How low will some people go?
Recently some ‘cowardly low lifes” have emailed clanging the patriotism bell both loudly and discordantly. The email was also sent to some residents of a retirement village it looked like a communiqué by Kevin Rudd which it advocated in essence that Muslims specifically and others should adopt our ways or go back from whence they came while
This has frightened a number old older people in this village. Both people who were born here and/or migrated here and now retired were frightened of attacks from “gangs /neighbours”. Also it has encouraged the less thoughtful in the wider community to abuse ‘foreign’ neighbours.

Mum told me, Doubting its authenticity (political and diplomatic suicide) I contacted Rudd’s web site and his office THE EMAIL IS BOGUS. Apparently the village management had taken calls from some from residents about safety in the last day or so and wondered why. They then send a communication clarifying that people were safe and that the email was a hoax. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but this behaviour is unacceptable

I often quot a 19th century British politician/philosopher etc Dr Samuel Johnson who coined “patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel” …by that he meant that if the only justification given for a position is patriotism beware its probably emotional manipulation.

Patriotism is a result of your actions not a reason or excuse for them.
i.e. Serving in real war of survival (WW2) as opposed to one to enforce National Pride (Falklands), of control/influence (Iraq, Vietnam etc.) or to gain more territory (Israel/Palestine, either side’s perspective).
To deny (aggressively) the faults of ones country/politics is to deny reality which is foolish…not patriotism. Therefore to attempt to convert either the leaving or receiving culture is simply jingoism.

NB. There is a world of differences between patriotism which is positive and jingoism (this email) which isn’t

Dear examinator,

I'm so sorry to hear about that email that frightened
so many elderly people. Bigotry is based on fear,
and it's a shame that fanatics feel the compulsion
to spread their hatred.

My father was extremely suspicious of self-proclaimed
'patriots.' I guess because in his country the ones
with the 'loudest voices' ended up selling
the country out. They became the staunchest members of
the communist party.

The true partisans worked silently.

He always said - it was your actions not your words that
mattered. Not how you spoke, but what was in your heart.

I think most Australians are proud of their country and
its achievements. The 'Australian Way of Life' is highly
valued and assumed to be among the best in the world.
And, what I find reassuring is that most of us don't
embrace anything blindly. We don't slide easily into
unquestioning obedience, 'My country right or wrong.'
We do tend to question things - and that's healthy.

Ah Examinator… I read the first part of your post and you almost convinced me you were back on the meds until you wrote

“Serving in real war of survival (WW2) as opposed to one to enforce National Pride (Falklands),”

The Falklands war was fought to repel the illegal occupation by the forces of an Argentinean Dictator.

The British did not ask the Argentineans to invade.

The British task force fought to overcome the aggressor and succeeded in that task.

National pride was not the issue, the right of Falkland islanders to determine the their own future is what was at stake, just the same as the East Timorese (were the East Timorese fighting "National Pride" too or were they entitled to determine their future and not the future which Indonesia carved out for them?

I suppose you would follow Whitlam’s Indonesian appeasement strategy which has since been denounced as a national disgrace by his own civil servants now free to comment.

I would have denounced Whitlam and

as I would ahve denounced Chamberlain in the run up to WWII, a war which was a war, no different to the Falklands.

but which you seem to think was somehow “different” because it suits your childish prattle.

I recall it was never made a party of the general election which happened a year or so later, until Dennis Healey, senior labour party politician criticized Thatcher over it…

Then it was gloves off and all able bodied to the defense

The result…

The UK Labour party routed and in disarray and Margaret Thatcher in for another couple of terms…the overwhelming majority of the British electorate full square behind her and her defense of the principles of democratic representation against the criminal actions of a military dictator.

You just don’t have a clue what it was about… you sad little man

Get over yourself Examinator.. with a name like that I am surprised you have time to write,

I would think you spent most of your time with hand inside a rubber glove, inside the backside of a cow.

Examinator,
Why would you deem someone a 'cowardly low life' for expressing a point of view and advocating that all in Australia adopt our way of life. Is there more to this that you are not saying or is it another troll?

I and the majority of Australians, expect everyone to obey and respect our laws and community/social standards. If anyone does not agree with that, then they do not deserve to live here and receive all the benefits that we enjoy.

If I had my way, I would introduce a discrimatory immigration policy which would bar those cultures who have clearly shown they have no respect for us, our laws and our culture. We should not tolerate those that cause friction and community problems.

Ther are millions pf potential migrants and if we continue with high immigration, which I also appose, we do not have to take all and sundry, but select those that will give us a cohesive society.

It is our country and we have an obligation to our decendants and a right to determine who comes here and who doesn't.

Banjo,
The Hoax didn’t bother me but the fact it distressed vulnerable people unnecessarily by hiding behind (attacking) their patriotism either by intent or by lack of thinking it through was my primary concern.
The cowardly part was not the opinion but the fact that it was set up to misrepresent it as an official release of a speech from the PM i.e. heading, picture, coat of arms the lot. This is not only illegal but the perpetrators didn’t have the courage of their convictions to simply put it out under their own names.
Their intentions were clear to falsely appropriate the authority and respect of the PM. This illustrated Samuel Johnson’s point how patriotism can be abused to cloud reason.
My overall objective was to discuss the boundaries of patriotism its uses and its abuses and jingoism.

BTW expressing a different opinion to others isn’t trolling.

Dear examinator,

I found several examples on the web, of how some people
interpret 'patriotism,' that may be of interest to other
posters:

1)This one was posted by someone called "Ginger'
9/6/05 -

" Hi Irs Yusuf ... Welcome to our country and we trust that
you make it yours and defend the way of life that you came
here for, that is if you are not Australian born. If you are
Australian born, then I doubt that you ever intend to become
'one of us.'

Read on please!

IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT.
I am tired of this nation worrying about
whether we are offending some individual or
their culture...there are a few things that
those who have recently come to our country,
and apparently some born here, need to understand.

