The Cowboys lost as did the Patriots. ::sneer::
And peaking of Patriots…
* * *
-=[ Nationalism vs. Patriotism ]=-
“I call him a patriot who rebukes his country for its sins and does not excuse them.”
“Patriotism is proud of a country’s virtues and eager to correct its deficiencies; it also acknowledges the legitimate patriotism of other countries, with their own specific virtues. The pride of nationalism, however, trumpets its country’s virtues and denies its deficiencies, while it is contemptuous toward the virtues of other countries. It wants to be, and proclaims itself to be, ‘the greatest,’ but greatness is not required of a country; only goodness is.”
Many years ago, George Orwell wrote a prescient essay on the differences between nationalism and patriotism Orwell’s Notes on Nationalism, has as much relevance today as it did when it was written right before the lead up to WWII as nationalistic fervor fed the fires of Nazism and fascism.
Too many people– in every country — confuse nationalism for patriotism. When I listen to the nationalistic fervor stoked by McCain and Palin, for example, it worries me, because it’s an appeal to fear to a population feeling betrayed — a population looking for any excuse to explode. The McCain/ Plain campaign’s strategy is to paint Obama as “the other” — as different and unpatriotic. It’s been a one-note campaign mostly because neocons don’t know any other strategy.
Usually it works: tar and feather a candidate by coming up with the scary face of a black killer — a Willie Horton. Dismiss people who dare question the wisdom of our current foreign policies as “unpatriotic.” Paint Kerry as “French” and deride him for having the courage to speak out against the immorality of a war we should’ve never fought. Tar and feather Obama as an uppity nigger (the nerve of a Harvard education!) who “pals around with terrists.”
It’s not working this time around. It’s not working partly because the failures of decades of lunatic conservative economic policies have created a global financial meltdown. It’s not working mostly because for the first time in a long time, a candidate has had the audacity to appeal to what’s good within us — to our hopes rather than our fears.
Like Orwell, I view nationalism as patriotism’s ugly stepsister. Orwell defined patriotism as “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 upon other people.” I have no argument with this definition. Anyone would be hard put to find fault with it.
According to Orwell, nationalism is the tendency of identifying oneself with a single nation or an idea, and “placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests.” In other words, nationalism doesn’t have to be based on a country. This same fanaticism can be applied to any “ism”: Neo-Conservatism and Fundamentalism (of any religion), for example. Whether it’s based on a country or an “ism,” nationalism always contains that dangerous combination of blind fanaticism and a lack of concern for reality.
In nationalism, thoughts “always turn on victories, defeats, triumphs and humiliations… Nationalism is power-hunger tempered by self-deception.” Moreover, that self-deception leads to catastrophic miscalculations based on delusions rather than facts. Orwell stated:
“Political and military commentators, like astrologers, can survive almost any mistake, because their more devoted followers do not look to them for an appraisal of the facts but for the stimulation of nationalistic loyalties.”
In other words, whatever happened to the widely held neocon assertion that the Iraqis would’ve greeted us as liberators and showered us with rose petals and free poosie?
But to really appreciate Orwell and understand how he had our current foreign policy down pat you only need to read this quote:
“All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage — torture, the use of hostages, forced labor, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians — which does not change its moral color when committed by ‘our’ side.… The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.”
It was Georges Santayana who said “… those who refuse to remember the past, are condemned to relive it.”
Any of this sounds familiar?