Patriotism or Nationalism?

[Postman]

Patriotism: Devotion to one's country
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Nationalism: Devotion, often chauvinistic, to one's own nation.

Chauvinism: Unreasoning attachment to one's race, group, etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Do Liberals argue from the standpoint of patriotism and conservatives from the standpoint of nationalism?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

1. Patriotism is "Good Nationalism" and Nationalism is "Bad Patriotism"

That's really the difference. Democrats are loyal to the best ideals of America, life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, equality, civil rights, a government of and by the people. Republicans like to wave flags and divide people by race and religion. So yes, Democrats argue from the standpoint of patriotism and Republicans appeal to nationalism.

[Postman]

3. great reponse. thanks

nt

[LSparkle]

9. You are correct, Sir!

Or ma'am ...

[sasquatch]

2. Liberals=Patriotism. Conservitives=Nationalism

[mmonk]

4. Nationalism

is more of a "my country right or wrong attitude".

[JailBush]

5. Here's the sequence:

Patriotism > Nationalism > Jingoism > Fascism

I'm not even completely comfortable with patriotism; what's wrong with COMMON SENSE? In other words, why do I have to feel a stirring of national pride in my heart to fight against Bush's insane tax cuts?

I've been working with a new term - GLOBAL PATRIOTISM. It suggests a patriotism that transcends national borders. Its a patriotism that focuses on the human race, the environment - the whole enchilada.

Screw the Pledge of Allegiance.

[Postman]

7. interesting.

I like the Common Sense approach.

[AliceWonderland]

14. Yes, interesting

That was my first thought, too. How about just plain common sense?

[Postman]

6. Could middle class conservatives really be Liberals? they just don't ...

recognize that they have much in common with "declared" liberals?

There are union members who are conservative. How do you explain the irony? Rush LimHanniSavage?

[iverglas]

8. divided by a common language ...

"Nationalism: Devotion, often chauvinistic, to one's own nation."

Well, that's one meaning, and perhaps the one that is most relevant in the US context.

Here's one that my Oxford Concise gives:

"a policy of national independence"

That's the one that would be far more relevant in many other contexts, including Canada, for example.

Of course, there's a subtext: the *reason* for that policy. Which has to do with adherence to the values of one's society and a desire to preserve those values, for starters; a sense of belonging to a culture, an attachment to history and land; all sorts of things.

Just as there is for "patriotism", actually. Gotta be a *reason* for "devotion to one's country". Otherwise, it really is just chauvinism: *unreasoning* attachment.

"Nationalism", in the sense that I use it, is historically a much more "conservative" tradition in Canada -- both as a policy of national independence and as attachment to the values, culture and history of the nation. Liberals were never much interested in national independence (being liberals, and therefore more interested in capital than in values), until the last quarter-century or so, and were not the source of many of the values that Canadians hold to, that date from longer ago.

But in the US? Yes, I assume one might say that "liberals" argue more from a reasoned attachment to things in their country that are good, while "conservatives" argue from reasoned attachment to whatever's in their interest and frame it as attachment to their country.
;)

.

[proud patriot]

10. The answer to your question is YES

Look I have a lot of repect for patriots from both parties
patriotism does not stem from Party line .

This subject is very close to heart , because
this line is under attack by neo-cons equating
patriotism to party line .

Neo-con bushies are neither Conservative or Patriots .
Nor do they care about the rule of law .

My republican Grandfather is a patriot , he is not
a neo-con in anyway shape or form.

John McCain is a patriot , I dissagree with
him mostly , but respect the man as a patriot .

[IndianaGreen]

11. As an internationalist, I reject both!

The great Emma Goldman described the true nature of patriotism in the following 1911 essay that rings so true nearly a century after it was written:

PATRIOTISM, A MENACE TO LIBERTY
by Emma Goldman, 1911

Indeed, conceit, arrogance, and egotism are the essentials of patriotism. Let me illustrate. Patriotism assumes that our globe is divided into little spots, each one surrounded by an iron gate. Those who have had the fortune of being born on some particular spot, consider themselves better, nobler, grander, more intelligent than the living beings inhabiting any other spot. It is, therefore, the duty of everyone living on that chosen spot to fight, kill, and die in the attempt to impose his superiority upon all the others.

<snip>

The awful waste that patriotism necessitates ought to be sufficient to cure the man of even average intelligence from this disease. Yet patriotism demands still more. The people are urged to be patriotic and for that luxury they pay, not only by supporting their "defenders," but even by sacrificing their own children. Patriotism requires allegiance to the flag, which means obedience and readiness to kill father, mother, brother, sister.

<snip>

We Americans claim to be a peace-loving people. We hate bloodshed; we are opposed to violence. Yet we go into spasms of joy over the possibility of projecting dynamite bombs from flying machines upon helpless citizens. We are ready to hang, electrocute, or lynch anyone, who, from economic necessity, will risk his own life in the attempt upon that of some industrial magnate. Yet our hearts swell with pride at the thought that America is becoming the most powerful nation on earth, and that it will eventually plant her iron foot on the necks of all other nations.