This idea of Australia being a multicultural community
has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our
national identity. As Australians, we have our own
culture, our own society, our own language and our
own lifestyle... We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish,
Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any
other language. Therefore, if you wish to become a part
of our society, Learn the language!

"In God We Trust" is our National Motto. This is not some
Christian, right wing, political slogan. We adopted this
motto because Chrisitan men and women, on Christian
principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly
documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on
the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest
you consider another part of the world as your new home,
Because God is part of our culture...

If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like
A Fair Go, then you should seriously consider a move...

This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we
will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But
once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about
Our flag, Our Pledge, Our National Motto, or Our Way of Life,
I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great
Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.'

cont'd

And just to balance things out:

Peter Faris writes:

2) "My family has been in Australia since before the 1880s.
My son is of the fourth generation to live/own property
in Far East Gippsland. My great-grandfather opened the first
store (Snowy River Store) in Orbost (FEG) sometime (I think)
in the 1870s. My grandfather (A Scot) was the first doctor
in Orbost in 1884 and served the community, rich and poor,
black and white, until his death in 1928. I still have family
in Orbost and I live about half of the year nearby.

My ethnic background is 50% Scot and 50% English
(Protestant N-Ireland). I am an Anglo-Celt.
I am proud of my ancestry.
I am proud of my country.
I am not ashamed to say so.

My people were immigrants and I am proud of that.

I welcome all other immigrants and descendants of immigrants
to what is our country - it belongs to us all."

Foxy
The hoax was a cut and paste of the opinion under your “please read on” with a few pointed additives including a few sentences on perverted patriotism with the Rudd header and signature.

Like I’ve said the content isn’t really the issue there are several flaws applying it to Aus. Firstly our national motto isn’t “In God We Trust” that’s the motto of The USA (Somebody has plagiarized it), . There are several other ill considered issues, flaws in logic in the base piece but the Most offensive bits were the add ons on questioning people’s patriotism and singling out Muslims and non WAS(P/C) in particular. The primary issues to me were
• The cowardly nature of the hoax
• Its effects of their appropriating The PM ‘s credibility and authority on these vulnerable people.
• That they were attempting to hide their racist (superiority) jingoism behind a smoke screen of patriotism.

My secondary issue was to provoke a discussion about the moral and practical uses and abuses of patriotism as opposed to the extremes like jingoism and chauvinism.

Dear examinator,

I got my examples of 'patriotism,' from
the following website:

http://www.farisqc.observationdeck.org/?p=209

However, Thanks for your explanation.

Keep smiling.

Foxy

I found your post rather at odds with how you usually present - thanks for providing the link from where you took that observation.

Australian culture is not static - we are a far different nation to that of 40,000 years or 200 years ago and changing all the time. These changes are due in part to the arrival of different people. Some of it has been good - greater tolerance for difference, some very bad indeed - annihilation and loss of an ancient culture from which we could learn a great deal about land management (vis-a-vis bushfires and indigenous flora/fauna for cultivation).

We have set laws that apply to all Australians (new and original) however qualities like respect, communication, understanding, empathy, consideration, appreciation only occur where we are open to the new, the different - they require a two way street. Sure immigrants can do well to leave the negative aspects of their old homelands behind (which is usually the reason for coming here) but we stand to lose any positive benefits if we expect them become clones of some largely imaginary Australian ideal.

I bet you still make borscht. Wonderful stuff.

And, for me, Pho Soup is like comfort food these days. And I find the sarong and brolly the best way to dress in this long hot summer.

So when I see jingoism like:

"IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT"

I cringe. I also admit to cringing when I read that a hijab covered face is permissible as a photo on a South Australian driver's licence - there has to be balance.

I prefer that "immigrants and Australians learn about and accept each other" - Okay it does not flow off the tongue, but even though I am sixth gen. Aussie I will never become like a Cronulla Yobbo and that is what I think of when I see blogs like Faris QC.

Banjo: << Why would you deem someone a 'cowardly low life' for expressing a point of view and advocating that all in Australia adopt our way of life >>

Probably because they did so fraudulently, in passing off their hate-spam as an official communication from the PM. "Cowardly low life" seems perfectly apposite to me.

Foxy - you do know what a notorious wingnut Peter Faris QC is, don't you?

Dear Fractelle,

I do make borsch, (and many other european
delights). Though in all honesty, not as often - because
they're too rich for every day fare.
Especially in summer - where we tend to
stick to sea-food and salads. (Mostly salads)
And the occasional
glass of red (or white).

Your sarongs sound divine. I usually stick to slacks,
or light wispy skirts in summer.
But I've bought some gorgeous material and will be
making a few caftans - (at least that's the plan).

Dear CJ,

I had no idea who Peter Faris was.
I simply stumbled onto his site - thinking
it was legit. Under ther heading of 'Australian Patriotism,'
And I thought, "Aha, this is what examinator is talking
about, good example ... et cetera."

Now, much to my embarrassment I'm finding out.

Is my face red!

Foxy

One of the joys of contributing to a site like this is that we all learn.. Um,, well most of us learn something new.

Serendiptiously, you have provided a wonderful lesson in what jingoism is all about and how easy it is to mistake for truly caring about your nation.

PS

Grated baby beetroot is a great summer salad - a bit of balsamic vinegar, yum. I think of it as my summer borsch.

Cheers

Dear Fractelle,

Thanks. I feel better now. And I do love baby beets
(I add sour-cream to mine)as a summer salad,
(along with buttered corn-on-the-cob,
especially with chicken, fried onions and fried mushrooms,
a pate of toasted capsicum + other ingredients ,
Yerring Station Wine-Bar, has a fab recipe that I plan
to steal one day - so far they're not parting with it).
But I'll keep on trying.

After all this Faris business, I sat down and had another
re-think about patriotism. I know that there are many
people out there that feel strongly about immigrants who
they see as being critical of our way of life. And they
want people to conform to what they feel is 'Australians.'
These people see their stance as being 'patriotic.' I don't know if these people are a minority. Somehow, I doubt that they are.

