Pew Research on Religious Nationalism Worldwide

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Do you mean not every Scotsman hated/disdained the English like I read in books and saw on TV?

Everyone knows only true Scottsmen hate the English.

[Stargazer]

10 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The normal Scotsman didn’t care whether the locals they paid taxes to were English or Scottish and at the time would have been hard-pressed to see much of a difference. 

Are you saying there is a normal Scotsman? Or are we talking about that elusive "true Scotsman"?

One of my sons-in-law is a Scotsman, and he is definitely not normal. He's a great guy and I love him, but normal? No way. I think he would even be offended if I referred to him as normal. 

In truth, nobody is normal. Everyone is individual. There are some misguided people who strive for normal, but they are misguided. Normality is for sheep.

As for Braveheart, the film is ahistorical nonsense. Great film! But completely bogus. On the other hand, why did those Highlanders show up to fight the English? Because if they were going to be taxed, at least they preferred to be taxed by their own people, not some bloody Englishman.

[The Nehor]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

Do you mean not every Scotsman hated/disdained the English like I read in books and saw on TV?

They might have disliked them but probably not much more than they disdained the local Scottish lords.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

As for Braveheart, the film is ahistorical nonsense. Great film! But completely bogus. On the other hand, why did those Highlanders show up to fight the English? Because if they were going to be taxed, at least they preferred to be taxed by their own people, not some bloody Englishman.

It is more that the local elites among the Scots wanted power and were able to call up their own levies. Those that were levied up likely weren’t burning with anything like patriotic fervor. They were there because of their obligations to whomever was in charge of the area and mostly wanted to survive to be able to go home. The loyalty to their neighbors and friends who they are likely fighting next to can keep them on the battle line because abandoning your friends is shameful. You want to win the battle but not because you think it will make your life better. You want to win because if you win you are more likely to live through it.

[Calm]

On 6/28/2025 at 7:37 AM, The Nehor said:

They might have disliked them but probably not much more than they disdained the local Scottish lords.

That comment was equivalent to “what, someone lied on the internet?!”, but now I am seriously wondering if such ideas (deep loyalty and respect to the local laird/lords and deep disgust/hatred of the distant ‘overlords’) were started because of political propaganda or just lazy writing (conflict being necessary to keep things interesting).

Edited June 29, 2025 by Calm

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

They might have disliked them but probably not much more than they disdained the local Scottish lords.

How many actual Scotsmen are you actually acquainted with?  

[The Nehor]

15 hours ago, Stargazer said:

How many actual Scotsmen are you actually acquainted with?  

The current Scots tend to be much more patriotic and devoted to a shared heritage. Projecting this backwards as if it has always been this way is a mistake.

[The Nehor]

20 hours ago, Calm said:

That comment was equivalent to “what, someone lied on the internet?!”, but now I am seriously wondering if such ideas (deep loyalty and respect to the local laird/lords and deep disgust/hatred of the distant ‘overlords’ were started because of political propaganda or just lazy writing (conflict being necessary to keep things interesting).

It can go both ways. For example the thing that probably made the fall of the Czar inevitable was the march on the capital. As bad as the administration was many held on to the idea that the local leadership was bad but the Czar would certainly not allow this to continue if he knew. After that it was clear the Czar did know and didn’t care.

There is also a bit of loyalty to the local lords or landowners of the church or whomever is in charge of your area if you are a subsistence farmer in the past. You may not like him much but there are obligations that go both ways. It doesn’t matter much to the farmer who the lord is but the lord is a safety net of sorts. If your crop fails completely the lord will probably step in to some extent. You will ear very very lean but may not starve (though the children or the elderly may not make it). You can see this kind of loyalty to the system even when it disadvantages someone in the long term because it is reliable. This was a problem with capitalism entering places like Southeast Asia at first. The landowners might be horrible but capitalism meant that the landowner safety net was gone. You relied on that. Capitalism usually did make the lower classes better off in the long run but in the short term it was scary for them to give up the systems of obligations they relied on.

