n00binio Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> in line with peter watson i´ll call things like
> liberalism an idea. and such ideas are invented by
> mankind. as mankind itself ideas go through a
> process of evolution. such ideas are not static
> cause the needs of mankind change. let´s take
> you´re liberalism example: originally liberty
> could mean to be able to go whereever you want /
> that no person owns another one. today we could
> say liberalism means beeing able to utter your
> opinion freely or freedom of religion. these two
> expressions of the same idea are strongly linked
> but obviously there is a difference between the
> two. the need of not beeing owned by another
> person was fulfilled so other needs are in the
> foreground (hierarchy of needs). this is a flowing
> process and nobody is saying "from now on
> liberalism means ...".
> it´s the same with patriotism: you´re right of
> course when you name napoleon etc... they were
> patriotic. but as i said many countries are now
> built up on the same values. so that direct clash
> of two different systems of values is not possible
> today. the feeling of loving your nation is still
> there but the original ways of uttering it have
> vanished. so people search for alternatives and
> supporting /identifying with countrymen and women
> in competitions against other countries in times
> of win and defeat is a means of showing pride for
> your nation. you don´t hide but stand up and show
> everybody where your from and that you´re proud
> of beeing part of that certain nation. therefore
> it is a expression of patriotic feelings
Hogwash...
> so you want to say what all the historians do is
> senseless? nobody wants a 100% answer. if you have
> a deeper understanding of a process you can at
> least say what is possible and what is not
> possible. the only thing i wanted to show with
> this question is that it is difficult to say in
> what way events that are more linked to money than
> patriotic feelings influence events like a
> revolution.
> there´s a saying that puts the point out, i hope
> i translated it correctly: why strive for a noble
> aim if a lower motif is perfectly obvious.
No, I am telling you, as a historian, what history is, and what history is not.
... you really didn't read my post at all did you? This is pointless...
It's only after we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything.