Opinion of this statement?

[DavidB.]

"In Europe, we have to ask ourselves the question whether we wish to become richer, smarter and stronger, or poorer, dumber and weaker. The answer is anyone's guess. All countries outside Europe place defending their own interests first. It is high time we do the same."

- Halbe Zijlstra (VVD), new Dutch minister of Foreign Affairs

[Tender Branson]

Common sense quote.

The problem today is that there are people who have a problem with small countries being able to defend their culture and heritage and who think it is "normal" to force large-scale immigration from culture-hostile areas of the world down the throats of the autochtonous populations.

[America Needs R'hllor]

Lean FF. While "X First" is usually a bad philosophy for foreign relations, it is true that Europe has been way too weak on defending the interests of their own people. Just like America is allowed to regulate its immigration, and Israel is allowed to prevent a flow of immigrants from the south that turned whole sections of cities nigh-unliveable, Europe shouldn't have to give up on their people's quality of life.

[mvd10]

FF (Halbe Zijlstra fanboy)

[TJ in Oregon]

I guess I don't go to bed every night asking myself whether I wish for us to become richer, smarter and stronger, or poorer, dumber and weaker. Horrible statement because of that line, and mediocre-at-best statement for the "us first" line, but could be rewritten to be a freedom statement with something like: "other nations consider their own interests first, so we must pay particular attention to our own interests". Sounds trite, but makes all the difference between a healthy nationalism and a toxic one.

[JA]

My problem with the statement isn't the statement itself if it existed in a vacuum. Who wouldn't want their society to be richer, smarter, and stronger? However, context matters. And the context of this quote implies that the large-scale migration and refugee resettlement of non-Europeans (and, arguably, Eastern Europeans) into Europe (or Western Europe, specifically) will make Europe poorer, dumber, and weaker. Obviously, that depends upon perspective and it's an incredibly heated topic in many places today, but it does suggest that not only are those coming into Europe of lower quality but that they'll fail to successfully integrate and will have a net negative contribution to European societies.

I simply disagree with that conclusion and find its underlying assumptions baseless and built on prejudice.

[SNJ1985]

Common sense quote.

The problem today is that there are people who have a problem with small countries being able to defend their culture and heritage and who think it is "normal" to force large-scale immigration from culture-hostile areas of the world down the throats of the autochtonous populations.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

I guess I don't go to bed every night asking myself whether I wish for us to become richer, smarter and stronger, or poorer, dumber and weaker. Horrible statement because of that line, and mediocre-at-best statement for the "us first" line, but could be rewritten to be a freedom statement with something like: "other nations consider their own interests first, so we must pay particular attention to our own interests". Sounds trite, but makes all the difference between a healthy nationalism and a toxic one.

Weird that I've been agreeing with TJ on some stuff lately.

[Lechasseur]

Common sense quote.

The problem today is that there are people who have a problem with small countries being able to defend their culture and heritage and who think it is "normal" to force large-scale immigration from culture-hostile areas of the world down the throats of the autochtonous populations.

[Mr. Smith]

I guess I don't go to bed every night asking myself whether I wish for us to become richer, smarter and stronger, or poorer, dumber and weaker. Horrible statement because of that line, and mediocre-at-best statement for the "us first" line, but could be rewritten to be a freedom statement with something like: "other nations consider their own interests first, so we must pay particular attention to our own interests". Sounds trite, but makes all the difference between a healthy nationalism and a toxic one.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

My problem with the statement isn't the statement itself if it existed in a vacuum. Who wouldn't want their society to be richer, smarter, and stronger? However, context matters. And the context of this quote implies that the large-scale migration and refugee resettlement of non-Europeans (and, arguably, Eastern Europeans) into Europe (or Western Europe, specifically) will make Europe poorer, dumber, and weaker. Obviously, that depends upon perspective and it's an incredibly heated topic in many places today, but it does suggest that not only are those coming into Europe of lower quality but that they'll fail to successfully integrate and will have a net negative contribution to European societies.

I simply disagree with that conclusion and find its underlying assumptions baseless and built on prejudice.