On the whole though the lower classes didn’t have a ton of devotion to specific people. They did tend to be loyal to the privileges such systems extended even when (to our view) the disadvantages the system created are very imbalanced against them.

[Teancum]

On 5/8/2025 at 1:56 PM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

This kind of begs the question, because as near as I can tell Christian nationalism has nothing to do with belief in and service of the things Christ taught. Quite the opposite. 

Yea @teddyawareis blinded by his rigid dogmatism and politics that is likely his true religion. He is just like the far right evangelicals and a large part of them are Christian Nationalists and they ignore what their Christianity teaches. They are whitened sepulchers that are shiny on the outside but fill of dead men's bones. And they stink like rotting corpses.  Teddy is clearly just like that. He wears his Mormonism on his sleeve and pretends to be some great and wise scriptorian.  But the way his religion presents itself is about as ugly as it gets.

[Nemesis]

22 hours ago, Teancum said:

Yea @teddyawareis blinded by his rigid dogmatism and politics that is likely his true religion. He is just like the far right evangelicals and a large part of them are Christian Nationalists and they ignore what their Christianity teaches. They are whitened sepulchers that are shiny on the outside but fill of dead men's bones. And they stink like rotting corpses.  Teddy is clearly just like that. He wears his Mormonism on his sleeve and pretends to be some great and wise scriptorian.  But the way his religion presents itself is about as ugly as it gets.

Let’s knock off personal attacks.  
 

Nemesis

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, Nemesis said:

Let’s knock off personal attacks.  
 

Nemesis

I’m not at all bothered by Teancum’s criticism because the Book of Mormon unequivocally states that if the gentiles in America fail to worship and diligently serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, they will be swept off after they have ripened in iniquity as a consequence of their rejection of Jesus Christ. Whether Teancum realizes it or not, his beef isn’t with me but with the inspired prophetic utterances in Book of Mormon that inform my worldview.

10 For behold, this is a land which is choice above all other lands; wherefore he that doth possess it shall serve God or shall be swept off; for it is the everlasting decree of God. And it is not until the fulness of iniquity among the children of the land, that they are swept off.

11 And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done.

12 Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written. (Ether 2)

[Teancum]

On 7/12/2025 at 5:05 PM, teddyaware said:

I’m not at all bothered by Teancum’s criticism because the Book of Mormon unequivocally states that if the gentiles in America fail to worship and diligently serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, they will be swept off after they have ripened in iniquity as a consequence of their rejection of Jesus Christ. Whether Teancum realizes it or not, his beef isn’t with me but with the inspired prophetic utterances in Book of Mormon that inform my worldview.

 

10 For behold, this is a land which is choice above all other lands; wherefore he that doth possess it shall serve God or shall be swept off; for it is the everlasting decree of God. And it is not until the fulness of iniquity among the children of the land, that they are swept off.

11 And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done.

12 Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written. (Ether 2)

Well since the Book of Mormon is clearly a work of fiction I do not have much to worry about.

[Tacenda]

On 6/19/2025 at 11:37 PM, BCSpace said:

I believe Nationalism, by itself, no adjectives, is an absolute requirement for liberty and freedom. Consider the extreme example of a one-world government. There is nothing you can do if you don't like that government, and nowhere to escape if that government comes after you. On the other hand, in the United States (where we can be loyal and devoted to individual states), if you don't like California, you can go to Nebraska. And state that at some point, you didn't like can become likable again.

I pray this is the case, but afraid it really isn't.

[Tacenda]

Edited out an Instagram video, maybe I will find another way to share it, because it's so good. It shows my FB account I believe.

The epitome of what Jesus does, but Christian Nationalists go against.

Edited July 20, 2025 by Tacenda

[teddyaware]

4 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Edited a TikTok out, maybe I will find another way to share it, because it's so good. It shows my FB account I believe.

