patriotism?

[Flying Pig]

That's a subtly different flavour of pride: I apologise for the military example but I am proud of my regiment and would speak up if somebody talked it down, but humble in that I recognise that coming from such a regiment doesn't make me inherently better at anything than anyone else - that's the sort of 'sinful pride', which is also counter-productive because it means you can't learn from others.

 

[MobBoss]

You seem to be confused over the difference between patriotism and nationalism, which isn't surprising in the least. Nationalists such as yourself typically make lousy patriots because they really don't understand that dissent of absurd governmental policies doesn't mean hatred of a country. It typically means just the opposite.

Form, your comments are more than just simple dissent. I dont think I can recall even one positive thing you ever said about this country.

I took an oath to protect the consitution, and serve this country. I have an excellent idea of what patriotism is, as opposed to nationalism. I've known more than a few that have given their all for this nation. You aint one of them.

 

[Leoreth]

Patriotism doesn't require you to approve of everything your country does, even though appeals to patriotism are often used to make sure that people do so.

If you see there's something wrong with your country, isn't it patriotic to criticize it so the problem can be solved to its benefit? Everything you can accuse Form of is that he disagrees with you about what the problems are. It's arrogant to conclude that he therefore hates his country.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Form, your comments are more than just simple dissent. I dont think I can recall even one positive thing you ever said about this country.

Again, that just shows how biased and completely clueless you are about my actual opinions.

I took an oath to protect the consitution, and serve this country. I have an excellent idea of what patriotism is, as opposed to nationalism. I've known more than a few that have given their all for this nation. You aint one of them.

How is condoning and even somewhat defending rampant homophobia in the white evangelical Christian community and the military, as well as the blatant discrimination and even persecution of homosexuals, protecting the constitution and serving this country?

How is confusing legitimate dissent of some of the policies of US government and the military with a hatred of a country doing so? Does the phrase "freedom of speech" mean anything at all?

How are those who have died in the military in any way relevant to being patriotic or not?

f you see there's something wrong with your country, isn't it patriotic to criticize it so the problem can be solved to its benefit? Everything you can accuse Form of is that he disagrees with you about what the problems are. It's arrogant to conclude that he therefore hates his country.

It isn't just arrogance. It is yet another excellent example of how unpatriotic and nationalistic this type of sentiment actually is.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Form, your comments are more than just simple dissent. I dont think I can recall even one positive thing you ever said about this country.

I took an oath to protect the consitution, and serve this country. I have an excellent idea of what patriotism is, as opposed to nationalism. I've known more than a few that have given their all for this nation. You aint one of them.

Who made you the judge of who is a patriot?

Also calling a comment "dissent" bring me images of a comment from a offical of a Peoples Democratic Republic...

 

[Traitorfish]

Then how does their nationalism expressed now, except cultural stuff?
Separatism?

Cultural stuff and separatism, yes. (More of the former in Wales, more of the latter in Scotland. The Irish traditionally go for both, although post-Troubles the focus is towards the former.)

It isn't just arrogance. It is yet another excellent example of how unpatriotic and nationalistic this type of sentiment actually is.

This is a pretty good example of what I've been talking about: MobBoss is "unpatriotic" and "nationalistic", because he's on the right, while you are "patriotic" yet non-"nationalistic" because you are to the left. The words aren't actually describing meaningful political or ideological tendencies, they're moral valuations.

 

[Domen]

my question, specifically, is, is it a bad thing to be unpatriotic and if so why?

Absolutely not. Why on earth should feel obliged to support some random country or culture, just because you happened to be born there.

You don't have to support a country or culture (or nation) where you was born, you can support any other entity, or several of them.

But hating / unsupporting every single entity is highly antisocial. So unpatriotic means antisocial.

Patriotism means putting loyalty to a fictional entity above loyalty to actual human beings,

Source? This is your "definition". This is what it means to you. But I don't have to agree with this. I define things which surround me. I on my own define what "patriotism" means to me. For me a country or community of countries or any other community (for example my small local community - municipality in which I live, and which I support), is not a "fictional entity" - contrary to what you claim -, but entity which consists of human beings.

Patriotism doesn't require you to approve of everything your country does,

This would be called blindness rather than patriotism.

Who made you the judge of who is a patriot?

Noone - if you feel a patriot, you are one.

Greek word "patria" has very multiple meanings: group, family, tribe or nation, people with common origin.

"Patriotism" means "love to patria". And nothing more than this. Since "patria" has so multiple meanings and no of them describes a "fictional entity" - because neither group, family, nation or people with common origin are "fictional entities" - I totally and completely disagree with Traitorfish' definition.

Greek "patriotes" means compatriot or fellow-citizen or "fellow companion" maybe.

 

[Formaldehyde]

This is a pretty good example of what I've been talking about: MobBoss is "unpatriotic" and "nationalistic", because he's on the right, while you are "patriotic" yet non-"nationalistic" because you are to the left. The words aren't actually describing meaningful political or ideological tendencies, they're moral valuations.

It has nothing to do with being "on the left" or "on the right" or "moral valuations". It has to do with fundamentally misunderstanding what the Constitution and basic human rights even mean. It has to do with being so authoritarian to think that anybody who criticizes the policies of the government and especially the military "hates" the country, even though those are typically the ones who strive the most to ensure that it remains committed to the basic tenets which it is so symbolic.

Leoreth and Ailedhoo summed it up quite succinctly:

Patriotism doesn't require you to approve of everything your country does, even though appeals to patriotism are often used to make sure that people do so.

If you see there's something wrong with your country, isn't it patriotic to criticize it so the problem can be solved to its benefit? Everything you can accuse Form of is that he disagrees with you about what the problems are. It's arrogant to conclude that he therefore hates his country.

Who made you the judge of who is a patriot?

Also calling a comment "dissent" bring me images of a comment from a offical of a Peoples Democratic Republic...

I'm really surprised you seem to have so much difficulty understanding the difference between patriotism and nationalism. How one is quite common and basically harmless, while the other is the real problem and can even eventually lead to fascism instead of freedom and liberty.

The "America: Love it or leave it" crowd are about as unpatriotic as one can possibly get. They are the ones who actually "hate" many of the country's basic premises.


Link to video.


Link to video.

Memo to Chuck Norris: America, Love it or Leave It.

A lot of attention has been paid to Rush’s statements about how he hopes Obama fails in his efforts to rescue our economy. This is bad enough, but now comes Chuck Norris with his column on World Net Daily who says in not such unsubtle language that it may soon be time for a violent uprising:

“On Glenn Beck’s radio show last week, I quipped in response to our wayward federal government, “I may run for president of Texas.” That need may be a reality sooner than we think. If not me, someone someday may again be running for president of the Lone Star state, if the state of the union continues to turn into the enemy of the state…How much more will Americans take? When will enough be enough? And, when that time comes, will our leaders finally listen or will history need to record a second American Revolution?”

I remember during the Bush years and my deep frustration and anger at the hijacking of the true nature of my country by the Bush, Rumsfeld and Chenney team and their cheerleaders like Norris and Limbaugh. Now that they are out of power they are experiencing similar frustration. But while I took the bumper sticker’s suggestion seriously – I considered leaving America – Norris is using violent seditious language that is dangerous and potentially treasonous.

Chuck and Rush – why not go back to the old standby – America, love it or leave it. I am sure we could raise enough money for your ticket. Otherwise stay. Tone down the rhetoric and be part of a great country that will be stronger if we all decide to hang together.

Only in America can the "patriots" support and defend GWB no matter what he did, while claiming they have the right and even the duty to violently overthrow the government merely because a Democrat president is elected instead.

 

[Traitorfish]

Source?

Okay, firstly? That doesn't make sense. It's a sociological interpretation, all I could cite would be a more expansive version of what I already said. There's no graph I can cite for this; what would that even look like?

This is your "definition". This is what it means to you. But I don't have to agree with this. I define things which surround me. I on my own define what "patriotism" means to me. For me a country or community of countries or any other community (for example my small local community - municipality in which I live, and which I support), is not a "fictional entity" - contrary to what you claim -, but entity which consists of human beings.

Patriotism is conventionally understood as loyalty to the nation qua nation, and that any corresponding loyalty to your co-citizens is derived from a shared national identity, rather than a shared humanity; that an American patriot is loyal to the United States in itself, and loyal to other Americans only insofar as they are American. If instead a person's fundamental loyalty is to other human beings as human beings, even while holding a special attachment to their own cultural heritage, they'd simply be a humanist. I think that everyone should be a humanist, and so find counter-humanist sentiments fundamentally objectionable.

What, in the above, do you find so shockingly problematic?

It has nothing to do with being "on the left" or "on the right" or "moral valuations". It has to do with fundamentally misunderstanding what the Constitution and basic human rights even mean. It has to do with being so authoritarian to think that anybody who criticizes the absurd policies of the government and especially the military "hates" the country, not those who strive to ensure that it remains committed to the basic tenets which it was founded.

Ailedhoo summed it up quite succinctly:

I'm really surprised you seem to have so much difficulty understanding the difference between patriotism and nationalism. How one is quite common and basically harmless, while the other is the real problem and even eventually leads to fascism instead of liberty.