I personally feel that the benefits
of freeedom, democracy, and the rule of law belong to all
Australians, regardless of how they look, what they believe,
or any other arbitrary criteria. But, perhaps I am the one who's
a minority?

Look at the way Col jumps in when there is even a vague
suggestion of criticism of anything British. (Or of Maggie
Thatcher) - he takes it extremely personally - even to the
point of bringing 'cows' into the picture (what on earth was
that all about?) as a form of insult.

Why was he talking about cows to examinator(?). Unless of course he wanted to refer to his own 'expertise' in that area. "Mad Cow Disease" originated in the UK in 1986 and by 1993 there were more than 1000 cases per week. Perhaps he's had a bad experience?
That would explain it!

So I guess to Col 'Patriotism' means to stand by your country, and
Maggie. Fair enough.
(But 'cows' I still don't get it!).

Mmmmm sour cream, I'll try that. A touch of nutmeg perhaps?

Here's my take on the topic:

Patriotism is abused when used to discriminate. For example, describing someone as "unAustralian" just for having a different POV. Like not being at all sodding interested in the game of cricket. Although I do follow AFL.

Jingoism: well I think the Faric blog has cleared up how jingoism is used to abuse - like school yard bullies.

Col Rouge?, I think what you have described there is a prime example of Blind Patriotism. Can't see the herd for the cows... so to speak.

As for me, I am a patriot of planet Earth. Fantastic place; excellent oceans, continents and islands. Home to all my favourite life-forms.

Dear Fractelle,

"Can't see the herd for the cows, so to speak..."

Clever!

But in his case he seems to be more at home
with the lower part of the cow's anatomy...

Which figures!

I agree with you about the planet earth.

As I wrote in another thread,

We can only hope and trust that our ultimate choice
will be to enhance the life on this bright and lovely
planet on which all of us share our adventure.

Although my father-in-law, (going back a few years),
was very irate because at one of my dinner-parties
I had invited a mix of people (different cultural
groups). He was upset they weren't all people from
the Baltic States. And guess what, he called me an
"Internationalist." I Thanked Him for the Compliment.
Had to laugh, 'cause he meant it as an insult.

Foxy

Isn't there a saying that it is better to judge a person by their enemies rather than by the friends they keep?

Okay, I'm not suggesting that your father-in-law is your enemy, per se, but he clearly has his prejudices.

I think if Runner, Boaz/carp or Col Rouge treated me with courtesy and respect, I would spend a great deal of time in deep introspection along the lines of 'what I am doing wrong?' or keep a watch out for flying pigs.

"Internationalist" is indeed a compliment.

BYW, having been 'out of the loop' while I waited for my landline to be restored after fire damage, I missed Col's cow references and given the odious nature of many of his posts I'm glad. Generally I try to skip the posts of those who think insult is debate - doesn't always work though. Abuse tends to leap out like an ambush whereas courtesy gets missed? Human nature so very fickle.

To quote Bill & Ted:

"Be excellent to each other, and you know, party on dude"

Dear Fractelle,

Thanks for your insightful words.
My father-in-law died some time back, and we
did make our peace beforehand. He was a very
dictatorial patriarch - who saw everything in
terms of black and white (no shades of grey).

He began to rely more and more on me, as his
health began to fail. I was grateful for the
time we got to spend together.

Take Care.

fractelle.."Col Rouge?, I think what you have described there is a prime example of Blind Patriotism. Can't see the herd for the cows... so to speak. "

maybe you would care to elaborate on that point fractelle,

because I am quite happy to elaborate on any aspect of my post needed for you to understand what I mean...

be it wood for trees,
herd for cows or simply
lefties for slime ... I can see it ...

maybe I just need to "word down" sufficiently for you to understand

Fractelle, Foxy,
Tis is way off topic but no one's looking.
I’m sorry to disappoint you Foxy but Col’s unique rationale at times is so titter and bwisted as to defy rational interpretation. I would have thought he was referring to the way makes a fuss (slags off) all (those who display some sense of humanity or see the world in shades of white to grey respond) gather like a herd of cows. This giving him a sense of control/superiority. A bit like the boy who cried wolf finding the way good people respond entertaining. Remember his comments in the post about “decency rules” and how continued to bait, (His quote “I am enjoying this topic” ask your self why. Fractelle you expressed the rational response to criticism.

He reminds me of my recently late father in law, a man of few words all of which he considered law, unassailable. He too derided people who achieved or had done more than he. In reality his words were loaded with responsive emotional constipation, pain, regret for opportunities to do something more, a marriage that all but failed and three daughters that were ‘distant’ also living in far flung states. Even in his last year after his ‘slave’ wife died (left him) his nun daughter had to leave for her own health (stress). On his death bed and subsequent funeral only his daughters came. He was 85. To my shame I gave up on him years ago.
While not absolutely applicable it does suggest a flavour.

But as I have said before OLO is not the place to resolve personal issues. This is a chat site personal issues need to be in that context.

Both of you not surprisingly, grasp the salient issue (Col had little bearing on it). I have observed that there are many posters on both sides whose differing definitions of patriotism and jingoism confuse an issue. I hoped it would clarify what each side meant as a basis for discussion as I too wonder what motivates excesses. (am I allowed to say that without appearing pompous?)

Dear examinator,

Thanks for your insightful observations, and
for being so open and honest. As well as patient
with us for going off topic. My apologies.

Fractelle did put it rather well. She always does.
However, I am beginning to realize that you can't
possibly have a discussion with someone who considers
insults to be a legitimate part of a debate.

I would like to see Col go for at least one week,
in any discussion on this Forum without insults.

The way he's headed though, - if he keeps it up,
I suspect that it won't be long before he gets banned.

I've found a vid on YouTube of Col discussing patriotic matters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOhXpmozpbE

I think that Britain needs him more than we do.

Go home, Col. You don't belong here.

