Blue Gal recently posted a wonderful video of Billy Bragg singing 'Waiting For the Great Leap Forwards', including a snippet of an interview at the end where he talks about dissenters being the real patriots. And while I appreciate the sentiment, I have to say I am uncomfortable with attempts to redefine patriotism so that it fits dissenters.Webster's has the following definitions:
patriot: one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests
patriotism: love for or devotion to one's country
I guess one could interpret those definitions in different ways. This is how I see it. I love many things about my country, without a doubt. Do I support its authority and interests? Not at all, and BushCo is just an extreme example of what the U.S.A. has stood for since its inception: imperialism, profiteering, expansion ...
Of course there are shining exceptions to the rule, but they seem to fall outside the authority and interests of the country, and are vulnerable to being co-opted or outright squashed.
What about devotion to one's country? To me, devotion implies a certain amount of blindness, and once again, I cannot allow that definition to define who I am and what I do.
So no, I am not a patriot, thanks all the same. I even got a chance to proclaim that nationally a few years ago.
Way back in 2001 -- pre-9/11 -- Republican legislators in our state managed to tack a bill onto the budget requiring daily recitation of the Pledge or singing of the national anthem in public schools. With a strange timeliness, it was shortly after 9/11/01 that it was implemented.
On 10/1/01 my mom lay on life-support in the ICU and I was at the board of education meeting arguing for an opt-in implementation (for example, an optional morning assembly) as opposed to having it piped into our rooms every day. (I think my mom would have been proud of me.) That night the school board made one of their infamous ill-conceived decisions, to require only instrumental versions of the anthem, which ignited a firestorm of controversy. The flames were fanned by the likes of Rush Limbaff and Dr. Laura.
Because I was one of the few who spoke out initially, I found myself in a rather bizarre situation of getting a phone call from an LA Times reporter, in the teachers' lounge on my lunch break one day. I said something like, "I believe that patriotism leads to nationalism, which almost inevitably leads to jingoism" which was published and widely quoted. (For a while after that if you Googled me, you would come up with right-wing websites raving about how I should be removed from my job. At Christmas that year my elderly and ultra-conservative Aunt Jean said, "I heard your name mentioned on Dr. Laura's show. She mispronounced your name, but I knew it was you." Yeah, well ...)
It gets stranger. About a week later I got a phone call from writer Mark Singer, a regular contributor to The New Yorker, wanting to interview me for an article. And then, one morning a photographer from The New Yorker showed up at my school to photograph my class reciting the Pledge. That photograph was published on a double page spread in the Nov. 26, 2001 issue. It's a motley crew in the photo, and the photographer was unhappy with the light where the flag was, so she actually took the picture where the kids are facing a banner proclaiming "PEACE" which I had hung up. Subversion R Us.
(And about 6 months after that, the author Mary Pipher -- who recently returned an award and resigned from the American Psychological Association in protest over their weak stance on torture -- requested permission to use that photo on the cover of her book The Middle of Everywhere: The World's Refugees Come To Our Town. Weird, eh?)
In another hilarious development, my principal brought in a recording of national anthems from around the world. She was away one day, but left directions for the secretary to "play the anthem." The hapless secretary didn't realize she meant our anthem, and played the national anthem of China!
Oh yeah, and the Pledge? After a huge media circus of a meeting, attended by busloads of Christian fundamentalists from out of town, Minutemen in full costume, and some normal people, the school board decided that principals would lead the Pledge over the P.A. system every day, but it must be preceded by this statement:
"We live in a nation of freedom. Participation in the Pledge is voluntary. Those who wish to stand may do so. Others may remain seated."
I am not a patriot. Come join me.
18 comments:
I understand what you are saying Suzy.... however, in America dissent should not be considered unpatriotic.
We have a problem here in that America has been kinda hijacked by rightists, and only if you are bellowing their rigid, bellicose baloney are you considered Patriotic....
Liberals accept dissent as part of the American spirit and tradition.... in fact how can one even have a Liberal Democracy without the capacity for disagreement in the public forum?