Agree 100%. Also, nation-states are obsolete.

[DavidB.]

My problem with the statement isn't the statement itself if it existed in a vacuum. Who wouldn't want their society to be richer, smarter, and stronger? However, context matters. And the context of this quote implies that the large-scale migration and refugee resettlement of non-Europeans (and, arguably, Eastern Europeans) into Europe (or Western Europe, specifically) will make Europe poorer, dumber, and weaker. Obviously, that depends upon perspective and it's an incredibly heated topic in many places today, but it does suggest that not only are those coming into Europe of lower quality but that they'll fail to successfully integrate and will have a net negative contribution to European societies.

I simply disagree with that conclusion and find its underlying assumptions baseless and built on prejudice.

Agree 100%. Also, nation-states are obsolete.

Perhaps this American missionary attitude would be appropriate if the country were a bit better at taking care of its own citizens, but alas...

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

[JonHawk]

Common sense quote.

The problem today is that there are people who have a problem with small countries being able to defend their culture and heritage and who think it is "normal" to force large-scale immigration from culture-hostile areas of the world down the throats of the autochtonous populations.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Nebulous statement but in and of itself I agree.

If immigration is what the quote is referring to, then I don't think Europe has a humanitarian obligation to take in immigrants from the rest of the world. I do, however, think that immigration, sensibly controlled, does help Europe become wealthier, smarter and stronger.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Eh, thinking about it a bit more, the quote commits the cardinal sin of contemporary debates over immigration by approaching the problem as an economic ("richer") rather than a cultural one, when cultural anxiety is in the main what drives opposition to immigration. On that basis I would have to change my vote from 'agree' to 'slightly disingenuous'.

Although thinking about it even more, the "defending our own interests" line is probably intended to be a dogwhistle to native people. So idk.

[The Govanah Jake]

Don't see anything wrong with that statement. Pretty common sense actually.

[parochial boy]

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

America is a nation-state though?

Anyway, if he is concerned about people being poor, then presumably he should be a member of a different party to VVD

[SNJ1985]

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

America is a nation-state though?

A nation state is a state intended to serve as the homeland of a particular ethnic group or collection of ethnic groups.

Germans, Italians, Swedes, etc. are ethnic groups. ''Americans'' are not. That's the fundamental difference between America and the countries of Europe.

[mvd10]

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

America is a nation-state though?

Anyway, if he is concerned about people being poor, then presumably he should be a member of a different party to VVD

Aren't you confusing David with me? I'm a VVD member but I've never heard anything about David being a VVD member. He didn't even vote VVD in the 2017 elections (and probably also not in elections in 2012, 2014 and 2015 but I'm not so sure about that).

Being a member of a centre-right party in the Netherlands is somewhat compatible with being concerned about the rough edges of the American system imo, but that's another discussion (but I definitely don't buy the "Bernie/Democrats would be centre-right in Europe" theory, and I generally still back the right in America so you're probably right).

[RINO Tom]

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

America is a nation-state though?

A nation state is a state intended to serve as the homeland of a particular ethnic group or collection of ethnic groups.

Germans, Italians, Swedes, etc. are ethnic groups. ''Americans'' are not. That's the fundamental difference between America and the countries of Europe.

And a lot of people would say that is what makes our country and the ideals it was founded on better than those nations states.  Just sayin'.

[parochial boy]

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

America is a nation-state though?

A nation state is a state intended to serve as the homeland of a particular ethnic group or collection of ethnic groups.

Germans, Italians, Swedes, etc. are ethnic groups. ''Americans'' are not. That's the fundamental difference between America and the countries of Europe.

America is absolutely a nation; it has a nationaly mythology, symbolism, an idea of what it is to be American and of what criteria must be fulfilled in order to be American, a collective national identity that states that the Americans are a people with the right to national self determination.

Just because the American national identiy is more recent, does not mean the USA is not a nation state.

Likewise, ethnicities are not mutually exclusive; and just because the USA as a nation is made up of multiple ehtnicities does not mean that there is no American nation. Similary, just because the definition of what it is to be American is less exclusive that other nations, it doesn't mean that there aren't certain criteria that exist.

