Not when you get the diametric opposite, like we have in the UK. It’s actually damaging. One cannot show the slightest pride in one’s country for fear of appearing as a nationalist.
The result is a pervasive gloom and drudgery which is not conducive to enterprise and achievement.
America had the exact opposite problem. The UK can’t bring itself to even mention an accomplishment; the US won’t stop going on about theirs to the point if sounding like a Month Python sketch.
Somewhere in between the two extremes would be nice. I’m sure plenty of countries are, but they dob’t have the global media focus that the US and - to a lesser extent but probably second in the world with that particular area of export - the UK.
They don’t just sit back and say “cuz God says so”
It is based on the premise that all people are equal and frankly doesn’t work without the notion of social contract.
The concept of right and wrong are not so nebulous taht you need a God to tell you the difference between the two. As long as you can get everyone to agree that all people should be treated equally, you can get yourself to a few rules that everyone agrees on. Those are natural rights.
What?!?!? Your rights are protected by the government and rule of law. This is a necessary part of the concept of natural rights. The founding fathers were not promoting anarchy, they were promoting a better form of government, one that was designed to protect our rights from the government and each other. Without the government to protect our rights, only the rights of the strong are protected.
I don’t see how you get there.
Awesomely abled
Well, a lot of Europe took a lot of time to recover from the effects of a country that had a very high opinion of itself
In too many places, patriotism is a stalking horse for tribalism and xenophobia and outright racism.
I think this is one of the keys to the relatively low-pitch national pride asserted in western and northern European countries. It’s not that the countries aren’t proud, it’s that we have had direct and unfortunate experience with where that sort of pride might go.
Which isn’t just a slam against Nazi Germany, by the way. I think a lot of countries discovered rather ugly aspects of their own society during that time, our own Quisling being a prime and deeply shameful example. I’ve had occasion to talk to a lot of people about this, from many countries, and they all bring up similiar experiences. The Swedes’ “national guilt” about remaining neutral during WW2, the UK’s history of colonization and the feeling of a “has been” country, Hungary’s back and forth allegiances, Spain and Italy’s fascism and so on and so forth. Thinking about it, I can pretty much give examples of every European country, aside from some in the eastern bloc I haven’t had the time to go to yet.
So you get this sense that being proud of your country is something good, but don’t be too proud, because pride leads to romanticism, romanticism leads to nationalism and nationalism leads to entitlement. The word “lebensraum” is probably the most evocative example I can think of for national entitlement.
And so you can contrast that with (what seems to me) the American mindset, which is that the US has yet to fail at anything it sets its’ eyes on. (Which is of course where Americans and Europeans often disagree.)
What I am balking at is the attitude that the US is exceptional since that is just a form of tribalism. I’m sure Germans think their nation is exceptional too. Brits too, Russians, Chinese, etc. Depending on what metric you use they can all make arguments for that.
So for Americans to say the US is exceptional is no different than Russians saying it about Russia or Chinese saying it about China. How do you even determine an objective metric for exceptionalism.
If I had to name exceptional nations I’d list England, Israel or Taiwan. But my metrics may not be the metrics of other people. That is like listing the best basketball player, what metrics do you use, and do you automatically discount every Chicago resident who says Jordan and every Ohio resident who says LeBron James?
I have no idea why Canada and Australia do not have our population, despite their large geographic size. But nations like the ones in western europe likely have population densities roughly the same as ours.
I do not know why the US population is so large (compared to a place like Australia). However I still don’t think a large population necessarily equates exceptionalism. Per capita, how are we more exceptional than any other OECD nation? Our military, science and political power is by and large roughly the same per capita as any other wealthy nation.
But what that all boils down to is saying ‘well, anyone could do that…if they just had all of the X that you have’. But, you know, they DON’T…so they don’t. That’s what makes us, you know, exceptional. If everyone had everything that the US had then they would be just like us, and we wouldn’t be exceptional.
As for other countries thinking they are exceptional…sure. They ARE, in most cases. Germany certainly has many exceptional aspects that are unique to them or to their history. Some are good, some are bad, but they all add to the mix. If everyone had the history that Germany has, had the resources and people and political mix that Germany has, then, well, everyone would be German, and they wouldn’t be exceptional. Same with Russia and China. They ARE exceptional in their own (different) ways. The US isn’t like either. We don’t have the history that either has.
Like I said, I think it’s the word ‘exceptionalism’, especially when coupled with ‘American’ that is the sticking point here. It has a lot of baggage associated with it (which, ironically, is part of American Exceptionalism :p).
Because we’d have to invade neighbouring countries to do so. Where to you suggest we put these people? We have a population density about seven times what you have.
One thing the US certainly has is space. European countries don’t have that luxury.
Are you really suggesting cramming 350 million people into England? We can’t move as it is.