Foxy,
I dont mind going off topic I'm not *that* rigid. I make that point regularly to signal to other posters interested in the topic that this is a diversion and perhaps skip it if they want to follow the original thread. Still trying to be helpful....Eeeech :-)

CJ,
You're a little harsh, I don't see his jingoistic mother England stance all that much although it does make discussions with him difficult. Clearly it isn't valid discussion in my mind either but that is his right
The only thing everyone (including me) seems to object to his is unwillingness to discuss without insult and abuse. We *do* have the *right* to be treated with respect and to demand hec leans up his game.

Examinator "Tis is way off topic but no one's looking."

(Yes they are)

“But as I have said before OLO is not the place to resolve personal issues.”

And

“He reminds me of my recently late father in law”

Your right Examinator, you are off topic, making excursions to post ad hominines, nothing surprising in that, the typical hypocrisy of someone who wants to change the rules and decide what others are allowed to post but who then ignores the rules when it suits you.

Foxy “I would like to see Col go for at least one week,
in any discussion on this Forum without insults.”

You must suggest similar to CJMoron or would you prefer me to observe the crass hypocrisy of your suggestion.

This is simple, when the swill stop hurling, I will stop throwing it back at them (with better aim).

CJMoron “Go home, Col. You don't belong here.”

I do…. Citizen since 1989, taxpayer and member of the compulsory voting roll since 1983 (when I arrived)

The difference between you and me… I applied and was chosen to come here after leaping the bar of acceptance criteria.

You are here the consequence of indiscriminate fornication.

As to Alf Garnett… the hair under the nose and the lack of hair on the head are two points of difference .. the pipe… no … the vocabulary certainly not… the height… nothing like… of course, he might be mistaken for your mother… or sister… and as always there are some points in common

First: Warren Mitchell is Jewish and I have some Jewish great grandmothers in my family lineage

Second Warren Mitchell also applied and was accepted for migration to Australia.

I suppose you will demand he too should “go home”

You nasty little racist.

How amusing to be called a nasty racist by Col the Troll, who seems very touchy for a Monday morning.

My suggestion that he doesn't belong in Australia stems from his tedious habit of babbling on about his former home, its repulsive politicians, and how they represent the peak of human civilisation. I don't think I've read anything at all from him over the years that might indicate any kind of affinity with Australia - outside of Melbourne, that is.

"Race" doesn't come into it.

Examinator

Thanks for your patience. If you ever think you are being pompous I suggest a read of any of Col's posts will set you straight.

I think that Col has provided the truth of jingoism as abuse. Graham certainly gives him a great more latitude than he does others. Maybe Graham pities him for his lack of humour - like CJ, I have teased him in the past and have received nothing but vile insults since. I am willing to wager that in real life he is a quiet little mouse, nothing like the "alpha-male" he claims to be. I mean since when did anyone have to claim they were superior? Its like claiming to be cool - if you do then you're not.

As for patriotism, I hope that this will become an outmoded concept, it is really just trumped up tribalism.

Like religion it is useful to control large numbers of people and gain their support to attack other large numbers of people.

PS

CJ I don't think a comparison to Alf Garnett was harsh at all, I bet Col has a framed portrait of M Thatcher on his wall at home.

fractelle "he claims to be."

I claim to be nothing other than myself, with occassional references to the facts of my life...

whatever way you try to hurl a backhanded insult at me is up to you but

you merely confirm the hypoctrisy of your posturing regarding "latitudes"... lets face it.. nothing I have ever said compares to the bottom feeding habits of CJMoron nor the highhanded arrogance of yourself or the sly side swipes from the likes of the Examinator.

the truth is you like to hand it out but just cannot bear it when someone slaps it back at you...

I remember you telling me how you were going to do this that and the other every time I posted something you disapprived of...

so I suggest fractelle, you bring it all on and see how far it gets you and then you will find out what I will do with it...........

Now, go get your galloshes, sou'wester and oilskins... the forecast "changable" with something wet and smelly possibly coming your way..

I cringe when flaky chicks bang on about recipes and exchange pleasantries. Have I stumbled into the Woman's Weekly forum?

Thanks Fractelle. For those who find Col the Troll more tiresome than amusing, I've stumbled across another video clip of him - this one appears to have been made shortly after his arrival in Australia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ymZaMJ_Pno&feature=related

Back to the subject of this thread - Patriotism.
I've got a few more thoughts...

People are less likely in this day and age to remain
in the hometowns or countries of their forefathers
throughout their lives. This raises some questions about
patriotism and loyalty. Do you love the land of your
ancestors, the land of their birth, or the country
in which you're presently living? To whom do you owe
your loyalty?

Examinator quoted, Samuel Johnson, who wrote,
"Patriotism, is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
Johnson was pointing out that patriotism, like other
emotional attitudes, sometimes becomes exaggerated or
distorted. People with an excessive attachment to a certain
group, especially people with an unreasoning enthusiasm for
military superiority and glory for one's country are
guilty of chauvinism or jingoism.

Exaggerated or distorted forms of patriotism have existed
at different times in almost all nations. The Germans
under Adolf Hitler and the Italians under Benito
Mussolini became convinced their nations had a patriotic
mission to extend their territorial boundaries.
In the late 1800's, the French and English believed they
had a moral responsibility to establish colonies in Asia
and Africa.

And, as we know demands for open and public demonstration
of loyalty are often heard in times of national crisis.
During World War I, for example, King George V of
Great Britain changed the name of the royal family
from 'Saxe-Coburg' to 'Windsor.'

The name 'Saxe-Coburg,' was German, and Britain was at war
with Germany. Then during World War II, thousands of
patriotic Japanese-Americans were placed in detention camps
because of unreasonable fears that they might be loyal to
Japan rather than the United States.

