Patriotism and the wired

I started this thread because of all of the different extremes that I have seen in the world. The question, or rather topic that I think is important to discuss would be to ask the question of what patriotism in the wired is. If we look through history, patriotism, or rather the pride in ones nation, the idea has been fundamental to nationalism, and even ultra-nationalism to some extent. Most of this closeness dealt with a national identity that one acquired from growing and interacting with members of ones nation state. With the advent of the Wired, at least one generation has grown into adulthood with a closeness to those met globally online rather than through physical community interaction as a formative factor of loyalty. As a result of such behavior, some would even say that major leaks and security incidents such as those with snowdern and wikileaks and the like would not have happened if he had had a better sense of patriotism. On a completely neutral note, how do we account for ultra-nationalists, or those completely against patriotism (i.e. the alt-rights/extreme right and alt-lefts/extreme left of the world). Can the wired also make people more patriotic because of an increased affinity for national propaganda? Can there be a sense of patriotism in an era where physical boundaries of communities are not as important for forming peer groups? What does it mean to be patriotic in a wired world? can patriotism exist without evolving to an extreme via social echo chambers fostered by social media groups? Where do you fall in terms of nationalism/patriotism, and did the wired shape your decision to be that way?

Im ultra left, regardless; the internet rewards and encourages individuality. Even politicial movements are not usually lead by anyone rather they are simply groups of people with key figures, and those within take the credit for being in that group. This is MY movement. This is ideal for an ultra stable society, almost all current movements are decentralized and unable to agree. Riots happen daily, yet you can't name any. The average person feels unable to do something like say, destroy a cop car or shoot the president, attacking the system is an impossibility. The internet has encouraged this unstoppable matrix of a fake world we can't break out of. Then patriotism to some degree could be a freedom from that. North Korea and to an extent America with trump in power are patriotic nationalistic and fascist I can safely say for at least one but would say for both are our best bet to break free of said matrix but in an absolutely catastrophic way. They are the biggest threats to power systems set up long ago, Trump only through his provocation of north korea. When I hear alex jones talk though I fundamentally disagree with most of what hes saying I can visualize what he is trying to get at. But this is a quick escape, to be forever engaged in patriotism and nationalism is just a halt of progress to avoid whatever disgusting abomination we are currentlt headed towards becoming. I would propose radical individuality, for someone to think "I would like to kill the president" and then picking up the gun planning and doing as such, rather than venting online. However the internet is a key piece in my opinion. Through radical self expression, and further increase in our ability to communicate across this world quickly, the human race can become an honest machine instead of a suffering hell machine. When every individual can broadcast his desires to every other human rather than us being contained in an infrastructure designed by elites we will become the inftastructure and nothing will be contained.

>>2747 to further elaborate the internet as chaotic ad it may seem will become a utopia before the real world does, and then the world should follow suite. However things such as censorship and money promoting who gets the most hits are certainly a roadblock.

Nation states matter less and less which might be a good thing except what they're being replaced with is even worse.

>>2749 Do you think that brand loyalty = patriotism in this day and age? it seems like even nations are trying to market themselves as products, rather than independent states

>>2752 I don't know... I mean look at FB. People don't have brand loyalty to that, they just use it because everyone else does. Same with other platforms. The main variable is age, young kids aren't as into FB as some other platforms that gave emerged, they just use whatever their classmates are using. People have brand loyalty to their phone or car but it's not always linked to personal identity (ok, cars might have been the worst example).

>>2753 so more like ultra-humanism i guess? people being more attached to each other via social norms than a nation based on shared national ideals? This would go along with your idea that younger generations are tied to their peers via "whatever is in", and it would also be supported by people trying to be internet famous.

>>2754 That's actually more accurate than whatever half-formed concept I was grasping at in my grumpy mood this evening.

What point is there in being proud of something you've had little to no control over for the biggest part of your life

>>2769 On that note, what's with all these millennials with STEM degrees but unable to find jobs (or girlfriends) suddenly latching onto some half-baked notion of nationalism or "taking back" their countries? These dudes would have failed at life no matter the era they were born in.

