Patriotism Poll

[ImaginalDisc]

What do you think about Canada and Mexico, countries we actually share a border with?

Are you sure your slogan isn't "Remember the Maine?"

 

[DanishDynamite]

The nation-state was invented by Europeans in the 19th century according to Wikipedia, though an argument could be made that Iceland invented it a thousand years earlier.

The point is that it is an invented concept. It was invented for a purpose, and when that purpose no longer exists or is superceded, it shouldn't have any more relevance than "tribe" used to have.

 

[Cain]

What do you think about Canada and Mexico, countries we actually share a border with?

Historically we've had more than one border with Mexico Anyway, I "America, **** Yeah" is one of my all-time favorite songs, but if it came out today it would not have the immigrants line. "Bed Bath and Beyond [slightly embarrassed] **** yeah!"

 

[BPSCG]

Are you sure your slogan isn't "Remember the Maine?"

I'm not sure I understand how that is supposed to be an answer to the question, "What do you think about Canada and Mexico, countries we actually share a border with?" Do you think we're a good neighbor to those countries, yes or no?

 

[Matt the Poet]

The question is, when you say the word 'America' in the sentence 'I love/dspise/fear America', what exactly do you mean?

The entire population of America? It's a big country - there must be someone you don't like.

The government of America? But that changes every four years, and presumably occasionally it's going to be people you voted against, doing stuff you don't agree with.

The power structures that underlie the government of America? It seems a rather abstract thing to get worked up about, and in any case this would be equivalent to stating that you will never brook any argument about the way your country is goverened (campaing funding etc) at that it is unpatriotic to do so.

The landmass itself? What is it about it's chemical composition that makes it more special than any other landmass?

This is the problem I have with patriotism - not that it's intrinsically evil, it's just that, like religion, the more you bring your brain to bear on it, the less it seems to make any kind of sense...

 

[RandFan]

Patriotism: The last refuge of the Scoundrel -- Dr Samuel Johnson 1709-1784

Johnson was with out a doubt a patriot. We don't really know what context Johnson used in his quote but it was likely that when all else fails scoundrels turn to patriotism. It's false patriotism that Johnson was speaking against.

 

[Puppycow]

I think you need to explain what you think the difference is between "seeing things from their perspective" and "actually sympathising". Is thinking "I think it is wrong what they do, but if I was in their situation I might do the same" sympathising or seeing things from their perspective? How about "I agree with what they do, but not with their justification for it" ?

Good question. To make a sports analogy, "sympathizing" is like rooting for a certain team. At least that's how I meant it. "Seeing things from their perspective" is trying to understand, but without actually "rooting" for them.

Well, if you want to see things from one's enemy's perspective, you kinda have to. The enemy doesn't see you from your best side and doesn't see himself from the worst. Someone who presents the view of 'the enemy' -- even if s/he does not subscribe to that point of view -- will have to present the facts cherrypicked the way 'the enemy' would do it.

Perhaps I should have used the term "confirmation bias" instead of "cherrypicking." Confirmation bias is the phenomenon that we tend to notice things that confirm our prefered world view more readily than things that do not. So yes, we can understand that the enemy has a confirmation bias against us. This can help us to better predict their behaviour. But if you allow yourself to get emotionally attached to their cause, you risk developing your own confirmation bias.

I guess what I am mostly saying is that as skeptics, we should be aware of how confirmation bias can lead to a warped world view, and therefore to question our own emotional biases and look for evidence on both sides of any question instead of only cherrypicking evidence that confirms our own world-view.

 

[Puppycow]

If you paid the least attention to the history of Cuba, one of our neighbors, you'd note the U.S. has not been a good neighbor to them. Haiti's been treated even worse.

One could also ask, have they been good neighbors to us? Is it our fault that Haiti has always been such a basket case? Or that Cuba aligned itself with the Soviets? Other Caribbean island countries have not had such bad relationships with us. Is it possible that confirmation bias affects your perception here?

 

[RandFan]

One could also ask, have they been good neighbors to us? Is it our fault that Haiti has always been such a basket case? Or that Cuba aligned itself with the Soviets? Other Caribbean island countries have not had such bad relationships with us. Is it possible that confirmation bias affects your perception here?

Good post.