The "America: Love it or leave it" crowd are about as unpatriotic as one can possibly get. They are the ones who actually hate the basic premises on which it was founded.

You're not arguing for your model, here, you're just insisting upon it. As I said, it's completely incoherent with how the term is otherwised used, historically or contemporarily. Were Garibaldi, Sun Yat-sen and Pádraig Pearse "fascists"? Or are the three distinct sub-disciplines concerned with their respective movements, among the countless examples I could bring up, all equally mistaken as to the proper definition of "nationalism"?

This distinction doesn't serve to enlighten us as to the character of either "nationalism" or "patriotism", into nationalism as a political typology, or into nationhood as an ideological category. All it does is all you to affirm that Democrats good, Republicans bad, just as you always suspected.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Only I don't think that at all. It is more like Democrats bad; Republicans bad, overly authoritarian, and hypocritical to boot. And it really has nothing to do with this issue. This is a matter of authoritarianism and feelings of superiority which granted are far more prevalent on the right side of the political spectrum in the US.

Is unifying a country the same as excessive authoritarianism bordering on fascism? Obviously not. But I think it is revealing that 2 out of 3 of those governments eventually did become quite fascist due primarily to excessive nationalism.

The Fascist Roots of the ROC

 

[G-Max]

any corresponding loyalty to your co-citizens is derived from a shared national identity, rather than a shared humanity; that an American patriot is loyal to the United States in itself, and loyal to other Americans only insofar as they are American. If instead a person's fundamental loyalty is to other human beings as human beings, even while holding a special attachment to their own cultural heritage, they'd simply be a humanist. I think that everyone should be a humanist, and so find counter-humanist sentiments fundamentally objectionable.

What do you think of Transhumanists?

 

[MobBoss]

Again, that just shows how biased and completely clueless you are about my actual opinions.

I'm starting to think you dont know what those words mean since you insist on saying this constantly, although the audience in general has indeed been listening to your actual opinions for years now.

Of course I am biased as to your opinion. Clueless? Not at all. You've been quite clear on your opinion and how you feel.

How is condoning and even somewhat defending rampant homophobia in the white evangelical Christian community and the military, as well as the blatant discrimination and even persecution of homosexuals, protecting the constitution and serving this country?

Now this is exactly what I am talking about. I have time and again cried out against groups like the WBC who are true homophobes - and you ignore me. I cry out against violence done against homosexuals simply because of their sexuality - you ignore me. I have repeatedly stated that I think anyone should have the right to have their significant other visit them in the hospital - you ignore that as well....as well as a long list of other specifics that i've pointed out that simply arent right.

But since i'm a christian who believes that marriage is 1 man and 1 woman you label me as the worst possible bigoted homophobe sort, because thats your particular brand of myopic propaganda.

You see things one way and one way only Form. Your way.

How is confusing legitimate dissent of some of the policies of US government and the military with a hatred of a country doing so? Does the phrase "freedom of speech" mean anything at all?

I've never said you didnt have a right to say what you want. Ever. However, the rest of us do have the right to say how stupid you are, say for example, like in your support of North Korea.

It isn't just arrogance. It is yet another excellent example of how unpatriotic and nationalistic this type of sentiment actually is.

Who made you the judge of who is a patriot?

A question that can be applied to anyone in this thread. But i've served my country in its military for going on 26 years now. I took an oath to protect the constitution and the people of this country. Whats more patriotic than that?

This is a pretty good example of what I've been talking about: MobBoss is "unpatriotic" and "nationalistic", because he's on the right, while you are "patriotic" yet non-"nationalistic" because you are to the left. The words aren't actually describing meaningful political or ideological tendencies, they're moral valuations.

Precisely so. I dont say Form is unpatriotic because he is 'left' but because of his widely known opinion of the United States as posted for awhile now in these forums.

 

[Leoreth]

A question that can be applied to anyone in this thread.

It's just that questioning the patriotism of others makes your own patriotism seem rather self-serving, which runs counter to the principles of patriotism.

But i've served my country in its military for going on 26 years now. I took an oath to protect the constitution and the people of this country. Whats more patriotic than that?

Sorry, but if you think that military service is a sufficient or necessary condition for patriotism you just show your lack of perspective.

Not to say that you can't be a patriot because of it. You're just not automatically one, and certainly not automatically the ideal patriot.

 

[MobBoss]

It's just that questioning the patriotism of others makes your own patriotism seem rather self-serving, which runs counter to the principles of patriotism.

Do you not think someone who lauds an oppressive nation like North Korea while vilifying that of the United States needs their self-proclaimed patriotism questioned?

