NATIONALIST11/05/21

Depending on the context; Nationalism may be inclusive in the interest of the nation. That means, those people living in a nation including citizens and naturalised ones share the same values as their host nation. Well, shared values give rise to harmonious coexistent.

Nationalist on the other hand may refer to a native person or natural citizens, but their shared interests pertain to the inherent interests of their nation, which excludes visitors and naturalised or permanent residents. So nationalism is a unifying term for natives, citizens, and permanent residents alike, but nationalist is a separatist term which exclude naturalised citizens, visitors and permanent residents.

The same concept is applied to Socialism. Socialism is a term given to the social organisation of the means of survival or social distribution of wealth and resources of society. The opposite is true of Materialism, which is a term given to the material organisation of the means of survival or material distribution of wealth and resources of society. Socialism is associated with a group or community, Materialism associates with individualism.

Now, socialism is inclusive of all human beings irrespective of difference, but socialist refers to an individual or class of individuals who usually manipulate socialism for their own benefit. A socialist leader may rule in the interest of a group or individuals or nationalist group - not including visitors and residents.

So when right wing parties for example rule in the interest of an elite group such as the private sector, or in the interest of well-off individuals, or a nationalist group, they become socialist separatist parties.

This is proven by the fact that every time a National /Act coalition is in office, immigrants are made cheap subjects of populous politics and are excluded along with Maori and Pasefika.

However, such terms as nationalism and socialism are deliberately applied by political spinners to confuse the public in fabrication of issues and influence of public opinions. And that's what power politics is all about. Its convincing other's opinions whether by deception, fake news or majority rule.

There is no moral standard in here. When a nation criticises another nation and executes such policies as annulation of citizenships and deportation in the so-called interests of own nation, it is clearly separating immigrants from their host nation. Thus immigrants are relegated to racist and dehumanising socialisation.

You see, a nationalist government deploys socialist policies in protest against another nation. At the same time, it resorts to the very human rights' violation of foreign personnel in one's own national affairs.

Israel had been killing the children of Palestine for yonks, yet no one nation raised an eyebrow; not even a claim by lobbyists of child abuse, separatists or genocide. So why these nationalist governments and their socialist leaders continue to prosecute ordinary citizens is political and political decisions have no respects for morality or human rights. It has desecrated the level of humanity and dignity for political opportunity. Such leaders are no different from dictators who have committed atrocious crime against humanity.

Whatever policy is actioned against another nation in opposition or protest is borne by the very citizens of one's own nation. As if trade hasn't been tarnished, the conflict may extend to sabotage of intellectual production.

However, let's face it. The memory of 9/11 is kept alive by extreme feelings and emotions associated with terrorist activities. When this threat is manifested to infect another country, I'm sure it's in the best interest of that nation and its citizens to weed out the contaminated seed or involved in such exercise as assimilation camps.

Other countries not mentioned in here are also involved in the same process. But for one country to interfere in the security of another especially when itself is involved in such weeding out process is extremely naked.

However in the modern, a person may have genetic connection to a nation he/she is visiting or become a resident of. He or she is a national of one county yet related to nationalism of another. It's common for a person to share genetic factors with citizens of three or four other nations. That reduces the relative use of nationalism to a possessive singular unit as nationalist or socialist. But since more individuals are related and intertwine between nations, the individual possession is replaced by a more fitting term in the modern as Diversity. Nationalist and Socialist become obsolete as persons are intertwined and related across nations.

It suggests a movement from individualism to the community as shared values unite differences and stabilise trading and survival. Uniting to counter the covid-19 pandemic has helped reduced a mass breakout in some nations. A singular nationalistic approach would make it difficult to control an outbreak.

So Nationalistic and Socialistic terms are typical of static individual possession. That's when both ends of the timeline of material progress meet as we are stuck in a cycle of deterioration. I did mention 'stuck in a loop of deterioration' in a platonic theory a little while ago, is now making sense.

Note 12/05/21

So there, a socialist regime is not an offshoot of Socialism, it stems from subjective materialism. Dictated by populous individuals, it is an organisation led by emotions such as narcissism and self-serving.

It seems the union may serve a pivotal role in maintaining inequity. It had conditioned the government by industrial action in support of wage increase for the public service, when the government intended to prop up low income earners instead.

So if middle and top income earners warn of industrial action every time low income earners are due a wage increase, the gap between the rich and poor can never be bridged. And it’s the workers themselves who are responsible.

Should the working class become too powerful for stable organisation that offshoots expect to develop. And we have witnessed before now socialist industries supporting lifestyles of elites among specialist groups.

What now for the low and single income families and their children among the sick and unemployed?

HOME