![302cc9b4780f8cbef6f70c3a8417913050b6aafb](http://klab.lv/userpic/172488/14890) | 302cc9b4780f8cbef6f70c3a8417913050b6aafb ( mindbound) rakstīja, |
"Latvietība", manā skatījumā vispāri nepastāv.
I readily equalize nationalism and patriotism with religion, both being based in the realm of simulacra and existing only as such - copies without original and signs without anything to signify. There are no such things as countries, or nations, or races, there are just a number of coloured regions on a map, there are just a number of imagined communities that people choose to belong and include in their identities, for whatever reasons, and all too often such extension of identity is dangerous, for the human brain is simply not fit for such an externalization of self.
Ergo, there are no actual "Latvians" in the sense of self-identification; there are citizens of a certain geopolitical structure, there are inhabitants of a certain territory, but there is nothing that can be identified with "latvianity", for culture is ever changing, history defines a separate context on its own, and language is never confined to any particular place on Earth. Nationality is an imaginary thing, probably stemming from politicisation of our primitive instincts of territorialism; and patriotism is nothing but paying homage to that phantom.
And, as with all ideas of splitting humanity into small, distinct groups, there is always the danger of in-group support and out-group hostility, which is precisely one of the main reasons why I am a citizen of the planet Earth (although I cannot say that I am a patriot of humanity).
An excellent, short and concise essay about the dangers of over-extended identity can be read here, highly recommended by me: http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.htmlLatvija kā ģeopolitisks veidojums man, nudien, ir diezgan dziļi vienaldzīga un, nē, jelkāda veida nacionālisma apgreidotas versijas mums nudien nevajag; to, kā daudzas citas bērnu slimības, ir, iespējams, jāizslimo, lai izstrādātos imunitāte pret nākamajiem gadījumiem, taču ne jau jākultivē vai jāattīsta.
Kas attiecas uz iespējām pašiznīcināties aizgājušo 1500 gadu laikā... it may sound strange, but - NU UN TAD? Ņemot esošo vēsturi, šobrīd mūsu iespējas iznīcināt sevi ir viennozīmīgi nesalīdzināmi lielākas, nekā visā iepriekšējā cilvēces pastāvēšanas laikā; vai tas nozīmētu, ka mums tagad ir jāatmet zinātne, jāatmet attīstība un progress, un, bīstoties no
iespējamības, jāatgriežas in the comfort and peace of a new dark age? Apzināties šādu
iespējamību, manā izpratnē, nozīmē tikai vairāk domāšanas un, atsevišķos gadījumos, vairāk piesardzības, taču tai nekādā gadījumā nebūtu jākļūst par šķērsli, lai dotos tālāk.
(Lasīt komentārus)
Nopūsties: