are you proud to be an American?

[Keystone Phil]

No. I see no reason to take pride in the geographic area you were born in.

It's not just about where you are born but there's no point arguing this with you. You'd make the argument that you're not proud to be an American because it's just a geographic area but you'll tell us how proud you are of your city. 

[Keystone Phil]

No. I see no reason to take pride in the geographic area you were born in.

It's not just about where you are born but there's no point arguing this with you. You'd make the argument that you're not proud to be an American because it's just a geographic area but you'll tell us how proud you are of your city. 

I wasn't born in my city so the comparison is pointless.

And you don't need to be born in America to be an American.

[Keystone Phil]

And you don't need to be born in America to be an American.

Again, I don't see why I should be proud of things I'm not responsible for. I can see BRTD's point for once.

He has no point though. He takes pride in being a citizen of his city.

[Keystone Phil]

And you don't need to be born in America to be an American.

Again, I don't see why I should be proud of things I'm not responsible for. I can see BRTD's point for once.

He has no point though. He takes pride in being a citizen of his city.

Except he had a responsibility in that and it was his choice to be here. Which is immigrants should be proud about America.

And you mean to tell me that he wouldn't be proud of Minneapolis if he was born there? Get real.

[Keystone Phil]

Besides it is one thing to be proud of a city and another to be proud of your country.

Why? And it's certainly no different when you consider BRTD's definition (geographic area).

[Keystone Phil]

Your opinion of your home city is all about the residents who live their and their culture while this may differ with your country. So really being proud of his city has nothing to do with the geographic area of it but its culture and the people inside of it.

...

And you can't have those feelings about your country? You're in way over your head, dude.

I'm proud of my city because it has the things I want and it's a city, not a suburb.

And that's why people are proud of America, too.

I love how it's silly to be proud of your country but it makes perfect sense to be proud of your city just because it's a city and not a suburb.

[Keystone Phil]

Your opinion of your home city is all about the residents who live their and their culture while this may differ with your country. So really being proud of his city has nothing to do with the geographic area of it but its culture and the people inside of it.

And you can't have those feelings about your country? You're in way over your head, dude.

His city has a different culture and different people than the rest of the country.

...

But his objection is not that he disagrees with American culture or people; it's that he doesn't take pride in geographic areas. A city is also a geographic area.

Your opinion of your home city is all about the residents who live their and their culture while this may differ with your country. So really being proud of his city has nothing to do with the geographic area of it but its culture and the people inside of it.

...

And you can't have those feelings about your country? You're in way over your head, dude.

I'm proud of my city because it has the things I want and it's a city, not a suburb.

And that's why people are proud of America, too.

I love how it's silly to be proud of your country but it makes perfect sense to be proud of your city just because it's a city and not a suburb.

People used to have more pride in their patch than in their (country won't do as the word was often used to mean "my patch" or whatever...) nation. Nothing strange about that at all.

That's not what I'm saying so don't twist what I'm saying. I understand that that has been the case. You're talking to someone with an Italian background.

I'm pointing out that his logic is flawed. A lot of people here are laughing off this idea of taking pride in their country because it's just geographically based or because it isn't of their choosing. However, they argue that you can take pride in your city because of its culture. Countries don't have culture? Countries are just geographically based? Countries aren't sometimes chosen? The logic is flawed. If BRTD doesn't take pride in being an American because of what it is to be an American, fine. That wasn't his argument though.

[Keystone Phil]

An argument could be made that city's are "things" in a way that nation states aren't, that they actually have an existence independent of the whims of boundary-drawers.

And if cities do, why wouldn't a country?

[Keystone Phil]

An argument could be made that city's are "things" in a way that nation states aren't, that they actually have an existence independent of the whims of boundary-drawers.

And if cities do, why wouldn't a country?

Can you tell that you're in a different country just by looking at the landscape?

Uh...is this serious? Can you tell that you're in a different city just by looking at the landscape? No, not always but I don't find that relevant at all.

Here's your argument: Country based only on geography. No sense in pride. City based on more than just geography so you can be proud.

It's a silly argument.

An argument could be made that city's are "things" in a way that nation states aren't, that they actually have an existence independent of the whims of boundary-drawers.

And if cities do, why wouldn't a country?

To a certain extent a city is an actual community, while a country is, to invoke Benedict Anderson, an "imagined" one. Say you were never told you were American, that nationality had no imprint on local culture and society.. would you really say that life would be much different?

Would life be much different if BRTD wasn't a citizen of Minneapolis? No, it wasn't. He acted the same way and had the same feelings when he lived in Mankato or whatever.

[Keystone Phil]

It's relevant in that it is proof that cities are real things.

Ok but I don't know how that changes anything. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Your argument is that you can tell the difference between cities but not necessarily between countries so you can take pride in one (because it is unique) and not the other (because it's generic). It's a lame argument.

[Keystone Phil]

Ok but I don't know how that changes anything. 

Depends on the argument you're making, doesn't it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's not my argument either.

I noticed that you really so no other point than to spew vague, annoying statements around. You don't clarify anything and think you're a genius with your "insight."

[Keystone Phil]

I think I've made my thoughts on this general issue fairly clear in this thread. Not my fault if you've not read them.

You use circular arguments and make very vague, totally unrelated comments. When I point out what you mean, you say, "I don't mean that" and don't elaborate.

Basically, you make a silly point, argue that it's a logical point and if you don't understand it you're just not bright/didn't read them.

There's more to a city than geography. There's more to a country than geography. You can be proud of both.

[Keystone Phil]

Sure. All I was saying (really) was that cities have an, er, objective physical existence that "nations" and "countries" don't. Cities simply are. Nations are not like that.

What do you mean by physical existence and how do countries not have that?

[Keystone Phil]

but to separate one from the others as being somehow unique just sounds like arguing for the sake of arguing.

Thank you. With this crew, that's probably the case.

[Keystone Phil]

I see what Al's getting at, but Snowguy is right as well. A nation is a larger collection of cities, and states, and provinces, just like a city is a larger collection of houses and businesses.

And national borders do delineate culture, sometimes simply due to their existence rather than their existence being based on any particular culture, but nonetheless they are distinctive.

Yeah...I've been arguing that for awhile now. I guess it's easier to give the credit to someone less controversial/more in line with your way of thinking. 

[Keystone Phil]

I can tell when I'm in a different country by looking at the architecture.

Obviously (to a point anyway). But that's not what I meant. What I meant (and mean) is this; when I cross the border between England and Wales is it immediately obvious that I'm now in a different country? The only obvious signs are signs. The landscape is the same. The accents are the same. The architecture is the same. The strangely sweet fumes from the Kronospan works in Chirk don't stop at the border with England. Even placenames are unreliable (choosing one fairly small section of the border as an example; Hengoed, Weston Rhyn, Gobowen and Street Dinas are all in England, while Overton, Bronington, Eyton and Worthenbury are all in Wales).

Uh...I can say the same for certain areas that border Philadelphia.