Nationalism

SameDifference

I am a fierce nationalist. So fierce that many of my friends call me a fascist, although I do not advocate fascism. I lead a diaspora Nationalist Group in the UK called the Niadh Nask.
We are based around diaspora nationalism (nationalism of Irish ex-pats) and romantic nationalism (based around an idealistic view of the irish culture language and race), but I in no way condone fascism or nazism.
I want to know what people think about this kind of extreme nationalism that I hold. Many people have also called me a socialist, but if you put that to gether it says national socialist (which is the official name of the Nazi party). However this is merely an name the Hitler made up to appease the working class, there were very few socialist elements in the nazi regime.

oscarBravo

What makes it extreme? And how do you define "nationalism"?

AngryHippie

Give us some of your political stances on some of your key issues ?


http://homepage.eircom.net/%257Eseanjmurphy/chiefs/niadhnask.htm


My take on it is that you are entitled to do and act as you so please, But most people in this country are too busy with day to day life for this kinda craic.
If your to busy to check out the link, here's the punchline below

With respect, the Niadh Nask in all its variants is, as we have shown, based on historical fantasy and fabrication, and furthermore is so tainted by association with the MacCarthy Mór fraud that it would be advisable for former members simply to let it die away. In short, the Niadh Nask is a testament to the dishonesty and greed of its originators and to the too trusting nature not to say credulity of those who joined, as well as yet another demonstration of the abysmally low standards applying in Irish genealogy and heraldry.

Sean Murphy
Centre for Irish Genealogical and Historical Studies
29 November 2001, revised 21 March 2002

MoominPapa

Stupid long phone call. Duplicated Angrys research

Sand

I want to know what people think about this kind of extreme nationalism that I hold. Many people have also called me a socialist, but if you put that to gether it says national socialist (which is the official name of the Nazi party). However this is merely an name the Hitler made up to appease the working class, there were very few socialist elements in the nazi regime.

Nope - The Nazi parties manifesto was extremely left wing actually. Read it sometime, if you find yourself nodding along seek help from either an economist or a psychatrist. Nationalism and socialism arent mutually exclusive. Socialism simply calls for the every member of society to work for the common good of all as opposed to individual interest. Nationalism defines that societys members. Communism does the same thing, the proletariat and "counter revolutionaries". Communism just has a broader defintion of its enemies.

As for the value of nationalism - its an instinctive genetic thing to define an in-group and an out-group. We're wired that way by evolutionary throwback, from the days when we spoke in grunts and the most advanced weapons were sticks and stones. Some areas down the west of Ireland are still like that to be honest - guys getting the **** kicked out of them because theyre from 2 miles down the road.

Nationalism was simply a way to jump start a common shared mythology between medieval fiefs that barely spoke the same language, to create a new, larger in group. The fact that someones Irish doesnt redeem them from the possibility that theyre a complete tool in my eyes.

DadaKopf

Socialism simply calls for the every member of society to work for the common good of all as opposed to individual interest.

Sand, socialism doesn't erase the individual. Socialism accepts that the market in industrial society (now post-industrial in many places) must be harnessed to benefit individuals in society, balancing individual with common good. Socialism is, therefore, defined as state ownership of the means of production in key industries/utilities/services, within a framework of democratic governance, and democratic influence over the market by the state.

Nazism was big on nationalism, not socialism. And certainly not democracy and equality. In fact, though not effected in practice, socialism, as an internationalist movement sees nationalism as a strategy by elites to break apart the global working class to prevent a proletarian revolution.

*Cue Sand accusing socialists of similarly repugnant historical atrocities associated with the Left*

Interesting that Nazism was, actually, a bizarre paganistic cult, albeit on an enormous scale.

turgon

I dont mind "fierce" nationalists if your open to compromise.

By that I mean that I hate nationalists going around:

• Attempting to use military means to unite Ireland (which will not work)
• Being backward ex. not wanting england rugby team at croke park
• Not being able to see anyone else's (inc Unionists) point of view*
• And generally acting as if their living a hundred years ago. For example eirigi protesting at the queen coming to Ireland. I hate that organization.

