: one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests

That phrase contains many many subtleties, but to the literal-minded just gets interpreted as an insult against the leaders and the vague love of country concept.Patriotism implies loyalty, yet one can't be patriotic to one's wife(republican kinky sex, flag fetishism?).More accurately it implies defending a country, not merely "supporting" it. Even more specifically, the subtext, as far as manipulative politicos are concerned, is going to WAR for the country. All available patriots to the front lines.The dilemma is, what if you don't agree with the war, or war in general. This is when the politicians start flinging coward and traitor and freedom isn't free, and freeloader and all other sorts of abuse- the boorish elements of the populace invariably join in and would gladly see the Quaker trash stoned to death.There are also conflicts concerning what the country's actual ideals and goals are, politicians try to appropriate generalized definitions and set themselves up as the protectors of these principles. In America at least, there are some extremely corny and pollyanna versions of what IS America. I always considered Rumsfeld and old man Bush(the Dad) to be killer pollyannas. Shrub is just an ignoramous of the worst kind. A true democracy has to make alllowances for dissent, and I think this country very reluctantly does. One does not escape without a very hard time and a lot of harrasment. I shudder to think what would happen if there was no volunteer army though.This is the benefit of the volunteer army; woe to the poor soldier who disagrees with the war. They either head for the border or go. Nowadays, it seems that most go.

Essentially, I think the false construct of country is a huge hindrance. However, we are getting into dreamland here. So what is patriotism? Patriotism is the fear-based need to belong to something, and to believe that something is special, even if it isn't(i.e. Deutschland 1933); and then to take all the corny crapulous slogans to heart and to convince yourself that you LOVE this land.(So why don't you marry it? As the great Pee Wee Herman would naturally ask)Patriotism allows the average schmuck to dissipate whatever self-doubts and self-hatreds into a vast, vague identity that promises to empower every single schmuck that wants to join to the extent of death and equally dubious heroic status. Now Joe G.I. getting pulled out of mamma's grocery store on Arthur Avenue to go fight the nazis is a totally different story.Patriotism blabbers AREN'T that guy, even though he may take in some of that guff as a way to survive or give himself a reason to fight that battle.The patriotism I'm talking about is the one that is abused like religion, and that is turned into a morbid religion. By the time the kid gets to the battlefield the enemy is real, and we have two patriots pointing machine guns at each other. I'm talking about these frenzied freaks that NEVER STOP blabbering about patriotism in times of peace, knowing damn well that it is an effective tool to create division,us and them, and a feeling of superiority(my country is better than yours and I'll PROVE it) Oh yeah, wanna fight you French asshole! Get my drift?

Think of it like this. Imagine you're having a conversation with someone who turns out to be brazenly selfish. Not only does he care only about himself, but he TALKS to you as if he cares only about himself. You listen to his schemes for getting ahead while walking all over everyone else. Only a social cretin would first have such a shrunken value system and then make no attempt to hide it.

Isn't that what politicians do with patriotism, only the selfish entity is, in this case, his or her country, and the others to use and walk on are all other nations? Why aren't we shocked by such "patriotic" blather the same way we are when listening to an individual hold forth on how she will use people to get what she wants? Communities are expected to cooperate and treat its members well. Scale up to Google Earth, and view the nations as the individuals and the planet as the country, and we would see how destructive and absurd "patriotism" is. We'd also see that those other individuals (the other nations) don't have to be our enemies.

How many times have you seen a Hollywood movie where the planet is united when an adversary, an alien from outerspace, threatens us with global destruction?

In politics, we've seen the "aliens" threatening us in the form of the Soviet Union and her "evil empire," or Iraq, Iran, and North Korea as (bad geometry aside) an "axis of evil." These examples happen to involve the Republican party, but let's leave that aside for a moment. (Only a moment.)

This kind of language is designed to bring out the sociopath in Americans by dehumanizing the people of other nations, who are presented as our adversaries. In personal interactions, we avoid people who act impulsively and cannot keep their emotions under control. We value people who remain calm, cool and collected in tense situations. Shouldn't a nation be held to the same standards?

I read this book some time ago entitled "Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers." The main message is that short-term emotional responses can't be sustained and become toxic over the long haul. Emotions are designed to mobilize our bodies and minds for short-term events. Disasters, like 9-11, result in a spontaneous outpouring of help, accompanied by deeply pleasurable feelings of unity (we are one, or as the French newspaper stated "We Are All Americans Now).