I would suggest a strategy whereas we define American Patriotism for what it is and not in accordance with rightest propaganda.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” Theodore Roosevelt, 1918
The "so called" extremists of the Republican Party exemplified by this Republican administration may be far from patriotic in their essential embrace of Theocracy- flavored Corporate Plutocracy.
A reassertion of true American values is required.
I for one decline to accept your surrender of the patriotic moniker.
Fix:
The "so called"
The so called "patriotic" extremists....
I agree completely, Ms. Ether. Personally, I believe that patiotism, no matter how you define it, only serves to divide people. "Our country is great!" which, by implication, declares that someone else's country isn't as great, or not very good at all. "God bless America!" Doesn't that sound like an attempt at intimidation? And what about Canada? Or Mozambique? Are they not entitled to God's blessings?
I think it's time to stop feeling that we have to redefine the word patriot and declare that, no, we are not patriots! I am not a patriot and I feel no shame in saying so.
Can we take back our country and then declare ourselves to be world citizens?
I started thinking about this and realized that I don't really care about how the word "patriot" is used. I know that the morning of 9/11 my neighbor went out to hang her flag and I went out and we talked it over. I was shaking when I went out; I felt exposed and weird. But she took the flag back inside the house.
This is the thing though: the United States has always been about imperialism, profiteering, and expansion, from the very beginning. This is nothing new, in my opinion, and hasn't stopped yet. Not exclusively a BushCo thing, and you know how I feel about them. It seems to me to be the foundation upon which the whole structure sits -- heartfelt, sometimes acted-upon, truly admirable convictions and all.
Terry
Well, I mean if you have a really low opinion of America in general and don't believe in he promise found in the Constitution and other founding documents, then maybe you aren't a patriot at all and shouldn't pretend to be.
I personally think this Nation is quite revolutionary in many ways, and the governmental structure provided by the Constitution is quite Liberal and to my suiting.
Understand as governmental schemes there are ancient monarchic and other despotic forms based on the "Divine rights of Kings" or out-and-out Theocracies, and before that the Divine rights of he-who-has-the-biggest-club.
Modern forms include various forms of Communism and Fascism as ideological polarities. Each in turn have yielded authoritarian, totalitarian dictatorships and oligarchy in their implementation.
Liberalism, inspired by the European enlightenment and gradually manifest in various Western governmental forms starting with the democratization of monarchies has probably the best hope for honoring ideals regarding the essential dignity of each human being.
So, I would say that in order to be in any way Patriotic in America, one would have to have a strong sense of value for the Liberal underpinnings of the government-by-and-for-the-people, and in fact prefer that over other forms.... if there is indeed some other form desired and in one way or another the vanquishing of the essential governmental architecture is indeed a goal, one could hardly be considered a Patriot.
That said, simple dissent on particular or collective matters of State manifest in either quietest or activist behaviors is not, within the American context, unpatriotic, and certainly not treasonous as has been suggested by the ideologically inbred members of the Republican Party.
Frankly I believe that dissent is the strongest form of democracy but that's just me. (and a few of you.)
As for being in or out- I would be proud to join you as a non-patriot.
Your stories are very moving here- I am glad I came by today.
Thanks for sharing all this.
Good for you for sticking by your beliefs. I don't believe in patriotism, either, it creates an us/them attitude that we don't need to intensify in these dangerous times.
I might add that, while the Constitution may be a revolutionary document, it seems almost incidental to what the power structure has always been in this country. Read Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, and suddenly you see the founding fathers in a quite different light. Don't get me wrong: I believe in liberalism, I believe in the right to dissent, there is much that I cherish and honor in our society. Free public libraries, for one. That is an institution that is absolutely unique. Public schools -- although the original intent may have been based on a factory model -- they do an amazing job of reaching so many children.
I also don't think that the opposite of a patriot is a traitor, as our current government may suggest. The more I think about it, I want to identify myself as a citizen just doing my best to be a good person, period.
Thank you everyone for all of your thoughtful responses!
Thank you for the opportunity.... perhaps we could reflect on what it means to be "religious" in a political context as well.... I just read something by Sister Joan Chittister to this effect.... once again she slams the ball out of the ballpark.