The epitome of what Jesus does, but Christian Nationalists go against.

Do you believe the Book of Mormon’s prophetic warning that if the Gentile inhabitants of the American promised land in the last days fail to worship and serve Jesus Christ that they will be utterly destroyed and vanquished provide believers in the Book of Mormon with a legitimate, morally sound reason for them to strive diligently to convince the inhabitants of the land that the United States will fail spectacularly unless its citizens worship and faithfully keep the commandments of Jesus Christ? But if in spite of the Book of Mormon’s prophetic warnings you still think that it’s morally wrong and offensive for believers to warn this nation that it’s imperative for them to believe in and follow Jesus Christ or face ruin, doesn’t it logically follow that an unbelief in the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon is the only reason for any rational person to fail to heed the following most solemn warning and divine decree voiced by the prophet Moroni?

7 And the Lord would not suffer that they should stop beyond the sea in the wilderness, but he would that they should come forth even unto the land of promise, which was choice above all other lands, which the Lord God had preserved for a righteous people.

8 And he had sworn in his wrath unto the brother of Jared, that whoso should possess this land of promise, from that time henceforth and forever, should serve him, the true and only God, or they should be swept off when the fulness of his wrath should come upon them.

9 And now, we can behold the decrees of God concerning this land, that it is a land of promise; and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fulness of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity.

10 For behold, this is a land which is choice above all other lands; wherefore he that doth possess it shall serve God or shall be swept off; for it is the everlasting decree of God. And it is not until the fulness of iniquity among the children of the land, that they are swept off.

11 And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done.

12 Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written. (Ether 2)

Putting aside any so-called Christian Nationalist organizations and groups for a moment (I’m not affiliated with any of them), can you not see how a believer in the Book of Mormon would see it as a terrible dereliction of duty and an act of reckless disregard to fail to heed Moroni’s warning?

Edited July 19, 2025 by teddyaware

[Tacenda]

11 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Do you believe the Book of Mormon’s prophetic warning that if the Gentile inhabitants of the American promised land in the last days fail to worship and serve Jesus Christ that they will be utterly destroyed and vanquished provide believers in the Book of Mormon with a legitimate, morally sound reason for them to strive diligently to convince the inhabitants of the land that the United States will fail spectacularly unless its citizens worship and faithfully keep the commandments of Jesus Christ? But if in spite of the Book of Mormon’s prophetic warnings you still think that it’s morally wrong and offensive for believers to warn this nation that it’s imperative for them to believe in and follow Jesus Christ or face ruin, doesn’t it logically follow that an unbelief in the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon is the only reason for any rational person to fail to heed the following most solemn warning and divine decree voiced by the prophet Moroni?

7 And the Lord would not suffer that they should stop beyond the sea in the wilderness, but he would that they should come forth even unto the land of promise, which was choice above all other lands, which the Lord God had preserved for a righteous people.

8 And he had sworn in his wrath unto the brother of Jared, that whoso should possess this land of promise, from that time henceforth and forever, should serve him, the true and only God, or they should be swept off when the fulness of his wrath should come upon them.

9 And now, we can behold the decrees of God concerning this land, that it is a land of promise; and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fulness of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity.

10 For behold, this is a land which is choice above all other lands; wherefore he that doth possess it shall serve God or shall be swept off; for it is the everlasting decree of God. And it is not until the fulness of iniquity among the children of the land, that they are swept off.

11 And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done.

12 Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written. (Ether 2)

Putting aside any so-called Christian Nationalist organizations and groups for a moment (I’m not affiliated with any of them), can you not see how a believer in the Book of Mormon would see it as a terrible dereliction of duty and an act of reckless disregard to fail to heed Moroni’s warning?

I know without a shadow of doubt, that the Jesus I believe would never agree with Christian Nationalists.

