It’s no secret I’m on the misanthropy spectrum, but as such a person you could say that about, I wanted to ask this ever since hearing this conveyed in response to recent events which sees three spheres of influence now arguably possessing the potential to deliver on such promises. Like… what’s the deal?
In general, the rules are:
It’s not ok to discriminate based on what people are (genetics, disabilities, race, gender, etc)
But it’s fine and necessary to discriminate based on what people do. We do it all the time. ‘No Smoking’ signs being perhaps the most common.
Culture is a thing that people do. They can choose not to do it. Cultures don’t deserve respect purely because they are a culture.
So if a culture is generally promoting something bad (racial/gender discrimination, for a very common example), why not discriminate? Oh keeping slaves/having vast wealth inequality/persecuting people for their sexuality/or calling for nuclear war is a thing in your culture? Then that’s totally fine and dandy because we respect all cultures, yaaay.
But in your case, it’s the leaders of the country declaring nuclear war, which may/ (or more likely) may not be in line with the culture. So… yeah no. Not ok to discriminate in that case, when it’s not a product of the culture, but of the leadership.
Even in hindsight, I wasn’t sure whether to say “countries” or “cultures” in this context. I know people who take their heritage very, very seriously, they might hire people because “they’re Italian like me” or order food because “it’s an Italian food” and so on, it’s a kind of nepotism for the history of one’s heritage that exists on a scale. While I do not necessarily agree with the question in the OP word-for-word (so many of the people here making assumptions can calm down, I simply see it discussed), I am worried, for example, about maybe Russia using nuclear power and wiping out a city or two and going above and beyond and then me having to work for someone from there who is “all for the motherland” and is exactly as I describe in my first sentence but pertaining to Russia, someone who will go so far as to favor something just for the upbringing connection. When people have their national upbringing challenged in society, they do often speak of it in terms of culture instead of nationality, especially if it’s a heritage thing.
A country can have multiple cultures within it, and cultures can be spread across countries, but a country is a line on a map, not a set of customs and traditions etc. They can align of course, but they aren’t the same thing. People can be proud of and represent both, but you can’t choose which country you were born in.
It sounds like maybe a better word would be patriotism?
What about terrorist organizations/entities that blur what a “state” is, what would they be?
If they aren’t ‘The State’ then it sounds like they were unlucky or didn’t follow the instructions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeurjIY3__o
But I have no idea…
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=eeurjIY3__o
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.