>>2775 tbqh a STEM degree means very little in the modern age, I am about to get a STEM degree and I think that most of it was just my ability to google concepts to self study and then memorizing stuff for tests and writing papers, knowledge is abundant, but practical comprehension is nowhere close to the way its explained in popular culture. I think that machinists and die/tool makers (in addition to engineers who launched rockets using pen and paper) were far more capable than today's generation , who think that they are so great because they have a Ti-84 and can use CAD >yeay the millennials are the smartest generation more like >millenials have the most access to information but don't use it I think that there is a dynamic social shift too when it comes to the whole "rights" argument. In the past, some social norms were tolerated because the end result was a greater existance of the country, problems manifested themselves as "us-vs-them" on a larger scale, an example would be the USSR/USA conflicts, even with objections with civil rights, everyone had pride in being an American. now the conflict is more internal and revolves around gender as to you question about >suddenly latching onto some half-baked notion of nationalism or "taking back" their countries? its just their convoluted feeling of trying to make sense of the world and "make a difference." in past generations, patriotism had a significant impact on going to far away lands to stop absolute evil (i.e. killin' japs and huns) bolstered by government propaganda and community leaders. with many nations becoming polarized internally instead of against each other, the views go from protecting national identity to two sides defending half of their identity but loyal to only the parts that they selectively choose. tl:dr its a "me-me-me society" that does not focus on the well being of the human herd, altruism itself is now confused with personal choice. it used to be a social obligation to help others, because it was a christian thing to do etc. but now its "an obligation* to help others" * so long as it is my view of what is right (only help blacks because i hate whites who are privileged, only support racists because blacks are dumb and account for more crime etc.). I have had some long conversations with grandparents who grew up on both sides of WW2, and they explain that even on the world stage, people would hate each other but remain respectful, unlike political leaders today who behave like a bunch of underage kids on /b/

Many of the great thinkers who made progress in science and society throughout history were influenced by cultures besides their own. Right now the extreme increase in global connectedness is causing some turbulence but within another generation or two it will have sorted itself out. What I do fear is the possibility that it will sort itself out through the development of a "ruling ideology" worldwide.

>>2954 > within another generation or two it will have sorted itself out I wish I was able to share your optimism.

>>2777 Yes, pretty much all of this is accurate. Everything lately seems like a reaction against something else now rather than an attempt to build anything. Movements are primarily defined by what they oppose. > millenials have the most access to information but don't use it People today just use the internet to prove what they already want to think. They ignore the opposing evidence and just rely on the sources that bolster their beliefs... the most powerful communication system ever devised and this is how it's used.

>>2955 I'm not saying that there won't be any problems stemming form it, but society as a whole will have adapted much more to things like the internet than the current population. Just consider how the automobile industry took awhile to catch on, but once it did it became a basic function of society and gave way to some of the most ambitious infrastructure projects in history. These things take time but if the past is any indication then growing pains from new modes of communication should be largely resolved within 50 to 100 years, one way or another.

>>2959 Except that the auto industry evolved relatively slow compared to the internet. I doubt the internet will look anything like this one in 25 years. Things are changing faster than before and most of the world may not be able to keep up.

>>2961 Not really, you're thinking too much from a pre-internet perspective. "Things" are always changing, it's just happening a bit faster right now because of how revolutionary the internet is as a concept. Everything moved at a glacial pace before industrialization, then society adapted to a faster rate of change and now it's happening again. People as a species are more resilient than you think. It's just individuals who have trouble adapting. Children always grow up in a world where everything around them is "normal", so the fast pace of change we have right now is just going to be normal for them.

>>2966 To build on that, actually, despite the fact that technology is changing so much, there hasn't been an overwhelming amount of change yet in the way politics, ideology, society in general works. The social change that will come after all the old people die is going to be the true marker of humanity's "next step" when it comes to an interconnected world.

>>2967 > there hasn't been an overwhelming amount of change yet in the way politics, ideology, society in general works. This is completely untrue. Look at how your parents and grandparents socialized, worked, consumed the news and formed opinions about it and compare all that to now.

>>2972 It's different but we're dealing with vestiges still, I'm saying that before we can know how things are actually going to be going forward in an interconnected world we first have to go through the generation that's used to the internet, and then subsequently have a generation that's ONLY ever known the internet

>>2981 Ok I see where you're going. We do have that generation now but they're too young to have done anything yet of course.

>>2982 I think all new technologies take a few generations to really become integrated with the society. With automobiles for example they didn't advance nearly as fast as the internet but more than the sheer rate of technological advancement it had to do with the way people's perceptions changed over time. Right now the majority of people either aren't using the internet or aren't using it to its full potential, but in the future more and more people will be acclimated with it and things might come closer to the whole "earth = brain" thing where every person is a neuron

>>2990 > "earth = brain" thing where every person is a neuron This concept always seemed so dystopian because I always imagined it in the science fiction sense where we all meld into one consciousness. That sounds awful but on the other hand there's no reason we have to give up our individuality or autonomy while also contributing to or being part of a global nerve net part of the time. We're kind of doing it a little every time we use the internet. Back to OPs question, nations seem less and less important the further into the future I gaze in the metaphorical tea leaves.

it will soon be a thing of the past. you know how cities are great because it makes so many minds within such a short distance that even a 0.001 percent of the population can organize and share thoughts? thats what the final goal of digitalization is, erasing distance completely and uniting all minds in the city of cyberspace.