Patriotism is a dying concept. In the context of globalization the idea of a nation, necessary for the sentiment of patriotism to make sense, is fading into oblivion. It's only a matter of time before ''we'' means human and not American, Russian, etc. Perhaps the idea will resurface if and when aliens invade the Earth.

I think that patriotism is foremost a tool during times of war used to cohere and motivate the populace in response to an external threat. In that function it's useful...

But during peace-time, I'm not so convinced that it really has a place. Pride in the merits of one's nation seems fine, but more than that and it becomes entertainment, cheer-leading, and allows the governing administration to take actions much more easily given they can appeal to percievably patriotic values.

Can liberals learn to stop worrying and love the nuclear super-powers?

I'm not sure how to answer. The ideologically driven conservatives claim to be minimalists and isolationists, but real world conservatives can't possibly get enough military spending. And I don't know what leftists want anymore... Ideologically they ought to revere western states for enshrining values like freedom of speech, but of late if they don't like what's being said their dissatisfaction of the system really shows...

You are conflating nationalism with patriotism:

The Difference Between patriotism and nationalism is that the patriot is proud of his country for what it does , and the nationalist is proud of his country no matter what it does ; the first attitude creates a feeling of responsibility while the second a feeling of blind arrogance that leads to a war .

Sidney J Harris

Diogenes Laertius when asked where he was from said he was a citizen of the world. The relevant contemporary issues have to with people like Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Many view these people as traitors, especially here in USA, but many others think of them as patriots of the world.

I did conflate the two. "My country, right or wrong", and "Love it or leave it" are two slogans that have characterized the American nationalist. These slogans (and others) also seem to be the province of the pro-military viewpoint and at least many conservatives.

Thomas Jefferson's statement, "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just" is more likely to be cited by left-liberals then ex-melitary members of the VFW or American Legion right-conservatives.

From my highest, most left-cosmopolitan view, nationalist and patriotic games are equally suspect. From this viewpoint I admire the European Community's de-emphasis of national perspectives in favor of a regional unity. From the perspective of my midwestern American value-set, there is something unwholesome about diluting national characteristics and the patriotism that not-very-long-ago went with it.

From that highest, most left-cosmopolitan view, most people in a given nation have very little stake in nationalist interests. Trade deals are generally not made in the name or interest of the working class; they are for the benefit of the ruling class which pretty much owns the country of (fill in blank here).

On the other hand...

For many left liberals, patriotism is inverted and becomes the occasion for self-flagellation. The past sins of national interest (the European colonization of much of the world, of which the proto-American state was one of many results) involved many trespasses upon the occupants of real estate which had been declared AVAILABLE.

The facts of how peoples and nations get ahead tend to be ignored by both patriots and self-flagellators alike. As often as not, our advancement is at your expense. The winners may be thieves, but that is generally the way expansion works.

Can we afford nationalism? — Bitter Crank

I thought this thread is about patriotism, like when you identify with a country and choose to serve it.

Is there any reason why actual leftists and liberals can't be as comfortable loving and serving their personal nation-state as the typical conservative? — Bitter Crank

The political yet again? Okay..
It's simple, liberalism is the opposite to conservatism and thus rejects all that is conservatism specific. Why is nationalism (?) specific to conservatism? Because it aims to preserve and perpetuate existing values, seems obvious to me.

Ok, my question, do you think

Is Edward Snowden a Patriot?

The NSA program he disclosed was latter found to be unconstitutional and this was only possible by his sacrifice, he clearly understood the risks and went ahead and sacrificed a good life for a moral life.

If Trump is considered conservative, looks like he a counterexample of the patriotic conservative- unless patriotic to Russiaor his own finances.

Is Edward Snowden a Patriot? — Cavacava

Yes, Snowden is a patriot (in my value system) because he revealed a program of data collection which, because of its immense scope and immense means, prepared the groundwork for American government agencies (NSA/CIA ET AL) to secretly track the activities of American citizens. My assumption is that they were not YET tracking ordinary citizen interactions.

The government agencies were (are) acting under the cover of defense against terrorism. The ostensible objective was to find and track terrorist plots. They should be doing that very thing, but the appropriate means is labor intensive police investigation, not wholesale surveillance. For purposes of discovering terrorist plots, the ratio of productive anti-terrorist leads to meaningless chatter is far, far too high, in favor of the meaningless.

Presumably, he didn't reveal unknown secrets to other nations (like China and Russia)--which would fall into a decidedly unpatriotic category.

