Sure, but the messaging and marketing is everything. For a certain segment of voters, it doesn’t do any good to win votes if you are actually patriotic but don’t come across as patriotic.
Worth noting that in 1989-1990, the conservative wing of the court split on the issue of flag desecration - Justices Kennedy and Scalia voted with the liberal Justices Brennan, Marshall, and Blackmun to overturn laws prohibiting flag burning. That doesn’t make it any more patriotic to burn a flag. Disrespecting the national flag is unpatriotic even though it is and should be legal.
This idea that patriotism is exclusive to the American right or left is absurd and even offensive. Politicos will, of course, claim that their positions are patriotic and the positions of their opponents are unpatriotic, but it is common knowledge that this is hogwash. Military service is the epitome of patriotism and there are veterans of all political persuasions. Even within the Republican party, Trump faced criticism after insulting John McCain for having been a POW, etc.
~Max
The problem with a total lack of patriotism is that the people near you are more important; you affect them and they affect you much more than people on the other side of the planet. Caring about all of humanity equally rather than the nation someone lives in sounds good, but in practice it means a person will be less caring towards other people rather than more even if they don’t intend it due to the fact that the majority of humanity is outside their nation and thus harder to help or hurt.
Then there’s issues like corruption and neglect; if someone doesn’t care about the nation then they don’t have any reason to not just loot it for everything they can and let future generations look out for themselves (one of the many ways the Right acts totally unpatriotic, despite beating their chest about patriotism).
There’s also the issue that a lack of patriotism doesn’t make tribalism goes away, it makes it worse. You don’t end up with everyone getting along, you end up with people breaking up into sub-national groups and infighting.
I think that if you “truly love” your country, you’d be open to making it better. So I don’t agree that criticizing your country means you can’t be a patriot.
That said, I do think that people who talk the way you describe aren’t patriotic. But that’s exactly what I’m talking about. I think an attitude of ‘Our country has had its struggles with race in the past, and continues to struggle today; but it has made immense gains, which I am proud of, and which give me hope for continued gains’ is healthier and more productive than an attitude of ‘our country is too racist for me to support’.
Yeah - our country today is whatever we make it.
And the issue is that you’ve / we’ve permitted the Right to define what “comes across” means. IOW: “Don’t have a US flag and a MAGA flag on your pickup truck? Then you’re not coming across as patriotic!”
If we let them define the idea of what “patriot” and all the derivative words mean, they’ll choose definitions that sell their story; dictionaries, truth, and history be damned.
That is definitely not how I would define Nationalism. That seems more like ‘nationraceism’, or national chauvinism, or jingoism, than what I would call “Nationalism”.
Yep. Even here on the SDMB, there was a thread where people thought that flying the American flag was somehow racist or MAGA. Get off the idea that because some Right Wing jerks do X, that should not be done- we cant do the OK sign or wear hawaiian shirts or fly the flag, or whatever. Stop letting the jerks co-opt stuff.
You started out well, but saying that “other nations do this so America should also” is a loser idea. This is why stuff like UHC hasnt taken off (or one of the reasons) - “Some Euro country has XXX and we should be more like them, and less like America” doesnt sell, it is a bad idea.
I agree that it would be good for the left to take back patriotism but it will not be easy. The right has co-opted performative patriotism into a symbol proto-fascist nationalism and Jingoism for so long that the ostentatious display of the American flag has the immediate effect to bringing to mind wing politics and all that comes with it.
Since it has entered our symbolic consciousness you can’t simply flip a switch and say, take it back any more than you can take back the swastika from the Nazis.
The one brief moment of exception to this was shortly after September 11th, when we all became patriots. With a different president it might have been possible to maintain this, but instead we had GWB, and his freedom fries, and “if you aren’t with us you’re against us” and it went back to Jingoism.
Right after 9/11, all the villages around here erupted in US flags. One in particular still had a massive number of flags flying in 2008.
