By: Josh Shapiro
Published: Wednesday, March 3, 2004
Washington University Student Life
Not long ago I attended an anti-war rally where I was bombarded by the screeching of a middle-aged woman.She swore at me and others for being "unpatriotic" and told us that, by not supporting our troops abroad, we were in essence "killing them."At first I simply disregarded these comments as being so outlandish as not to merit consideration. However, time has passed, and now I have begun to realize that behind the silly and often debasing rhetoric is an interesting and quite perplexing question: does being patriotic mean under all circumstances supporting our troops abroad and the government which creates American foreign policy? And the necessary corollary: is patriotism a value that citizens should strive to epitomize?
I thought about two events in American history in which patriotism was a motivating factor in political and subsequently military action.The first was the American Revolution, in which a sense of patriotism emerged for a fledgling nation. In retrospect, this newfound patriotism was beneficial in rallying support to overthrow the yoke of English rule.The second event that came to mind was the Mexican American war, which occurred during the time of the pervasive belief in Manifest Destiny.The patriotism engendered here led to stealing land and killing innocent people.
Since I was still confused about the meaning and value of patriotism, I began to think about recent history. Of course the USA PATRIOT Act quickly came to mind.This piece of legislation is aimed at "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism." Reading the document, I realized I disagreed with many of its provisions.However, the "PATRIOT Act" must be patriotic by definition. So am I not patriotic?
In attempting to answer these questions, I am guided by Theodore Roosevelt, who said, "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." It is not just my right, but my duty to question the actions my government takes.In a democracy the varied voices of the people constitute another check on the power of government.We do not live in a totalitarian state where we are forced to agree with the regime.We have a great privilege, that of free peoples: a say in the affairs, choice, and fateful decisions our government makes. A citizen can and should demonstrate against government actions contrary to basic democratic values. This is the course of true patriots.
Should one thus strive to be patriotic? It depends on the definition of patriotism.Voltaire bemoaned, "It is lamentable, that to be a good patriot one must become the enemy of the rest of mankind."If it is true that to be patriotic we must lose our broader sense of love for all humans, then of course patriotism is something I want no part of. However, if we define patriotism as love of one's country while not losing sight of our obligations to the rest of the world, then it is an ideal we should strive for and something I believe is beneficial for societies. I see no reason patriotism must end when the artificial boundaries of a nation end. Socrates completely renounced his tie to the state in his famous line, "I am not an Athenian or a Greek, I am a citizen of the world."
Unlike Socrates, I do not believe it is a contradiction to love one's country and at the same time maintain a more global perspective on humanity. I am an American. And I am also a citizen of the world. These two statements do not have to be mutually exclusive. Together, they suggest a new, more humanistic approach to patriotism. Until a world view of patriotism stands in tandem with simple national patriotism, it will only lead to conflict and more violence in the world.