So yes, patriotism is the love and loyal support of one's
country. Including a feeling of oneness with the nation.
But it does have its abuses as well. Questions need to be
raised about how far should patriotism and loyalty go.

cont'd

Dear Houellebecq,

I don't pretend to have all the answers.
If I did I'd be a man. :)

Houellebecq,
And? Are you a literary or cuisine critic or something? :-)

Fractelle
I have concerns that most &#475;ber patriots generally fall into two categories those messianic complexes and those who need the emotional security of being part of the mass to validate their existence. The latter relying more on Dogma of others rather than logical analysis/argument to “prove” their stance. Like I said his basic attitude is the same as my late FIL. I would surmise at home he was more of petty opinionated dictator (Alf Garnett + or – is probably near the mark). They tend to see ‘soft terms like environment, sensitivity, thought etc” as signs of weakness. Like wise they are prone to do or die loyalty to tough (parental like) leaders. Answers are always simplistic and black or white.
This type of individual is usually resentful/fearful of those they can’t dominate. Their partners are usually mice occasionally one may rebel/challenge then his (usually male) vitriol etc is extreme and desperate in an attempt to regain their self belief in their correctness. To admit their partner could be right will under mine their confidence as theirs is a brittle edifice.
In their hands patriotism takes on a weapon with which to batter intelligent arguments to death with.
Cure? Ignore them.

Examinator

In a rational world your recommendation to ignore the "Alf Garnett's" is good sense.

And most of the time I can and do. However, it doesn't hurt (from time to time) to let the AG's know that their illusions are not shared by others though they are deafened by their own rhetoric.

Where they see compassion as weakness, silence is misconstrued as agreement.

Freedom of speech is not achieved by silence - oxymoronic? Yes.

examinator,

'have concerns that most patriots generally fall into two categories those messianic complexes and those who need the emotional security of being part of the mass to validate their existence. The latter relying more on Dogma of others rather than logical analysis/argument to “prove” their stance. Like I said his basic attitude is the same as my late FIL. I would surmise at home he was more of petty opinionated dictator (Alf Garnett + or – is probably near the mark). They tend to see ‘soft terms like environment, sensitivity, thought etc” as signs of weakness. Like wise they are prone to do or die loyalty to tough (parental like) leaders. Answers are always simplistic and black or white.
This type of individual is usually resentful/fearful of those they can’t dominate. Their partners are usually mice occasionally one may rebel/challenge then his (usually male) vitriol etc is extreme and desperate in an attempt to regain their self belief in their correctness. To admit their partner could be right will under mine their confidence as theirs is a brittle edifice.
In their hands patriotism takes on a weapon with which to batter intelligent arguments to death with.
Cure? Ignore them.'

That's priceless. Blah blah blah.
Gotta say it, what a lot of pompous rubbish. You really are the champion of pigeon holing groups of 'those people'. It must be so nice to have such a sense of superiority, and to faux-analyise these fictional 'types of people', and tell us all about all the shortcomings they have and how you are obviously so much better than them. Good work!

“I bet Col has a framed portrait of M Thatcher on his wall at home.”

I don’t

but when did the truth or accuracy ever figure in one of your posts, which are invariably populated by the judgmental asides of the small minded…

I have mostly reprints of Canaletto Venetian landscapes, some early 19th century politics prints, 16th century map of Southern England and that’s the lounge… the themes of the dining and family rooms are entirely different but I have made my point, which is

you are, as usual, speaking through your opinionated backside.

Foxy, regarding your dissertation on “Patriotism”. Patriotism, to some degree, is inherent in all people with a healthy perspective of their life and how it relates to their origins.

Regardless that we might call it “patriotism” or “pride”, those without it are invariably cynical and lacking in spirit, purpose, balance, perspective, understanding or direction.

Some posters here seem to find fault and enjoy parodying what they perceive as my “patriotism” to that of certain television characters.

Such is their lack of understanding
Such is their cynicism
Such is their envy, for they clearly lack sufficient pride in themselves, they have to denigrate and ridicule it in others.

And unlike some of the small minded, cynical and envious critters, my sense of right and balance propels me to support their freedom to post as they see fit,

rather than suggest the only reason I post is because “Graham certainly gives him a great more latitude than he does others.”

Such small minds, cluttering the threads,

a well, freedom of speech, like democracy, is not perfect but it is infinitely superior to any of the alternatives

Anyone if free to ignore my posts but no one, except GY & Co, have the authority to censor or supress them

Col,

I simply don't believe you.

If you don't have a picture of Margaret... just why not. She was such a wonderful woman. And you obviously love her so. Ah, all those ideas and musings and wonderful policies, the attitudes about society and tough love, oh Col you just have to get a picture. That is if you're not just being coy as I suspect. I can only think if one was to look at a picture of Margaret every morning, well, that has to be a wonderful start to any day. How endlessly and effortlessly inspiring.

BTW: What kind of pictures do you think Margaret has on her walls. Huh? Answer that one? Come on!

Col,

You say that, "...Patriotism to some degree is inherent
in all people with a healthy perspective of their
life and how it relates to their origins..."

That still doesn't quite answer my question though.
Where is a person's loyalty supposed to lie - to the
country of their ancestry, or the country in which
they are currently living?

And why?

I'm curious to hear your take on this subject.

Houellebecq,
You have waded into a comment taking it personally(?) and out of context.
As I'm sure you know anything taken out of context can be seen to be many things its not.

What you read was a mixture of psych 101 and observation by me based on years observations in the field (my opinion only. they were specific to the context we were discussing. I'm sure those involved saw it in the correct context. People are at liberty to take or ignore my views. I force them on no-one.

It seems to me that you are more than a little inconsistent. First this subject has been going for days and is close to its end...you come in and decide to lecture the ladies on what… a harmless diversion where nobody was being harmed. Talk about pompous and insulting.

Some of your posts have valid points and others don’t but I don’t leap in and attack you *personally* so why do you attack me? You are at liberty and I would welcome an informed/reasoned rebuttal of my thumb nail *generalization*.
BTW I have altered some views because of points raised on this site…and you?

The problem is I can’t ‘un-experience’ what I have (in many cases I wish I could) neither can I unlearn what I have learned in order to offer “acceptable” opinions nor should I. If I have done something then why hide it if it is apposite to the topic… as a basis/context for the opinion.
If someone else hasn’t comparable experiences/knowledge/ education that’s not my fault.