The United States, we love to say -- and Europeans repeat in a kind of incredulous wonder -- is the most "religious" country in the world. Meaning, of course, the most church-going country in the world. Whether or not going to church correlates well with religious values is clearly a debatable subject. To wit, the corporal works of mercy -- as in, feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, house the homeless, visit the imprisoned, visit the sick, and bury the dead. It is on these criteria in Matthew 25: 31-46, however, that Jesus rests his definition of salvation. No small thing for those who considers themselves "religious." No small thing, then, one would think, if a nation -- if a candidate for political office -- were really serious about being "religious."....
It's time, it seems, if we're Christian, to judge people the way Jesus told us to judge them: "By their fruits." But if that's the case, then the question is not: What do each of these candidates tell us about how religious they are? The question is: What do each of these candidates plan to do to make the corporal works of mercy a living sign of the Christian tradition in this so-called Christian culture?
In fact, how conscious are we of the silent erosion of each of these works of mercy in the society around us while we define "religion" as single-issue politics? After all, food and education and decent housing and support services are exactly the things that take the strain off families and make abortion unnecessary.
From where I stand, it may well be our own unawareness of the loss of these services that's making it so difficult for us to make a distinction between what is really "religious" about our candidates and what is only religion being used as another kind of slippery election strategy. God save us all from that kind of religion again.
We need candidates who are really religious
That was an excellent article. Quaker Dave posted on it.
Thanks, Suzy. Odd how things worked out in your life, too--Subversion-r-us, very good. You remind me of my daughter's opinion of patriotism, as you know where her blog is. I am still pondering this and moving slowly at times, but moving more towards views my career Marine Corps father would have abhorred. How shall we live?
What's a good word for someone who "believes in everything his/her country is supposed to stand for, even if it doesn't"?
I'll be one of those.
"Patriot" is a word that has been so twisted and abused that it has ceased to mean anything. Kind of like "liberal." It's been denigrated in the same way the flag has been. You can wear a little metal one on your lapel, use it to sell cars or gasoline, fly one out your car window till it shreds into nothing, even have "stars 'n stripes" boxer shorts. But DON'T "desecrate" it! Huh???
Please keep fighting the good fight. It gives the rest of us hope. And community. Which are both more important than "patriotism."
It is interesting you commented on the term "liberal" Quaker Dave. I consider the eradication of the term "liberal", "Liberal" and other Liberal language to be one of the great unfortunate successes of rightist (movement conservative, modern Republican) propaganda in America.
What if the problem "conservatives" have had with "Liberal" Judges, "Liberal" Laws, "Liberal" programs, and "Liberal" Government was not essentially a collection of single-wedge-issues, but with the Liberal Constitution itself?
Who is the Patriot then?
In my opinion, eradication of the term "patriot" and "patriotic" from the Liberal vocabulary is just such another success.
There is no need to allow ones adversaries to define you. The truth is movement-conservatism, modern Republicanism is truly neither Liberal, liberal, or Patriotic.... it is fascist.
And Liberals are not Communists, by the way.
And I ask you too, Ghost Dansing to continue standing up for your beliefs -- we are all in this together. "Liberal" is something I can easily get behind. Starting with Michael Dukakis, liberal politicians did everything they could not to have that label put on them by their adversaries. Well, I'm liberal and I'm proud of it.
Oh, don't worry: I have a "Proud Liberal" bumper sticker on my car, and a new t-shirt that just says "Liberal" in great big letters across the front.
No, they can try, but they can't take that away from me.
the way you wear your "liberal" shirt...
the way we pray for peace...
the way we work for change...
the way oh no, they can't take that away from me.
Oh I'll be singing that all day long. Thanks for the linky Suzy hon.
I'm with you 100% on this one. The funny thing is that I don't even like anthems or pledges involving my chosen country. Nationalism and jingoism turn me off, no matter who is doing it.
I'm glad they have the disclaimer in there about standing or sitting.
Peace,
~Chani
http://thailandgal.blogspot.com
Post a Comment