Patriotism

SLUSK

Out of all strange and crazy things one thing I do not understand is patriotism. Why are people so in love with their country where they happen to be born?

Like the patriotism I've encountered while I lived in Ireland was insane, people took it personally if you said something bad about Ireland. Why do people care so much? I don't care about my home country and can set up shop anywhere else.

PaulieD

"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it."

Mark Twain.

SLUSK

PaulieD wrote: »

"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it."

Mark Twain.

Well I don't think countries are such a great invention. Nation states are relatively young entities in human history. Anyways why should you support your country?

liah

I can understand being patriotic for a country that's worthy of it.

I'm proud of where I'm from. I'm lucky I went through the Canadian education system, dealt with the Canadian health care system, grew up surrounded by the beautiful Canadian scenery, was raised by beautifully-minded and kind Canadian people, voted in Canadian politics, and ended up with an alright (though not spectacular, but then again who has a spectacular) government.

My country shaped my attitude towards life, the world, and everything in it; it was where I was raised so obviously the ideals of a country as a whole have been imparted unto me.

What I don't understand is blind patriotism; following a country that does things you don't agree with for the sake of being patriotic. Or agreeing with something simply because your country says you should. That is stupid.

But there's nothing wrong with being proud of your country and what it's done for you or your ancestors, provided it's deserved.

PaulieD

Why am I proud of being Irish. Simples. I am proud to be Irish because despite our "difficult" past with the suffering and heartache, Ireland, through sheer hard work and fortitude picked itself up of its knees and educated itself so that now we can hold our heads up and feel proud of how far we have come and how well educated, both us and our children are.

I am proud to be Irish as despite our ancestors being forced out of the country and to scatter to the four corners of the globe, the Irish identity remains strong. We stick together, look out for our own, might seem a tad romantic but while other countries moan about losing their identity I don't see it happening with Ireland.

I am proud to be Irish as our own national sport is among the best in the world. Nothing beats Croker during Championship season. The sun shining. When Amhrain na bhFiann is being sung by an 80,000 strong crowd. Unbeatable. Goosebumps on the back of the neck time.

Where are you from, Slusk?

Bigdeadlydave

You love what you have had to fight for. Remember Ireland has only been a republic since the late 40s.

asdasd

Like the patriotism I've encountered while I lived in Ireland was insane, people took it personally if you said something bad about Ireland.

Well, you see. Going to a country and criticising it can be - shall we say - a form of nationalism in itself. Particularly if you come from a country with a superior attitude. I live in England and while I would criticise the government in general terms, or a local council I would not - in front of English people - criticise England, or Englishness specifically.

I, of course, have no idea where you come from but were you to say something like

"You Irish have a siht transport system" , or "You Irish have crap politicians" is a red rag - that is quite possibly a nationalist rant too : that is, it comes across as "You Irish have a sh*t transport system compared to us" etc.

You will notice that we are very self critical amongst ourselves. Foreigners dont get to do it, because the very form of external criticism, could be itself a form of bigotry, nationalism or general smugness.

And that applies everywhere.

asdasd

And, on that subject it does not take too long to see that there are in fact "normal" countries, and abnormal countries in SLUSK's world view. Plenty of examples, but here ( from the first 2 pages in his list).

In normal countries like Sweden, Norway and Finland people live in proper detached houses.

Thats in regard to housing in Ireland ( where we have the same size housing as the UK).

Interesting use of the word "normal" there, normal being where SLUSK is from ( SWEDEN) and close by Nordic countries - a statement which is clearly a form of Nordic patriotism.

My job here is done /thread.

b12mearse

im in no way patriotic but I love a good fight when the opportunity arises! :rolleyes:

RandolphEsq

I wouldn't be a patriot at all, and I would go as far to say that patriotism encourages negative prejudice against people of other nationalities and in many cases, unfortunately, racism. It may be true that the racism is unintentional but it is still there.
I'm glad to be part of the EU though where national pride is ruled out in favour of European pride!

asdasd

I'm glad to be part of the EU though where national pride is ruled out in favour of European pride!

You really need to get into Earth pride, although that might be alienist.

K-9

Patriotism to me is remembering the past and your History and your culture. The National Anthem being played at an Ulster Championship match in Casement or Celtic Park beats Croker goosebumps anyday.

More importantly Patriotism means not being slaves to the past and embracing change. A Nation doesn't stand still, it evolves. Collins and DeVelera never envisaged the EU, Lemass did.