*An example of this - the republican sinn fein deputy leader went crying to the irish examiner about how a unionist at a GAA game didnt respect the irish flag or anthem at the game. Now in all fairness he would be the one person suggesting we disrespect the english flag and anthem at their games. So what right has he to complain.

I believe in liking your country, like I do. But I also believe in respecting other people. I dont like saying Im a nationalist because people get the wrong immpression that im one of the above

SameDifference

On response to the Sean Murphy quote, may I point out that even more recent evidence has proved that the Niadh Nask did exist but not in the way that it was portrayed by Terence Francis (who doesn't even desrve to be called a McCarthy).
And besides, even it if was correct, Francis misused his position in order to make himself filthy stinking rich through Heritage tourism. He disbanded the Niadh nask when he abdicated, so I am merely (though a McCarthy) using a defunct name (which by the way means Champions of the Collar).

Its a busy time for the Niadh Nask at the moment with St. Pat's day coming up. We have are own section in the newport parade.

The Hill Billy

SameDifference wrote: »

Its a busy time for the Niadh Nask at the moment with St. Pat's day coming up. We have are own section in the newport parade.

I would have thought that a "fierce nationalist" would have frowned on our national saint's day being referred to as anything other than "St Patrick's Day".

/2¢

AngryHippie

Membership of the International Commission on Orders of Chivalry (Commission Internationale Permanente d'Études des Ordres de Chevalerie) as of January 1996

• 1 Lt. Col. Baron Patrick T. O'Kelly de Conejera
  Born 1921 as Patrick Kelly or O'Kelly; assumed the (allegedly Spanish) title of baron and name of O'Kelly de Conejera by deed poll in 1955; Grand Banner Bearer of St Lazarus; Niadh Nask.
• 2 the Chevalier Zygmunt von Sikorski Mazur
• 3 Captain the Chevalier R. Mingo Sweeney, of Bolgers Park
  Canadian heraldist, a member of the original commission; St Lazarus, Niadh Nas

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/orders/icoc.html

for a real chuckle go to:


http://niadhnask.weebly.com/

It reads like something Tolkien wrote on a very bad day, It is one thing to be proud your heritage, But there is some fairly dubious stuff in there,
Not to mention some of the names on the list at the start there are comical.

I'm not saying that the Niadh Nask didn't exist, as they probably did, But they probably were not the kind of organization to be proud of back then, and they've done little to redeem themselves since, as far as I can see....

I'm not sure if I'm too keen on their influence in promoting all things Irish abroad either, although TBH marketing has sold our green souls and its just a day for boosting booze sales anymore, and flogging shamrocks and green dye and all the rest of the ****e people get caught up in. Parades are grand, but its been turned into a total Darby O'Gill fest as far as I'm concerned. Only good thing about it is its during the VI nations, and spirits usually run very high for matchday as a result. Other than that, Boston and NY can fcuking have it. (IMO)!!!:rolleyes:

Raintonite

turgon wrote: »

I dont mind "fierce" nationalists if your open to compromise.

By that I mean that I hate nationalists going around:

• Attempting to use military means to unite Ireland (which will not work)
• Being backward ex. not wanting england rugby team at croke park
• Not being able to see anyone else's (inc Unionists) point of view*
• And generally acting as if their living a hundred years ago. For example eirigi protesting at the queen coming to Ireland. I hate that organization.

*An example of this - the republican sinn fein deputy leader went crying to the irish examiner about how a unionist at a GAA game didnt respect the irish flag or anthem at the game. Now in all fairness he would be the one person suggesting we disrespect the english flag and anthem at their games. So what right has he to complain.