It's fair to note that America has really blundered on a number of decisions. However it seems that many folks just can't bear to think that America could actually have done a number of things right or that other nations bear a share of responsibility for some of the problems. Remember, besides aligning with the Soviets, Cuba seized considerable assets of American businesses. Chavez is now doing the same.

Sometimes we reap that which we sew. That works both ways.

 

[Lonewulf]

The government of America? But that changes every four years, and presumably occasionally it's going to be people you voted against, doing stuff you don't agree with.

Uh, wrong.

The government doesn't change. Certain leadership may change, and other policies implemented, but the government itself does change.

The same three branches still exist.

The constitution is still there.

The bill of rights is still there.

Name one set of four years where this was not the case, please?

Also, I'd add that the previous policies that were implement are often kept, in one way or another, even with new leadership. So no, the previous government doesn't "disappear" just because some new administration comes in charge of the Executive branch.

I'm not sure I understand how that is supposed to be an answer to the question, "What do you think about Canada and Mexico, countries we actually share a border with?" Do you think we're a good neighbor to those countries, yes or no?

Canada, I'm not sure of. Mexico, though?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican-American_war

'nuff said.

But, naturally, I see you blame all of those damn illegals for everything. Naturally.

Next they'll be blamed for spreading disease, causing earthquakes, and generating tsunamis...

 

[RandFan]

...causing earthquakes, and generating tsunamis...

Canadians cause earthquakes and tsunamis. Odd since we give them fortified rain water. You would think they would be happy with that.

 

[Puppycow]

Good post.

Thanks, and happy indepencence day!
(I'm at work because the Japanese don't celebrate it for some strange reason.)

 

[Matt the Poet]

The government doesn't change. Certain leadership may change, and other policies implemented, but the government itself does change

That's sort of what I meant by 'the power structures that underlie the Government of America' - I was making a point of differentiating these from the people who happen to be in power at the time.

I'm aware that some Americans (I'm not one) view things like the constitution and the bill of rights as being inviolable, but that doesn't make a great deal of sense to me, and in any case it seems rather abstruse to feel genuine love for a set of legal framework documents.

It also gets you into trouble occasionally. I'd recommend Daniel Lazare's 'The Velvet Coup' as a worthwhile analysis of how near-religious inflexibility over constitutional structure was a major factor in the 2000 election debacle.

 

[slingblade]

The question is, when you say the word 'America' in the sentence 'I love/dspise/fear America', what exactly do you mean?

The entire population of America? It's a big country - there must be someone you don't like.

The government of America? But that changes every four years, and presumably occasionally it's going to be people you voted against, doing stuff you don't agree with.

The power structures that underlie the government of America? It seems a rather abstract thing to get worked up about, and in any case this would be equivalent to stating that you will never brook any argument about the way your country is goverened (campaing funding etc) at that it is unpatriotic to do so.

The landmass itself? What is it about it's chemical composition that makes it more special than any other landmass?

This is the problem I have with patriotism - not that it's intrinsically evil, it's just that, like religion, the more you bring your brain to bear on it, the less it seems to make any kind of sense...

Good post, and I tend to agree.

 

[RandFan]

I'm aware that some Americans (I'm not one) view things like the constitution and the bill of rights as being inviolable...

I'm not sure what this has to do with the point at hand.

...seems rather abstruse to feel genuine love for a set of legal framework documents.

What is genuine love and who says we should have it for anything?

It also gets you into trouble occasionally.

Loving anything will get you into trouble occassionally. What's your point?

I'd recommend Daniel Lazare's 'The Velvet Coup' as a worthwhile analysis of how near-religious inflexibility over constitutional structure was a major factor in the 2000 election debacle.

I'm sorry, I'm guessing I missed something about some view of the constitution that I didn't see anyone make. Who is the poster who expressed such a view?

 

[RandFan]

The question is, when you say the word 'America' in the sentence 'I love/dspise/fear America', what exactly do you mean?

I mean that I love the ideals for which my nation was founded on. The principle that all people have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This lead to an end of slavery in America. It led to the right of women to vote. It lead to civil rights for all. It promises due process, free speech and freedom of religion.

When I say I love America it is an abstract concept of liberty and justice. One however that has brought so many concrete realities even if it often didn't live up to the goal. As the framers put it, "a more perfect union". One that is flexible and can get better and perhaps most importantly, one that the people can steer if we would get off our collective rear ends.