We are cutting the ties to the UK and finding our own way in the world.

ArseBurger

I'm not proud to be Irish.

Mainly because of the Irish.

More often than not, I am also ashamed to be Irish.

MistyCheese

My answer to your question is;

It's the people that make a country. To be proud of your country is not to be proud of rivers and mountains but to be proud of your ancestors, proud of your family and friends and to feel a connection with people who have walked the same path as you.

When people are "homesick" they rarely yearn for buildings or for trees, they yearn for the people who made their "home". Of course, if you simply transported all these people to a different soil the emotions would be the same. But we often feel a connection with the people, even the people before them, who shared their land.

Not because of the land, but because of the people.

asdasd

ArseBurger's point is well made. A nation is a bit like a family, we share a lot of biology ( at least nation-states do) and, more importantly, a shared culture which may seem odd to the rest of the world. People are also embarrassed about family. And proud of family.

That may seem trite, but it isn't. We have increasing circles of tribalism from self, to family, to neighbourhood, to town, city, county, nation and the planet. Some of this seems irrational - why be proud of Ireland if you were just born to it; why be proud of Joyce, or Beckkett if you didnt contribute to either's ouvre. People often make the point about it being irrational - but it is no more odd to be proud of Beckett, if Irish, than being proud of a famous ancestor in the family. Its not rational, but it's not odd. Thats the way we humans flow.

And like with family, as I mentioned before, we can be self-critical but we dont like outsiders being as critical ( by we I mean everybody not just Irish people ) so that may explain ths OP's issue with the patriotic Irish - he seems like an outspoken sort.

SLUSK

asdasd wrote: »

And, on that subject it does not take too long to see that there are in fact "normal" countries, and abnormal countries in SLUSK's world view. Plenty of examples, but here ( from the first 2 pages in his list).



Thats in regard to housing in Ireland ( where we have the same size housing as the UK).

Interesting use of the word "normal" there, normal being where SLUSK is from ( SWEDEN) and close by Nordic countries - a statement which is clearly a form of Nordic patriotism.

My job here is done /thread.

This has nothing to do with patriotism, the housing conditions around here are better and those are the cold hard facts. Anyone from Ireland and UK who lived in Sweden, Norway or Finland can confirm this.

So no my previous statements were not patriotic at all.

Dades

People like to a part of something, whether it be a football fan club, an online community, a religion, or indeed a nation.

Nationality makes people different to those in other nations, which in turn makes them closer to the people of their own nation.

That and the human animal's inherent xenophobia. In the same way you have a pride of lions - a pride of nationals would be a fitting collective noun.

Neuro

I think Bill Hicks had the right idea about patriotism...

KindOfIrish

Nothing wrong to be a patriot. But in Ireland, specifically, patriotism of Irish people has been abused for decades by those who rule this country (my personal opinion).

Moomoo1

Patriotism has been abused in most countries by the powers that be. It's a great way to beat down on any opposition, to label them as 'unpatriotic'!

I don't like patriotism either, and I think that nation states are a (very bad) recent invention. Before a few hundred years ago most people would associate with their village or area, but wouldn't think of themselves as being from a particular country: indeed many modern countries didn't exist back then.

Many people seem to think that just because you were born in country X you have to support your government and your citizens no matter what. I don't really see why this should be the case.

I grew up in a country where there was no patriotism, and it was great! The official philosophy was all about friendship among nations and peace (of course this was total hypocrisy from the state, but at least people had the 'right' ideas planted in them). And then a 'cult' of patriotism was artificially created, and now we have skinheads roaming the streets and killing foreigners... in my experience patriotism costs lives (let's not forget the millions sent to die in wars in the name of patriotism) and does very little good in return.

asdasd

I don't like patriotism either, and I think that nation states are a (very bad) recent invention. Before a few hundred years ago most people would associate with their village or area, but wouldn't think of themselves as being from a particular country: indeed many modern countries didn't exist back then.

Absolutely not true. nations ( like Poland or Ireland) exist prior to the nation-States.

And then a 'cult' of patriotism was artificially created, and now we have skinheads roaming the streets and killing foreigners..

that's a leap. I bet whatever country you come from promotes multi-culturalism, not patriotism, and the skinheads are a reaction to that, not a cause from it.

