Isn't nationalism (or ethno-nationalism) basically identity politics?

Isn't nationalism (or ethno-nationalism) basically identity politics?

>Nationalism is further oriented towards developing and maintaining a national identity based on shared characteristics such as culture, language, race, religion, political goals or a belief in a common ancestry

>A nation (from Latin: natio, "people, tribe, kin, genus, class, flock")

>Identity politics, also called identitarian politics, refers to political positions based on the interests and perspectives of social groups with which people identify. Examples include age, social class, culture, dialect, disability, education, ethnicity, language, nationality, gender identity, generation, occupation, profession, race, religion, sexual orientation, settlement, urban and rural habitation, and veteran status.

Yes, ethno-nationalism is retarded. Civic nationalism is the way forward.

There are way too many people of color who have contributed to the country anyway. It'd be unfair to kick them out.

>There are way too many people of color who have contributed to the country anyway.
>Netherlands
Are you roleplaying an american?

Identity politics represent subsets within a nation, nationalism is the largest subset.

No. It's reality. (N - not e-N)

Identity politics is a vague buzzword that doesn't mean anything. Pretty much every political opinion can be formulated in such a way that it has the word "identity" in it.

No I'm 100% serious. Though it applies to America as well I guess. To any western country.

Yes. Identity is everything.

Yes. And?

I'm not saying that it would be bad if it were. I'm just wondering here.

Yes.

this. i never saw the problem with "racism".

isnt denial of white interests an sjw talking point?

you arent an SJW are you?

Yes. Problem?

Indentity politics is pandering to "marginalized" groups of entitled niggers in multicultural abominations.
Ethnic nationalism is nationalism for a certain country, and therefore a certain ethnicity.

no shit, ethnicity in the same way that being a male is part of a mans identity

The people of colour should be contributing for their country of origin.

Give me a name of a negro who contributed to Netherlands.

One promotes unity, the other division.

ethno-nationalism is stupid, nationalism makes actual sense and isn't racist nor identity politics.

Zwarte Piet

>A nation (from Latin: natio, "people, tribe, kin, genus, class, flock")
Are niggers your people?

Kek this is a character plus blacks and castrated liberals want to ban this tradition because of "blackface" which doesn't even exist in Netherlands.

I don't see why ethno-nationalism would be retarded. You don't have to kick out all of the foreign ethnic groups. Even Nazi Germany had non-germanics in Germany.

Defining a nation only based on culture (or by democracy, tolerance, you know the deal) will add an additional layer of tension to the society. Diversity.

Forging a society with no ethnic base will eventually lead to the destruction of the native ethnic groups, in your case the dutch.

As the origin of the word 'Nation' goes
>A nation (from Latin: natio, "people, tribe, kin, genus, class, flock")

I don't think you understand what 'contribute' means. It applies to anyone who held a job for most his life, started a business, is a successful entertainer, a politician, etc. Why would I know the names of regular people living normal lives?

Yugoslavia and the USSR were gloriously shining examples of strongly nationalist states composed of diverse groups which tried to not be racist and look just how well that worked out for them.

So why can't the dutch do the work? Why do we need negroes in european cities?

Identitarians are about "deciding" everything about their identity, including gender and race. Ethno-nationalism is quite contrary to it, stating you cannot chose your race, and should be proud as you are born into your nation.

USSR actually did their best to destroy cultures and ethnic groups. They destroyed many Finnish tribes by Russifying them

Of course it is.
And identity politics will never die so long as countries are multiracial. Whites will always vote in their own interests, blacks in theirs, asians in theirs and so on.

That's probably part of why America is generally more conservative than Europe. We have only two major parties, one for traditional WASPs, and another for everyone else. Problem is that "everyone else" is such a wide net to cast that they fail to properly unify all the various people under that net and so many of them get disillusioned from voting, believing that the party doesn't serve their interests.

On the other hand, yuropoors have a left-wing party for every identity and they all get their individual votes and form happy coalitions to destroy the native populations.

Really, funny how it's only majority white nations that have to accept this. Fuck off, Yuropoor. If some niggers in Africa can have a state controlled entirely by one ethnicity, then Europeans sure as hell can.

The goal of ethni-nationalism is to render identity politics impotent by making sure the country is so homogeneous that the populace cannot be credibly divided into mutually hostile factions (though as the kikes have proven, they can put in a veritable effort with feminism, LGBTQ stuff, etc.)

Top bantz pekka
You cannot deny that non-germans were second class citizens in Nazi Germany. It would be unfair to those who have contributed. The world has changed since 1933. There are many non-whites who helped build up the Netherlands and any western country alike
That is not what I am saying at all. I am talking about people who have already contributed. It is unfair to them to kick them out / make them second class citizens.

This is not about why
He just says kicking them out would be unjust

>If some niggers in Africa can have a state controlled entirely by one ethnicity, then Europeans sure as hell can.
Didn't Zimbabwe kick out all the contributors who didn't fit the ethnic profile? How is that working out for them?

Life is not fair. They did the same thing and worse to europeans in South Africa. Sacrifices have to be made for the future of the people.

Fuck off Mohammed. Non-whites have contributed fuck all to our countries. Working and paying taxes when at the same time more and more tax money is being diverted to fund immigration and welfare for immigrants, all while diluting the religious, ethnic, and cultural identity of the country and undermining its legal system is worth nothing.

