religion. Who will be in charge, the religion. No one is going to accept social communes at the present time and you know that. Don't be obtuse.
Proposing something that 95% of the people will not accept is a non-discussion. A power vacuum cannot exist or there is chaos and we go back to a warlord existence, not social communes. People are then controlled by religion. That is the way of civilization. That is the way it has always been and will be unless you can remove the genes for power and greed from human existence.
Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.
"The first thing Fascists usually try to do is silencing the opposition."
you belong to a state but you have no pride in your home? What would be the point of the state? Why would people give their time to the state for the benefit of others? Wouldn't you just get a hedonistic environment where everyone simply fought for their own piece of the pie without concern for their neighbor?
There is no previous history of people not having pride in their state unilaterally helping their neighbor. Without an historical precedence it would be folly to anticipate a movement towards social equality without a catalyst. - Just answering your next statement.
There is also no previous history of people in a certain state not having religion. Nevertheless people here always talk how important it would be to get rid of religion. The thought that you need historical precedence to anticipate something is extremly conservative. Progressive, by definition, want to move beyond the current situation. Patriotism is being proud of the state you were by coincidence born in. In my opinion you should only be proud of things you have achieved yourself. That's why you shouldn't be proud to be white, heterosexual, a man... However if you had to struggle to overcome obstacles you can be proud of that. There also have been states where patriotism was not considered something positive. I know this for sure about Germany, because I grew up there. We cosidered patriotism as something dangerous and a crutch for people who have a problem with their own life and need something they hadn't achieved on their own to be proud of, because they are losers. People would still consider it worth giving their time to the state for the benefit of others, because that's a good way to help other people, regardless of their nationality. The structure of the state just provides a good infrastructure to help. That's the only reason why states should be accepted. In no way does this lead to more hedonism, if anything the opposite is true, because people have to think more on their own. No authority tells you what's right or wrong, you have to find that out on your own.
P.S.: Sadly Germany is moving away from this attitude, because consumerism becomes more and more prevalent.
a decline in Patriotism as a natural consequence of losing the war. Both are now returning to their natural state. The pendulum swings back. there is nothing wrong with that. Patriotism can be a force of good or evil depending on the leaders and the economic situation.
When you mix nationalism or religion with economic dislocation you usually get a toxic brew. In the end the economy is the match that sets the nation on fire. Germany and Japan have a long way to go before that will become an issue.
Germans have much to be proud of and they shouldn't be bashful, just not expansionist like the United States.
