On Patriotism
07/06/2023
As we have again commemorated the Fourth of July, through the year, Flag day, Memorial day, Pearl Harbor day, etc, it seems to me that one word is used to varying ends over and over, to the point that its meaning sometimes becomes so muddied that an English language learner might well wonder exactly what is meant by its use. That word is "Patriotism."
I'm not in any way referring to responding to, or being prepared to respond to, acts of aggression against the nation by those with hostile intent. There was a real threat in World War II, which we waited too long to address in Europe but were forced to confront in the Pacific and then in Europe. That waiting was a result of American disgust over the 20 million death toll of World War I. Nor am I minimizing the realities of threats that the Soviet Union presented in the last half of the 20th century. I'm not even referring to missiles in Cuba. I am however referring to actions taken by politicians to garner public approval under the flag of "patriotism" when there is little of it in the legislators themselves in many cases - or as someone famously said, "The fat old men sending the fine young ones out to die."
Admittedly, this is a word which is incredibly subjective in nature at best. That said, there is also, and more so now than any time since the McCarthy era, a huge partisan divide over that meaning. In looking for a meaning I could live with, I went to history, since it's what I do. So here, in no particular order are a couple of definitions I consider reasonable and on point for "patriotism"
" My dream is of a place and a time where America will once again be seen as the last best hope of earth." - Abraham Lincoln.
This, of course, from the first Republican President, who would be chagrined, I think, to see what has become of those who identify as Republican. The "last best hope" to which Lincoln alludes is defined numerous places in his own words and generally includes concepts such as rights for all citizens, adherence to the Bill of Rights, and excludes any mention of religion beyond a Deity. What is interesting that "super patriots" such as Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum et al, frequently, in their self-serving public orations, refer to "In God we Trust" as if it is a foundation stone of the Constitution and the nation. In truth it was adopted in 1956, replacing "E Pluribus Unum" ("Out of Many, One”) in a move away from the Founder's discernable intent. It was a kneejerk reaction to what we were told was the threat of "global, Godless, Communism." The sad implication here is that apparently, although Socialism had existed as a political persuasion in the US since the early to mid-1800s, some in power had so little faith in the better natures of Capitalism and its appeal to Americans, that it was necessary to invoke the Deity as an ally.
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." - George Washington
I recently noted an internet ad headed by the bold words "Power for Patriots!" Who wouldn't be curious? It turns out it was an enterprising individual hawking his plans for homemade solar panels. What was interesting was his assertion that if the national power grid crashed that somehow only "patriots" who bought his information (by the way, readily available elsewhere on the "net" for free!) would be able to have electricity. Really? I don't know what proof of "patriotism" one was required to submit to obtain the information, but I nonetheless marveled at the idea.
Of course, Washington, who tried so desperately to minimize any sense of "partisanship" (and failed, in the final analysis, although his farewell address warned of its negative aspects) was already beset by the pissing match between Adams/Hamilton and Jefferson, which resulted, among other things in Adams and Jefferson sulking and refusing to speak to one another for 8 years. Earlier, in 1793, Jefferson had resigned as SecState because of Hamilton's access to Washington's ear on matters related to finance and the "shape" of the new republic. Would anyone call any of those three "unpatriotic?" Some today undoubtedly would, more from ignorance than discernment.
"Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about;" and this gem, "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it. - Mark Twain
Sam Clemens was an anti-imperialist and had "minimized" his Civil War involvement to several weeks, after which he went west. He later described the war as: “A blot on our history, but not as great a blot as the buying and selling of Negro souls.” Regardless of how he avoided the War, Clemens, writing as Mark Twain, staunchly reserved his approval of war for defense of the home and hearth. While McKinley was exhorting American jingoism and Patriotic zeal in the Philippines, Twain was holding up the actions of US Soldiers in the slaughter of women and children to the light of a free press.
Faced with the evidence of mass exterminations, he wrote: "General Wood was present and looking on. His order had been, 'Kill or capture those savages.' (those 'savages' were Filipinos who thought they should not be a colony of the US) Apparently our little army considered that the "or" left them authorized to kill or capture according to taste, and that their taste had remained what it had been for eight years in our army out there--the taste of Christian butchers."
Subsequent investigation and the testimony of enlisted men involved would reveal water boarding and the mass shootings of women and children. My Lai, in Vietnam wasn't the first and neither was the Moro massacre which Twain describes, since the US Army had honed its genocidal skills at Wounded Knee 25 years earlier and, in truth, as early as 1637, when fine upstanding Christian English from Plymouth and their Indian allies all but erased the Mashantucket Pequots as a tribal group in the Mystic Massacre. They, also, probably told themselves it was their "patriotic duty", but it was really just about controlling the wampum trade.
"Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism - how passionately I hate them!" - Albert Einstein
We are exposed, almost every day, to those who express their worship of those who are "Fighting for our freedom." I am conflicted by that concept, since I unequivocally support the safety, welfare and safe return of any and all US servicemen and women. Having said that, we must examine the reality of the statement, so freely expressed and apparently rarely analyzed.
Plainly stated, there are no Americans alive today who are “freer” than they would be if we had never sent any US troops to Iraq. In contrast, there are many families who mourn children killed under the guise of "fighting for our freedom." This is not in any sense an indictment of strong national defense. My 26 years in the Submarine Force during the Cold war, and the continued efforts of those in all the services who keep us prepared to defend ourselves are categorically different from the expeditionary forces of volunteers ("mercenaries?") who excitedly go to hostile areas, antagonize persons of other faiths and nationalities and come home, themselves frequently damaged, both externally and in invisible ways. The Middle East isn’t the first such disaster, but we apparently failed to learn the lesson of Viet Nam.
In that instance, we had a President, Harry Truman, a good man who, when begged by Ho Chi Minh not to let the French reestablish their "Indo-Chinese" colony, was politically unable to do so because of the perceived response to allowing a "communist" government in Southeast Asia. We were moving into the era of the "domino theory" and all Communists were seen as merely clones of Lenin, Stalin or Mao, neither of which description fit Ho to any degree. He was, first and foremost, a nationalist, who, disliked the Chinese as much or more than the US did at the time. This mistake cost millions of lives, 60,000 American and another 75,000 disabled veterans. For what? Today Vietnam is united under their version of Communism and both they and the China we "feared" are major US trading partners.
Finally, since I am sure some readers will take issue with my opinion, take a moment to read these last two quotes from two of America's greatest generals, one a Republican President.
"The world has achieved brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war that we know about peace, more about killing that we know about living." - Omar Bradley
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
But all too often, and as we sometimes saw it expressed by the previous administration, and as Samuel Johnson famously pointed out:
“Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”
I prefer this one: “Patriotism inspires our local police to patrol the streets every day, maintaining law and order in our communities. Teachers see hope for America in the children they work so hard to educate. In times of crisis, patriotism unites us. We put our differences aside to help our countrymen in need.”
Would that it were ever so.
We are exposed, almost every day, to those who express their worship of those who are "Fighting for our freedom." I am conflicted by that concept, since I unequivocally support the safety, welfare and safe return of any and all US servicemen and women. Having said that, we must examine the reality of the statement, so freely expressed and apparently rarely analyzed.
Plainly stated, there are no Americans alive today who are “freer” than they would be if we had never sent any US troops to Iraq. In contrast, there are many families who mourn children killed under the guise of "fighting for our freedom." This is not in any sense an indictment of strong national defense. My 26 years in the Submarine Force during the Cold war, and the continued efforts of those in all the services who keep us prepared to defend ourselves are categorically different from the expeditionary forces of volunteers ("mercenaries?") who excitedly go to hostile areas, antagonize persons of other faiths and nationalities and come home, themselves frequently damaged, both externally and in invisible ways. The Middle East isn’t the first such disaster, but we apparently failed to learn the lesson of Viet Nam.
In that instance, we had a President, Harry Truman, a good man who, when begged by Ho Chi Minh not to let the French reestablish their "Indo-Chinese" colony, was politically unable to do so because of the perceived response to allowing a "communist" government in Southeast Asia. We were moving into the era of the "domino theory" and all Communists were seen as merely clones of Lenin, Stalin or Mao, neither of which description fit Ho to any degree. He was, first and foremost, a nationalist, who, disliked the Chinese as much or more than the US did at the time. This mistake cost millions of lives, 60,000 American and another 75,000 disabled veterans. For what? Today Vietnam is united under their version of Communism and both they and the China we "feared" are major US trading partners.
Finally, since I am sure some readers will take issue with my opinion, take a moment to read these last two quotes from two of America's greatest generals, one a Republican President.
"The world has achieved brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war that we know about peace, more about killing that we know about living." - Omar Bradley
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron." - Dwight D. Eisenhower
But all too often, and as we sometimes saw it expressed by the previous administration, and as Samuel Johnson famously pointed out:
“Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”
I prefer this one: “Patriotism inspires our local police to patrol the streets every day, maintaining law and order in our communities. Teachers see hope for America in the children they work so hard to educate. In times of crisis, patriotism unites us. We put our differences aside to help our countrymen in need.”
Would that it were ever so.
No comments:
Post a Comment