a) NATION implies each one of a people. Suggested nationalism slaps a label upon a people to collectivize them.
b) consenting (want or not want) to suggested (nationalism) tempts one into a conflict of reason (want vs not want), while permitting those suggesting to rebrand the sides into for example Palestine vs israel.
c) focusing on a brand (nationalism), distracts one from what's burning within (each one of a people). Reasoning (Palestine vs isreal) over suggested; tempts one to ignore each one underneath the labels, hence distracting one from all the ethnic cleansing of other ones.
d) to distract from nationalism...others suggest internationalism to tempt one into an internal (nationalism) vs external (internationalism) conflict of reason. The external side is now called "globalism".
What one ignores..."internationalism" implies INTERNAL NATION, hence within and among a people. But if nationalism burns a people (nation) and those who suggest internationalism are not outside but inside, then how do they protect themselves?
Situated at the center (chosen ones) of every conflict (imbalance among reasoning choices), the local few can make a burned offering out of the many within their circumference, hence circumcising external imbalance to sustain internal balance.
Why does that work? Because being implies center (choice) of surrounding (balance), and consenting to the suggested choices of others puts oneself into imbalance. If a many ignore perceivable balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want); then only a chosen few remain balanced.
a) NATION implies each one of a people. Suggested nationalism slaps a label upon a people to collectivize them.
b) consenting (want or not want) to suggested (nationalism) tempts one into a conflict of reason (want vs not want), while permitting those suggesting to rebrand the sides into for example Palestine vs israel.
c) focusing on a brand (nationalism), distracts one from what's burning within (each one of a people). Reasoning (Palestine vs isreal) over suggested; tempts one to ignore each one underneath the labels, hence distracting one from all the ethnic cleansing of other ones.
d) to distract from nationalism...others suggest internationalism to tempt one into an internal (nationalism) vs external (internationalism) conflict of reason. The external side is now called "globalism".
What one ignores..."internationalism" implies INTERNAL NATION, hence within and among a people. But if nationalism burns a people (nation) and those who suggest internationalism are not outside but inside, then how do they protect themselves?
Situated at the center (chosen ones) of every conflict (imbalance among reasoning choices), the local few can make a burned offering out of the many within their circumference, hence circumcising external imbalance to sustain internal balance.
Why does that work? Because being implies center (choice) of surrounding (balance), and consenting to the suggested choices of others puts oneself into imbalance. If a many ignore perceivable balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want); then only a chosen few remain balanced.