WRDL Debate #3: The Rise of European Nationalism: Winner: Thurisaz

Fawlty

Banned
Banned
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
45,244
Reaction score
6,619
iQ9zUYc.jpg



"Is the rise of nationalism in Europe a good thing?"

Affirmative: Thurisaz

Dissenting: snakedafunky

moderator: Bald1/Fawlty
judges: HomerThompson, IDL, Palis



*links to the debate posts are at the bottom of this post*




The debate begins now, with a public opening statement by Thurisaz.




Rules & Procedures: http://forums.sherdog.com/posts/126371787/

The rules adjustments for this debate are as follows:

No word limits on opening

Opening statement will be public.

Format:

Opening by Thurisaz
Response/Opening by snakedafunky
Response by Thurisaz
Response by snakedafunky
Free exchange period for 48 hours
Question & Answer
Closing by snakedafunky
Closing by Thurisaz




Audience: Please be familiar with the rules (link directly above) that pertain to the audience. Be respectful. Don't spam. Do not assist the debaters, and do not make your own arguments about the proposition in this thread. A new thread will be created later and you can do it there.





@Lead @Limbo Pete @JDragon @HomerThompson @IDL @Palis @Thurisaz @snakedafunky
 
Last edited:
are either of these two european?
 
someone plz ban seiger from this thread
 
are either of these two european?

Snakedafunky is German (living abroad though iirc).

Looking forward to this debate. I would like to remind all spectators of the rules in place. Specifically, please refrain from engaging in debate and commenting on specific points during the debate.
 
Isnt @snakedafunky a german nationalist? I think his view of the world is "how will this benefit the "volkdeutsche"?

I know he is anti-European nationalism but only because that weakens Germany standing as the center of the EU.

Did he agreed to this? Also Thurisaz is American isnt?
 
can we have a seiger vs (volunteer) on whether migrants is a good thing or not?
 
Snakedafunky is German (living abroad though iirc).

Looking forward to this debate. I would like to remind all spectators of the rules in place. Specifically, please refrain from engaging in debate and commenting on specific points during the debate.
Seconded.

Please let the two participants flesh out their points without steering the debate in a particular direction. There will be ample opportunity for participation at a later time, and in other threads.
 
Isnt @snakedafunky a german nationalist? I think his view of the world is "how will this benefit the "volkdeutsche"?

I know he is anti-European nationalism but only because that weakens Germany standing as the center of the EU.

Did he agreed to this? Also Thurisaz is American isnt?

No comment I have to play my cards close to my chest.

Also yes I agreed but I think this topic has an error.

Shouldn't it be: The rise of nationalism in Europe is a good thing?
The topic here is: Is the Rise of European Nationalism good?

They sort of mean two different things.

@Lead @Limbo Pete @JDragon @HomerThompson @IDL @Palis @Thurisaz @snakedafunky @Bald1 @Fawlty
 
No comment I have to play my cards close to my chest.

Also yes I agreed but I think this topic has an error.

Shouldn't it be: The rise of nationalism in Europe is a good thing?
The topic here is: Is the Rise of European Nationalism good?

They sort of mean two different things.

@Lead @Limbo Pete @JDragon @HomerThompson @IDL @Palis @Thurisaz @snakedafunky @Bald1 @Fawlty
It's not my place to step in here, but it would be useful to clear this up before the debate starts. If the peanut gallery muddies up the waters by playing with the terminology it could have effect the course of the debate.
 
The counterargument should be interesting. How many creative ways are there to word "No, they should just quietly go extinct"?
 
someone plz ban seiger from this thread
concern troll.

how about stop your yapping and lets actually watch the debate.
 
No comment I have to play my cards close to my chest.

Also yes I agreed but I think this topic has an error.

Shouldn't it be: The rise of nationalism in Europe is a good thing?
The topic here is: Is the Rise of European Nationalism good?

They sort of mean two different things.

@Lead @Limbo Pete @JDragon @HomerThompson @IDL @Palis @Thurisaz @snakedafunky @Bald1 @Fawlty
I don't see the difference, but that's also just the wording on the silly graphic and edited for space. Updated OP with the actual wording of the question.
 
I don't see the difference, but that's also just the wording on the silly graphic and edited for space. Updated OP with the actual wording of the question.

I think he meant

European nationalism = Euro-nationalist = Pro EU = EU centric

Nationalism in Europe= Nation-state nationalism (individual nations being distinct peoples/cultures etc) = nation-state centric = pro nation-state sovereignty

The two concepts do overlap to an extent but can also conflict.
 
I like the PC wording of the question.

The Real Question.

Is it ok to keep darkies/muslims out of your country to keep it from turning to shit.
 
I like the PC wording of the question.

The Real Question.

Is it ok to keep darkies/muslims out of your country to keep it from turning to shit.
It's about more than your narrow view there buddy. The EU, NATO, global economy, automation, fascism, socialism, white immigration too (think Poland -> Britain), all big factors.
 
It's about more than your narrow view there buddy. The EU, NATO, global economy, automation, fascism, socialism, white immigration too (think Poland -> Britain), all big factors.

Glad you listed the other 5% of the problem.[/QUOTE]
 
I argue that the rise of nationalism in Europe is a good thing.

The first reason for this is its historical inevitability. The different populations in different regions didn’t happen by accident. Every historical people has been relatively homogeneous due to killing off or driving away all competition for their territory. Empires rise and fall, but nations endure.

The second reason is the possibility of social harmony. Homogeneous populations with the same language and culture build trust and safety.

Every group restricts its membership by a set of rules. If there are no ways to distinguish oneself from others, there is no group. Human is a social creature and needs groups to be part of.

Nations do have the right to exist. Separating them from each other with well defined and maintained borders ensures just that.

A nation is an extended family and the nation does not only share territory and culture but also a genetic cluster. Just like one should care who one’s brothers or sisters marry, one should care whom the nation marries. If their future is wed to a foreign population without their approval, that’s rape on national level.

Nations are what their populations look like. Alter the population and you alter the nation, bit by bit. If one sees value in the nation’s existence, one has to consider any and all immigration an evil.

One needs also think about what are the possible alternatives to nationalism.

By far the strongest reason to advocate for nationalism is that it is not globalism nor is it multiculturalism. Multi-culturalism is an insane goal, as it is simply a transition state from one homogeneous culture to another by way of cultural conflict.

Multi-culturalism also foments unnecessary hostility between ethnicities.

One world government would be just as disastrous as various attempts at communist governments were, simply on a more massive scale and with absolutely no brakes to the cruelty and evil exhibited by the representatives of the state who aren’t hindered by even a sense that they’re dealing with their own anymore. To a globalist a man is mere abstraction and something to profit from or discard at will. The more powerful the state, the worse it tends to be, because it doesn’t need to fear repercussions.

Even in multicultural areas that don’t encounter a massive increase in criminality and poverty, the sense of community and trust is eroded – even between the native populace. That disrupts social harmony and efficiency and the fruit built for centuries becomes undone in just a couple of decades.

Allowing welfare for immigrants means that they become a parasitic class, which leads to them breeding on the expense of the native population who ends up having less kids due to having no money to support them. Immigration is not natives+foreigners, it’s less natives+foreigners.

One would have to be in absolute denial of historical and biological facts, along with current events showing the total disaster that has been the multi-cult experiment throughout the West, to oppose nationalism.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top