>Zimbabwe kicked out all the whites and its country collapsed
>Therefore, having nonwhites is good
Stick to toothpaste making

...

This

Difference is whites in Zimbabwe were actually the best producers in the country who were the only ones who actually knew how to do shit. Kick shitskins out of white countries and you'd see an improvement if anything

>You cannot deny that non-germans were second class citizens in Nazi Germany.
You're right on this one. They were.

I don't have the classical-liberal view of everybody being equal in a society. I don't see a problem with upholding the historical ethnic balance of the nation. Yes, i think that ethnic Finns should be regarded as more desirable in Finnish society.

Like i said earlier, if we put no emphasis on ethnic Finns defining Finland then we would eventually lose this ethnic group. If the government is 'color-blind', that is.

When a society gets too diverse, leftist identity politics start to emerge. Just look at the U.S; "I will the be the president for all minorities", "I will deal with the problems that Latinos are facing".

People have ethnic interests. They also see race, every person notices the in-group and the out-group.

You guys reason at the level of the group, I reason at the level of the individuals. Keep the good ones and put a proper nationalist system in place that enforces that people do their part. No reason some brown people can't take part in that.
Furthermore, it's impossible to get an ethno-nationalist movement off the ground. There's maybe 10,000 people in them in the US who can't even agree among themselves. How are you going to convince 100 million people to take part in the day of the rope?
No, I'm saying it's okay to keep the good ones if a system is in place that forces them to work.

Whatever happened to the propaganda you familiams were shitting out with those types of pics?

Did dumber and reddit catch on and started to ban them?

Couldn't a homogeneous society in a sense be more individualistic than a society where there are many ethnic groups? Surely having many ethnic groups around makes you more collectivist.

At this point, I think creating an ethno-state is just about as likely as "enforcing that people do their part". Hell, it may even be more likely because European politicians operate in a corporatist cartel that ensures that every member of society is a mindless consumerist regardless of any given person's actual ability to be as such. That's why there's no serious opposition to the welfare state anywhere in Europe, while on the other hand you have parties like Front Nationale, let alone fucking Golden Dawn actually making it into parliament.

Though fundamentally, I agree. I do not mind high skilled workers and the brightest of students lending our country a hand no matter what country they hail from. These almost never pose any kind of problem to the natives.

>I don't have the classical-liberal view of everybody being equal in a society. I don't see a problem with upholding the historical ethnic balance of the nation. Yes, i think that ethnic Finns should be regarded as more desirable in Finnish society.
I guess that is the core difference in our values then. I think anyone who puts in the work should be regarded as equal.

I think leftist identity politics is more a result of people being able to sit around all day doing nothing. The 'problems that minorities are facing' always boil down to more gibs. In a truly colorblind society, it would be impossible to stand up for any groups rights in particular.
I don't mean I'm against collectivism per se. It's the difference of 'Moroccans as a whole are a drain on society so we need to get rid of them' versus 'Moroccans as a whole are a drain on society so we need to get rid of the bad ones'.

come back in 30 years and tell me how that worked out for you.

case study:
>oj simpson murders white wife and her partner with kitchen knife
>runs from police because he knows he's guilty
>obvious evidence says he's guilty
>blacks on jury
>whitey be framing him
>not guilty

how the fuck do you intend to maintain a civilization with these forces ripping it apart at the seams? And point to 1 successful multi ethnic country-- not the us because it's failing due to minority groups.

I got it guys: Cultural-Nationalism

ethno nationalism is nationalism. there is no multi racial nation.

nation only means people of the same heritage, it doesn't mean country or state.

>And point to 1 successful multi ethnic country
Switzerland, Japan, China

The problem is not being multi-ethnic or even being multi-cultural (though those don't help). It's being multi-racial.

you reason at the level of the individual who thinks the group doesn't matter. it's very myopic and arrogant. go movie to china by yourself and see how you fare.

you're being pretty pedantic

Thats called civic nationalism and it only works when American because it generally requires guns

So all people in the world deserve a country with their people, their culture and their values except white people? Fuck off.

wrong.

look at USA. Chinese, indians koreans and americans all building super cool tech companies together. Multiple ethnicities that all become to share American values

Must be pretty sad to live amongst traitors like you as a dutch.

Good your opinion wont matter when mohammed separates your head from your shoulders

How do you deal with coordinated collectives using the individualism of the "nation" to divide and conquer? In the end they would win anyway. Bow to the collective, retard. It is just game theory. Not a matter of opinion.

This 100%

no becuz nationalizm is rational and sjws are literally just blithering retards whos parents pay to have colleges babysit.

>no becuz nationalizm is rational and sjws are literally just blithering retards
I agree. Isn't nationalism identity politics though?

>Like i said earlier, if we put no emphasis on ethnic Finns defining Finland then we would eventually lose this ethnic group. If the government is 'color-blind', that is.
Yes. Government should use policy tools to shepherd the ethnic composition of the country along lines acceptable to the citizenry. I think the citizens of every country have the right of ethnic self determination and should empower government to work in harmony with their wishes. If Finns reject the idea, then it's possible in the future Finland could be radically different in ethnic composition.