What motivates our local anti-Americans?

Mark Nguyen6 said:I suspect even basic, entry-level psychology could explain these kinds of cases:

A person with an unformed character—which, I suppose, leads to a lack of self-confidence, given that identity is the root of everything—will inevitably turn into a striver who tries to act more devout than the Pope. Since they lack the inner quality to affirm themselves through their own merit, they settle for the only thing left: affirming themselves by negating everything they actually know. Their "win" is simply receiving some form of recognition or acceptance, and frankly, I don't think they care who it comes from.

If you want my opinion, those loudmouthed bullies are actually the perfect examples of this phenomenon.

Look, that bolded part is a flawed premise. 😉
Self-confidence, character, and mental stability come from where you fit in and your status within society—not from some imaginary national identity, which I assume is what you're aiming at here.
And if you just shifted a few assumptions in this post—or flipped the script—you’d see how perfectly it all aligns regarding their lifestyle and why people find them so repulsive.

For instance, Since they lack the substance to assert themselves on their own merits, all they have left is to define themselves by rejecting everything they actually know.

The correct way to put it: Since they lack the substance to assert themselves on their own merits, all they have left is to define themselves through nationality and by rejecting everything they don't understand.

Charles Jackson5 said:Look, that bolded part is a flawed premise. 😉
Self-confidence, character, and mental stability come from where you fit in and your status within society—not from some imaginary national identity, which I assume is what you're aiming at here.
And if you just shifted a few assumptions in this post—or flipped the script—you’d see how perfectly it all aligns regarding their lifestyle and why people find them so repulsive.

For instance, Since they lack the substance to assert themselves on their own merits, all they have left is to define themselves by rejecting everything they actually know.

The correct way to put it: Since they lack the substance to assert themselves on their own merits, all they have left is to define themselves through nationality and by rejecting everything they don't understand.

It seems that for those who, as the cowboy might put it, have no father, no mother, and no children...
You’ve essentially described the classic opportunist—someone without a shred of scruples—and I find myself in complete agreement with you there: for people like that, self-assurance, character, and emotional stability are entirely derived from their social positioning. Since they are completely dependent on receiving applause—regardless of who is doing the clapping—they would likely turn on their own kin or sell out their own parents just to stay in favor. I suppose that moves past mere behavior and straight into pathology.

All they care about is staying in the game.

Charles Jackson5 said:Look, that bolded part is a flawed premise. 😉
Self-confidence, character, and mental stability come from where you fit in and your status within society—not from some imaginary national identity, which I assume is what you're aiming at here.
And if you just shifted a few assumptions in this post—or flipped the script—you’d see how perfectly it all aligns regarding their lifestyle and why people find them so repulsive.

For instance, Since they lack the substance to assert themselves on their own merits, all they have left is to define themselves by rejecting everything they actually know.

The correct way to put it: Since they lack the substance to assert themselves on their own merits, all they have left is to define themselves through nationality and by rejecting everything they don't understand.

In this era of Western civilization, societies existing outside the framework of the nation-state simply don't exist. It’s pure nonsense peddled by left-liberal shortsighted types like Benedict Anderson and his fantasies about nations being nothing more than "imagined communities."

Only someone talking about a Chinese person—whose "imagined community" has endured for 4,000 years—would say that. They'll be crushed into the dirt long before they start whining about it.

Mark Nguyen6 said:It seems that for those who, as the cowboy might put it, have no father, no mother, and no children...
You’ve essentially described the classic opportunist—someone without a shred of scruples—and I find myself in complete agreement with you there: for people like that, self-assurance, character, and emotional stability are entirely derived from their social positioning. Since they are completely dependent on receiving applause—regardless of who is doing the clapping—they would likely turn on their own kin or sell out their own parents just to stay in favor. I suppose that moves past mere behavior and straight into pathology.

All they care about is staying in the game.

The thing is, in this country, those types make up about 90% of the crowd (total pathology, like you mentioned). Out of that group, maybe 15% actually manage to climb the ladder, while the other 85% just sit around nursing massive grudges against them, wishing they could be in those shoes.

And look, it isn't just an American problem—it's everywhere. Just watch how quickly people "forget" about their country the second there's money involved, suddenly scrambling to move their assets to some tax haven out in the Caymans....