I believe in liking your country, like I do. But I also believe in respecting other people. I dont like saying Im a nationalist because people get the wrong immpression that im one of the above

It's funny because of the ideas you and others express, I've been turned off by nationalism altogether. I'm more supportive of my local community (whether they be unionist, republican, or others) and couldn't give a flying leap about the nation. It's full to the brim with carpet bagging, me'ism, corruption and a general willingness to accept any bullchit for a Euro. The "i'm alright, screw you pal" mentality has come to the forefront of our society. One thing I do agree with, though, is that many people are living in the past or at least hope to reproduce the past. A past where history is written for the rich, by the rich and for the sole edification of the rich. Oh, and any pandering person that wishes to believe they're one of the elite. A past where the rules a written to ensure that the rich and their progeny have the upper hand and the plebs can duff their caps in admiration. So, yeah, to hell with nationalism.

rowlandbrowner

Nationalism translates to - one type of people are superior to another. I have no time for nationalists, they are usually the kind of people who start a sentence with "I'm not a racist but...."

dsmythy

rowlandbrowner wrote: »

Nationalism translates to - one type of people are superior to another. I have no time for nationalists, they are usually the kind of people who start a sentence with "I'm not a racist but...."

That's a very narrow view. Sure to some that is how they think of it.

You can be proud of who you are without claiming to be better than everyone else.

Karlusss

The weird post-World War II trend of disappearing nationalism is something that is hard to figure out where to stand on, for me.

There are elements of what the word Nationalist represents that I dislike a lot. British Nationalism, for example, has almost no positive connotations, and ethnic or religious nationalism can and does cause a lot of trouble.

But then, waving a flag in continental Europe will have you branded a Fascist in seconds, and that's not necessarily the only motivation behind it. It's not like that in Ireland, but a tricolour decoupled from a sporting event or a government building has a good chance of evoking thoughts of the IRA.

I think, in 1900, I would've been a nationalist. I'm not one one now, though. Because of those connotations. I have no time for the IRA or for its PR department Sinn Féin. Ireland as lion rampant is a delusional idea. But I do think it's a pity that the idea of nationalism has been sort of debased by its associations at local level.

In response to the OP: what is the point of diaspora nationalism in 2008? There's a story about the writer Frank O'Connor, that when he moved to New York, he had to come back to Ireland every few years to remind himself what a hole it actually is.

MrJoeSoap

Hill Billy wrote: »

I would have thought that a "fierce nationalist" would have frowned on our national saint's day being referred to as anything other than "St Patrick's Day".

/2¢

I would have thought a fierce nationalist would have lived in the country, but there ya go!

rowlandbrowner

dsmythy wrote: »

That's a very narrow view. Sure to some that is how they think of it.

You can be proud of who you are without claiming to be better than everyone else.

Where you are born and to who you are born too are both very random acts, I don’t understand why you'd place so much pride in that.

Also, it’s often the case that when people have such strong emotions for their race or nationality they are against “outsiders” moving to their countries and marrying their women but maybe you aren’t of that mindset.

oscarBravo

Karlusss wrote: »

But then, waving a flag in continental Europe will have you branded a Fascist in seconds, and that's not necessarily the only motivation behind it.

Really? My girlfriend is from Denmark, where pretty much every house has a flagpole in the garden, and the Dannebrog is an important part of everyday life.

In fact, it seems to me that the only thing tainting a national flag is extremist nationalism: the Irish tricolour is a tragic case in point.

Raintonite

A nation where no politician holds repsonsibility for their department's actions. A nation where brown envelope political-business enterprise is accepted as the norm. A nation where gombeenism is the apex of social acceptability. Is a nation thats flag is not only tainted but turned into a rag. Take it down and replace it with the white flag of surrender to panderism, meism and self-congradualatory inanity. Better nationalism should disappear altogether in such environment.

brianthebard

DadaKopf wrote: »

Nazism was big on nationalism, not socialism. And certainly not democracy and equality. In fact, though not effected in practice, socialism, as an internationalist movement sees nationalism as a strategy by elites to break apart the global working class to prevent a proletarian revolution.

*Cue Sand accusing socialists of similarly repugnant historical atrocities associated with the Left*

Interesting that Nazism was, actually, a bizarre paganistic cult, albeit on an enormous scale.

Not really true, I'd be more inclined to side with Sand's post. In the 1933 elections many traditionally socialist regions in Germany actually voted overwhelmingly in favour of Nazism.

