are you proud to be an American?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The "I'm not an American" answer, I think.

But in a more general sense... I'm I proud to be British? No, I don't think so, it's a little artificial isn't it. Welsh? English? Hmm... I don't know. I certainly don't think "thank God that I'm Welsh and English", but all the same I do love my country, though I'm not entirely sure what "my country" is. In any case, it's more of a gentle emotional pull, no, tug, than a cheast-beating, flag-waving thing.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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.

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. Though BRTD likes to define cities by their official boundaries and nowt else, so maybe not.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wasn't actually attack you there...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Uh...is this serious?

I think it is. Yes. It must be, and is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If we're talking actual cities (or towns, frankly), sure. Though the cute, no, quaint, American tendency to call any group of more than about three houses a "city" might confuse that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's not my argument.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I noticed that you really so no other point than to spew vague, annoying statements around.

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 must be logged in to read this quote.

Don't I?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do I?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You use circular arguments

Not real ones. Or at least, I don't think so.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Never do that. Comments are always related.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I like to read things. I always assume that this is true of other people. To not do so would be rather rude, wouldn't it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't usually make silly points. Strange ones, maybe. Probably. Guilty.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

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.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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).
On the other hand, I know when I'm in Manchester or Birmingham (or, haha, Bangor). I'm not talking about official city boundaries or anything, but cities as a physical entity. You can even tell when you're moving from the suburbs to the city proper.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, I'm not thinking about boundaries, but actual existence.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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.

Ah, you have to be an American to be able to use the word "nation" is such a free sense

But even in a physical sense a city is more than just a collection of buildings; it has an actual physical existence all of its own. For one thing, they grow. And their growth can be observed;

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeeeeeeesssss... but even so border areas will often have more in common with the area on the other side of the border than with the rest of the country that they're in.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This is a thread about America...

Sure. But general concepts can be applied to America as much as they can to anywhere else.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

More to the point the normal meaning of nation (with all the associated ethnic trappings) has never really been introduced to America. Which I why I wrote that only an American can really use that word is such a free sense.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would argue that it's American political terminology that's often bizarre and confusing (American useage of the word "liberal" especially... though the same does apply, to a more limited extent, to "conservative", actually...)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think that I ever wrote that it's silly to be proud of a country. My answer to the initial question;

The "I'm not an American" answer, I think.

But in a more general sense... I'm I proud to be British? No, I don't think so, it's a little artificial isn't it. Welsh? English? Hmm... I don't know. I certainly don't think "thank God that I'm Welsh and English", but all the same I do love my country, though I'm not entirely sure what "my country" is. In any case, it's more of a gentle emotional pull, no, tug, than a cheast-beating, flag-waving thing.

Moving on...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah, I've written several times now that I'm not talking about official boundaries but, really, almost the city as a landscape (or something like that. Or as something almost alive).

Look at the maps of the growth of Birmingham I posted. See the thick red line? That's the official boundary of the city right now. It's every bit as arbitrary as the boundaries of America cities, perhaps more so because in places it was actually imposed centrally (though Brum suffered less on that count than, say, Leeds).

I'm not talking (writing actually) about the city as-the-officially-sactioned-public-body.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Same here actually, though zoning is not so common. City vandals planners can be very powerful.