Hannah Hill3 said:We are discussing people who are Americans, yet they work directly against the United States. My message above highlights one of the primary reasons why Americans, Mexicans, Albanians, etc., feel so isolated and disconnected from their fellow countrymen today.
It’s all part of the same pattern — injustice breeds isolation, which creates division. It’s simple logic.
Every group mentioned has faced some form of historical injustice somewhere.
Take the wealthiest man in Russia... Roman Abramovich. While I am certain he is a terrible individual, the reason for his arrogance and the complete breakdown of cooperation with the state and its people is—believe it or not—rooted in the injustices faced by him and his family as orphans years ago. ☕

I will say it again. Identity is a relative concept. Today you are an American Catholic, tomorrow you are an American Muslim... get it?

This is pathetically naive.

Gregory Howard said:In this era of Western civilization, societies existing outside the framework of the nation-state simply don't exist. It’s pure nonsense peddled by left-liberal shortsighted types like Benedict Anderson and his fantasies about nations being nothing more than "imagined communities."

Only someone talking about a Chinese person—whose "imagined community" has endured for 4,000 years—would say that. They'll be crushed into the dirt long before they start whining about it.

Personally, I wouldn't even go that far.
It is enough to simply observe where those rather libertine, stateless, cosmopolitan types—people like Mandica, Dezulovica, and the rest—actually end up. They belong in the heavens, I suppose.

So, there you have it regarding the lack of national identity. Regarding one's convictions. Or character.
And, if I may be so bold, regarding pathology as well.

Mark Nguyen6 said:It seems that for those who, as the cowboy might put it, have no father, no mother, and no children...
You’ve essentially described the classic opportunist—someone without a shred of scruples—and I find myself in complete agreement with you there: for people like that, self-assurance, character, and emotional stability are entirely derived from their social positioning. Since they are completely dependent on receiving applause—regardless of who is doing the clapping—they would likely turn on their own kin or sell out their own parents just to stay in favor. I suppose that moves past mere behavior and straight into pathology.

All they care about is staying in the game.

No, you missed my point. When I talk about social standing, I mean having some kind of useful role—a job, being established in your field, sports, the arts... anything. In that sense, feeling like you actually belong and contribute is what keeps a person sane.

Charles Jackson5 said:No, you missed my point. When I talk about social standing, I mean having some kind of useful role—a job, being established in your field, sports, the arts... anything. In that sense, feeling like you actually belong and contribute is what keeps a person sane.

Basically, you're saying if you translate that into raw power and cold hard cash, then you've hit the nail on the head.😉

Gregory Howard said:In this era of Western civilization, societies existing outside the framework of the nation-state simply don't exist. It’s pure nonsense peddled by left-liberal shortsighted types like Benedict Anderson and his fantasies about nations being nothing more than "imagined communities."

Only someone talking about a Chinese person—whose "imagined community" has endured for 4,000 years—would say that. They'll be crushed into the dirt long before they start whining about it.

Sure, maybe they don't exist if you look at things through the lens of "international migration" or how new nations constantly bubble up—but shouldn't the goal be to move past those primitive foundations our own nation clings to? Most advanced societies moved on from that stuff ages ago.

Austin Gonzalez13 said:Basically, you're saying if you translate that into raw power and cold hard cash, then you've hit the nail on the head.😉

I wouldn't go that far, but fine—have it your way. 😁
I guess you can frame it that way in this crazy consumerist capitalism we live in.

Charles Jackson5 said:No, you missed my point. When I talk about social standing, I mean having some kind of useful role—a job, being established in your field, sports, the arts... anything. In that sense, feeling like you actually belong and contribute is what keeps a person sane.

Alright, let's slow down—what are you even talking about? Don't get carried away.
Mandic, Dezulovic, and that whole crowd in New York City pull off events just like they always do. Over there, people actually view them as figures of value. Here, though, they're—to put it mildly—pretty mediocre.

Take Mandic, who claims identity doesn't even exist. Or Jergovic, who seems to have fled wherever he could from the slightest bit of pressure, leaving everything behind. Then there's Stankovic, who sits there while Tijanic lectures him on what it means to be a true American. And Ivancic—whose entire publication collapses the moment foreign sponsors dry up, yet he still tries to lecture us on market dynamics and hard work...

So, when it comes to these types of characters—people who, if you scratch just beneath the surface, turn out to be nothing more than bags of mediocrity—what exactly are you trying to say? That their behavior is driven by some cosmopolitan ideal? Or that they're somehow progressive? Or perhaps they're champions of liberty?
Please, pull yourself together.

Charles Jackson5 said:Sure, maybe they don't exist if you look at things through the lens of "international migration" or how new nations constantly bubble up—but shouldn't the goal be to move past those primitive foundations our own nation clings to? Most advanced societies moved on from that stuff ages ago.