DadaKopf

It's possible to distinguish between 'form' and 'content' in political movements. In form (its organisation), Nazism was not democratic. In content, it was not socialist. Nazism was a centralised, statist and autocratic ideology.

Where the confusion lies for you and Sand is the statist (and possibly centralist) aspects of Nazism. While socialism in that era called for the creation of a strong, redistributive and interventionist state, Nazism was profoundly anti-Marxist.

But you have to view things in context. The German people were so battered by the 1930s that social-democrats would rationally have sought stability and promises of prosperity at any price. But make no mistake, compared to socialists, Nazism did not offer a radical, universalist, liberatory, egalitarian, democratic option, it offered a conservative, nationalistic, particularistic, hierarchical, autocratic, racist and militaristic option. In other words, what went before, but to the extreme.

brianthebard

I'm not confused on this point. I'm aware of what was offered by socialists and nazis at the time. I may not have gone as far as to say the Nazi manifesto was extremely left wing but thats not the point.

SameDifference

AngryHippie wrote: »

Membership of the International Commission on Orders of Chivalry (Commission Internationale Permanente d'Études des Ordres de Chevalerie) as of January 1996

• 1 Lt. Col. Baron Patrick T. O'Kelly de Conejera
  Born 1921 as Patrick Kelly or O'Kelly; assumed the (allegedly Spanish) title of baron and name of O'Kelly de Conejera by deed poll in 1955; Grand Banner Bearer of St Lazarus; Niadh Nask.
• 2 the Chevalier Zygmunt von Sikorski Mazur
• 3 Captain the Chevalier R. Mingo Sweeney, of Bolgers Park
  Canadian heraldist, a member of the original commission; St Lazarus, Niadh Nas

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/orders/icoc.html

for a real chuckle go to:


http://niadhnask.weebly.com/

It reads like something Tolkien wrote on a very bad day, It is one thing to be proud your heritage, But there is some fairly dubious stuff in there,
Not to mention some of the names on the list at the start there are comical.

I'm not saying that the Niadh Nask didn't exist, as they probably did, But they probably were not the kind of organization to be proud of back then, and they've done little to redeem themselves since, as far as I can see....

I'm not sure if I'm too keen on their influence in promoting all things Irish abroad either, although TBH marketing has sold our green souls and its just a day for boosting booze sales anymore, and flogging shamrocks and green dye and all the rest of the ****e people get caught up in. Parades are grand, but its been turned into a total Darby O'Gill fest as far as I'm concerned. Only good thing about it is its during the VI nations, and spirits usually run very high for matchday as a result. Other than that, Boston and NY can fcuking have it. (IMO)!!!:rolleyes:

I know the guy who runs that website. He is my 3rd cousin Eoghan and claims to be the McCarthy Mor. My Niadh Nask have no connection with his bull****. By the way, how did you find that, I got the idea that very few people know about that site.

Sand

DadaKopf wrote:

Sand, socialism doesn't erase the individual.

Well its true that you can express that opinion in a liberal democracy like Ireland, and youd probably be able to express it in a socialist regime [ given that its positive towards the ruling regime]. However the real test would be could I criticise socialism in a socialist regime without winding up in a gulag as a kulak/counter-revolutionary/political dissident.

My individual rights are dependant on my economic freedom. Once the government has control of the means of production - what need do they have for the people? When the state controls the means of production - especially in cases of natural resources like oil - then tyranny quickly follows, because the state no longer needs to bother with peoples interests, or persuade anyone to pay it more taxes. It simply takes what it wants, and anyone who objects gets to visit the gulag holiday camps. About the only exception I can think of is Norway, and Norway had a tradition of functioning democracy prior to oil having an influence on its politics.

It's possible to distinguish between 'form' and 'content' in political movements. In form (its organisation), Nazism was not democratic. In content, it was not socialist.

Oh come now, Nazism has been given the ultimate endorsement of its credentials as a socialist political movement of influence. In the aftermath of the horror, every self described socialist has disowned it and claimed "that wasnt really socialism". Like the USSR. That really wasnt socialist either. All those tin pot USSR dependancies, they werent really socialist either.