 

[Matt the Poet]

I'm sorry, I'm guessing I missed something about some view of the constitution that I didn't see anyone make. Who is the poster who expressed such a view?

My last post was a response to Lonewulf, but may have overshot what he was actually trying to express. I was merely clarifying that I, like him, had differentiated the government from the structure of that government. My apologies for extrapolating this into an attitude which he may not have had.

You seem to have expressed a similar attitude in your own posting, however. I, too, am fairly enamoured of the abstract ideals of ‘liberty’ and ‘justice’, although in the concrete I’m aware that you can debate what those two words mean until the end of time.

As a Brit, for example, I personally consider our NHS, dilapidated though it is, to be a sublime expression of ‘justice’. Others might reasonably argue that taxing me to pay for the healthcare of others violates their idea of ‘liberty’. I might come to be swayed by this argument (it’s not happened yet) – that’s not a terribly stable platform from which to declare the sort of emotional attachment you describe.
.
And I’m unnerved by the idea that you think these things are unique to America in any case. Lots of other countries have managed to get universal suffrage, end slavery, encourage freedom of religion and expression etc. The fact that the US was founded on these principles is an expression of the fact that it was founded at all – most countries don’t have that sort of easily identifiable ‘first moment’.

To summarise these ramblings, your concept of patriotism:

1) Requires me to be absolutely secure, to the point of dogmatism, that my concepts of ‘liberty’ and ‘justice’ are the correct ones.
2) Makes it logically necessary for me either to love equally any other government that expresses those concepts, regardless of whether or not I live there, or to assert that only my government has the form that can truly achieve them.

I hope that my mind stays open enough never to achieve (1), and (2) is ideology, not patriotism.

 

[chocolatepossum]

I mean that I love the ideals for which my nation was founded on. The principle that all people have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This lead to an end of slavery in America. It led to the right of women to vote. It lead to civil rights for all. It promises due process, free speech and freedom of religion.

When I say I love America it is an abstract concept of liberty and justice. One however that has brought so many concrete realities even if it often didn't live up to the goal. As the framers put it, "a more perfect union". One that is flexible and can get better and perhaps most importantly, one that the people can steer if we would get off our collective rear ends.

Do you love other countries that embody those ideals, or do you not think there are any? Would you become a Russian patriot if their political system embraced those ideals and America abandoned them? I don't think there's anything wrong with what you're saying per se, but I don't see why you can't say "I love liberty" instead of "I love America". I think there is a lot of danger inherent in confusing the two concepts.

 

[MaGZ]

I selected only the first one. I think loyalty to your "tribe" is important, and I think all members of that "tribe" have a responsibility and a duty to protect and preserve that "tribe" if it is threatened. My country is my tribe.

New Zealand raised me. This country protected me and nurtured me as a baby. It educated me, and it continues to offer me protection, education, and a peaceful free society in which to live. I have no desire to ever fight to protect or defend my nation. But if my nation is ever threatened, I will fight for it. I will fight to ensure that the generations of New Zealanders that follow me will enjoy the same life that I have enjoyed. If necessary, I believe New Zealand is worth dying for.

There's a number of key considerations however. Firstly, is the tribe threatened?

Secondly, in the statement:

"Loyalty to a country worth defending is important."

The terms "loyalty", "worth defending" and "important" leave room for a variety of positions.

Most countries have treason laws that prohibit citizens from actively participating in, or inciting war against their own country. That seems reasonable and justified to me.

Does that mean citizens shouldn't be allowed to express sympathy for our perceived enemies? (Whether they actually pose a threat or not). I don't think so. One of the things that makes the country worth defending is that it allows citizens to express whatever view they wish.

No opinions should be outlawed. It is acting on that opinion that should not be permitted.

-Gumboot

My race is my "tribe." That is why I am a White Nationalist.

Gumboot,
At some point in time you "tribe" of New Zealand will be destroyed when it is no longer a White country.

 

[MaGZ]

I consider myself an American patriot. However, I am not proud of what America has become. If I ever fly an American flag, it will be the thirteen star 'Betsy Ross’ flag of the American Revolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:US_flag_13_stars_–_Betsy_Ross.svg