Unlike some patriots I take my pride from the good that *I * do (and the shame for what I’ve done knowingly wrong) not in of an accident of birth, the actions of others or give allegiance to some petty dictator because their ‘our petty dictator’. To me if events (taken in context are) wrong then they are (in my opinion) but that doesn’t mean be judged as b/w, life isn’t like that.

Oh examinator,

"You have waded into a comment taking it personally(?) and out of context."

I took nothing personally from the post.

"What you read was a mixture of psych 101 and observation..."

Your 'analysis' was a hell of a stretch and a massive generalisation about patriotic people, and naive pigeon holing. The ugliness of character you attempted to depict in this self defined 'other' reflected much more on your own character and you don't even recognise it.

"It seems to me that you are more than a little inconsistent."
Most people are. Which illustrates my point about your naive pigeon holing.

"...you come in and decide to lecture the ladies"
Lecture? I think you're stretching it again. It was a light hearted jibe. Foxy's reaction proves that.

"The problem is I can’t ‘un-experience’ what I have (in many cases I wish I could) neither can I unlearn what I have learned in order to offer “acceptable” opinions nor should I. If I have done something then why hide it if it is apposite to the topic… as a basis/context for the opinion.
If someone else hasn’t comparable experiences/knowledge/ education that’s not my fault."

Hahaha. That smells, nay, reeks of... 'It's such a burden being so smart and having to talk down to your level. Don't hate me because I'm so fabulous, it's really hard being so educated and intelligent you know.' Which kind of proves my original point doesn't it. Case closed.

BTW: I'm the least patriotic person you would find. I just happen to take offence at your constant high and mighty attitude.

Houellebecq,

I am disappointed that you view me in such a light.
Foxy is a unique personality I think that she sees the good in every one.
OK I am clearly less so. In hind site my initial post to you was unnecessarily suspicious (Nothing more).

The part you read as self congratulatory et al was intended to convey that I am moulded by both the good and bad that I have learned/experienced. I can be no more/less than I am. I would draw your attention to ’my regrets’ and that I said ‘comparable’ *not* better. How else can I indicate that I don’t see myself as any more than anyone else? Which begs the question how can I reasonably argue a contrary position with out giving some basis for that opinion? If cite reading/education or experience then I’m pompous or talking down.

The only ‘high horse’ (as such) I can admit to on OLO is being annoyed with the level of abuse and personal attack of some…it is so unnecessary/ inappropriate (you choose the word) and against the rules. The odd jibe is fine but when it becomes, extreme, personal, vindictive or offensive…I’m sorry but that I don’t accept. That is no more pompous than saying I don’t accept yelling and swearing at the theatre and attempting to do something about it (Simply lack of respect for others).

To me the difference between arrogance/pomposity etc is the willingness to accept other opinions and debate an issue without insult. Not simply say its trash then walk away.
I make no pretence to any concept of superiority over anyone. I guess its all in the eye of the beholder

WHAT IS PATRIOT?

1. From the first American soldiers who killed in Iraq was a latino with green cart.
Was this man an American patriot or not?
2. About 13% of American population are blacks but 33% from the American soldiers in Iraq was black. Are American blacks more patriots from whites?
3. If not can we tell that patriotism does not depends only from who fought and dieed for his country?
4. In the second war, Bill Brand, (later president of SPD, SocialDemokratic party from West Germany, Canselor(prime minister) from West Germany and President from Socialist Intrnational, an International Political organization which consist from all the socialist, socialdemocratic and labor parties worldwide) this man left the NAZI Germany and from overseas fought against Hitler and German militery forces. The German militery forces controled from NAZI but the german soldiers was not NAZI and they did not care or fought and died for the NAZI but for their country.
Bill Brand said that he loved his country and fought against Hitler and German Militery forces of cause his huge love for his country and the whole wolrd. He knew how bad for the german people and for the whole world was Adolfo Hitler.
My question is ==was Bill Brand a patriot or a bertaiyer from his country?
5. German soldiers who fought and many of them died for their country was good patriots or bad? Why they did not fight against Hitler but against the rest of the world and finaly drived the foreign forces into their country?
6 When was the race riots in Cronula Bech, Sydney, the prime minister Howard said a person who hold an Australian flag is a patriot and ask the people to calm, the premier from NSW Ienna said that it is not patriot a person who hold an Australia flag and create problems to his country and called them to calm or they will go to prison.
Who is Patriot?
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaid

Dear examinator,

I truly admire your patience, good manners, and
courtesy, in bothering to explain so nicely
your position while it should be crystal clear
to any person with even a basic capability of reason.

I congratulate you in sticking to your principles
and not stooping to any put-downs or insults but calmly
explaining your meaning to people that almost certainly
would not return the favour to you.

You have gone up even higher in my esteem. Well done!

Dear Antonios,

You might find the following website of interest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriotism

It's a comprehensive article on the meaning of
Patriotism. And gives a few examples of patriots.

It may help answer some of your questions.

Ah, I finally get it Foxy. So you're allowed to insult people as long as you do it in a round about way and use 'polite' language. I'm learning about OLO all the time, using my slightly less than basic capability of reason that is.

examinator I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree. I held a mirror up to you and you refused to look into it. How you can look at your caricature of the average patriot and not see it as a extremely patronising, derogatory and negative/unfair generalisation I'll never know.

I've met some quite nice partiotic people myself, who aren't 'petty opinionated dictator's, who don't 'dominate' their partners, do not have 'messianic complexes' and don't need to be part of the mass to validate their very existance.

Dear Houellebecq,

No. You don't get it.

I don't think you ever will especially as you
seem to feel that asking for discussions without
stooping down to insults is being 'patronising.'

It's allright for you to make swipes at people
but when they come back with appropriate retorts -
that you find 'insulting.' A bit one-sided.

Also, when things are explained politely you feel
that is being 'arrogant.'

Instead of suggesting mirrors to others, you'd best
hold one up to yourself especially as you seem eager
to learn something from posting on OLO.

"What's he got that I haven't?"

"Awareness!"

"What's that?"