But then, people need to return to their baseline emotional state within a matter of weeks. The emotions of fear, anger and hatred have such powerful adverse effects on our bodies and minds that they literally become toxic if sustained too long. They eat away at our immune systems and even our brains. A national policy or any belief system that attempts to sustain strong emotions of fear and hatred over the long term (as Bush-Cheney have attempted to do) is almost certain to fail and to produce serious negative side effects. Human potential, according to the Zebra book, can be developed only when we are not scared, angry, or hungry. Our development as a species and as individuals requires long periods of safety, satiety-- times when we can feel carefree and laugh. If we aren't laughing and enjoying each other's company, our bodies and minds begin to break down.

So now you know why Bush, Cheney, Ghoul-iani get no reaction when they repeat 9-11 so often. Human beings can't live for seven years in fear for their lives every moment of the day.

If you buy into patriotism, please make sure you have a good health plan.

Last Edited on 8-Jul-2007 7:25 PM

Certainly there are wars worth fighting (not many, but yours is the perfect example); however, more often than not, it's only by demonizing the people of other nations, by buying into an "us v. them" paradigm (which is what patriotism has degenerated in to) that such wars gain the support necessary to be fought. What our fearful leaders don't get is that emotion is passing. Can someone be angry every minute of the day for six years? You can be bitter for that long; you can be depressed for that long; you can't be angry and rabid for very long at all without suffering a breakdown. It seems so obvious, and yet I heard a recent sound bite from Ghouliani and in his first sentence, he uttered 9-11 three times. People just don't react to that anymore. How can they?

* The creation of the borders generally results from wars over territory, so the antagonism is there even as the country/nation/society is established.
* After it is established it creates geographical borders and symbols such as flags to denote the difference between us/them.
* These imaginary borders treated as natural entities result in people assuming there are actual inherent differences in people in other borders.
* If one is weaned on nationalism, it can lead to ignorance of others, allowing individuals to be manipulated by those in power.
* And of course this manipulation can lead to ignorance, disdain, dehumanization, and the ability to amass the public around the concept of war -- and with current technology that could lead to any horror imaginable.

Benefits of patriotism:

* IF one consciously separated patriotism from nationalism and understood histories of migration and war, then and only then, might patriotism be used for good. One might take on the challenge of creating the most just, inspiring, and equitable society possible. Then one could befriend their neighbors and exchange their best ideas. EXCHANGE, not impose.

I think this is an enlightened idea and one I appreciate. Still, the word patriotism made me shudder. The waving of American flags always made me uncomfortable and in my radical younger days, I found it repugnant.

Reflecting back, I attribute these feelings to what I consider the greatest gift of my childhood, attending the United Nations School in New York City. My friends were everywhere in the world. I was constantly reminded I was part of the round earth full of diverse but equally valuable human being. I dreamed of traveling everywhere, heard the good and bad of different places from my peers, and meanwhile saw shocking poverty and crime all around me in NYC. Also, since I have an itty-bit of indigenous heritage -- enough to make me interested and alert -- I knew about genocide. And obviously about slavery. So why were we waving this flag? And why was Andrew Jackson on the twenty dollar bill?

Although I know now the flag’s meaning symbolizing different things for different people -- and sometimes I can see some value in their point of view -- it will never be a symbol I embrace.

And yet, though I see my self as a human citizen of Planet Earth-- not a patriot of America -- I am fascinated by American history (especially the 19th century.)

With all the unspeakable horrors that happened with such rapidity, there was tremendous activism and bravery. Whether is not these battles were won in full, or in name only, or defeated, I'm inspired and influenced by Whitman, Douglass, Sojourner Truth, Sitting Bull, Anthony and Cady Stanton, Garrison, Chief Joseph -- as well as later figures like DuBois, Newton, King, the Roosevelt’s (only at their best,) X, Dorothy Day, and yes current people: Nader, The Black Caucus, Kozol, Boxer, Zinn, good ole Michael Moore, just to name a few.

I love that out of all the chaos and attempts to make to create fear, some people were passioinate and undettered rebels, martyrs, and leaders.

And then, in 1995, I drove across the country for the first time, and saw, apart from the strip malls and factories, splendors I never imagined. And then I went to Mexico, Central American, and saw more. And THEN I remembered the borders are fake. Underneath the map, we are completely connected: historically, genetically, economically, and environmentally.

Yes, I would move to a more just society if the specifics of my life were different, but I am here. And since I am, it is worth trying to make the society more just, be it “there” or “here,”.

And one little way I try to do that, in class, is to show that countries’ boundaries can not be seen from outer space. Despite a wall here and there, some wire, and customs stations, the planet appears like an abstract painting, swirling with fluid, land and and mountains. There are no color coatings and no black lines that divide this country from that.