Moomoo1

asdasd wrote: »

Absolutely not true. nations ( like Poland or Ireland) exist prior to the nation-States.

they existed in a very different form. And there was no national consciousness among the people like there has been the last few hundred years. In fact, divisions along regional and religious lines were often much stronger than divisions along national lines.

asdasd wrote: »

that's a leap. I bet whatever country you come from promotes multi-culturalism, not patriotism, and the skinheads are a reaction to that, not a cause from it.

I am from Russia. So you are totally wrong.

asdasd

In fact, divisions along regional and religious lines were often much stronger than divisions along national lines.

Religious differences are just another form of tribalism, or course. They were very important, but people also saw themselves as German, whether or not Germany existed as a State - which it didnt until Bismark.

I am from Russia. So you are totally wrong.

You are from Russia so I am partially right. Far from being non-Nationalist the Soviet Empire was effectively a Russian empire, imposing Russian culture on it colonies. For example the Baltics. Or the Ukaraine. Both received plantations of Russian colonialists even though Russia has vast amounts of space, and had their own culture denigrated, and Russian was taught in school ( but not Estonian in Moscow).

And how many non-whites were in the Kremlin? Or the Supreme Soviet?

The rise of street nationalism in Russia, which often is nostalgic for communism ( i.e. idolaters of Stalin) is proof of this. It is not a reaction to the demise of the Soviet Union and an increase in Russian State nationalism, but the reverse: a nationalistic yearning for what was a more successful nationalist state, at least for Russians.

Often people who preach universalism are from Big Powers, but broken down to its basic level they are preaching the spread of their values worldwide. i dont think humans are ever anti-nationalist.

OS119

Moomoo1 wrote: »

I am from Russia. So you are totally wrong.

i'm sorry, you're saying that the Russian (formerly Soviet) cultural and education systems in no way promoted patriotism, merely peace and understanding amongst all nations?

so, in school and at home, you'll have learnt about the Second World War and very definately not about the 'Great Patriotic War' as its been called - and defined -by every Soviet or Russian adminstration, social and political organisation and textbook or history book author since 1945?

now, you may be confusing a lack of patriotism caused by Russia being unable to feed itself and having concrete that falls apart in the rain with 'there was no patriotism in the Soviet Union', but Patriotism was high on the list of 'good things' in the Soviet Union, as evidenced by them constantly using the word in political context. to suggest it didn't exist is just mendacious.

meditraitor

You get back what you give in this life, if you dont give a fuck about your community/country it wont give a fuck about you.

Its simple, if you think Ireland(example) is better than other countries say the US when it comes to morals/ethics then it right to be proud of your country.

Many gombergs consider patriotism to be a form of racism but thats because they are weak and have not been able to survive in the community they grew up in so they run away and lets fantasy instead of reality cloud their judgement.

Moomoo1

OS119 wrote: »

i'm sorry, you're saying that the Russian (formerly Soviet) cultural and education systems in no way promoted patriotism, merely peace and understanding amongst all nations?

so, in school and at home, you'll have learnt about the Second World War and very definately not about the 'Great Patriotic War' as its been called - and defined -by every Soviet or Russian adminstration, social and political organisation and textbook or history book author since 1945?

now, you may be confusing a lack of patriotism caused by Russia being unable to feed itself and having concrete that falls apart in the rain with 'there was no patriotism in the Soviet Union', but Patriotism was high on the list of 'good things' in the Soviet Union, as evidenced by them constantly using the word in political context. to suggest it didn't exist is just mendacious.

there were different phases in Soviet history, where different ideologies were 'official'. It all started with the Trotskyite idea of the International and class struggle. Lenin even said how it great it was that Russia lost to Japan, because it was good for the working class. Then he gave territory away for free in the Civil war, because 'after all, we are just giving it to our brothers in the class struggle'.

Stalin changed all that, he got rid of this and re-introduced Russian patriotism as the cornerstone of the USSR. That is how the war got its name. And also by analogy with the war of 1812, which was the 'Patriotic War'.

After Stalin, there was a partial return to older values. This was a time of the Cold war propaganda, and so a positive image of the USSR and of the ideology it represented was imperative. The ideas of friendship among nations and world peace were widely propagated. The war now was presented as a struggle between the forces of good and evil, rather than a war between Russa and The Enemy. But the name of the war stayed.

Yes, it is true that there was a very strong Soviet identity being put forward, but it seemed an altogether different thing to Western patriotism, because you couldn't really be a true Leninist and a true patriot: the two were too contradictory. And certainly there was nothing like what's happening now, where Putin and Medvedev, for 10 years, worked hard on fostering a culture of Russian nationalism. It's no surprise that Lenin is widely criticised by the present authorities, whereas their line on Stalin is very ambiguous and unclear...

