Benjamin H

To begin with, I would like to point out that the whole terrorist issue is quite exagerated. it seems to me, that the war against terrorism is somewhat like the hunt for communists during the McCarthy-era in the 50's. A witch-hunt causing much fear amongst people than is really necessary, so that some top politicians in the U.S (I won't mention any names) can gain votes, and power. Just like mr. Richard Nixon did. Nevertheless, we are facing a somewhat different problem now. Where the supposed communists did not hurt anyone, terrorist obviously does. They are indeed a threat to the open society, but not a new problem. The Bader-Meinhof party also used terrorism, but they were a small movement. Now, it is a religion that keeps some terrorist factions together, making it a larger area for the leading powers. Of course terrorism is not right, never! Still, there is hatred amongst some countries towards USA, as that country is big brother, always interfering in everyones business, and always with their own interest in mind. About the Spanish issue, the victory for the Socialistic party, may have been inflicted by the terrible deed, and if so, I value their victory no less. What I believe is the sadest thing about the whole issue, except the bombings of course, is that the two parties would try to use it for their own advantage. The former prime minister of Spain, called up a news magazine just after the deed, and insured him that it was ETA who were responsible, which was unethical and unfair. Finally, it reminds me of the scare of comunists, it is just another tool that is used to gain votes, to scare people, to control us, but what is actually done?

Hello dearest fellow contributors to the forum! First of all, I would like to say that I believe that you all have written very interesting comments to the topic. (And sorry Anders for my late response) Here are my opinions on the subject. (I would like to say, that I am not a nationalist, very far from nationalistic actually. Also, I should pointout, that as I am waiting for my new internet conection, I canot quote you others, as I cannot understand this stupid mac computer) A small introduction to better understand where I stand: In Sweden, as well as in Denmark, the two countries in which I have spent most parts of my life, and where I am currently studying, a massive wave of nationalism is spreading. In Denmark, there is even an outspoken nationalistic party in the highest "constitution" or Regering as it is called there. They have high posts, and they are making the country very protectionistic by i.e making it very hard for immigrants to get a citizenship. In my eyes, that is not acceptable, but nevertheless I will try to understand why so many people are voting for this party. Denmark has, during the last decade received many immigrants, especially from countries in the middle east area with sorroundings. When a country gets a number of people from countries with different cultures, problems arise. There is a natural fear, for what is new and different, and this fear is very well used, as some of you have pointed out, by i.e politicians who wants power. When you believe that something is threatening you, you naturally become defensive and group together with others who feel alike to protect yourself. Also, in lack of a better word, jealousy is something which I believe affects the way of thinking. In bad times, as we all know, it is easy for populistic parties to use both fear, and the jealousy of others to gain power. Hitler used it against the jews, and now we can see the same tactic used by the "Danish peoples party". A very dangerous tactic, as it appeals to the basic instincts of man, fear, egoism and jealousy. First, what I believe is one of the most dangerous things about nationalism; the acceptance of the word, and how easy it is to hide behind it whilst still being accepted as i.e a serious party. Nationalism has not yet gained the sound of racism, or nazism, and people often use it together with patriotism to gain acceptance and votes. I believe that the word must be defined very exactly, even though one must be able to see it as positive or negative. Next, to teach in an internationalistic way or a nationalistic way should not be decided by anyone else than the teacher. The teacher must be able to have a standpoint of his own, to be able to teach in an interesting way. Students must react if they do not agree with him, and this will create discussion, which is extremely important in this case. The teacher, I believe could be a member of any political movement, as long as he does not teach facts wrong. If facts are taught correctly, students must decide themselves if they want a system that is nationalistic or not, and tell the teacher. The teaching of history, I believe should involve both a study of the countries history, but mostly it should concern the study of major historical events where parallels can be made to todays society. Teaching only Swedish history is totally worthless if there is nothing to compare it to, while teaching European colonialism in different countries is extremely important as that is something which still affects big parts of the world. Learning only facts, as I think Steven talked about, is not entirely worthless I believe. Learning facts will give a basis for your own thinking, and give you the tools to think for yourself. To sum up, nationalism is indeed dangerous in some aspects, but not more dangerous than religion, which I actually think is the new nationalism, as it unites many people with the same ideas and opinions. Nationalism is not dangerous to a certain degree, but when used as a cover for more extreme ideas, I think it is dangerous, but so is any political idea, violent video games or even music. I would be pleased to get some comments on what I wrote //Benjamin

First, I would like to express my opinions of this debate, and not especially the topic debated. The debate regarding the schools is somewhat quite onesided in a forum such as this. Most of the students discussing are chosen by a teacher, and are therefore most probably quite ambitious and talented. Hence, we will see posts and opinions that are well written, politically correct and shows ideas and creativity. However, we do not see posts from people attending public schools in areas where many students have social problems. At least I haven't so far. I would like that though, as to get a wider perspective, and not only students from the middle and upper class schools etc. As to answer Mr. Nerzic's question, I am quite critical towards the schools system in both Denmark and Sweden. In my junior years, from first to ninth grade, I did not have to do much studying. My classmates were not very ambitious, and as we here i Sweden always have to adapt our classes after their wishes and skills. Furthermore, the teachers were never likely to promote students to the next year class or anything like that. There was a famous politician in Denmark who said:"What not all can learn, no one shall learn", and this somehow represents the general opinions in some parts. I would have liked some challenges during these years, which would have made my years at the I.B much more easy than they are now. I am not a fan of separating children from each other, but I would like some reforms in this area. Has anyone got any ideas? /Benjamin

Benjamin Hellden Hegelund 17 years old Born in Hjørring, Denmark but I currently live in Gothenburg. I attend the IB at Hvitfeldtska, and my subject are History HL, English A1 SL, Swedish A1 HL, Chemistry HL, Biology HL, Mathematical Methods and of course TOK. I enjoy social activities such as playing chess and football, however not on any higher level. I am also very fond of music, both listening, playing the cello and collecting records. I have no plans for the future, except to continue studying on any level. Ask me for further info if you have any interest or just criticize my posts in the forum, that will do just as well! Oh yeah, I speak Danish, Swedish, English, a little Spanish and some French. Just so you know. edited to remove email address