Dear Foxy

On the topic of jingoism.

You do realise you are guilty of expressing an opinion while being female? Therefore, Houellebecq, is justified that all his posts to female contributers on OLO are nothing more than "lighthearted jibes".

And as for those 'nancy boys' who actually discuss issues WITH women and point out to the 'B & T's' that their comments are insulting; well they are just 'pussy-whipped'.

Cheers m'dear

Hahaha Foxy,

The point isn't whether I find it insulting, as I'm not the one calling for 'not stooping to any put-downs or insults', 'good manners, and
courtesy'. I see you and examinator constantly calling for all this, and then just engaging in the same behaviour as Col, just in a more cowardly, roundabout like way. Encouraging the likes of CJ (living by vicariuos putdowns of the 'bad' people, where you don't have to get your hands dirty, 'Oh Cj, Oh I know you shouldn't, but good on you 'ol chap), and partaking in sly little conversations about others between yourselves, and then standing up for your high and mighty 'principles' when castigating people like Col for their posting style.

Well, I'd much rather be stabbed roughly in the front, eye to eye, than stabbed smoothly in the back by someone being cheered on by the self appointed OLO 'politeness' police.

So many topics you and your cronies hand out your solutions to all 'those' people in the world with a problem (patriots for example), attempting to educate the poor souls where you can, so that one day the world may live up to your expectations and people would all be, well, nice, like you. And you should educate them too. Education is the key! (How many times do we hear that)

BTW: Why did you put arrogant in quotes? I never used the term. Also I used 'partonising' in a totally different context. i.e examinator patronising his pigeon holed patriots.

Ah it's so sweet that you have Foxy's back Fractelle. You go girls!

For someone who complains on another thread about gender wars, you seem very interested in putting things in gender terms. Or did you just want to come back and round up a posse of 'sisters' to help you over here now that you've laid down your rules in the other thread and people are, OMG, ignoring them.

So why do you think if I argue with foxy, it's because she is a woman? is examinator a woman? is Col a woman? I seem to remember geeing him up constantly about Margaret. Or maybe you just think I should relate differently to posters if they're female?

Dear Houellebecq,

Most posters don't use terms like, "Lying Socialist,"
or tell people to,"go back to whatever Socialist
country will have you..." or that their opinion is not
"worth a brass razoo," or that they have the "cognitive
skills of a newt," or call a mentally ill person," a
cheap con-bitch on a free-ride," or sees every discussion
as a "field of battle," where if a person leaves the futile
discussion, its seen as "one's adversary feeing the field
of battle with their tail between their legs," or sees
hurling insults as "that is and always has been my personal
right," or tells a Greek poster about how he's known
Greek women in the "biblical sense," or tells an 88 year old
on an article thread about sexual relations (the man was a
widower - who'd lost his wife a year ago), or sees our
Indigenous people as an 'irrelevant minority,' and the lists
go on. But hey, you see nothing wrong with that. That's
your personal right. Just don't expect others to agree with
you.

You're in the minority here. No matter which way you may
try to justify things -It simply won't wash.
There is no excuse for that sort of posting - and is
and will continue to be, to most people - unacceptable!

Now - go stand in a corner, there's a good boy!

OK, I will stand in the corner Foxy. Not sure what that means. Back now. You know that list I found quite amusing most of it.

"Lying Socialist,"
Is lying or socialist abusive?

'"cognitive skills of a newt," / (not a) "person with even a basic capability of reason.". Potayto, Potarto.

" a cheap con-bitch on a free-ride," , well, what about CJs constant assertions about different people's mental health you all laugh along with, because it's CJ saying it not Col. (BTW: CJ if you happen to look in on this, I'm not at all taking sides in any CJ vs Col (though I do find it entertaining), and sorry CJ not against your posts in any way, I just think you get away with murder here compared to Col)

It's offensive to let Greek people in on the fact that non-Greeks have on occasion had sex with Greeks? I did not know that.

Col probably sees all minorities as irrelevent. How's that abusive anyway? That's just politics, as are a lot of your list of so-called 'abusive' posts. I thought you were against *personal* abuse. You didn't seem too fazed when examinator painted that supremely ugly picture of anyone who happened to be patriotic? Is that because patriotic people are more likely right wingers?

'There is no excuse for that sort of posting - and is
and will continue to be, to most people - unacceptable!'

By some posters only obviously. By the sounds of your last post anyone who isn't a bleeding heart, basket-weaving, latte-sipping, chardonnay-guzzling, tree-hugging elitist member of the chattering classes perhaps?

Dear Houellebecq,

All you have to do is read some of Col's posts
in full. I didn't have the time to give you
the full picture of the context of each example
that I quoted - but you're probably not interested
anyway.

It isn't a question of "potato" /"Potato." None of us
use the vulgarity of language that he does. None of
us views discussions as a "battle-field," and we certainly
don't deliberately try to demean other posters.

We don't tell anyone, "I wouldn't cross the street to pee
on you if you were on fire." You might find that sort of
language entertaining. I find it offensive.

As I've tried to tell Col in the past. There is an
etiquette for communicating online. An informal "set of
rules" for behaviour in computer-based conversations. We should
comply to codes of conduct that make the 'play' easier and
more enjoyable for everyone. Manners and politeness rule.
Anything else turns people off. Many posters stop
posting because of the vulgar offensive abuse that they
experience. Why would you want to put up with such
unnecessary abuse - life is too short. And please don't
use cheap shots like we belong to the "cafe latte, et cetera
set," that's so lame!

However, this is getting rather tedious. You see things
differently - fine. That is, as Col would put it, "your
personal right." Mine from now, is to simply scroll past
your posts. And not bother reading them.