Right after Obama got elected, I drove through there. And for the first time in a whole lot of years, I felt like those flags fully included me. It was a really nice feeling.
I’ve been trying to take that flag back since the Vietnam years, though. I had a small one I carried in protest marches. I finally wore it out, in 2017, and had to replace it.
On a broader note, the left wing has a tendency to abandon and run away any time the right wing claims something, as opposed to fighting and reclaiming it.
Take the “OK” finger hand sign, for instance. The moment it became seen as some secret Nazi sign, liberals immediately ran from it and then claimed that people who used the hand sign were racist - rather than fighting back, “No, it would be ridiculous for us to let right-wingers prevent us from using the OK sign with our hands.”
There’s jingoism and then there’s patriotism. I don’t know that the left really ever abandoned patriotism.
Sure, but if the public perception is that the left abandoned patriotism, then that will be a factor that hurts them at the polls, unfair though it may be.
Changes to public perception are like changes to language. I suppose a concerted effort could be made to try to redefine terms, but something tells me those kinds of distinctions, subtle and otherwise, are beyond the capacity of many on the right to make and those efforts doomed to fail.
It appears the public’s perception is that flying fighter jets over stadiums and singing the national anthem before every public event with more than three people present passes for patriotism. I don’t know if ‘unfair’ is the right word, but it is what it is.
Here’s what patriotism for me entails:
- Paying my taxes
- Vocally advocating for resources to go to people when it won’t benefit me directly (universal health care, educational funding, civil rights, help for the homeless and disadvantaged, etc).
- Rather than merely thanking veterans for their service, I advocate for them to have great retirement benefits and hassle-free health care for the rest of their lives. Same for teachers.
Burn all the flags you like. I realize it’s an important symbol for some people, and for that reason I probably wouldn’t do it as a form of protest. But it is just a symbol, and I don’t want to participate in performative patriotism. I don’t wave flags, I have no bumper stickers on my car and I will not pledge allegiance to anything. Nothing deserves my blind allegiance.
What I appreciate most about my country is that we are free to criticize it, and thereby hopefully improve it. I love that we are not required to love the country, but I know enough of the world to appreciate the good things and want to improve others. That’s my form of patriotism, and I don’t expect for a moment that it will be shared by many other people.
I disagree, since this is a fairly recent phenomenon. Not set in stone like the swastika from 1939 or so.
Which was the libs being trolled by trolls from 4chan, since it really wasn’t. And still isnt.
Blind allegiance is not implied by patriotism. But allegiance is required.
Citizens of the United States owe allegiance to the United States, and violation of this duty is punishable by law, with death in the worst cases. The theory of social compact is that your continued complicity in living as a citizen under U.S. jurisdiction is tacit consent to a contract where you give your allegiance as consideration for the benefits of citizenship. Even noncitizens have an obligation commensurate with the benefits of living under U.S. jurisdiction. Related: the oath of allegiance is the most important part of the naturalization process.
The distinction between blind loyalty and the loyalty called for by a social compact is that the compact must not violate higher law, be it divine law, natural law, human rights principles, or what have you. So Americans in the 18th century justified rebellion against British rule…
~Max
I disagree, but I think it’s a semantic difference. To me, the word allegiance does suggest something like blind loyalty. Or possibly disregarding national failings in favor of unconditional love for the country.
In any case, I’ve always been uncomfortable with the idea of a pledge of allegiance and have found it more and more creepy over time.
And I think it’s a problem if people are unable to conceive of allegience that isn’t “blind.”
Say what?!
Treason’s punishable by death. But treason is very specifically not just not giving allegiance. Refusing to say the pledge of allegiance is protected by law. What are you talking about?
No. You give your obedience to the law; which is not at all the same thing.
And “the theory of social compact” is in any case not one of the laws of the United States.
Yeah. Like I said: My country. Right the wrongs.
I assumed @Max_S was thinking of treason as the extreme form of not being allegient (is that a word?) to one’s country.