Patriotism: Trash or Treasure?

This is what I was trying to get at in my first post (not very well, apprently). There are subtle -- and some not so subtle -- differences between patriotism, chauvinism, jingoism, nationalism and a whole lot of other -isms. If we accept the standard definition of Patriot as "someone who loves and defends his or her country," there is absolutely nothing wrong with patriotism. It is not only understandable, it is laudable. What do we want? Someone who hates his or her own country? The person who says, "My country is better than your country," is not a patriot. That person is, by deinition, a chauvinist. To me, the true patriot not only loves his or her country, but works to make and keep that country a decent place. In this sense, someone who is violently opposed to an existing dictatorial regime is a far greater patriot than the government functionary who spouts patriotic phrases but helps to oppress the people.

MA, Sounds familiar. ;(

truth
MA,

Agreed again.

Re: truth

truth
Sophia, good responses. Let me say something about some of them.
I was comparing love of one's culture with a sometmes blind loyalty to one's nation (or its government of the moment). Not the same thing.
Tribal loyalties very often have to do with defense of property and are probably very primordial. Patriotism, however, is most likely a product of the nation-state which is fairly modern in its emergence. It arose possibly with the development of kingdoms (out of primitive "states" or chiefdoms) and became nation-states personified by the king/queen head. It demanded loyalty to the king/queen. Here people are required to be loyal to the impersonal legal entity of the nation-state (not truly personified in "Uncle Sam").
"My country right" as opposed to "my country right or wrong", of course.
Your last point is more difficult to response to. Let me just say that the vast majority of young men and women who go to war for our nation-state do so with a very vague--and often naive--notion of what the goal of the war is. In their minds it's usually just a matter of "us" against "them"--like a soccer game. And this is also the case with warriors of other countries. Patriotism is "designed" to serve as a functional substitute for "good reasons for responding to the call of duty." "Duty" is another concept-of-coercion. You say that we go to war against others for good reasons while others go to war against us for wrong reasons. I've never heard you sound naive before.

Well she picked really good examples of good reasons versus wrong reasons. ;-)

But a good point is that the black and white good reasons/bad reasons of WW2 are rare and overused as examples of US military action.

truth
Yes, Craven. I was once the director of a USO club, and spent a lot of time talking with young "grunts" about their attitutes toward the Viet Nam war (I did not try to lobby against the war--at least not at work). I was deeply touched by the naivete and often deep doubts of the young men who were off to fight (many of them died. One came back and committed suicide). It was a radicalizing experience

Yeah, Vietnam was a bit more "fuzzy". We went to war because we wanted to surpress an ideology.

WW2 was a very rare war, even the vanquished recognize, almost unconditionally, that they were in the wrong.

As such I don't think it's a good example. It's incredibly rare.

JL's question about admiring the opposition when they kill us is best framed within a conflict in which we were in the wrong. I know it's hard for some to cede that we have waged war in the wrong but I'm sure they can cede that there were some "fuzzy" ones.

In all our 19th Century wars (with the exception of the one between the states) we were in the wrong.

Well, you might quibble about the War of 1812, We didn't have much choice there.

Fascinating thoughts - I am still locked up in writing an essay land - but I will be bcak to comment properly later...

Let's start with the worst first-----below is the anarchist's view of Patriotism

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/goldman/aando/patriotism.html

What is obvious from the posts thus far is that patriotism is a very individualistic emotion and the definition eludes us.

To me patriotism is pride in country and the many contributions we have made to mankind. I am not blind to the other side of the coin which would recite the mistakes we've made. Thus far it is important to note that our contributions far exceed the mistakes IMO. Is it arrogant of me to make that statement? I don't believe so-----I am not saying we're better that any other country, I'm just proud of what we've accomplished ---- period.

It is also obvious that there exists an abundance of cynicism regarding the word "patriotism". Many people on this forum are much better educated than the average citizen and therefore do not want to be categorized as a "sucker" which is the modern intellectual term for patriot. I'm just guessing about the reason for this phenomenon but it probably has something to do with the belief that most Liberals consider themselves to be intellectuals while us conservatives indentify with the "average citizen"

The conclusion from the posts thus far is that the word "patriotism" had a fairly noble meaning and connotation until several years after WWII.Then college professors(starting at Berkely and spreading across the country) convinced everyone during the vietnam war that anyone who wore a uniform was a sucker and that patriotism was only for the uneducated masses much the same as religion.

Obnoxious quotations such as this by Samuel Johnson "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" have given the word a "bum rap" IMO

truth
Perception, you say that liberals consider themselves intellectuals; I would reverse that and note that most intellectuals consider themselves liberals.
You say that you are not blind to the mistakes America has made. Good. I would just note that we usually do not refer to the "mistakes" other countries have made that have hurt us as miskaes;we call them "evil actions." Why do conservatives never/rarely refer to our mistakes as evil actions? Is it only liberals who are not in denial? I don't recall professors calling American draftees "suckers," but as it turned out they were. The smart ones went to Canada in order not to kill or be killed for no good reason. It was an unjustified war. A just war must be one that is OBVIOUSLY just, unlike the Viet Nam or Irak controveries.

Ooooooh Perception - I am soooo gonna argue with you when I have finished this wretched paper!!!!!

But - folks - is there any way this thread can not turn into the usual tired "librals/conservatives are bad, wicked, evil etc" stuff, but stick to arguing about the topic? I don't mean not referring to what people imagine to be the analysis of differing groupings, but just not with the usual insults?

I know I can only ask...

Dunno, Deb. I would be happy if we all just had the same definitions for the words we use. This business of "What <fill in blank> means to me even makes the insults hard to come up with. Now that I mention it, I think you may have already mentioned it.

JL

Regarding "evil actions"---please show me an instance when our actions started out with "intent" to do evil. The intent is the key word---actual consequences are often very different from intended consequences.

Dlowan

I find it very difficult to discuss patriotism without involving politics since the main thrust of those who criticize patriotism believe it is merely a manipulative tool of the politicians in power at the moment.

Patriotism doesn't neccessitate an army, just a philosophy.

On the Patriot Act - ironically, it is anti-patriotic. It is virtually counter-opposed to the philosophy of patriotism in America.

no, i was just stereotyping, that's why I added "thing to do"

--------
-----------------
No, I didn't. I gave an example of how our reasoning to go to war in at least one case illustrated why we may not 'respect' the other side.

I do think many times, the majority of the country agrees with our stance in a war--finding it 'righteous'--rendering the 'enemy' unrespectable.

I don't think VietNam is accepted as one of those times.

<hissy fit removed>

edit-- I think the answer I gave to JLNobody's question about why we don't respect opposing combatants in war is one explanation--not the ultimate explanation...