|
| ▲ | rixed 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Unless we disagree on the meaning of "national character", isn't that easy to come up with 100 other reasons to explain those economic/political differences? |
| |
|
| ▲ | shermantanktop 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| History? Geography? Specific laws? Particular parties in power? There are a lot of things to look at alongside mystical notions of a collective national character of a people, especially now that most of these countries have significant immigration and exposure to ideas from elsewhere. |
| |
| ▲ | permo-w 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | all of the things you listed make up or result from national character. besides some short interludes, for example, Japan has had the same party in power since 1955. it's a weird thing to deny the existence of. different nations act differently. it's not heresy to make generalisations, particularly in the age of nationalism when many/most people actively try to set and follow their country's norms | | |
|
|
| ▲ | noobermin 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Waiting for the country of people who fly out of their mother's wombs or whom are born in a sack on their father's backs and further those who mentally convince themselves to pass through walls. |
| |
| ▲ | permo-w 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | so there not being the difference between a human and a kangaroo or a frog and a bat means that the difference between an Argentine and a Japanese person isn't real either? literally meaningless analogy |
|
