These days a lot of people are being accused of being unpatriotic if they do not tow the establishment line. I have heard many a talk-radio show host refer to Scott Ritter, for example, an ex-Marine who participated in combat, as “little more than an apologist for Saddam Hussein.” A common response to this charge is that it is patriotic to question your leaders. I am wondering if perhaps those who dissent from the establishment view are taking a wrong position by accepting the premise that patriotism is, in itself, a virtue.
I can’t remember who said it, but it sounds good to me: “Patriotism is the belief that your country is the best because you were born in it.”
I have always felt that patriotism is not really a virtue. I think loyalty to ideals, ideals like freedom of speech, justice, equality, and so on, is a virtue. And, if your country upholds these values then, by extension, you would be loyal to your country. If your country does not uphold the values you are loyal to, wouldn’t it then be a vice to be patriotic? Why should you be loyal to your country just because it is your country?
I think you’ve phrased it nicely. Loyalty to one’s country should be based on things about that country that are deserving of respect or appreciation, not based on the existence of that country in itself.
Rampant, unthinkng patriotism leads to arrogance, xenophibia, meaningless conflict, and a defensive reflex.
Reminds me of an anecdote a friend told me. He was backpacking though Canada with various nationalities, and they stopped by a breathtaking gorge in the Rockies. “I think that’s the most beautiful thing I’ve ever seen,” he said.
A Chinese girl who was travelling with him said “it is very nice, but it can’t be the most beautiful.”
“You do think it’s beautiful, though?” he asked her.
“Yes I do, but it’s not in China, so it can’t possibly be the best.”
If we think of patriotism as support for your nation rather than support for your state, then it may be a virtue, in the same way that support for one’s family or one’s community may be virtuous. I do not mean “support” in the sense of backing your country when it is in the wrong, or uncritical advancement of your country’s interests at the expense of the interests of other countries. I mean support in the sense of recognising an obligation to aid and assist, to be aware of needs, etc. We all accept that to support, nourish and sustain one’s children is virtuous, whereas to neglect them is not. Similarly support for community organisation is virtuous; littering and graffiti are not. The nation is just a still larger group of people with whom we identify. Supporting your nation in this sense is virtuous.
By extension, though, so is the world. So how do we balance the interests of the nation we live in with those of the international community we all belong to?
Oh, I agree. But, just as it is possible for me to advance the interests of my family without damaging the interests of the community (by, e.g., educating my children) so it is possible for me to advance the interests of my country without damaging the interests of other countries.
Patriotism is not an absolute value which justifies all actions and overrides all other considerations.
Patriotism is a virtue, and it’s a good thing, I think, to love the country you live in. It’s not the only virtue, though, and I think the true patriot has a duty to point out injustices in his country, and work to improve bad conditions.
I would here distinguish between nationalism (belief that your country is right, even when it does wrong) and the more benign patriotism (simply, love of your country).
If opportunity presents, I’d encourage anyone seriously interested in this question to read an essay by Robert A. Heinlein entitled “The Pragmatics of Patriotism.” It constitutes the second half of the James V. Forrestal Memorial Lecture that he delivered at the U.S.N.A., and can be found in his collection Expanded Universe.
It’s a highly perceptive and reasoned piece from a man who was not afraid to think freely (who in fact largely invented modern science fiction) but who was firmly devoted to the United States as a country, and gives his reasons why in a logical sequence in that essay.
Were the Nazi’s who betrayed Germany to spy for the Allies bad because they were unpatriotic? All morality is subjective and should be determined on an ad hoc basis. Patriotism can be good, or it can be bad (i.e. the Nazis who blindly followed Hitler out of german pride because “germany is the best!”).
It seems to me that any idea that can be so easily abused as “patriotism” can’t be all good.
What I think I owe the US is to not be a nuisance to the rest of society and to defend the country when called upon.
I don’t think I have to think that all US actions are proper and I don’t think I have to believe that the people in charge for the time being know what the hell they are doing.
It doesn’t mean that I think my family is objectively better than all other families. It doesn’t mean I think it’s okay to be unfair to people outside the family in favor of those in it. It doesn’t mean I must support the members of my family in whatever they say or do; in fact, sometimes I may feel a special duty to oppose them.
But at the same time, I have a special love for them, and a special duty to them. Because of what they’ve done for me, and, well, because they’re my family.
Replace “nation” for “family” in that, and I think it’s a good description for what patriotism can be, and why it can be virtuous.
