Dubious
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2012
- Messages
- 37,717
- Reaction score
- 80
- Country
- Location
A person's identity revolves around various different factors; bloodline (heritage & appearance), language, & religion are the 3 most important ones. People's geographical location may also help shape their identity. The truth is that one single method of defining identity isn't really enough to create unity among the populace. Some of you consider language as a method of defining identity, but it's clear that others are going to disagree with that. Bloodline's importance should be self-evident seeing as whatever is written in your genes can never change. No matter how different you might be from another person of your own ethnic group, you share a bond that can never be broken or weakened. Appearance is another important aspect of bloodline, people belonging to the same race generally find it easier to associate & accept each other despite of ethnic differences. If a person's race is visibly different from your own, no amount of religious, cultural, or linguistic brotherhood crap would help you get accepted by that individual. Of course there are some exceptions to the rule.
An identity based around language & culture has an obvious weakness that I am sure everyone reading this has already recognized. What happens if your language & culture changes? Does that person turn in to an outcast even though his or her's bloodline remains the same? As far as I am concerned; that individual retains the bond of blood. As long as that exists; he or she will always feel some affection for that ethnic group while retaining the right of blood (jus sanguinis) to associate with them. In my opinion; the weakest uniting factor is religion or creed even though it's just as important as other elements of nationalism. The reason is that a belief is simply a state of mind, if a person's belief was to weaken or disappear then this idea of religious unity would immediately evaporate from his or her head. Besides, religion never claimed to eradicate differences between nationalities & races. Only a fool would believe that sharing a religion immediately turns people in to best friends.
I am sorry I have had read this! I hate natioalism and blame all this big hoo hoo haa haa of civil wars to it!
It was this nationalism that made the already failing khalifah to finally be zapped into nothingness
As for religion uniting people...That is its main purpose! I am sorry you failed to understand that...When we stand for prayer we stand shoulder to shoulder for a reason...But why do MANY thing that brotherhood is ONLY important when we stand for PRAYERS? Why is it confined to the Masjid?
I believe water is the best drink, do any of you believe the same? Well congratulations because you are now my brothers & sisters via our creed. Let's go kill those infidel b@stards that claim "Red Bull gives you wings" because it most certainly does not. Anyway, religions main objective is to maintain a nation's moral standards, & in many cases; it has failed at meeting this objective itself. In any case, the idea of unity via religion, bloodline, language & culture are equally old. I could easily inform people of previous civilizations that accepted foreigners depending upon the Gods or Goddesses they worshiped. In conclusion, nationalism & identity need to revolve around all 3 of these elements. By doing so, people can associate with bloodline or culture & language depending upon every individual's will & yet the identity still remains flexible enough to welcome newcomers. Those newcomers could be integrated via culture, language, or religion while the locals continue to celebrate & preserve their bloodline or race. This was my point of view, & I might post about Pakistan's different ethnic groups later if I feel like it.
Well, Religion now is not exactly what it was before nor is the understanding of the people now...