Exactly. Which is precisely why these individuals headed to New York City to escape those very same primitive tendencies—a city that has essentially rehabilitated old, regressive ideologies.

Your logic is completely flawed.
😬

Charles Jackson5 said:I wouldn't go that far, but fine—have it your way. 😁
I guess you can frame it that way in this crazy consumerist capitalism we live in.

Look, from where I'm standing, the vast majority of people would ditch their national identity and all that patriotic nonsense in a heartbeat if someone offered them a million bucks... or honestly, probably way less than that.

Most people basically fall into two camps: those who are driven by the almighty dollar, and those who care less about the cash and more about some kind of leverage—some form of power, really.

And that power? It’s a spectrum—it could be anything from being the President of the United States to running a local chess club, or even just having moderator status on some random online forum.

Then you have that tiny 10%—the ones who walk away from both money and influence because they aren't actually chasing either—and most people just look at them like weirdos or cult members. 😉

But honestly, you shouldn't judge people for chasing wealth or control... life is just a whole lot easier, more comfortable, and longer if you've got a grip on at least one of those things. 😉

Mark Nguyen6 said:Alright, let's slow down—what are you even talking about? Don't get carried away.
Mandic, Dezulovic, and that whole crowd in New York City pull off events just like they always do. Over there, people actually view them as figures of value. Here, though, they're—to put it mildly—pretty mediocre.

Take Mandic, who claims identity doesn't even exist. Or Jergovic, who seems to have fled wherever he could from the slightest bit of pressure, leaving everything behind. Then there's Stankovic, who sits there while Tijanic lectures him on what it means to be a true American. And Ivancic—whose entire publication collapses the moment foreign sponsors dry up, yet he still tries to lecture us on market dynamics and hard work...

So, when it comes to these types of characters—people who, if you scratch just beneath the surface, turn out to be nothing more than bags of mediocrity—what exactly are you trying to say? That their behavior is driven by some cosmopolitan ideal? Or that they're somehow progressive? Or perhaps they're champions of liberty?
Please, pull yourself together.

Exactly. Which is precisely why these individuals headed to New York City to escape those very same primitive tendencies—a city that has essentially rehabilitated old, regressive ideologies.

Your logic is completely flawed.
😬

That’s exactly it—who honestly cares what these mediocre folks or those pseudo-intellectuals—the ones who barely managed to survive a stroke—actually think... let them think whatever they want... why even bother getting worked up over it?

Austin Gonzalez13 said:Look, from where I'm standing, the vast majority of people would ditch their national identity and all that patriotic nonsense in a heartbeat if someone offered them a million bucks... or honestly, probably way less than that.

Most people basically fall into two camps: those who are driven by the almighty dollar, and those who care less about the cash and more about some kind of leverage—some form of power, really.

And that power? It’s a spectrum—it could be anything from being the President of the United States to running a local chess club, or even just having moderator status on some random online forum.

Then you have that tiny 10%—the ones who walk away from both money and influence because they aren't actually chasing either—and most people just look at them like weirdos or cult members. 😉

But honestly, you shouldn't judge people for chasing wealth or control... life is just a whole lot easier, more comfortable, and longer if you've got a grip on at least one of those things. 😉

And honestly? The legacy such people leave behind is nothing but garbage.

Mark Nguyen6 said:And honestly? The legacy such people leave behind is nothing but garbage.

Look, maybe they aren't even artists—maybe they aren't trying to leave some grand legacy behind, but just want to make a living, you know?

Mark Nguyen6 said:Alright, let's slow down—what are you even talking about? Don't get carried away.
Mandic, Dezulovic, and that whole crowd in New York City pull off events just like they always do. Over there, people actually view them as figures of value. Here, though, they're—to put it mildly—pretty mediocre.

Take Mandic, who claims identity doesn't even exist. Or Jergovic, who seems to have fled wherever he could from the slightest bit of pressure, leaving everything behind. Then there's Stankovic, who sits there while Tijanic lectures him on what it means to be a true American. And Ivancic—whose entire publication collapses the moment foreign sponsors dry up, yet he still tries to lecture us on market dynamics and hard work...

So, when it comes to these types of characters—people who, if you scratch just beneath the surface, turn out to be nothing more than bags of mediocrity—what exactly are you trying to say? That their behavior is driven by some cosmopolitan ideal? Or that they're somehow progressive? Or perhaps they're champions of liberty?
Please, pull yourself together.

