How would yr politics differ w/ ur nationality?

[Kulturkampf]

Here is a theoretical question for everyone out there... Say you were not born into your native country, have you ever thought about what ways your politics would differ?

I know mine would differ, for certain, if I was not an American, as issues are different and as are the natures of governments. America is constitutional and based on principles that I view American politics through versus European or Asian politics.

I have only put great thought into a few areas, and here is how I know I would differ:

If I were Asian, I would support more protectionist markets. A sort of 'national capitalism.' Why? Because foreign products (everything from toiletries to foods to films) could easily overtake all domestic markets and prevent growth of local industry and know-how. If Korea did not have an amount of protectionism, local culture would have disappeared (the beverages like soju, makkoli, chilseong cider, etc. would be destroyed by foreign alcohol and soda imports and forever alter the culture and destroy hundreds of thousands of job).

If I were from a very poor nation, I would take it to larger levels and probably support national subsidies to major industries/corporations. Never outright socialism, but the idea of 'national capitalism.'

If I were anything but American, as well, I would support more careful immigration policy very similar to Korean/Japanese policy that is currently here: visas only for skilled workers and only for unskilled workers when there were demonstratable labor shortages and special contracts given to special industries who demonstrate as much.

To be a citizen, also, would require a foreigner to be proficient in the native language and demonstrate both knowledge and respect for the local history and customs.

I also know that I would support public universities more.

I would also be for far more stringent policies concerning things like no homosexual civil unions, no homosexual adoption, more stringent laws on prostitution (designated and monitored districts) and more anti-drug policies.

Whereas, as an American, I think I am required to support the rights of gays to have some sort of civil union before the government as it is a fundamentally free nation. But if I was from a country founded more on cultural tradition, not only would I support a national religion but be in favor of legislating some of these views concerning GLBT policies.

I also want to come on the record that even if I were a Christian in India, a Christian in Jordan, or a Christian in Thailand, I would support these nations adopting officially Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist state religions and legislation which honored their national religions insofar as holidays, tax benefits to their religious institutions and a modicum of Hindu/Muslim/Buddhist education in schools.

Religion in all of its forms gives backbone to the culture of the people. I think that even if I had Christian kids in school learning Christian values at home, I would not object to formal education in the local religion as it would be both beneficial and morally enlightening to my kids.

Even if sending them to a Muslim school or a Hindu school would have them learn an amount of anti-Christian doctrine, I would shrug it off as there is far more benefit in having a kid learn sound moral doctrine and cultivating a relationship with another religion than having them learn nothing of the sort.

But as an American, I cannot agree with religious education in public schools other than perhaps very general classes examining all religious views and moral philosophies.

Thanks.

[mburbank]

Woah... wait a sec, now... are you saying that... that peoples, like... political views are shaped by the culture they're a part of? Like, if I was... Chinese or something, I might think differently about politics?

Wow. Holly shit. You just blew my mind.


I take back everything I said about you not understanding that lots of people actually think and stuff.

You should go into like, government or teaching, or philosiphyizing.

[Kulturkampf]

Oh jeez Burbank! Would you just give me a little answer for mysakes?

[mburbank]

Not until you stop being so impressed with yourself

[AChimp]

Even if I was from a different country, I'd still think KKK was a twit.

[Sethomas]

Counterfactual arguments are all kinds of fun because you can sound smart without ever having the scary, looming threat of empirical observation to prove you as abjectly wrong about something as you are about everything else.

[mburbank]

It's not so much how often he's wrong that irritates me. It's how an idea crosses his brain pan that every slightly above average student toyed with in Junior high when puberty chemicals and/or marijuana started making them want have extra deep rap sessions, and he thinks he's had some stroke of genius and he needs people to know what a special extra deep guy he is, like not just a 'warrior' but a PHILOSOPHER POET warrior, sort of a brawling macho Norman Mailer type.

And when you won't share in and validate what an extra deep guy he is because by the time you hit eighteen you were starting to realize that everybody else has mulled over all the same shit you did and thought they were extra deep during the whole puberty/marijuana period, YOU'RE the one who's being difficult.

Kulture Kitty. If you are still reading; express ONE single thought, carefully and clearly. Succeed in that without patting yourself on the extra deep back and preening and I'll address your 'point', instead of pointing out what a buffoon you are.