[ZealouslyStriving]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I know without a shadow of doubt, that the Jesus I believe would never agree with Christian Nationalists.

I  tentatively agree you- but I don't believe that is what @teddyaware is saying- so let's define terms:

When you say "Christian Nationalist" what do you mean?

What do they believe?

How do they put those beliefs into practice?

[teddyaware]

24 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I  tentatively agree you- but I don't believe that is what @teddyaware is saying- so let's define terms:

When you say "Christian Nationalist" what do you mean?

What do they believe?

How do they put those beliefs into practice?

I believe the main complaint of those opposed to so-called Christian Nationalism, whatever that might be, is the perception that the Christian Nationalist’s plan is to cram their religious ideas down everyone’s throats, whether they like it or not, thereby depriving them of their agency. My point doesn’t address this perception and fear. Rather, my point is that the Book of Mormon makes it perfectly clear that unless the people in the American promised land freely choose  (i.e. without compulsion) to worship and keep the commandments of Jesus Christ the nation will be doomed to eventual destruction. This makes the Book of Mormon a Christian Nationalist document in the sense that it testifies that unless Jesus Christ is worshipped as the God of the land the nation will eventually fail. I’m just the messenger!

Edited July 20, 2025 by teddyaware

[ZealouslyStriving]

14 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

I believe the main complaint of those opposed to so-called Christian Nationalism, whatever that might be, is the perception that the Christian Nationalist’s plan is to cram their religious ideas down everyone’s throats, whether they like it or not, thereby depriving them of their agency. My point doesn’t address this perception and fear. Rather, my point is that the Book of Mormon makes it perfectly clear that unless the people in the American promised land freely choose  (i.e. without compulsion) to worship and keep the commandments of Jesus Christ the nation will be doomed to eventual destruction. This makes the Book of Mormon a Christian Nationalist document in the sense that it testifies that unless Jesus Christ is worshipped as the God of the land the nation will eventually fail. I’m just the messenger!

Oh, I agree and understood it how you meant it. I am just trying to get @Tacendato define "Christian Nationalism" in order to discuss what her idea of the term is vs. what you were saying.

[webbles]

2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

I believe the main complaint of those opposed to so-called Christian Nationalism, whatever that might be, is the perception that the Christian Nationalist’s plan is to cram their religious ideas down everyone’s throats, whether they like it or not, thereby depriving them of their agency. My point doesn’t address this perception and fear. Rather, my point is that the Book of Mormon makes it perfectly clear that unless the people in the American promised land freely choose  (i.e. without compulsion) to worship and keep the commandments of Jesus Christ the nation will be doomed to eventual destruction. This makes the Book of Mormon a Christian Nationalist document in the sense that it testifies that unless Jesus Christ is worshipped as the God of the land the nation will eventually fail. I’m just the messenger!

Then use a better term.  The Book of Mormon never once says "Christian Nationalism" nor even "Nationalism".  So it isn't a Book of Mormon term.  Modern prophets don't appear to have ever used that term.  The term has a lot of bad connotations and is extremely off putting.  There has to be a much better term that actually fits what is being said.

[ZealouslyStriving]

7 minutes ago, webbles said:

Then use a better term.  The Book of Mormon never once says "Christian Nationalism" nor even "Nationalism".  So it isn't a Book of Mormon term.  Modern prophets don't appear to have ever used that term.  The term has a lot of bad connotations and is extremely off putting.  There has to be a much better term that actually fits what is being said.