I thought this thread is about patriotism, like when you identify with a country and choose to serve it. — Noblosh

It is about patriotism.

he political yet again? — Noblosh

"Patriotism" can not be a-political or non-political because it's a virtue or vice depending on the definition. Many people think Snowden was a traitor -- betraying his country by revealing government secrets, like various spies have done in the past. Daniel Ellsberg (of the Pentagon Papers having to do with the Vietnam war) might be considered a patriot or traitor too. Various others.

It's simple, liberalism is the opposite to conservatism and thus rejects all that is conservatism specific. — Noblosh

Come now, you surely don't expect to get away with that, do you?

Why is nationalism (?) specific to conservatism? Because it aims to preserve and perpetuate existing values, seems obvious to me. — Noblosh

This holds water in that "nationalism" is based on "my country right or wrong", as Cavacava's quote from Harris points up. But liberals and leftists also find values in national life that they wish to perpetuate. For instance, liberal-leftists tend to prefer that civil liberty principles be interpreted as generously as possible, rather than as restrictively as possible.

I agree, though, that the pattern of what conservatives want to preserve is usually distinguishable from what left/liberals want to preserve. (Except when it really isn't.)

Trump is so problematic in so many ways.

The confusion between one's country and one's government -- a confusion which is actively promoted by the government, of course -- is at the root of problems of this kind.

But liberals and leftists also find values in national life that they wish to perpetuate. For instance, liberal-leftists tend to prefer that civil liberty principles be interpreted as generously as possible, rather than as restrictively as possible. — Bitter Crank

So liberals would prefer to expand values, rather than preserving them.

I'm sorry, I really don't get why you conflate patriotism with nationalism, which promotes national superiority. That's like conflating patriotism with globalism as well, like the left already does.

Is there any reason why actual leftists and liberals can't be as comfortable loving and serving their personal nation-state as the typical conservative? — Bitter Crank

Nation-states are arbitrary, universal ideals that promote the greater good are a a much more rationally and ethically sound basis for political commitment. Loyalty to country should depend on how faithful a country is to those principles. Another thing to keep in mind is that of all the countries that have existed throughout history not many were worthy of any sort of patriotic devotion, most were barbarous and brutal and built on bullshit and savagery.

Think global, act local. — Patrick Geddes

Identification is always divisive, but one must deal with whatever is here.

I am patriotic in that I support my country, referring to the government, people, laws, values, culture, and territory designated by the US. I think it a good government, a good people, to have good laws, good values, a good culture, and a pleasing landscape.

I am also a qualified nationalist, in that I believe the US system of government, as well as its laws, values, and culture, to be superior to other forms of government and other laws, values, and cultures throughout the world and in history. I also believe the US should be independent and sovereign over its own territory.

I am not a jingoist. I do not think the US is perfect, its people superior, or that we should declare war on other countries without proper justification.

Like Captain America, I'm loyal to nothing but the dream.

Is there any reason why actual leftists and liberals can't be as comfortable loving and serving their personal nation-state as the typical conservative? — Bitter Crank

While, as usual, I think your idea for a thread is great and your thoughts on the topic deserving of attention, I can't help but take issue with this question.

My observation is that the group of people who serve the state in the sense of being employed by it seems to have a higher proportion of people that one might loosely describe as 'left' than the general population. At least that seems to be the case where I live (not in the US). The exception is the military services, for which the leaning tends to go the other way. But the military services are only a small part of public employment, and the overall 'left' lean of public servants seems distinct.

So the empirical evidence seems to suggest that 'left'-inclined people are more comfortable serving their personal nation-state than the non-'left'-inclined.

I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing.

It's just a thing.

I served two years in the US domestic peace corps program in 1968-70. Most of the projects were interesting, challenging, and all of them were paid at a nominal level (low enough to be a real earnings sacrifice). Most of the people in the program were young, college educated and mostly very liberal. It was not an escape from the draft.

Most of the volunteers worked very hard and took pride in the fact that they were serving the needs of their country. (We also understood we were the primary beneficiaries of the program.) We were uniformly against the war in Vietnam, but we were also patriotic.

I am also a qualified nationalist, in that I believe the US system of government, as well as its laws, values, and culture, to be superior to other forms of government and other laws, values, and cultures throughout the world and in history. I also believe the US should be independent and sovereign over its own territory. — Thorongil

We were also qualified nationalists. Here's the confusing part: one can be very critical of one's government's policies, methods, and objectives; one can loathe the presidential candidates (back then our preferred much loathed POTUS candidate was redneck George Wallace, a segregationist) and still feel that one's country is superior. We did a lot of bitching and carping about the way things were run, but we also recognized that we were in a good place to both do interesting work the nation needed to have done, and have our bitching and carping tolerated.

