CE - this reminds me of my other thread - please take a look:
A "Must" Read on war, patriotism and the Way of Knowledge
I would love to get rid of the borders on an experimental basis. I agree in theory, but then I also wonder about what Robert Frost said about "Good fences make good neighbors." I'm sitting on a fence on this one, lol.
Patriotism or Nationalism?
October 16, 2001
by Joe Sobran
This is a season of patriotism, but also of
something that is easily mistaken for patriotism;
namely, nationalism. The difference is vital.
G.K. Chesterton once observed that Rudyard
Kipling, the great poet of British imperialism,
suffered from a "lack of patriotism." He explained:
"He admires England, but he does not love her; for
we admire things with reasons, but love them
without reasons. He admires England because she is
strong, not because she is English."
In the same way, many Americans admire America
for being strong, not for being American. For them
America has to be "the greatest country on earth"
in order to be worthy of their devotion. If it were
only the 2nd-greatest, or the 19th-greatest, or,
heaven forbid, "a 3rd-rate power," it would be
virtually worthless.
This is nationalism, not patriotism.
Patriotism is like family love. You love your
family just for being your family, not for being
"the greatest family on earth" (whatever that might
mean) or for being "better" than other families.
You don't feel threatened when other people love
their families the same way. On the contrary, you
respect their love, and you take comfort in knowing
they respect yours. You don't feel your family is
enhanced by feuding with other families.
While patriotism is a form of affection,
nationalism, it has often been said, is grounded in
resentment and rivalry; it's often defined by its
enemies and traitors, real or supposed. It is
militant by nature, and its typical style is
belligerent. Patriotism, by contrast, is peaceful
until forced to fight.
The patriot differs from the nationalist in
this respect too: he can laugh at his country, the
way members of a family can laugh at each other's
foibles. Affection takes for granted the
imperfection of those it loves; the patriotic
Irishman thinks Ireland is hilarious, whereas the
Irish nationalist sees nothing to laugh about.
The nationalist has to prove his country is
always right. He reduces his country to an idea, a
perfect abstraction, rather than a mere home. He
may even find the patriot's irreverent humor
annoying.
Patriotism is relaxed. Nationalism is rigid.
The patriot may loyally defend his country even
when he knows it's wrong; the nationalist has to
insist that he defends his country not because it's
his, but because it's right. As if he would have
defended it even if he hadn't been born to it! The
nationalist talks as if he just "happens," by sheer
accident, to have been a native of the greatest
country on earth -- in contrast to, say, the
pitiful Belgian or Brazilian.
Because the patriot and the nationalist often
use the same words, they may not realize that they
use those words in very different senses. The
American patriot assumes that the nationalist loves
this country with an affection like his own,
failing to perceive that what the nationalist
really loves is an abstraction -- "national
greatness," or something like that. The American
nationalist, on the other hand, is apt to be
suspicious of the patriot, accusing him of
insufficient zeal, or even "anti-Americanism."
When it comes to war, the patriot realizes
that the rest of the world can't be turned into
America, because his America is something specific
and particular -- the memories and traditions that
can no more be transplanted than the mountains and
the prairies. He seeks only contentment at home,
and he is quick to compromise with an enemy. He
wants his country to be just strong enough to
defend itself.
But the nationalist, who identifies America
with abstractions like "freedom" and "democracy,"
may think it's precisely America's mission to
spread those abstractions around the world -- to
impose them by force, if necessary. In his mind,
those abstractions are universal ideals, and they
can never be truly "safe" until they exist,
unchallenged, everywhere; the world must be made
"safe for democracy" by "a war to end all wars." We
still hear versions of these Wilsonian themes. Any
country that refuses to Americanize is "anti-
American" -- or a "rogue nation." For the
nationalist, war is a welcome opportunity to change
the world. This is a recipe for endless war.
In a time of war hysteria, the outraged
patriot, feeling his country under attack, may
succumb to the seductions of nationalism. This is
the danger we face now.
I'm never proud of things I haven't done anything to deserve, or haven't worked hard to achieve. To me, it's like being proud of winning at a lottery.
