The British National Party

[Whaleboy]

1. Because you are a citizen of this country.

A legal status not something affecting my identity. My philosophical view of life is unrelated to the information contained on my passport.

2. Because you and your family(I assume) and friends live here.

I have friends and family in Canada, Australia, the USA, India, Portugal, Israel, Germany, France, Holland, Belgium, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and South Africa. Is that a reason to love those nations too?

3. Because you are a citizen, everything bad that happens to this country will have an adverse effect on you.

An economic association. At the very most that justifies economic allegiance (to protect my arse), though that falls apart because global economies do not respect national borders, and rightly so. It most certainly does not entail gratitude because it is an environmental. Take a functionalist perspective, I'm not given money because they love me!

4. An emotional attachement to this country like you feel towards a family member or friend.

I feel an emotional attachment to my family and my friends. The other 59 million people here are not my family or my friends, no more so than any other member of the human race. You cannot appeal to my emotional attachment because like you say, I have none. However, I am asking you why I should have one, but you are addressing wholly different premises and not affecting my conclusion.

You and you're family might work hard but so do people in Africa and they live in poverty, the difference between them and us is that we were born into a country that has educated us and given us the opportunity to make a good life. British citizens (not citizens of Saudi Arabia) provide us with security and justice as policeman fireman and Judges. If my kids and your kids and every other British citizens' children can have the same opportunties and freedoms as us at the price of the rest of the world, then I pick us anyday of the week.

The fact that it was this nation is irrelevant. That nation is merely a piece of paper. It was simply my luck of the draw to be born in a place where the economy is particularly rich. There's nothing magically fantastic about Britain. Do I feel an emotion attachment to a winning lottery ticket? Of course not, it is just another piece of paper, it represents a few numbers. An externel (to the paper) set of rules means that I would get millions, but that is consequential as far as the paper nation is concerned so this patriotism you purport is somewhat irrational and illogical and it would be an unwise decision for me to use it as a basis for a political view.

If I had the choice between pleasuring myself, or 99 other people (99x more pleasure gained), the utilitarian thing to do is choose the latter!

[Derekrage]

But here's the thing...ever play the Six Degrees game? We're all interconnected. We can't just go around pushing our agenda through regardless of the effect on anyone else like the bratty kid on the playground. Cause that kid gets his ass whooped. Sacrificing the rest of the world to secure our immediate future only ends up ****ing us over in the long run. You seem to have a very short term view of things. That African farmer and pro-British policies on, say, being self-sufficient in food on this Isle may seem like two completely unrelated concepts but they're not. When he migrates because he can't, like you know, farm profitably due to us it becomes our problem. It's of no benefit to us if we do things to improve our lives at the expense of others.

Look, I understand that policies that help Britain in the short-term may have long term consequences to us and I have never said that we should just just push our agenda through but we should always put British interests first in a sensible manner. It is not beneficial to Britain to piss off half of the world and we are not talking about sacrificing the world here, we just shouldn't send troops half way around the world on the US or UN say so. IMO we should implement some protectionist measures that will help us now and in the long term (and not draw too serious reprisals) and we should have a foreign policy that protects British interests.
I am not talking about sticking our two fingers up to the world and saying f**k you, I am advocating a policy that puts all British interests first, that will not necassarily have a negative effect on anyone else, just if push comes to shove we always choose us instead of them (aslond as it does not hurt us more in the long term)

True. But gee, bad things happening in other parts of the world also have an effect on me. It's almost like the world is interconnected or something.

Obviously, so then it is our problem aswell.

[Starchild]

But don't you understand that putting our interest first may not necessarily serve our interests best?

Oh, and FYI honey:

It is not beneficial to Britain to piss off half of the world and we are not talking about sacrificing the world here

If my kids and your kids and every other British citizens' children can have the same opportunties and freedoms as us at the price of the rest of the world, then I pick us anyday of the week.

[Whaleboy]

Look, I understand that policies that help Britain in the short-term may have long term consequences to us and I have never said that we should just just push our agenda through but we should always put British interests first in a sensible manner. It is not beneficial to Britain to piss off half of the world and we are not talking about sacrificing the world here, we just shouldn't send troops half way around the world on the US or UN say so. IMO we should implement some protectionist measures that will help us now and in the long term (and not draw too serious reprisals) and we should have a foreign policy that protects British interests.