Last Edited on 8-Jul-2007 11:28 PM

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1020.htm

Putin ‘Narrowly’ Averts US Nuclear Armageddon

By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

Russian Military Analysts are reporting today that this past weeks ‘Sudden-Summit’ between Presidents Putin and Bush in the United States has ‘narrowly averted an American nuclear Armageddon’ in which the Americans were planning a massive atomic strike upon Iran.

Putin was advised immediately prior to the ‘Sudden-Summit’ by Russian Military Commanders that the United States had issued the orders for a nuclear strike on Iran, and which has been further confirmed by the Washington Times News Service, and as we can read:

/"International radio operators picked up large numbers of coded Air Force communications being sent around the world on June 26 that indicated some type of military activity was about to take place.

/

/A U.S. military official said the radio traffic was monitored from the Air Force Global High Frequency System (GHFS) that some observers regarded as "extraordinary" because of the unprecedented length of messages. They were sent to Air Force commanders at Andrews Air Force Base; Wideawake Airfield on Ascension Island; Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska; Andersen Air Force Base, Guam; Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii; Lajes Field in the Azores; Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska; Salinas Air Base, Puerto Rico; Thule Air Base, Greenland; and Yokota Air Base, Japan. All are sites of GHFS ground stations.

/

/The messages appeared to be emergency action messages, coded communications sent by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to U.S. Air Force strategic nuclear forces.

/

/The messages sent June 26 included 174 characters, much longer than normal 30-character messages, and amateur radio monitors say they have not seen the size of this message since the 1991 Persian Gulf War."

//

/

Upon his learning of the Americans planned nuclear attack on Iran, Putin ordered an ‘immediate ’ flight change to the United States while he was in route to Guatemala for the

2014 Olympic Games announcement, of which Russia was announced the winner

These reports state that Putin was ‘blunt’ with the American War Leader Bush in stating that any nuclear attack upon Iran’s nuclear facilities, being built by Russian nuclear engineers and technicians, would be viewed by Russia as attack upon Russia itself.

These reports further state that the planned American nuclear strike upon Iran was to coincide with Israel’s long-planned invasion of Syria, and which their military forces are currently massed in what is described as the largest ‘war games ’ on the Golan Heights since Israel’s capturing of this Syrian territory during the 1967 Six Day War.

Russian political analysts state the War Leaders of the United States are ‘frantic’ to engage the entire Middle East in Total War as the support for their present wars has eroded their standing among their citizens with over half of the American people are now calling for the impeachment

DPS: WE HAVE GOT TO IMPEACH THESE TURD FONDLERS BEFORE THEY KILL US ALL!!! Write to Pelosi. Demand impeachment be put back on the table and stuffed in that crooked palsied smile of Cheney.

Let's hope these stealth reports are not true, but I suspect the worst. I have no other sources; I simply copied and pasted from those posted. It won't be found in the corporate media, but I suspect this story will percolate up into the more reputable Internet and foreign sources with time.

In retrospect, when I first heard about Putin and Bush's "Lobster Summit," I did a double take. I had read that Putin was on his way to lobby for the Olympics. Why was he detouring to Maine unannounced? So the story does provide a possible explanation for the detour and the war games. Only time will tell. Or we'll wake up one morning dead.

Obviously though, I'm grateful if Putin provented the destruction of the people, animals, and land of Iraq. Not proud of being an American.

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/89728-0/

Last Edited on 9-Jul-2007 6:15 PM

All your presidents have been 'nazis'. Is this a surprise?
But as ever - what can we do about it? Not a lot. Democracy?
The people rule? Doesn't look like it to me

Last Edited on 10-Jul-2007 1:21 AM

Last Edited on 10-Jul-2007 5:49 AM

We do not have a right to tell Iran they can't have any because we have no moral right the most vile immoral concept ever either. Has fear stopped wars with our egregious nuclear proliferation? Absolutely! But is that the way human beings should live together on the planet? Absolutely not. And don't tell me I am naive. Ever since Hirojima and Nagasaki, utter destruction of the earth has been hanging over the heads of all humanity. No one has a right to it, and it is an immoral bargaining chip. All nuclear weapons must be dismantled and we must rise up collectively to tell world leads and the UN that nothing else is acceptable.

"The real issue is that Russia is helping Iran build a nuclear power plant. How can you NOT be frightened by that?" Sure I am frightened by that. Soon any country that chooses to (and some won't) will have nukes. That's OUR Pandora's box. Is the solution to cause painful death to millions of people that have nothing to do with that and destroy that part of the earth for generations? Know any Iranians? I do and they are no less valuable than Americans, than me.