Cheers,

Foxy
I understand you and I agree with you that it is better if we are more sensitive and polite but people are what they are, they have their own way to write, to communicate, to express their self.
Some people use often hard words but in real life they are not hard persons, some persons are very polite but in real life they are very hard. I think I use hard words and in real life I am even worst!
The way we write, the words we use say something but they do not say everything about us.
There is not reason to try to change something you know that can not change or the cost from the changes for this person will be very hard.
Personaly I ignore the bad, offensive words and I try to write on the basic meaning of his/her text, If I feel angry simple I ignore it and I do not write at all.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Foxy,
The king is dead long live the king Houellebecq,

Houellebecq,
I agree that not all patriots are messianic or are they all petty dictators at home. Two points
• First it depends on what generation you are referring to any one over 50 will see the type (= or -).
• The other traits I mentioned are extensions of anthropological drives specifically to gather like with like (birds of feather) those tending towards the right end of the spectrum ‘tend’ to gravitate to absolutes and purveyors thereof. No put down just a statement of well documented fact. Perhaps I should have added all these individual traits are on continuous continuums and any one person can be a combination of all or none and in varying degrees i.e. unique combinations. I have given this qualification several times (and wrongly it would appear) was by now a given for any generalization I offer.
As stated previously ANY argument that can’t be discussed in civil terms is not worth having. In my opinion both you and Col are smart enough to make your points civilly Col simply chooses not to therefore he made the ride and must accept the consequences as do we all. (Including me)
I see no point in fights/ “battle grounds” they only injuries/deaths and no one really wins. Me I learn from everyone so I am disappointed when people write me off to me it’s a lost opportunity. Soppy perhaps but that's my experience.
Bu t like you said agree to disagree.

While agree that some of us should endeavour to restrain our enthusiasm for aggressive argument in a civilised forum like this, most of us (even dear old Col) post something substantive regularly between snipes.

In Houellebecq's relatively recent but prolific membership of OLO, I haven't noticed that s/he's posted any substantive argument, opinion or evidence about anything. Rather, his/her posts seem to be invariably meta-snipes about other OLO users.

I usually ignore his/her posts, but this latest hysterical outburst above warranted a comment. What exactly did Houellebecq expect, after appearing from nowhere and contributing little more than sequential attacks on established OLO forum users, regardless of their political, ethical, cultural etc dispositions?

Now s/he obviously feels on the outer, poor dear. Duh.

Fair enough Foxy, but I really think if you stepped back and didn't take Col so seriously, you would see the funny side of it all.

'we certainly don't deliberately try to demean other posters.'

I think that's exactly what CJ does a lot of the time. Talked to daggett lately?

'And please don't
use cheap shots like we belong to the "cafe latte, et cetera
set," that's so lame! '

Foxy that's no cheap shot. I'm actually a lot of those things. I like all those terms the righties use against the lefties, and I tried to use all the ones I could think of.

CJ Morgan,

I'm not here to change the world man, I'm here for entertainment and to stir a few people up, be stirred up and enjoy characters like Col. So sue me. I just don't take this site so seriously as some, I've no interest in all this patting each other on the back and googling for 'studies'.Some posters here really do think they are changing the world and even call it their 'work'. Good for them but I find that quite amusing myself.

Anyway I think you're the champion of 2 line snipes, not that there's anything wrong with that. I just find it strange you would object.

I find the quote 'sequential attacks on established OLO forum users' very interesting. How dare I touch the 'established' users. The high court of OLO is how I thought a few of you see yourselves, and it appears I am correct. There is a certain pecking order here with people striving for kudos and respect. It's part of what I'm interested in messing with on the whole really. Don't fret that I'd worry about being on the outer, I would think you could tell by my antics that, unlike some here I'm not out to impress anyone. Mission accomplished:-)

Dear Houellebecq,

Thanks for explaining things to me from your perspective.
Believe me, I've tried not to take things so seriously as
far as Col is concerned. I've leapt to his defence in the
past, I've even apologised to him, when I thought I was
out of line, I've done everything I could to make him
not view discussions as fields of battle.
But then he goes and says things
like, "Why don't you bugger off back to whatever pesthole
it is you originated from?" to Antonios, whose English is
not that great, and I cringe.

I know that some people are terribly touchy and thin-skinned
on the subject of any criticism, however an intelligent man
like Col could surely handle matters in a different, less
abrasive way. Using shoves, and put-downs will only be met
with anger and an equal reaction. Perhaps that's why Col
doesn't receive sympathy, when he cops it from others -
because he's so seriously out of line himself.

Anyway Houellebecq, I'll try to lighten up, as you and Antonios
have suggested to me. I can't promise that I'll always succeed
but I'll give it my best shot
(depending on Col's next comment).

However, I will try.

That's the best I can do.

Foxy
I've been reviewing some topics and one of Col's more 'colourful' posts is missing...I haven't seen his posts for a while hence my comment the king is dead? holidays perhaps?

Dear examinator,

One of Col's most 'colourful' contributions
(I don't know if that's the one you're
referring to), was the awful comment he
made about that mentally ill person.
Quite a few posters found that comment
offensive.

Col may be on holidays, but it could also
be that he's been 'sin-binned,' by Graham.
Col always said that Graham was the only one
who could tell him how to post. Graham may have
done just that.

Well, I guess this thread has now run its course.
Before I leave however, I'd like to end with two
quotes which I think are appropriate to the subject
of this thread, (it's by way of an apology to
examinator - for having de-railed the thread).

The first quote is by Abraham Lincoln on "patriotism."

"We must not be enemies. Though passion may have
strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.
The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every
battlefield and patriot grave,
to every living heart and hearth-stone,
all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus
of the Union when again touched, as surely they will be,
by the better angels of our nature."

John Dryden said it equally well when in "Alexander's Feast,"
he wrote:

"War, he sung, is toil and trouble;
Honour but an empty bubble.
Never ending, still beginning,
Fighting still, and still destroying,
If all the world be worth the winning,
Think, oh think, it worth enjoying."

All The Best,

Cool, Houellebecq. You rattled some of our chains. Congratulations.

Next please.

Yeah Houellebecq, you caused the least offensive poster on OLO to apologise to you.

Well done, big man.

Examinator

Despite the topic running off the rails, I do think there were some fine examples provided by others on patriotism and jingoism. Mission accomplished.