tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post1986525337334908809..comments2024-03-27T07:18:39.229-05:00Comments on In Medias Res: Thoughts on Kosovo, Mill, and WalzerUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-7679023861271210602008-03-17T11:19:00.000-05:002008-03-17T11:19:00.000-05:00Haven't finished reading the post, but just wanted...<I>Haven't finished reading the post, but just wanted to note that Germany's laws on citizenship were considerably revised in 1998, now almost a decade ago. Even then they were a lagging indicator. Germany doesn't have the republican ideology of France, but the "constitutional patriotism" of the post-war republic, and actual practice of integration are a long way from the old story of "blut and boden".</I><BR/><BR/>Yes; thanks for the correction Doug. Or, not so much a correction as an addition; I think Chris was probably just pulling out the literature on German nationalism (much of which, as I alluded to elsewhere, I kind of question) to make a stark example, as many defenders of "civic" nationalism have long done. As for myself, I actually had just finished a lecture in my comparative politics class about changing and different notions of citizenship in Germany and elsewhere (<I>jus soli</I> vs. <I>jus sanguinis </I>, etc.) when your comment appeared. Sorry I didn't respond sooner.Russell Arben Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03366800726360134194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-1032427103781941572008-03-14T21:12:00.000-05:002008-03-14T21:12:00.000-05:00For a discussion of what Germans are and are not s...For a discussion of what Germans are and are not so far capable of see jason Stanley <A HREF="http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2005/12/multiculturalis.html" REL="nofollow">Ruminations on "Multiculturalism" in Germany</A>D. Ghirlandaiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06283931383770759507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-37068074326736136892008-03-13T04:47:00.000-05:002008-03-13T04:47:00.000-05:00Haven't finished reading the post, but just wanted...Haven't finished reading the post, but just wanted to note that Germany's laws on citizenship were considerably revised in 1998, now almost a decade ago. Even then they were a lagging indicator. Germany doesn't have the republican ideology of France, but the "constitutional patriotism" of the post-war republic, and actual practice of integration are a long way from the old story of "blut and boden".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-71042335162984790332008-03-10T15:52:00.000-05:002008-03-10T15:52:00.000-05:00Russell,I believe that Kosovo’s independence will ...Russell,<BR/><BR/>I believe that Kosovo’s independence will definitely have consequences around the world.<BR/><BR/>In the near future, we may see escalation of conflict in the Basque region of Spain, fighting for independent Kurdistan, problems in Romania, Slovakia, Sri Lanka, and many other countries. German Spiegel comments that “many countries fear that their separatist groups could choose to emulate developments in the Balkans.”<BR/><BR/>Bosnia will definitely go through a lot of uncertainty. In December 1995, Bosnia ended its three-sided bloody war that lasted for almost four years. Since then, the country is formally divided into two, and informally into three ethnically homogeneous parts. It is very possible that some ethnic groups in Bosnia could decide to follow Kosovo’s path and seek partition of the country. German newspaper Handelsblatt writes that “the West will have problems explaining why one is against Republika Srpska [Bosnian Serb entity in Bosnia] when Kosovo's secession was deemed acceptable. Keeping the artificial state Bosnia-Herzegovina together against the will of the Bosnian Serbs will, in any case, be difficult.”<BR/><BR/>SAVO HELETA<BR/>Author of "Not My Turn to Die: <BR/>Memoirs of a Broken Childhood in Bosnia" <BR/><A HREF="http://savoheleta.livejournal.com" REL="nofollow">http://savoheleta.livejournal.com</A>Savo Heletahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01793836194423547986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-17387933698802658872008-03-09T12:11:00.000-05:002008-03-09T12:11:00.000-05:00Matt my comment may annoy but it's directed at the...Matt my comment may annoy but it's directed at the question. Yours is directed only at me. <BR/><BR/>Politics is not just philosophy, its a matter both of principles and cases. it requires understanding the philosophy of others as it requires understanding their psychology, and your own as well. Politics is situational. Pretending that issues of psychology are logically irrelevant to you as a reasoner and morally irrelevant to others as barbarians is dangerous and silly. If you want the cliche versions, then fools rush in where wise men fear to tread and the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Your actions may be seen by others as setting precedents that in your infinite wisdom you had not thought of. They might be lost in a fog of nationalism and still by logically correct. After all, American foreign policies is as much predicated on lying to ourselves as lying to others.D. Ghirlandaiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06283931383770759507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-68338049662253553712008-03-09T10:05:00.000-05:002008-03-09T10:05:00.000-05:00Russell- I still need to leave you a substantive c...Russell- I still need to leave you a substantive comment but wanted to let you know that Brad Delong has a post up on your post where, I'm pretty sure, he gets the points exactly backwards. I pointed this out. He got angry and demanded citations. I offered some, he deleted that remark, disemvouled my earlier one and called me a troll. So, it's all the more typical Brad Delong dishonesty over there, but you might want to take a look at it. He doesn't understand philosophy at all, regularly makes a huge hash of it, and throws a fit if you point that out, but since it's about your post you might want to have a look.