The reason for the real hatred between German Communists and German Nazis is that liberal democracy was on its knees, it was finished. The Nazis and the Communists both knew it - they both scented blood and they viewed each other as rivals with very similar target voters, the working/middle classes who had been hit hardest by the chaos of post WW1 Germany. Thats where the hate comes from - rivalry, not a real opposition of ideas. Hitler himself is quoted as saying ex-Communists made good Nazis. If the Communists had taken power in Germany Jewish people would still have been sent to the concentration camps, but because they were rich, not because they were Jewish. Is that really an improvement?

Anyway, look at the below - most of it gets reprinted and used as slogans by Labour, the SWP and various loony lefties even up to today. Apparently the Nazis were proto-enviromentalists too, love of the Fatherland and all that. Global warming, wouldnt have happened under the Nazis I tell you

7. We demand that the State shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens.

9. All citizens shall have equal rights and duties.

10. The activities of the individual must not clash with the general interest, but must proceed within the framework of the community and be for the general good.

We demand therefore:

11. The abolition of incomes unearned by work.

The breaking of the slavery of interest

12. In view of the enormous sacrifices of life and property demanded of a nation by any war, personal enrichment from war must be regarded as a crime against the nation. We demand therefore the ruthless confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all businesses which have been formed into corporations (trusts).

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industrial enterprises.

15. We demand the extensive development of insurance for old age.

17. We demand a land reform suitable to our national requirements, the passing of a law for the expropriation of land for communal purposes without compensation; the abolition of ground rent, and the prohibition of all speculation in land. *

19. We demand that Roman Law, which serves a materialistic world order, be replaced by a German common law.

20. The State must consider a thorough reconstruction of our national system of education (with the aim of opening up to every able and hard-working German the possibility of higher education and of thus obtaining advancement). The curricula of all educational establishments must be brought into line with the requirements of practical life. The aim of the school must be to give the pupil, beginning with the first sign of intelligence, a grasp of the nation of the State (through the study of civic affairs). We demand the education of gifted children of poor parents, whatever their class or occupation, at the expense of the State.

gaf1983

Very interesting article in this week's The Economist, which examines the arguments of whether the European Union has held the peace in Europe for the past 60 years because of nationalism or in spite of it:

http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10919159

Tim Robbins

SameDifference wrote: »

I am a fierce nationalist. So fierce that many of my friends call me a fascist, although I do not advocate fascism. I lead a diaspora Nationalist Group in the UK called the Niadh Nask.
We are based around diaspora nationalism (nationalism of Irish ex-pats) and romantic nationalism (based around an idealistic view of the irish culture language and race), but I in no way condone fascism or nazism.
I want to know what people think about this kind of extreme nationalism that I hold. Many people have also called me a socialist, but if you put that to gether it says national socialist (which is the official name of the Nazi party). However this is merely an name the Hitler made up to appease the working class, there were very few socialist elements in the nazi regime.

I think it's a bit dim. If you look at Science you'd see that there is very very little difference in our DNA between us all.

Nations are man made constructs purely to get a bit of social order amongst people that share a geographical area. These geographical areas were never fixed, they have depended on ice ages and movements of craters and thickness of the earth's crust. No-one chooses their nation, it is decided for them before they are born.

Go to the DNA and there's very little difference between us all. In fact 55 chimps even closely related will have more variance in DNA between them than 6 billion humans. This is because we are a relatively new species that more than likely evolved through a very very narrow bottle neck in the Homo Ergaster, Homo Habillius, Homo Erectus line. So from a DNA perspective there is very little difference between an English person, an Irish person and French person. There is far greater difference between a man and a woman that are from the same nation or even the same family.

There are more reasons provided by Science which will illustrate how stupid nationalism is. Your brain's neo-cortext is proportion to a group size which seems natural. Our neo-cortext has evolved to favour a natural group size of 150. This is about the same size as hunter gatherer societies.
So if you are going to argue ethnocentricity and herd mentality is natural, well that should be for a group of about 150 not a nation which usually runs into millions.