You've got a excellent point because "Christian Nationalism" is basically creedal Calvinist Dominion Theology by another name:

Dominion theology - Wikipedia https://share.google/1zJP0DtUQapV0RjEE

 

[longview]

2 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

You've got a excellent point because "Christian Nationalism" is basically creedal Calvinist Dominion Theology by another name:

Dominion theology - Wikipedia https://share.google/1zJP0DtUQapV0RjEE

 

Interesting overview but note this section - - -

Criticism of usage of term

Those labelled dominionists rarely use the terms dominionist and dominionism for self-description, and some people have attacked the use of such words.^[7] The journalist and conservative commentator Stanley Kurtz, writing for the National Review, labeled it "conspiratorial nonsense," "political paranoia," and "guilt by association",^[77] and decried Hedges' "vague characterizations" that allow him to "paint a highly questionable picture of a virtually faceless and nameless 'Dominionist' Christian mass".^[78] Kurtz also complained about a perceived link between average Christian evangelicals and extremism such as Christian reconstructionism:

The notion that conservative Christians want to reinstitute slavery and rule by genocide is not just crazy, it's downright dangerous. The most disturbing part of the Harper's cover story (the one by Chris Hedges) was the attempt to link Christian conservatives with Hitler and fascism. Once we acknowledge the similarity between conservative Christians and fascists, Hedges appears to suggest, we can confront Christian evil by setting aside 'the old polite rules of democracy.' So wild conspiracy theories and visions of genocide are really excuses for the Left to disregard the rules of democracy and defeat conservative Christians—by any means necessary.^[77]

Joe Carter of First Things writes:

[T]here is no "school of thought" known as "dominionism." The term was coined in the 1980s by Diamond and is never used outside liberal blogs and websites. No reputable scholars use the term for it is a meaningless neologism that Diamond concocted for her dissertation.^[79]

[Calm]

I like this discussion of Christian Nationalism.  It also has a good, imo, discussion about the inherent problems with nationalism (very simplified, a nation is made up these days of more than one social/culture group—groups which overlap, have fuzzy borders, may be poorly defined or be defined differently by different groups such as many excluding Saints from the Christianity culture group—and the government privileging one group over the other creates inequality and eventually oppression)

https://www.christianitytoday.com/2021/02/what-is-christian-nationalism/

Quote

Patriotism is the love of country. It is different from nationalism, which is an argument about how to define our country. Christians should recognize that patriotism is good because all of God’s creation is good and patriotism helps us appreciate our particular place in it. Our affection and loyalty to a specific part of God’s creation helps us do the good work of cultivating and improving the part we happen to live in. As Christians, we can and should love the United States—which also means working to improve our country by holding it up for critique and working for justice when it errs.

What is nationalism?

There are many definitions of nationalism and an active debate about how best to define it. I reviewed the standard academic literature on nationalism and found several recurring themes. Most scholars agree that nationalism starts with the belief that humanity is divisible into mutually distinct, internally coherent cultural groups defined by shared traits like language, religion, ethnicity, or culture. From there, scholars say, nationalists believe that these groups should each have their own governments; that governments should promote and protect a nation’s cultural identity; and that sovereign national groups provide meaning and purpose for human beings.

What is Christian nationalism?

Christian nationalism is the belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way. Popularly, Christian nationalists assert that America is and must remain a “Christian nation”—not merely as an observation about American history, but as a prescriptive program for what America must continue to be in the future. Scholars like Samuel Huntington have made a similar argument: that America is defined by its “Anglo-Protestant” past and that we will lose our identity and our freedom if we do not preserve our cultural inheritance.

Christian nationalists do not reject the First Amendment and do not advocate for theocracy, but they do believe that Christianity should enjoy a privileged position in the public square. The term “Christian nationalism,” is relatively new, and its advocates generally do not use it of themselves, but it accurately describes American nationalists who believe American identity is inextricable from Christianity.

My bold

———

At the very least, imo when christian nationalism is capitalized, it is the name of a particular ideology…one that is riddled with problematic political ideology.  (Capitalizing something turns it into a proper noun, proper nouns refer to specific persons/groups, places, or things. For example, “psychology” could refer to a person or group’s pattern of behaviour or the psychological factors of a situation as well as the study of the mind, but Psychology is obviously just the study of the mind/psyche).  I think there is enough baggage attached to the term even “christian nationalism” should be avoided unless referring to that particular political ideology, especially in verbal dialogue where one can’t see the lack of capitals.  I see nationalism as always problematic anyway as it’s not simply patriotism or a love of and desire to protect one’s country, it’s much more.

