This attitude bothers the shit out of me. It says that by dint of being born something, you have more right to speak about it than anyone who wasn’t born that. To be sure, this is true in some cases. But to assert that someone who watches news, follows politics, has experiences and interactions with Americans, and knows history has less right to comment on what he feels American patriotism is than Joe sixpack who has never left his trailer except to buy more beer and collect his welfare check is pretty fucking insulting.
ETA: Oh, and thanks Dutchman. I haven’t had any cause to feel patriotic in the last 8 years. Now I do-- America is reclaiming the principles on which it was founded (could we move a little faster on reclaiming that church and state thing, though?).
For the first time in my voting life, I’ve finally voted for a presidential candidate who won. I even made my first campaign contribution. I don’t have any illusion that things will be perfect, but I will be happy to see a president who won’t impugn my loyalty to my country or commit my country to what I believe are horrible wrongs.
As for all the people appalled at the gall of the Dutchman in saying “real” patriotism - come on, everyone knows patriotism is easily hijacked into jingoism, and we don’t all agree about where that line is. Dutchman is making clear where he believes the line is, but that doesn’t prevent you from having a different belief.
I think there’s a solid tradition of Alexis de Tocqueville and the like commenting on Americanisms, though of course it helps to have actually spent time there. (I grew up in the States, so I’m probably good on that point.)
The cynic in me wants to say that Obama is good at making Americans feel good about themselves — much like Reagan — and that capacity isn’t necessarily a good thing. Still, I haven’t seen any evidence that feeling good about onesself makes things better. Nor do I like the idea that there’s a “true” patriotism — it’s just love of your country, dude*.
Then again, the rest of the world is quite happy about the whole Obama thing, and that should prove extremely useful for everyone.
*If you’ll pardon the hijack, I’ve always found the equation of loving America with loving some other higher ideal somewhat offensive, in that America is a country, not an ideal. On the other hand, as The Flying Dutchman aptly demonstrates, non-Americans often buy into that ideal too.
To when? What are you talking about? The fact is the US had widespread support and sympathy worldwide after 9/11, and it lost it due to its actions.
I’m not allowed to have an opinion either? Fair does. You don’t comment on the Europeans who died supporting the US, however.
But you would presume to pronounce on the opinions of an entire continent.
Go Pete! If I was American he would make me proud to be so.
For what it was worth I thought the speech was very impressive, especially the brief support for us atheist science fans. Let all Americans know that you have Petrobey Mavromihalis’ official permission to be proud of yourselves.
Why do they find fault? Because. IT’S TAKING LONGER THAN WE THOUGHT. But at least the majority of us, like the OP, have hope, and that is the jump-start we need right now.
Well, the USA are a country born around a specific set of ideas and not only around, say, geography. Some of those ideas have been discarded, some have been tweaked, some have been temporarily abandoned and then taken up again, some new ones have been added. But it’s still a country that’s rooted in that paper starting “We, the people…” more than in the complications of finding a pass over the mountains.
A country, a homeland, isn’t a piece of land. It isn’t some lines on a map. It’s a way of doing things, a culture, a mentality. For the USA or for any country you care to name.
PS: I know I have problems taking compliments, but some of the people in this thread really should see a head-doc about it. You’ll be happier once you learn to take a pat on the back in the spirit in which it was given. Promise.
I don’t want to hijack much further, because the current tangent of the thread is very interesting. I don’t think that we’re in disagreement, and that further discussion would eventually lead down the changes in the electoral process and information distribution in the times of those giant victory margins (even during something so chronologically close as Reagan/Mondale).
But I think barring a future October Surprise, we will be hard-pressed to see a margin-of-victory much larger than this one in elections to come.
I think that we are a country that has awoken, hungover, overweight, and deeply in debt, but with a new determination to get ourselves back in shape, one day at a time. I can’t see the future, but if we can continue in this spirit, we’ll be fine.
Kindly read my comments carefully. As you should see, I said no such thing. I merely commented on your comment. But you allow yourself to ask a leading question about something I did not do.
Our troops have testified to the bravery and expertise of the other troops, and I am grateful. But the other countries have generally sent the minimum they could, regrettably but rightfully bowing to their peoples’ will. And AFTER the hardest fighting was over, France and Germany screeched for a share of reconstruction disproportionate to their military contribution.
Are you saying you’re not representative? You spoke for all the European troops. And I figured if Walt Whitman could do it, so could I.
The operative word is “real”. Yes, ONLY Americans DEFINE what “real American patriotism” is. Anyone, including non-Americans, can comment on whether our policies are good or bad.
It’s unfortunate you have such a low opinion of your fellow citizens.
As a real American, I hereby define “real American patriotism” in an inclusive way that invites non-Americans to contribute to the definition of real American patriotism.
So that takes care of that. Non-Americans, feel free to contribute to the definition of real American patriotism. Real American patriots deeply value your perspectives.
(Reee-al American paaa-triots…)
So non-Americans can comment, but their comments have no bearing on a definition. So what’s the point of the comment in the first place? Why not just say they’re not allowed to comment? That’s like saying that only an expert in language is allowed to change the definition of a word. Like it or not, the opinions of the masses are what changes definitions of things. In this case, the masses exist both within and outside America.
Yup, I said that every single person in America was like that. Did you get any splinters setting that straw man up?
I made the point that the US had received support from Europe, and continues to do so. You ignored this main point to take issue with my opinion. Hence my commenting on your comment about my comment.
You have a funny way of showing it.
You keep losing me. What on earth are you on about?
I wasn’t aware that reconstructing a country was a prize awarded only to those who knocked the shit out of it in the first place.
I certainly didn’t speak for all European troops. I not sure I’ve ever even met one. I just pointed out that many of them have fought and died in support of the US since 2001, a fact you were ignoring.
I did use a ‘we’ when talking about European support of the US. This was a flippant reply to you painting the entire continent with one brush.
And you’ve lost me again with the Whitman bit. I think I understand what you’re saying, I just don’t get why you’re saying it.
I don’t need to point out what nonsense this is, as Terrifel has already done a superb job of it.
Once again, the OP was a compliment and commented on what he saw as good traits in the American character. You responded by telling the rest of the world what it could or could not think. We (I’ve done it again) don’t appreciate that.
