I’m reading some H.G Wells. The man is very globalist and hates any sort of tribalism or nationalism. He argues here that many imperial conquests are simply the result of rich elites gambling their wealth on extraction of conquered territories and convincing the king it’s in the national interest. They convince the people to go along with this but really the citizens just get taxed to fund wars that benefit the aristocracy
>>524280979Frig, it flipped the photo
>>524280979What does nationalism have to do with imperialist expansionism?
>>524281145They go hand in hand, the idea that you are a better nation, a superior people, and should only act in your own interest, not in mutually beneficial relationships with the world, can easily lead to the temptations of imperial conquests
>>524281145Nothing and everything. It's like asking about price without establishing first whether one is buying or selling
>>524281278The Soviet Union engaged in plenty of Imperial expansionism. The Liberal World Order spent all its existence post-Cold War engaging in imperial expansionism. Placing your people first instead of immigrants will most likely not lead to any more Imperial Expansionism than Globalism.
>>524281278So you're posting about a certain view concerning imperialist foreign policy which can be, but is not inherently expansionist, and which is only nationalism according to it's detractors? Doesn't that give the heckler the right to define everything, and make the rules entirely nonsensical?
>>524280979Now imagine if H.G. Wells lived next to niggersYeah, not so smug anymore huh chud?
>>524281488Soviet Union was quite nationalistic even if they pretended they weren’t. And yeah I guess it’s true a liberal democracy can be imperialistic, it’s not that nationalistic societies are the only ones that go to war. But a highly nationalistic society, especially when hatred of others is part of the propaganda, is more inclined to see domination of others as rightful progression. A liberal democracy that views others as equal will be less inclined to engage in imperialistic conquest, and instead likely choose trade and diplomacy
>>524281643As if the thinkers of the past, living qithin their own paradigms, can ever contribute at a 1:1 with thinkers of the present in confronting modern problems.
>>524281582Do you think a society that views others as equal, that wants to expand through trade, innovstion, and mutual prosperity, is as likely to pursue war as a nationalistic country that views itself as superior and rightful inheritors of the earth. Especially if they view their neighbours as inferior Nationalists also tend to discourage trade and promote autarky, nations that don’t trade are more likely to go to war
>>524280979Tribalism, clans, and big families create the foundation for powerful nations. Anyone who opposes this is either a fool or wants to subvert their enemies.
>>524280979>H.G. Wells: literal atheistic, anti-Catholic socialist>Hates natioanlism... No shit you fucking retard.
>>524281680Would you agree that the exploitation of foreign nations labour under the liberal paradigm isn't any different than the resource extraction policies of "nationalistic" empires. You no longer need boots on ground to exploit foreigners. The "danger" of nationalism is seeing the extermination of others as a net positive (which it usually is when dealing with non-nationals).The collusion between elites and the power structure is inevitable regardless of the system in place.
>>524281278>betterOh, look, the classic strawman.It remains clear that Wells understood nothing of the world and had no business writing.
>>524281278This is a non sequitur.A sovereign state is entitled to act in it's own best interests regardless if it considers itself to be better or worse than others. It also applies to people
>>524280979well there is a good and a bad globalism. Good globalism is european imperialism in the interest of the white race. Bad globalism is what we have today
>>524280979Side note: this guy writes like I do when I'm baiting, but with empty words filling spaces that don't exist.
>>524281766>is as likely to pursue war as a nationalistic country that views itself as superior and rightful inheritors of the earthwhere is this religion coming from?please be specific. unless you are saying that the government is god your fictitious worldwhere is the impetus to just kill others coming from?