Nationalism is fine for Sport or if it's just a bit of buzz, slagging matches and bit of fun. But to take it really seriously, is just really really dim. It's usually accomanied with a major ignorance of Science and deep rooted insecurity and inability to deal with the philosophical questions "who am I?" or "why am I?".

Seriously read a few good philsophical and Science books and you'll change your views.

SameDifference

^
I do happen to study sociology. It still hasn't changed my views, and although the nation state is a fairly recent development, it is important to socialise people into a culture and identity. If not, they will end up like the average white male brit, who inhabits a so-called invisible culture.

DadaKopf

If not, they will end up like the average white male brit, who inhabits a so-called invisible culture.

Surely they've been socialised in a particular way? In essence, your argument is self-defeating. You say it's important for people to be socialised into a cultural identity, but when the reality of a particular kind of cultural identity emerges that you don't like or understand, you reject it because reality doesn't fit your theories.

AngryHippie

SameDifference wrote: »

I know the guy who runs that website. He is my 3rd cousin Eoghan and claims to be the McCarthy Mor. My Niadh Nask have no connection with his bull****. By the way, how did you find that, I got the idea that very few people know about that site.

A few well placed /'s and google pulled it up

My Niadh Nask

:rolleyes:

I'm not sure exactly what your Niadh Nask is about, but you still haven't graced me with a political outlook aside from green good, butchers apron bad, if you want some credibility try gettin your cousin to cut the spouting to a minimum. TBH the whole thing looks like a hangover from some Haughey era tax scam that got dropped like a hot potato as soon as Charlez got some Maggie Thatcher chocolate on his face;)

Tim Robbins

SameDifference wrote: »

^
I do happen to study sociology. It still hasn't changed my views, and although the nation state is a fairly recent development, it is important to socialise people into a culture and identity. If not, they will end up like the average white male brit, who inhabits a so-called invisible culture.

You obviously didn't read my post. They already are very like the average white male brit. Take the DNA from 100 white male brit and 100 Irish lads (even your mates) and there is very very very little difference between them. In fact it would be very difficult to differentiate between the two.

Your mind has decided to play tricks on you, to think that actually there is a big difference bwteen the two. This is more than likely driven by fear.

Darwinian evolution would say that humans have a fear of the unknown as it is harder to predict and asses saftey so its best avoided, your brain therefore thinks to avoid and look down on those you don't know that well.

However, most of us have moved on from the Caveman, have some sort of education and are capable of some sort of rational analysis.

Sounds like you're stuck in cave there and not really capable of challenging yourself. You're the victim of all this as you feel angry and threathened when there is no reason to feel this way. Would suggest you read or get out a bit more.

AngryHippie

oooh, burn !

One world by Peter Singer is a good one, If your looking for a book pointing to the problems associated with nationalism in our ever globalising society

DadaKopf

Niadh Nask from Wikipedia:

The Niadh Nask was a self-styled nobiliary association devised by Terence Francis MacCarthy. It was alleged to be a nobiliary fraternity which developed from the old warrior-guard of the Kings of Munster. The group dissolved when it was proven that its Grand Master claimed a false pedigree and resigned in 1999. It was also determined at this time that the association had no historical precedent.

About McCarthy:

Terence Francis MacCarthy (born January 21, 1957), formerly styled Tadhg V, The MacCarthy Mór, Prince of Desmond and Lord of Kerslawny, is a genealogist, historian, and writer. Born in Belfast, Northern Ireland, he is a resident of Morocco. His last name is sometimes published as McCarthy.

On June 20, 1999, the Sunday Times in Dublin published an article questioning both the facts of MacCarthy's particular application of tanistry, and the verity of his descent from former chiefs of the MacCarthy clan.

It is now clear that Terence MacCarthy's claim to be the MacCarthy Mór was based on fabricated documentation, and rather than being aristocrats of Munster origin, his ancestors were ordinary Belfast working people.

This whole Niadh Nask thing is a hoax. Not much of a political outlook, just a big pile of poo invented by some crazed egomaniac from Belfast.