PS: also, remember that in Russian there are several words that are translated into English as 'Patriotic'. The name of the war and the term patriotism in the sense it is used in this thread are different words in Russian.

asdasd

It's no surprise that Lenin is widely criticised by the authorities, whereas their line on Stalin is very ambiguous and unclear...

I think you are fooling yourself. As I said the Soviet Empire was really an colonial enterprise, with Russian being forced down peoples throats. In central Europe it wasnt that bad, in Eastern Europe it was very bad indeed. So whether the ideology acknowledged that or not, that is what is was. Any State can say nice things about the brotherhood of man, and send in the tanks. Ask the citizens of Prague.

Modern Russia, for all it's faults, is not in Central Europe and doesnt claim central Europe. So it is less nationalistic than the Soviets.

Moomoo1

asdasd wrote: »

Religious differences are just another form of tribalism, or course. They were very important, but people also saw themselves as German, whether or not Germany existed as a State - which it didnt until Bismark.



You are from Russia so I am partially right. Far from being non-Nationalist the Soviet Empire was effectively a Russian empire, imposing Russian culture on it colonies. For example the Baltics. Or the Ukaraine. Both received plantations of Russian colonialists even though Russia has vast amounts of space, and had their own culture denigrated, and Russian was taught in school ( but not Estonian in Moscow).

And how many non-whites were in the Kremlin? Or the Supreme Soviet?

The rise of street nationalism in Russia, which often is nostalgic for communism ( i.e. idolaters of Stalin) is proof of this. It is not a reaction to the demise of the Soviet Union and an increase in Russian State nationalism, but the reverse: a nationalistic yearning for what was a more successful nationalist state, at least for Russians.

Often people who preach universalism are from Big Powers, but broken down to its basic level they are preaching the spread of their values worldwide. i dont think humans are ever anti-nationalist.

On the second point, see my reply to OS. As for the non-whites in Kremlin: who do you class as 'white'? To the Russians, 'white' means Slav. The original Communists were heavily Jewish, Georgian or Armenian. Stalin cleaned the Jews out bit by bit, and the later we got, the more prevalent the Russians were. But even that comes with a proviso: Russia has 170 ethnic minorities, and so even the people who, on the surface, might seem Russian, will in truth turn out to be mixtures of some sort.

On oppression of ethnic minorities: this was mainly done by Stalin during his russian-nationalist phase. And let's not forget that this sort of thing was done by Russia for centuries: eg Poles still remember the suppression of 1830 and subsequent banning of Polish in many universities. After Stalin, the people he displaced were largely returned, and the racism stopped, except for the Jews. But the Jews were seen as i) elitist (=how is it fair that one nation gets to have lots of people in the Academy of Sciences and another doesn't) and ii) cosmopolitan (with their homeland elsewhere they were always eyed with suspicion.

On street nationalism you are wrong too: they hate communism and see it as a 'Jewish disease'. Hitler is a much bigger role model to them than Stalin.

Bottom line is, people are sheep. If they are fed that 'you must be friends with black people', that's what they will be. If they are fed 'Russia is great let's kick everyone else', that's what they'll do. Also, the Russia example wasn't meant to discuss the relative ease with which people can be made into nationalists and the reasons behind such ease, but more describe the way patriotic feeling can be abused by the authorities for their own popularity, and how this abuse costs lives.

On your point about Germany: 19th century is already too late. I was thinking of earlier, say 400-500 years ago. Then it was really unclear what the term 'nation' even meant.

asdasd

On street nationalism you are wrong too: they hate communism and see it as a 'Jewish disease'. Hitler is a much bigger role model to them than Stalin.

Really. I find that amazing given that the Nazis ( or most, definitely hitler) saw Slavs as non-white and untermenschen. They are supporting an ideology which historically saw them as inferior, as if Irish white nationalists became Unionists. Utter weirdnesss.

There's naught as strange as folk.

Ok, thanks for the reply. I think that the Soviet Union was more Russian nationalist than you think it was, but I agree that a Russian empire of that size which had a fascist ideology, or a 19th century colonial ideology would have been worse.

And on that I think we would find common ground.

TheCandystripes

nationalism isn't good but its better than tribalism. imagine if ireland was like it was 1000 years ago, all differenth tuaths at war with each other.