The USA isn't even particularly unique in this regard, as most ethnic groups are composites of different ethnic backgrounds, just often in the more distant past.

[parochial boy]

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

America is a nation-state though?

Anyway, if he is concerned about people being poor, then presumably he should be a member of a different party to VVD

Aren't you confusing David with me? I'm a VVD member but I've never heard anything about David being a VVD member. He didn't even vote VVD in the 2017 elections (and probably also not in elections in 2012, 2014 and 2015 but I'm not so sure about that).

Being a member of a centre-right party in the Netherlands is somewhat compatible with being concerned about the rough edges of the American system imo, but that's another discussion (but I definitely don't buy the "Bernie/Democrats would be centre-right in Europe" theory, and I generally still back the right in America so you're probably right).

The original quote was a Dutch politician, just because you cheese munchers all look the same doesn't mean I can't tell you apart

[mvd10]

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

America is a nation-state though?

Anyway, if he is concerned about people being poor, then presumably he should be a member of a different party to VVD

Aren't you confusing David with me? I'm a VVD member but I've never heard anything about David being a VVD member. He didn't even vote VVD in the 2017 elections (and probably also not in elections in 2012, 2014 and 2015 but I'm not so sure about that).

Being a member of a centre-right party in the Netherlands is somewhat compatible with being concerned about the rough edges of the American system imo, but that's another discussion (but I definitely don't buy the "Bernie/Democrats would be centre-right in Europe" theory, and I generally still back the right in America so you're probably right).

The original quote was a Dutch politician, just because you cheese munchers all look the same doesn't mean I can't tell you apart

Ah, that explains it. I though you referred to David's quote about the nation state functioning better (he also wrote something about the nation state and the welfare state in a different topic and I thought you referred to those quotes). But I think Zijlstra wasn't specifically referring to poor people with poorer. He probably was referring to the negative consequences of European countries not defending their own interests (poorer, dumber and weaker aren't to be taken literally). That's my interpretation.

[Kingpoleon]

Every single day, the problems in America show us why nation-states function better.

America is a nation-state though?

A nation state is a state intended to serve as the homeland of a particular ethnic group or collection of ethnic groups.

Germans, Italians, Swedes, etc. are ethnic groups. ''Americans'' are not. That's the fundamental difference between America and the countries of Europe.

And a lot of people would say that is what makes our country and the ideals it was founded on better than those nations states.  Just sayin'.

Precisely.

The interests of all mankind, if put ahead of each and every person’s own interests, will thus be best served. We can either work together and cooperate, or we can declare our creed that of selfishness and that of greed. Maybe the latter would be more economically/personally beneficial, but is it the moral thing to do? “Victory at any cost.” is the mantra of dictatorships - Nazism and Stalinism. “Selfishness at any price to others.” is the mantra of Social Darwinism. It seems that “Me Before We.” is the new mantra of nationalism, reminiscent of dictatorships and Social Darwinism.

[Person Man]

I guess I don't go to bed every night asking myself whether I wish for us to become richer, smarter and stronger, or poorer, dumber and weaker. Horrible statement because of that line, and mediocre-at-best statement for the "us first" line, but could be rewritten to be a freedom statement with something like: "other nations consider their own interests first, so we must pay particular attention to our own interests". Sounds trite, but makes all the difference between a healthy nationalism and a toxic one.

Weird that I've been agreeing with TJ on some stuff lately.

And people keep talking about "ethnic states" or "nation states'.  How do you determine if someone is German or Italian or English. Do you have to take a language test? Is it a blood test?

Of course Europe isn't like America and the political landscape there is based more on history than philosophy and it is totally the prerogative of a society on whether people who are from another society should ever be allowed to join their society. That's all great and all but is it ultimately their benefit to have an exclusive society. You can look at Rome and make an argument either way.

On one hand, Rome started taking care of a lot of foreigners who couldn't care for themselves and that may have put excessive stress on their system after a half dozen generations, on the other, when they eventually started cracking down on refugees, it ultimately backfired.