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-35768669948576180722008-03-08T22:21:00.000-06:002008-03-08T22:21:00.000-06:00"nationalism: it emerged in response to particular..."nationalism: it emerged in response to particular felt needs, as the human community/consciousness is expanded and/or refined through cosmopolitan experiences those felt needs change, and hence, people who act on that basis of nationalism are invoking something that human beings have moved beyond, or at least should be moving beyond."<BR/><BR/>I'm sorry but there can be no argument against this...<BR/>except to say that such cosmopolitanism can not be enforced from without, whether in Kosovo or the US. If it could be I would be in favor of doing so in my country (the US). As it is there's more sophisticated discussion of politics in the teahouses of Tehran than there is here. <BR/>Whether Europe's old blood is willing to recognize it or not, the new cosmopolitanism is here, and it includes Islam. The Islamists in Turkey are more modern than the military secularists, and are more modern than the arch-secularists in the west: Dawkins et al. According to Steven Weinberg <A HREF="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/WEIFAC.html?show=contents" REL="nofollow">Zionism is science</A>. (see Chapter 15) If thats the case, so is the Trinity.<BR/>The rule of reason is the rule of experts, who spout language most people don't understand. And it's also the rule of experts who in their arrogance will twist reason into their own perverse definition of the reasonable. Weinberg did just that. And that's the danger of the rule of men. Communities who prefer the rule of community as such have every reason to rebel against this. But in time, and not under threat, <A HREF="http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2008/03/cutting-across-diverse-muslim-countries.html" REL="nofollow">all communities will learn.</A><BR/>Some things can't be taught. Modernity, as the secularism of law and democracy (and not the secularism of Platonism and pseudo-science) must be learned, and earned. The question of Kosovo is whether stability and "progress" is best served by specific actions in specific places at this time. If one wants to play the neutral observer then one's own ego and desire to be publicly on the side of the angels or of righteousness is irrelevant.<BR/><BR/>"The compromises that people make, the sacrifices they forgo, may trouble a philosopher who is obsessed with human rights. But "I don't believe," says Walzer, "that the opposition of philosophers is a sufficient ground for military invasion."<BR/><BR/>This is simply truly obvious. To say otherwise is the logic of those without any second order awareness of themselves and of the world.D. Ghirlandaiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06283931383770759507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-9268487640605462862008-03-08T10:00:00.000-06:002008-03-08T10:00:00.000-06:00Ends and means. Liberal democracy as a means to a ...Ends and means. Liberal democracy as a means to a successful determination of the tribe or inevitably coming together as an identifiable group to realise an enlightened globe.<BR/><BR/>In my opinion it boils to down that most human of all things human. Procrastination. It is far more fun to fight over conscious methods instead of crystalising our unconscious motivations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-82027770795485988702008-03-08T09:29:00.000-06:002008-03-08T09:29:00.000-06:00Chris, I appreciate you taking the time to read my...Chris, I appreciate you taking the time to read my long post. No obligations, of course, but if you manage to respond sometime next week or whenever, I'll read whatever you have to say with great interest.<BR/><BR/>Abb1, what you suggest is a common--and intuitively sensible--argument in the literature on nationalism: it emerged in response to particular felt needs, as the human community/consciousness is expanded and/or refined through cosmopolitan experiences those felt needs change, and hence, people who act on that basis of nationalism are invoking something that human beings have moved beyond, or at least should be moving beyond. The problem is that, in my mind at least, such an argument depends upon a rather narrow understanding of national/communal affectivity, and consequently it misunderstands what is still happening all around us. I look at the European Union today, and I see arguments over a constitution, I see the widespread reliance upon ELF (English as Lingua Franca), I see discussions about a common "European sensibility" towards war and security that is in contrast to America's (look at Habermas's comments back during the lead-up to the Iraq War)...and I see a slowly emerging ("imagined") national consciousness. Not that I think the EU is going to turn into the United States of Europe anytime soon, but still, the basic expressive/psychological process appears to me to still be at work, even in the heart of "Enlightened" Europe.Russell Arben Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03366800726360134194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-38037693405434737532008-03-08T07:52:00.000-06:002008-03-08T07:52:00.000-06:00Not being a philosopher I don't see anything parti...Not being a philosopher I don't see anything particularly 'messy', 'convoluted' or 'complicated' here. <BR/><BR/>There seems to be a clear evolutionary path from tribalism to ethnic/cultural nationalism to humanism. It was OK, maybe even progressive, to be a nationalist in the early 19th century, but human civilization moved on to bigger and better things and now it's simply reactionary. Sure, the idea of nationalism is still strong, but its time has passed.<BR/><BR/>Why can't it be this simple?<BR/><BR/>abb1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7907752.post-43131422118616916182008-03-08T04:05:00.000-06:002008-03-08T04:05:00.000-06:00Thanks for this Russell, much food for thought. I ...Thanks for this Russell, much food for thought. I may respond at length at CT next week, but, for now, a weekend of family obligation/domestic labour beckons.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com