Is there any reason why actual leftists and liberals can't be as comfortable loving and serving their personal nation-state as the typical conservative? — Bitter Crank

I agree with andrewk, that the modern nation-state is half the child of Weberism, of a 'centrist' or 'liberal' belief in benevolent management by the state and its officials, so there's every reason for state-loving among some leftists and liberals. Perhaps one reason the nation-state seems so stable is that as an institution it can express this social democratic urge, and also be what we fight for, believe in, regard as a quasi-mystical source of values.

There is a difference here between north America and Europe/Australasia. The first world war cast a long shadow over appeals to patriotism for those whose young men died or were scarred for life by the ordeals of the trenches. Quite apart, that is, from the culture of the USA. When I first met young Americans in the 1960's, and I mean those who were against the Vietnam war and facing the possibility of the draft, I was startled by their patriotism compared to how I and my British contemporaries felt. I cheered when England won the World Cup, but I had no notion of my country representing my values in the way that many people from the USA did and do.

Thinking a little more about Edward Snowden. His crime against the state, his 'traitorous' act stopped the State system from the continuation of its unjust and indiscriminate intrusion into the lives of its citizens, but at the same time his actions represent a challenge to the stability of the laws that enable the functioning of the society that nurtured him.

If the word 'Patriot' is true to its roots, it has to do with the father(pater)land, it has a familial feel to it. Historically it has been closely aligned with religion, which is still is a potent combination as we are currently experiencing around the world.

Patriotism has to be more than just flag waving, that seems too facile, but then again this depends on the society where one resides. Recall Victor Havel's "The Power of the Powerless", in it he suggests that the system itself that determines right and wrong, not individuals. In some societies any transgression of what the system has determined leads to ostracization and even very minor infractions can entail harsh punishment.

Maybe Marx was right "The working men have no country", there are no patriots.

Come all ye young rebels, and list while I sing,
For the love of one's country is a terrible thing.
It banishes fear with the speed of a flame,
And it makes us all part of the patriot game.

My name is O'Hanlon, and I've just turned sixteen.
My home is in Monaghan, and where I was weaned
I learned all my life cruel England's to blame,
So now I am part of the patriot game.

It's nearly two years since I wandered away
With the local battalion of the bold IRA,
For I read of our heroes, and wanted the same
To play out my part in ththe patriot game.

This Ireland of ours has too long been half free.
Six counties lie under John Bull's tyranny.
But most of our leaders are greatly to blame
For shirking his part in the patriot game.

They told me how Connolly was shot in his chair,
The wounds from his battle all bleeding and bare.
His fine body twisted, all battered and lame
They soon made me part of the patriot game.

And now I am dying, my body all holes
I think of those traitors who bargained ones soul
I'm sorry my rifle had not done the same
To traitors who sold out the patriot game.

Billy Bragg's Internationale, the theme song of the revolution. Better than the old red square version.

God might be on our side, but certainly not yours. Dylan wrote the song and recorded it, but, you know, his performance of his own song (in 1988, at least) was so gawd awful I couldn't stand it.

Dimitrios Gounaris was PM Greece in 1915 and again in 1921, he was charged with treason along with 5 other cabinet ministers all were found guilty (scapegoats for Greece's defeat)

They shot the six cabinet ministers at half-past six in the morning against the wall of a hospital. There were pools of water in the courtyard. There were wet dead leaves on the paving of the courtyard. It rained hard. All the shutters of the hospital were nailed shut. One of the ministers was sick with typhoid. Two soldiers carried him downstairs and out into the rain. They tried to hold him up against the wall but he sat down in a puddle of water. The other five stood very quietly against the wall. Finally the officer told the soldiers it was no good trying to make him stand up. When they fired the first volley he was sitting down in the water with his head on his knees.

Hemingway's description takes the romance out of it.

Thank you.

Did you see "Z" -- the movie about the military dictatorship in Greece (1969)?

No, I don't recall seeing it.

Songs, like Patriot Game and With God on His Side influenced me quite a bit. Music can be more persuasive if the lyrics are clear (and sung clearly) and the melody compelling.

Here's another that I like very much, and is stirring: The Ballad of Jean Deprez by Robert Service, sung by Country Joe McDonald. Some of Service's songs are clearly antiwar, and dismissive of the patriotism that feeds war. This song celebrates the courage of the French soldier -- the zuave. The Prussians are not so esteemed.

"I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country."
—Nathan Hale