kcchippy
Member
Basically just supplementary readings that could help in understanding the topic.
Feel free to add to this forum and share ideas about the unit, it’s the best way to further your own understanding!!!
To start, I found this great essay in the SMH Spectrum 14-15 April 2007 pp 28 – 29, “The Essay” titled “Flag of Convenience” by David Rutledge. The byline is “A renewed eagerness to display our national symbol has fuelled a tension between tribalism and internationalism divided along class lines”.
Thus the article discusses key ideologies including post modernism (deconstructs how we form our identity) and semiotics (looks at symbols). It also looks at the affects of globalization in forming our identity and the flag bearing as a way of dealing with the changing structure of society to do globalization (nationalism vs internationalism). Furthermore it discusses these issues using class and religious paradigms (It pitches atheism against theism, discusses the place of religion in discussion of nationalism and argues that it’s primarily irrelevant).
Some interesting quotes:
“But I will say, in defence of more parochial people that we are basically tribal by nature. Those of us who can make the whole world our tribe have probably been favoured, and are lucky in some ways, and shouldn’t be too supercilious about those who need more local points of attachment” (How individuals deal with the changing global environment).
“If the much abused term ‘postmodernity’ refers to anything, it refers to the contemporary tendency of all unifying structures of meaning to dissolve, providing a shaky foundation at best for one’s individual sense of self. National identity no longer tells us who we are in quite the clear, ringing tones of bygone days. Mass immigration, multiculturalism, the globalization of commerce and labour – all these phenomena conspire to make our geographical location mean a good deal less than it used to.” (transcending the barriers of time and space – talks about present in the context of the present, dissolving national boundaries, RFTG is all about maintaining a sense of identity in terms of communities or “nations” and in terms of individuals – great quote, in my humble opinion).
“For the partriot, on the other hand, national allegiance may be the only fixed point left in a disintegrating, atomized universe. I might not feel secure any more in my job, my relationship, my religious beliefs or my sexuality, but, by crikey, I’m an Aussie and that means something”. (here we see mentions of religious paradigm, economic paradigm – my job and discussion again of how the changing reasons for patriotism are developing in a globalised world)
“Globalisation today shows disturbing signs of crystallizing into a coercive religion-by-default, with its doctrines and dogmas, its saints and heretics, its promises of heaven and its warnings of hell for those who refuse to avail themselves of its benefits. And to espouse a form of global ethics, to identify as a concerned citizen of the world rather than of a nation-state, can often go hand in hand with an intolerant suspicion of those who prefer to look after the local”. (all I can say is – perfect as stimulus for a RFTG exam, or at least in my opinion encapsulates the complexity of what globalization is, it’s not just an economic phenomenon it’s a fundamental change in the way we think [hence texts and ways of thinking] about ourselves and our place in the world, how we form our identity).
“modern internationalists tend to belong to a privileged class”
“In the broadest sense, we’re all citizens of the world. But whether or not we enjoy our citizenship-without-borders depends on whether or not we’re receiving the benefits of other forms of globalization”.
“Perhaps patriotism…is today the refuge of a new kind of sceptic: one who lacks job security, who sees the fruits of 21st-century capitalism chiefly in emergence of a super-rich plutocracy, who likes Japanese food but finds it hard to swallow Japanese ownership of large swaths of coastal Queensland. For such unbelievers, the flag is more a shield than a weapon”. (symbolism, The Castle anyone?)
IF YOU CAN GET HOLD OF THE ARTICLE – READ IT!!!
Feel free to add to this forum and share ideas about the unit, it’s the best way to further your own understanding!!!
To start, I found this great essay in the SMH Spectrum 14-15 April 2007 pp 28 – 29, “The Essay” titled “Flag of Convenience” by David Rutledge. The byline is “A renewed eagerness to display our national symbol has fuelled a tension between tribalism and internationalism divided along class lines”.
Thus the article discusses key ideologies including post modernism (deconstructs how we form our identity) and semiotics (looks at symbols). It also looks at the affects of globalization in forming our identity and the flag bearing as a way of dealing with the changing structure of society to do globalization (nationalism vs internationalism). Furthermore it discusses these issues using class and religious paradigms (It pitches atheism against theism, discusses the place of religion in discussion of nationalism and argues that it’s primarily irrelevant).
Some interesting quotes:
“But I will say, in defence of more parochial people that we are basically tribal by nature. Those of us who can make the whole world our tribe have probably been favoured, and are lucky in some ways, and shouldn’t be too supercilious about those who need more local points of attachment” (How individuals deal with the changing global environment).
“If the much abused term ‘postmodernity’ refers to anything, it refers to the contemporary tendency of all unifying structures of meaning to dissolve, providing a shaky foundation at best for one’s individual sense of self. National identity no longer tells us who we are in quite the clear, ringing tones of bygone days. Mass immigration, multiculturalism, the globalization of commerce and labour – all these phenomena conspire to make our geographical location mean a good deal less than it used to.” (transcending the barriers of time and space – talks about present in the context of the present, dissolving national boundaries, RFTG is all about maintaining a sense of identity in terms of communities or “nations” and in terms of individuals – great quote, in my humble opinion).
“For the partriot, on the other hand, national allegiance may be the only fixed point left in a disintegrating, atomized universe. I might not feel secure any more in my job, my relationship, my religious beliefs or my sexuality, but, by crikey, I’m an Aussie and that means something”. (here we see mentions of religious paradigm, economic paradigm – my job and discussion again of how the changing reasons for patriotism are developing in a globalised world)
“Globalisation today shows disturbing signs of crystallizing into a coercive religion-by-default, with its doctrines and dogmas, its saints and heretics, its promises of heaven and its warnings of hell for those who refuse to avail themselves of its benefits. And to espouse a form of global ethics, to identify as a concerned citizen of the world rather than of a nation-state, can often go hand in hand with an intolerant suspicion of those who prefer to look after the local”. (all I can say is – perfect as stimulus for a RFTG exam, or at least in my opinion encapsulates the complexity of what globalization is, it’s not just an economic phenomenon it’s a fundamental change in the way we think [hence texts and ways of thinking] about ourselves and our place in the world, how we form our identity).
“modern internationalists tend to belong to a privileged class”
“In the broadest sense, we’re all citizens of the world. But whether or not we enjoy our citizenship-without-borders depends on whether or not we’re receiving the benefits of other forms of globalization”.
“Perhaps patriotism…is today the refuge of a new kind of sceptic: one who lacks job security, who sees the fruits of 21st-century capitalism chiefly in emergence of a super-rich plutocracy, who likes Japanese food but finds it hard to swallow Japanese ownership of large swaths of coastal Queensland. For such unbelievers, the flag is more a shield than a weapon”. (symbolism, The Castle anyone?)
IF YOU CAN GET HOLD OF THE ARTICLE – READ IT!!!