To avoid confusion, one could go to the effort of defining every time one talks about one’s own version of christian nationalism, but since there are other ways to discuss Book of Mormon teachings than using a label that has been attached to something quite different in other people’s eyes.

It’s like arguing since we (LDS) believe there are three people in the Godhead, everyone should feel okay if we use “the Trinity” instead of the Godhead to talk about it.  After all, “trinity” can be defined simply as three in unity or even just “group of three people or things” (google’s first definition of the term) and that fits the Godhead if the unity is in ideals, purpose, etc.  The fact that those we would be discussing would be so confused and probably less informed about the Godhead afterwards due to likely attaching at least some wrong ideas to our beliefs on this subject because of misuse of the term “Trinity” is a very, very good reason not to adopt the term even if we are trying to ‘talk their language’, pointing out similarities of belief, just like the sound of the word “Trinity”, or whatever.  Not trivializing anything here as I prefer lots of words based on primarily sound.  If it wouldn’t lead to great confusion I would choose to use Trinity over Godhead anytime.  However, if I adopted to use “the Trinity” because of my personal preference, I would have to add with practically every use an explanation such as “in this case meaning three persons who are three beings, not three persons who are one being) and even then the conversation would often be a mess and being constantly derailed with “Trinity, why are you using Trinity here? I thought you were LDS?” and other variations as well as me having to correct assumptions by others like “no, I don’t believe in the Catholic view of the nature of God” or “no, I don’t believe in three persons in one being…unless of course that  is a social unit like family”….just as every time you (longview or teddyaware or anyone else) use the term Christian Nationalism the conversation gets derailed and assumptions are made about your political ideology that are likely untrue.

Edited July 20, 2025 by Calm

[Tacenda]

8 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Oh, I agree and understood it how you meant it. I am just trying to get @Tacendato define "Christian Nationalism" in order to discuss what her idea of the term is vs. what you were saying.

I hope this helps, I was trying to share the video with the young man's opinion on here w/o giving my identity away. Hope this works:

ETA: Oh, it's still showing my identity. I will edit again hopefully.

ETA again:

Here's the AI response I like.

• Universal Gospel:

  The Bible emphasizes a universal gospel message that transcends national boundaries and calls for love and service to all people, regardless of their nationality or background. 

   
• Kingdom of God:

  Christianity focuses on the "Kingdom of God," which is not synonymous with any earthly nation. The Bible teaches that the true allegiance of Christians is to God's kingdom, which is not limited to a specific country. 

   
• Warning against Idolatry:

  Christian nationalism can be seen as a form of idolatry, prioritizing the nation above God and distorting Christian faith. 

   
• Jesus' Teachings:

  Jesus' teachings emphasize love, compassion, and justice, which should be applied to all people, not just those within a particular nation. 

   
• Focus on Individual Conversion:

  The Bible emphasizes individual conversion and a personal relationship with God as the path to salvation, not national identity or affiliation. 

   

While some Christians may hold nationalistic views, these views are not supported by biblical teachings. Christians Against Christian Nationalism is an organization that actively opposes Christian nationalism and offers resources for understanding its dangers. 

Edited July 20, 2025 by Tacenda

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I hope this helps, I was trying to share the video with the young man's opinion on here w/o giving my identity away. Hope this works:

ETA: Oh, it's still showing my identity. I will edit again hopefully.

I believe it only shows your identity to you as it opens up for each person in their own profile if it’s like Facebook.  Why don’t you PM it to me and I can test if I can see your actual name or not.  Pretty sure you have told me it before, but since I think of people typically with their alias, I often forget actual names unless I use those as well…so chances are I will forget it again and even if I don’t, I won’t share it.