Such is the logic of patriotism.

http://www.spunk.org/library/writers/goldman/sp000064.html

[Postman]

12. awesome.

I've read this from her in Zinn's book.

[iverglas]

18. well I swan

And will you tell that to the East Timorese, or the Palestinians, or any of a number of other oppressed / colonized / subjugated peoples one might name? Would you have told it to the colonials in the pre-US back in 1775? How about to Gandhi?

Forgive me, but it seems to me that USAmerican "internationalists" might be almost as ethnocentric as their "nationalist" fellow citizens sometimes.

Not every nationalist in the big wide world is looking to "plant her iron foot on the necks of all other nations". Some are looking to get an iron foot off their necks, and to have the freedom to organize themselves and govern themselves as they choose, and speak their own language and practise their own culture, and that sort of thing. And sometimes a nation is the only thing that will enable them to do that, so nationalism is more than appropriate, it is laudable.

"Patriotism requires allegiance to the flag, which means obedience and readiness to kill father, mother, brother, sister."

Again ... maybe to some, or many, or most USAmericans it does.

And actually, that may not be far wrong in general. And that would be why I prefer nationalism, which doesn't really necessarily mean the nasty things it has apparently had ascribed to it in the US.

In French, the word nation retains more of its original Latin flavour:

natio nation, people

Peoples are those things with the right of self-determination. They may not want to be part of one big global village just at the moment; they may think that there interests are better served by protecting their values and language and culture from being swallowed up. They may decide that independence as a state within secure borders best serves those interests. That would make them nationalists, in my book.

So hey, I'm not surprised that you reject patriotism. I just wonder why you reject nationalism. Except that I guess we are speaking two different languages.

A sense of belonging, an awareness of shared values and cultural expressions, is important for individuals. Certainly we need to expand that sense and awareness to include more people and peoples in our "us", and to remove the "versus" between "us" and "them". But when a people is on the receiving end of that "versus", and the expansion of the thing on the other end of it would simply mean that it would gain hegemony and the one on the receiving end would crumble under the weight, so that its members would no longer be part of something, they would be subjects of something, I think it's up to them if they want to put up an iron gate.

.

[durutti]

21. Internationalist support of national liberation...

Like IG, I consider myself an internationalist. "The worker has no country."

Still, I support national liberation struggles like that of of the Palestinians and the Irish. How do I reconcile these views?

When one nation is oppressed by another, the people of the oppressed nation tend to focus on this national oppression. They can't be expected to act in solidarity with the international working class when the oppression they suffer at the hands of another nation is much more obvious than that which they suffer at the hands of their own capitalists.

So, I support nationalism when it will ultimately lead to increased internationalism. I support Palestinian nationalism and Irish nationalism. I'm more skeptical of black nationalism in the U.S., Quebecois nationalism in Canada, and Scottish, Welsh, and Cornish nationalism in Britain. I'm absolutely opposed to the nationalism of oppressor nations like the United States and Israel.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

19. Far be it from me to argue with Emma Goldman

So I won't :)

[Malva Zebrina]

13. a little bit of this

and a little bit of that. Excess in either is not good.

My favorite Emma quote

If I can't dance, it's not my revolution!

[durutti]

15. I am neither a patriot nor a nationalist.

Devoting yourself to any country means putting aside class differences. But the difference between the international working class and ruling class are bigger and deeper than any between nations.

[uberotto]

16. I don't think that the Patriotism vs. Nationalism debate...

can be easily segmented into a liberal vs. conservative issue.

for my definition of Nationalism and Patriotism I use this article by George Orwell:

http://www.resort.com/~prime8/Orwell/nationalism.html

By "nationalism" I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled "good" or "bad." But secondly -- and this is much more important -- I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests. Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By "patriotism" I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseperable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.


I've known liberals who are Nationalistic, in that they believed that the U.S. should actively spread it's form of democracy around the world (mostly to other countries which are currently being controlled by opressive governments).

I've known conservatives who are patriotic in that they take pride in the accomplishments of the U.S. and felt the U.S. should concentrate on making itself into a model of democracy that other countries could follow if they chose.

I would say, based on my own personal experiences that a persons Nationalism or Patriotism is based more on on an individuals personality than a party affiliation.

[pinkpops]

17. I'm thinking back to history class

and it's been a long,long time. Maybe the connotations have changed.
My recollection is that nationalism describes the shared values, feelings, whatever, that makes a group of people think of themselves as a nation. For example, you could argue that the northern area of Iraq doesn't really belong in Iraq, but rather in a nation of Kurds, along with the southern area of Turkey. The fact that this is not the case is due to outside imposition of borders. Nationalization comes from within, and it is not necessarily negative. Don't jump all over me on this. My favorite is Jingoism, if I have spelled it right. I won't try to define it - maybe someone else can.

[iverglas]

20. bingo

That really is what nationalism means to a lot of people in the world. And it does come from within -- the individual's need to belong in order to survive and thrive, and the group's corresponding need for the individual's adherence in order for the group to survive and thrive. To assume that the nation's purposes and objectives are evil is to read too much into it.

Thanks!

.