3 ms·

> I don't think you understand what nationalism is. I was misusing the term nationalist in a literary device in order to deliberately mimic your misuse of the

> I don't think you understand what nationalism is. I was misusing the term nationalist in a literary device in order to deliberately mimic your misuse of the word colonialist. I wasn't so condescending as to assume you didn't know what colonialist meant so I assumed its misuse was deliberate too. > my reply was thoughtful, not pointlessly insulting. My mistake. It's rare to see colonialist used as a term of endearment. > sovereign destiny / sovereign rights I guess this is the meat of the point. See I don't believe that just because someone in temporarily in charge of a country that they should have carte blanche to do whatever they fancy. Now, in the case of the Coptic monasteries in the Sinai, there is no threat from the present government. If, say, the Sinai Insurgency escalated and the monasteries were under threat, it would be entirely appropriate, in my view, to pressure Egypt to do something about it. I can't envisage a realistic situation where external forces would be appropriate in this case. I do believe that it is both right and proper to care about, and if necessary act for, our fragile collective cultural heritage. If that makes me a colonialist in your eyes then so be it. I've been called worse.

FroshKiller 9y ago
As I've said elsewhere in this thread, it's that you consider culture in general to be "collective," and that's a dangerous idea. I'm pretty okay with the idea of sharing my culture with you, but unless you're one of my people, you certainly don't have any claim on it.
- lucozade 9y ago
  What a scary notion. I'm Egyptian Christian descent (genuinely, my father was from Alexandria). Do I get a golden ticket? If I want to set fire to the library are we good with this as its "my people"? What about if I asked an external power in to preserve it? But wait, I'm not Coptic. Are they not my people now? Am I a colonialist for wanting to preserve the library because of the church my old man attended? What could possibly go wrong with cultural ghettoisation?
- keyboardtyper 9y ago
  > "...but unless you're one of my people..." This is complicated. Are we to assume that we aren't in a culture group unless we are born from a group's member or born in a specific location. If a culture resonates with an individual that doesn't fit into the "culture group" definition, can they never see the culture as their own? It definitely seems to bring into question what the definition of culture is and when is a culture added to the collective. Isn't that what sharing does? Aren't there arguments about writers writing books and readers interpreting the story in their own way? The story is now everybody's, right? I do feel the danger in the idea, but it also feels sort of correct.

FroshKiller 9y ago

As I've said elsewhere in this thread, it's that you consider culture in general to be "collective," and that's a dangerous idea. I'm pretty okay with the idea of sharing my culture with you, but unless you're one of my people, you certainly don't have any claim on it.

lucozade 9y ago
What a scary notion. I'm Egyptian Christian descent (genuinely, my father was from Alexandria). Do I get a golden ticket? If I want to set fire to the library are we good with this as its "my people"? What about if I asked an external power in to preserve it? But wait, I'm not Coptic. Are they not my people now? Am I a colonialist for wanting to preserve the library because of the church my old man attended? What could possibly go wrong with cultural ghettoisation?
keyboardtyper 9y ago
> "...but unless you're one of my people..." This is complicated. Are we to assume that we aren't in a culture group unless we are born from a group's member or born in a specific location. If a culture resonates with an individual that doesn't fit into the "culture group" definition, can they never see the culture as their own? It definitely seems to bring into question what the definition of culture is and when is a culture added to the collective. Isn't that what sharing does? Aren't there arguments about writers writing books and readers interpreting the story in their own way? The story is now everybody's, right? I do feel the danger in the idea, but it also feels sort of correct.