Again, ME, of course we don't have genuine socialized democracy in the US. It is the ideal of Democracy I am interested in. Where it is an informed citizenry, not a few with questionable intent, that I believe in. Other than monitoring voting corruption, the Electoral College is antiquated and will go.

I'm not convinced most Americans would vote against a global policy of disarmament.

This is what I mean by liberals being irresponsible. Can't you draw a distinction between our government(no matter which party is in charge),and the governments of nations like Iran and Russia? You like the idea of "Democracy", does either of those two countries come even close, by your standards?
You keep focusing on the weapons, but as long as some men realize they can control others by use of force, it doesn't matter if we go back to sticks and stones, violence will prevail. You just admitted that wars were averted by our having nuclear weapons, are you placing conditions upon the lives that have been saved?

The world WANTS a strong United States presence. It makes EVERYONE safer. Russia is a mafia state, with Putin being the moral equivilent to a thug who worked his way up from being a legbreaker to the Don.

Gradual disarmament could happen, once the system was shown to work. The major nuclear powers could greatly reduce stockpiles: monitoring and inspections would be the key to the whole thing, with the coalition overseeing the free movement of inspectors on a VERY regular basis all over the world.Small arms production, esp. cheap kalashnikovs etc. would have to be outlawed, as these are really what cause the most damage. Also,religious fundamentalism would have to be closely monitored be it neo nazi type christian identity, radical right wing Judeism or islamic fascism. Lots of details but you get the point.

The only thing the U.S. would need to relinquish is it's belief in chaos and violence, as spread through the cia, as a means of keeping the military-industrial complex cranking at full speed. They would not have to relinquish any military power per se. They would simply have to leave behind the racist manipulation of other governments, in a murderous attempt to rule by intimidation; the same would apply to China. I think though, that other countries would play by the rules once they realized that the U.S. was curtailing it's plans to pillage their resources and enslave the people.

In her perfect, futuristic, secularized humanist, United Nations world, how will they run the re-education camps if they don't have any weapons?

Third world nations in no way control the UN.The U.S. and the permanent security council members do, and the way they control it is by constant stonewalling on all major issues; the U.S. percieves the institution as a definite threat if it is allowed to function with even a modicum of democracy. To make such a claim is just ignorant: nowhere does Julie advocate this anyway. Let's see, what else; it is further ignorance to make the ridiculous and aggregious claim that the "Liberal West"(sic) is responsible for genocide in Africa . Most if not all of the responsibility belongs to the cia and Wall street, one fomenting chaos at the other's bidding. These are not liberal entities are they?

Jopaku, we are nowhere in agreement in even the most remote way, and your thoughts are the farthest thing from pragmatism imagineable! They are, in fact, overtly racist parroting of the stupidest trash talk radio garbage. You and the people that think and talk like you need to be the first ones tossed into a re-education camp!!! RE-EDUCATION CAMPS????? Somebody please take that one!

I have so many thoughts on this to try and organize and articulate, not just about jo's reponse, but the issue at large. Unfortunately, unless an unexpected opportunity arises I will have to bow out till Thursday at the earliest -- if not then Sunday. So, you guys carry on.

I didn't mean to imply that we should go back to colonialism in the negative sense, just that there needs to be more than just a peace corp type involvement to get things going.
JB seems to fear the missionaries, but not the mullahs.
It's the east that is bringing down Africa, not the west, and it will be christians and capitalists that save it, not securalists and socialists.

To further clarify what I meant by the Liberals of the west comment, I think it is the same mindset that allows the inner cities in america to languish by advocating the same failed policies over and over again.

The first warlord that gets a bullet in the head would have you screaming racism and imperialism.
How would you change things in Africa?

And you propose more US interference?
All I can say is... BRAINWASHED

What do you think will be america's ultimate solution to Iraq? Will it be "democratic principles" (see jopaku, the non-christian, above).
I shouldn't need to answer it of course, but it will be someone who will be firm with terrorists and religionists. Someone who can unite the country under a centralised authority. It will be someone who takes a stand against iranian and syrian interference, and who support turkey against kurdish terrorists.

It will someone just like saddam hussein was.

Patriotism: is it any different from vanity? If a man boasts about his country, he always does so because he's a part of it. No one boasts about other peoples countries do they?

So how is that not just the same as vanity and self-obsession?

Last Edited on 26-Jul-2007 3:51 AM