prefer a political entity which is native to their culture.

Nationalism is based on those things and is secondary to them.

If you study some more history you'll realize that lords swapped territory as often as people move to new homes today, and the lives of the people who lived there didn't change at all. And why would they identify themselves with every single random new territory they belong to, when matters such as war or politics don't even affect their lives?

Very odd assumption for a person who is trying to teach others history.

From one day to another people suddenly belonged to different kingdoms and empires, and it mattered not, because for commoners life outside of their villages or towns mattered very little. They could barely even know about what happened outside very well.

Yeah, like Roman villagers when Huns overrun half of their empire. Or those pure Ru... cough-cough... Chinese when Mongols came to burn their cities. Or those Scottish guys who never were aware of any Norman or English bullies waving axes here and there and having sex with their wives.

"People", "country" or "race" are concepts much different from nationalism.

Of course they are! Should I give you an award for you finally have got it?

[Grelf]

There is no nobility today where I live. So yeah, it is. The general population has a voice on politics, and warfare is not a mere sport of the nobles either.

There's always a privileged elite class.

Oh yeah, and we have absolutely no influence over politics, and pretty much no chances to socially raise. And of course, the reptilians control everything!

Nationalism is basically identification with one's own country or political entity. Why is that important if people didn't identify themselves with their country and didn't dabble in politics?

Identification with one's own country is natural and given. Identification with a political entity is normal for civilized people. And it is natural for people to prefer a political entity which is native to their culture.

How is identification with one's own country natural before the 19th century when the territorial borders of most political entities had little to do with culture?

If you study some more history you'll realize that lords swapped territory as often as people move to new homes today, and the lives of the people who lived there didn't change at all. And why would they identify themselves with every single random new territory they belong to, when matters such as war or politics don't even affect their lives?

Very odd assumption for a person who is trying to teach others history.

Really? How so?

From one day to another people suddenly belonged to different kingdoms and empires, and it mattered not, because for commoners life outside of their villages or towns mattered very little. They could barely even know about what happened outside very well.

Yeah, like Roman villagers when Huns overrun half of their empire. Or those pure Ru... cough-cough... Chinese when Mongols came to burn their cities. Or those Scottish guys who never were aware of any Norman or English bullies waving axes here and there and having sex with their wives.

The Mongol invasions are one of the few samples of total war in the Middle Ages, but it was not the general rule. I was mainly speaking of feudal disputes, not nomadic invasions.

"People", "country" or "race" are concepts much different from nationalism.

Of course they are! Should I give you an award for you finally have got it?

No, man, I am the one who should be giving you an award! Because of you most of the academic thought on nationalism will have to be reviewed. You certainly deserve this.

[al]

Grelf, your binary logic of two extremes is incompatible with me, sorry.

[Grelf]

Grelf, your binary logic of two extremes is incompatible with me, sorry.

Now you leave generic post without any elaboration instead of trying to argue with my points, nice evasion.

[al]

Points? Do you have any? I see only distortion of historical facts and my words.

[Grelf]

Points? Do you have any? I see only distortion of historical facts and my words.

Distortions of your words? Really? Where? Distortion of "historical facts"? Where?

Maybe you should read something on nationalism too. You could start with something as generic as Wikipedia. Oh wait, I suppose you will engage in a good edit war if you go there, so it's best to stick to your own cognitive bias, right?