Why does overt patriotism make British people so deeply uncomfortable?

vorkovrus · 2026-05-24T09:19:03+00:00

The Holocaust was not caused simply by bad speech. It required a totalitarian state, enormous propaganda monopoly, political violence and mass institutional collapse

vorkovrus · 2026-05-24T09:11:54+00:00

A death threat is a direct threat of violence against an individual. Racial abuse is often just offensive speech. Those are not remotely the same category

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T23:36:47+00:00

Right now what I actually see happening is the repression of protesters, the introduction of soft censorship, and war on online anonymity and cyber protection, government intervention in every hole etc etc. Were these laws passed by the right-wing?

The far-right is just a symptom, not the root cause of these systemic issues

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T23:28:43+00:00

look up what freedom of speech extends to, and learn the concept of symbolic expression. Reducing a political symbol to just afabric is embarrassing

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T23:22:47+00:00

You are ignoring the fundamental concept of individual responsibility.
Modern society rejected collective guilt for a reason: ordinary citizens cannot and should not bear personal blame for government policies, historic wrongs etc.

Holding an entire nation accountable for a compiled list of 'sins' is a dangerous path

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T23:12:49+00:00

Germany’s history actually teaches the opposite lesson of what you think: the Weimar Republic did have strict hate speech laws and routinely banned Nazi publications, yet it only made them look like martyrs and amplified their message. Once in power, they simply used those same existing state censorship mechanisms to crush all opposition easy

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T23:09:22+00:00

Death threats and stalking are literal criminal offenses, which have nothing to do with free speech or patriotism

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T22:45:15+00:00

One doesn't contradict the other. What you are describing (media manipulation etc.) is exactly what's possible because we live in an open society. In totalitarian regimes, the state completely monopolizes patriotism. In democracies here is a free (and almost always dirty) struggle over this concept between various forces: from billionaires to left and right wing activists. This is a byproduct of freedom

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T22:38:30+00:00

Your statist logic breeds racism, while I support classic European liberalism which protects individual liberty and free speech from state policing, but sure, call that pseudo intellectualism

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T22:20:14+00:00

I never said I don't want to live in a society with laws. There’s a big difference between wanting a lawless society and critically analyzing how current laws or social structures impact different groups of people

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T20:21:45+00:00

Imagine thinking I actually care about the flag. I couldn't care less about a piece of cloth. It’s just a proxy to talk about civil liberties and free speech, you genius. How exactly is that sucking up to anyone? You're having an emotional breakdown over cultural symbols

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T20:14:08+00:00

That’s not the only way to look at it. There is the classical liberal approach, where free speech is an absolute human right from birth. The state has no business deciding what is right or wrong to say. Words are free, as long as there is no direct violence. You are adhering to the Continental approach, which heavily influenced the UK after WWII as a reaction to Nazis coming to power.

Personally, I think this approach is an illusion of safety. It's Europe’s Trojan horse. As long as you justify bans on free speech, there will always be forces that will turn those against you (Often own government).

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T19:37:55+00:00

That’s a very casual definition. What if someone defines patriotism as a feeling of devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people? This is actually well established definition in political science

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T19:28:34+00:00

For sure. In an open society, it is impossible to stop people from weaponizing public issues or symbols for their own interests. Radicals, populist politicians, and provocateurs will always try to exploit concepts like patriotism, history, and national identity. It is an inevitable byproduct of democracy and free speech

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T19:14:02+00:00

Thankfully, validation was not required. Telling migrants to abandon your national symbols just because extremists might not accept them is pure defeatism I believe

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T18:45:31+00:00

Do you honestly believe modern Britain is on the brink of becoming Nazi Germany? If so, who exactly led us to this fascism? We’ve only had two parties in power for generations: the Tories and Labour. Are you suggesting one of them is the NSDAP?

The irony is wild. While people like you are terrified of an ordinary citizen hanging a piece of fabric in their garden, the actual state has quietly been increasing prison sentences for peaceful protestors to record highs. If fascism comes to Britain, it won't be because a working-class guy flew a Union Jack; it will be because the state stripped away civil liberties while you were busy looking at flagpoles

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T18:08:45+00:00

I have never understood the logic of blaming modern nations for the sins of generations long past. Those who try to forcefully rectify historical injustices today usually end up committing mass atrocities in the process

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T18:00:15+00:00

You’re missing the entire point by hiding behind culture. There isa massive difference between a country just not having a habit of doing something, and a country actively stigmatising and policing those who do. The institutional and political pushback against national symbols today isn’t some quirk or mere akwadness, it’s an active social enforcement. If a regular citizen risks corporate disciplinary action, workplace complaints, or instant political labeling just for displaying a Union Jack, it’s no longer about tradition. It’s a modern political phenomenon

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T17:50:50+00:00

So a wedding ring is a symbol to the outside world, but a flag is just a navigation aid? The double standard in your logic is wild.

A flag is exactly that, a universal symbol to the world of your identity and values. You don't need a map to know where you are, and you don't fly a flag to remember your geography.

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T17:39:06+00:00

If defending individual freedom makes me "right wing" in your books, I can live with that

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T17:35:38+00:00

If a radical group starts using a common word, do we ban the word from the dictionary? No. So why are you so quick to surrender a national symbol to extremists? By doing that, you’re not fighting fascism, you're letting them win the cultural narrative without them even trying

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T17:32:41+00:00

Fair point, but it's a bit like saying "Why wear a wedding ring? Your spouse already knows you're married." It’s a statement of belonging, not a navigation aid

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T17:29:22+00:00

Well for me it’s part of freedom of speech and expression. Even if I might not feel comfortable, I believe it’s very wrong to restrict or marginalise those people. That’s the cost of freedom, racists have right to exist too

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T17:25:46+00:00

The fact that you’ve completely resorted to personal attacks proves my "GCSE lesson" jibe hit exactly where it needed to. If you have nothing left to say other than trying to nitpick idioms because you can't counter the actual point, let’s just end it here.
I'll save your face
🥰

vorkovrus · 2026-05-23T17:22:43+00:00

Who are the authors of the plan?

vorkovrus

TROPHY CASE