Exactly. Which is precisely why these individuals headed to New York City to escape those very same primitive tendencies—a city that has essentially rehabilitated old, regressive ideologies.

Your logic is completely flawed.
😬

Says who? If I may ask—who exactly is running the show around here then?

Mark Nguyen6 said:Alright, let's slow down—what are you even talking about? Don't get carried away.
Mandic, Dezulovic, and that whole crowd in New York City pull off events just like they always do. Over there, people actually view them as figures of value. Here, though, they're—to put it mildly—pretty mediocre.

Take Mandic, who claims identity doesn't even exist. Or Jergovic, who seems to have fled wherever he could from the slightest bit of pressure, leaving everything behind. Then there's Stankovic, who sits there while Tijanic lectures him on what it means to be a true American. And Ivancic—whose entire publication collapses the moment foreign sponsors dry up, yet he still tries to lecture us on market dynamics and hard work...

So, when it comes to these types of characters—people who, if you scratch just beneath the surface, turn out to be nothing more than bags of mediocrity—what exactly are you trying to say? That their behavior is driven by some cosmopolitan ideal? Or that they're somehow progressive? Or perhaps they're champions of liberty?
Please, pull yourself together.

Exactly. Which is precisely why these individuals headed to New York City to escape those very same primitive tendencies—a city that has essentially rehabilitated old, regressive ideologies.

Your logic is completely flawed.
😬

I mean, look—they aren't even looking at New York City as the official or mainstream hub. I mean, really? What kind of shallow conclusions are those?
Off they go—hanging out with their fellow intellectuals, I suppose. Good for them.
Until you actually show me a nationalist in their own element—someone specifically spitting on America rather than just playing around with these half-baked political theories of yours—then we can have a real conversation.

Austin Gonzalez13 said:Look, maybe they aren't even artists—maybe they aren't trying to leave some grand legacy behind, but just want to make a living, you know?

Well, look, I’m no artist either, and my life's work might just be complete garbage. So, next time nature calls, maybe I'll just head over to your front yard, right on top of your father's grave, or even in your baby's crib—just to see if you can keep a straight face. I'd expect you to just sit there and take it.

(This is clearly just a caricature, of course. Nothing personal.)

Charles Jackson5 said:Says who? If I may ask—who exactly is running the show around here then?

I mean, look—they aren't even looking at New York City as the official or mainstream hub. I mean, really? What kind of shallow conclusions are those?
Off they go—hanging out with their fellow intellectuals, I suppose. Good for them.
Until you actually show me a nationalist in their own element—someone specifically spitting on America rather than just playing around with these half-baked political theories of yours—then we can have a real conversation.

Either you’re completely out of the loop, or I just don't know what else to say.
The Republic of Mexico has officially rehabilitated nationalist movements. It’s an official stance.

So, basically, everyone in that social circle is part of that movement. Or, at the very least, they're supporting it.
And if it isn't through direct support, it's certainly happening through their tax dollars.

I really don't see what part of this is unclear.

Mark Nguyen6 said:Either you’re completely out of the loop, or I just don't know what else to say.
The Republic of Mexico has officially rehabilitated nationalist movements. It’s an official stance.

So, basically, everyone in that social circle is part of that movement. Or, at the very least, they're supporting it.
And if it isn't through direct support, it's certainly happening through their tax dollars.

I really don't see what part of this is unclear.

So, let me get this straight—for every unjust law or resolution, anyone who disagrees should just stop paying taxes or resort to civil disobedience?
By that logic, shouldn't athletes, business owners, or pretty much anyone else stay far away from the country just to avoid supporting the Royalists?
Does that mean every trucker and shipping agent paying tolls and freight fees is also a supporter of drag Mihailović?

Charles Jackson5 said:So, let me get this straight—for every unjust law or resolution, anyone who disagrees should just stop paying taxes or resort to civil disobedience?
By that logic, shouldn't athletes, business owners, or pretty much anyone else stay far away from the country just to avoid supporting the Royalists?
Does that mean every trucker and shipping agent paying tolls and freight fees is also a supporter of drag Mihailović?

Sarcasm isn't really going to solve anything here.

Their actions—believe it or not—don't actually have much to do with what you're pointing out. But, if you look closer, they have everything to do with the movement in question. And honestly, their goals are identical—they simply despise the American identity. They share the same ideology (one language), the same delusions of grandeur (one nation), and that same twisted rhetoric about how "we" are being led astray...

If that’s the case, it’s actually quite significant that they moved to a country that rehabilitated those old movements, rather than somewhere like South Africa.