Yet you have already stated that when faced with such a choice, you would chose the pro-Britain option though long term it may not work like that. I have no quarrel with a foreign policy that looks after economic (and only economic, not political) interests within limits, but it is my view that a foreign policy should be about helping the world. Lets not forget that ultimately, what is good for the rest of the world is vastly better for us than what is immediately good for us, but needless to say, that should not be the basis of the decision. Of course you could invoke egoism vs altruism but I don't think that's required at this level of debate.

I am not talking about sticking our two fingers up to the world and saying f**k you, I am advocating a policy that puts all British interests first, that will not necassarily have a negative effect on anyone else, just if push comes to shove we always choose us instead of them (aslond as it does not hurt us more in the long term)

There's your problem. It's suprising how much of economics is a question of karma .

Obviously, so then it is our problem aswell.

What do you propose? Economic self-sufficiency too?

[Whaleboy]

Starchild: You're very much on the ball tonight! Care for a vodka shot competition?

[Starchild]

Only got the cheap swill at my house. Don't particularly want to touch it....

I got some saké though. Godbless the industrious and hard drinking Japanese.

[Derekrage]

Starchild I was answering a point that Whaleboy put to me,
he said:

In terms of British citizens maintaining that, I wouldn't want that at the expense of the rest of the world, where only 1% of the worlds population live on this island, should the 99% have to suffer for us?

But realistically we will never have to make that choice.

[Whaleboy]

Only got the cheap swill at my house. Don't particularly want to touch it....

I got some saké though. Godbless the industrious and hard drinking Japanese.

I'll raise my glass of absolut and lime to that!

But realistically we will never have to make that choice.

It is a simplistic scenario but a good test of attitudes and motivation. The results were not pretty. I like pretty.

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Derekrage
But realistically we will never have to make that choice.

But the fact is a very small percentage of the world's population live very well off lifestyles while the vast majority suffer hardship and early death. So we make that choice to sacrifice the world every time we put our interests ahead of theirs. Ahead of our common interests. The only result of choosing nation over species is that everyone ends off worse off.

[Derekrage]

But don't you understand that putting our interest first may not necessarily serve our interests best?

I think you misunderstand what I mean when I say our interests first. I mean to benefit Britain overall, weigh up the short term gains versus the long term consequences and vice versa.

I will give a very basic example: If a country(lets call it country A) is investing in Britain heavily and keeping our economy from collapsing, and I have a decision to make that will create thousands more British jobs but it will have a negative effect on country A which will in turn lead to negative consequences for Britain down the road then I would not take the decision to create the thousands of British jobs because it will end up costing us thousands of jobs.

[Whaleboy]

I think you misunderstand what I mean when I say our interests first. I mean to benefit Britain overall, weigh up the short term gains versus the long term consequences and vice versa.

Utilitarianism wins out in that case, which is my point.

[Derekrage]

It is a simplistic scenario but a good test of attitudes and motivation. The results were not pretty. I like pretty.

Choosing between Britains destruction and survival is not a hard choice for me.

But the fact is a very small percentage of the world's population live very well off lifestyles while the vast majority suffer hardship and early death. So we make that choice to sacrifice the world every time we put our interests ahead of theirs. Ahead of our common interests. The only result of choosing nation over species is that everyone ends off worse off.

But I do not believe that we do end off worst. I think Britain and the whole of the western world has been putting nation above species for the last millenium and the standard of living for us just keeps going up and up.

[Derekrage]

Utilitarianism wins out in that case, which is my point

Well not exactly Because we are only considering the consequences and benefits for Britain.

[Whaleboy]

Choosing between Britains destruction and survival is not a hard choice for me.

Choosing between Britains destruction and the destruction of the rest of the world is not a hard choice for me either. I choose the rest of the world.

But I do not believe that we do end off worst. I think Britain and the whole of the western world has been putting nation above species for the last millenium and the standard of living for us just keeps going up and up.

You honestly think that can continue? You dont think, for example, that Western civilisation is analogous to bacteria in a petri dish, destined to be the cause of their own demise?

[Derekrage]

You honestly think that can continue? You dont think, for example, that Western civilisation is analogous to bacteria in a petri dish, destined to be the cause of their own demise?

Well we will eventually die out, as everything does but I don't see why we cant continue growing and improving for a good few centuries yet.