My initial posts in this thread had nothing to do with my own perceived patriotism. At all. But rather that of an individual well know in his opinion of his home nation.

Sorry, but if you think that military service is a sufficient or necessary condition for patriotism you just show your lack of perspective.

Necessary? No. Sufficient? Partially. I dont think its the only way one can show Patriotism, but selfless service via the military should at least be an initial qualifier.

Not to say that you can't be a patriot because of it. You're just not automatically one, and certainly not automatically the ideal patriot.

I agree. Timothy McVeigh served in the military, but he was in no way a patriot. If you think my comment implied that, it didnt.

 

[Flying Pig]

but selfless service via the military should at least be an initial qualifier.

Not really; some people join out of patriotism, but I think they're the minority - alright, you don't get very many ardent anarchists in the ranks, but it's not as if we're all flag-waving God Save the Queen types, either.

 

[Formaldehyde]

You see things one way and one way only Form. Your way.

This post again shows you really have no clue at all what my opinions actually are. It even deliberately twists my comments about your quite public opinions regarding homosexuals in the military and in general completely out of shape into a form you think you can vilify.

I never ciaimed you were a "bigoted homophobe", much less the "worst possible" type. And to even insinuate I did is "your particular brand of myopic propaganda".

But I certainly don't think publicly expressing the opinions you frequently do is a proper example of defending the Constitution and serving the country, much less claiming that I "hate America" for merely expressing my opinons. YMMV.

It's just that questioning the patriotism of others makes your own patriotism seem rather self-serving, which runs counter to the principles of patriotism.

Indeed.

Sorry, but if you think that military service is a sufficient or necessary condition for patriotism you just show your lack of perspective.

Not to say that you can't be a patriot because of it. You're just not automatically one, and certainly not automatically the ideal patriot.

Enlistment spiked immediately after 9/11 because many recruits wanted a chance to kill Muslims to get even. Do those soldiers qualify as being patriots?

How about all those who were essentially forced into joining the military due to the recent recession? Are they patriots for merely getting on the government dole?

What about the people in the military who clearly don't understand the Constitution at all by being racists and bigots and discriminating against and persecuting homosexuals and other minorities? Are they all patriots?

It seems like the criteria to some to be considered to be a patriot has an incredibly low standard when applied to military personnel, but it is extremely high for everybody else. All one must do to lose that distinction is to merely express their true patriotism and understanding of the Constitution by simply complaining when the US government fails to live up to its own basic tenets.

 

[kochman]

Enlistment spiked immediately after 9/11 because many recruits wanted a chance to kill Muslims to get even. Do those soldiers qualify as being patriots?

What a jerk way to look at it.

Enlistment also spiked after the Japanese did a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. Many who joined knowing the would be sent to fight the Germans... but we all know they must have enlisted only to kill Japanese, since they are different...

Why do you so often assume the worst about people?

How about this, enlistment jumped because people get emotional when thousands of innocent countrymen/women, some of whom they may know, are killed out of thin air while trying to work and pay their bills, and those who enlisted wanted to fight for their country's defense/etc? Why do you have to boil it down to the worst possible reason?
It is pretty disgusting.

 

[civver_764]

Patriotism means putting loyalty to a fictional entity above loyalty to actual human beings, and is therefore fundamentally objectionable.

This. I find patriotism really strange and it leads to all sorts of bad things.

 

[Formaldehyde]

What a jerk way to look at it.

Just think about how the families of hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis likely consider it. Don't you care what they might be feeling or experiencing?

This is an excellent example regarding the difference between patriotism and nationalism. Patriots were understandably saddened by 9/11. I certainly was after knowing at least 50 people who died in the World Trade Center. Nationalists joined up to get revenge on Muslims for the acts of 19 dead criminals, and a leader who should have been simply arrested after the US government provided the Afghan government proof that bin Laden was behind it. Most of them didn't even care for the first few years that almost all of them were even in the wrong country.

Enlistment also spiked after the Japanese did a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. Many who joined knowing the would be sent to fight the Germans... but we all know they must have enlisted only to kill Japanese, since they are different...

Many of them did join up just to kill Japanese. Numerous atrocities were committed by soldiers in the Pacific theater in particular as a direct result after the US government even generated a massive amount of propaganda portraying them as being sub-humans. Were they patriots?

And what "sneak attack"? The US knew for months that Japan was going to strike someplace in the Pacific. The only real surprise was the location, and that was the result of a massive intelligence failure on the part of the US government.

 

[Flying Pig]

This. I find patriotism really strange and it leads to all sorts of bad things.

I think most people who self-identify as 'patriots' would contest that statement greatly.