An Important Distinction [Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal]
An Important Distinction [Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal]
An old comic that feels oh so relevant in this tumultuous election year.
Source: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/an-important-distinction
I take issue with the first panel.
To me, patriotism is "I'm going to work on my house because I love the people who live in it and I want them all to have the best house."
If you start from the assumption that your country is the "best" that's nationalism and straying too close to the roots of xenophobia.
Yeah, it's maybe the greatest difference between Patriotism and Nationalism: the former is all about "I'll work to make my house the best house" whilst the latter is about "Yield to me, as I am from the best house".
Patriots want their country to be the best country, Nationalist want to extract gains from living in what they think is the best country.
You'll notice that the only things Nationalists ever do for their country are things like "stopping others from coming here" or "celebrating the greatness of their country", which aren't at all about making the country better.
It could be the best for you.
You seem to be implying all people and countries are on a scale moving closer to some single ideal.
But it's perfectly valid to think your house is the best and want it to be different to someone else's house, who also thinks their house is the best.
You seem to be implying all people and countries are on a scale moving closer to some single ideal.
I mean that's definitely how some people interpret it but at least for me, patriotism encompasses the idea that my country should be best for me and the people in it but that other people in other countries get to think the same thing about their country and work towards their own version of "best."
But I'm not gonna argue that everyone does patriotism this way because that's clearly not the case 🙃 plenty of "patriots" out there willing to wreck their own country in a war over bringing their own ideals to a different place.
Words are defined by how they're used.
Nah.
Patriots would be there waving a giant flag saying we’re the best house ever, despite not actually being involved in building the house or having anything to do with the state of it outside of living in it.
Patriotism and nationalism has zero place in society.
We need to build a shared culture so that we can work together.
My house will become the best house should be a message we all can get around. Otherwise, why should I work with you to build society?
If you don't like shared work or shared culture to begin with, it's a bit problematic in that your own political ideologies are destined to die. At the very minimum, your ideology must be self sustaining.
Patriotism and nationalism has zero place in society.
That's not true, Bernie Sanders campaign had a wonderfully wholesome and inclusive version of patriotism which they used to great effect:.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nwRiuh1Cug
...and he also talks about his nationalism when deriding the Koch brothers:.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0
So like most things it depends on when AND HOW they're used.
Patriotism and nationalism has zero place in society.
Not true. Patriotism is wanting and seeking the best for your country. Because our society relies on those physical divides, patriotism would actually improve society. Nationalism is deciding that whatever your country is doing already is the best simply by virtue of self-identification. There is no desire for improvement outside of an individual perception so it, functionally, can never offer any improvement for society.
One is potentially beneficial. The other is cancerous.
Ok so let's entertain the opposite of patriotism and talk about self distane what is going to drive you to fix the crumbling rotting foundation or leaky roof because who cares if this crummy house rots and collapses on me if you don't care about your county then you won't have the drive to maintain it sure some might but those people who don't need motivation to do things are rare and far between if the world is hopeless then what hope is there of fixing it
Yup. The main difference between a patriot and a nationalist - or fascist - is a few years and an opportunity.
Last time I checked, we were able to deploy the Office of Censorship to censor US Postal Mail. Conscript Disney and Loony Tunes to build up a massive database of wartime propaganda. Use it to influence the entirety of the US Civilians. Use it to drum up support for War Bonds to help expand the US Debt to pay for the war, raise taxes to 90% on the highest end and build a better country while defeating both Fascism and Communism.
We, as a country, decided that desperate times called for desperate measures. And not only that, we also got rid of these dangerous emergency powers (of explicit Censorship / War Information / Propaganda) before we corrupted our society into an irreversible state.
And therein lies the problem with people who just yell "fascism" whenever they disagree with someone. Yall obviously don't know the history of this country.
Patriotism also sucks, because it implements a bias that can then be exploited, and brings very little to the table.
State-level patriotism also makes you complicit in the division of people by countries and nations, as opposed to classes and other valid groups of people.
And there is no valid reason to have some special relation to your country. It is natural to feel ties with the place you were born or the place you spent a lot of time in, this is human psychology, but your country is nothing but a piece of land that was marked by somebody as belonging to some virtual entity.
We should ditch state-level patriotism as a concept and treat local-level patriotism as a natural bias. We should strive to help people of all places and origins, and come together as one.
also makes you complicit in the division of people by countries and nations, as opposed to classes and other valid groups of people.
I don't think we need to do any division between people.
Instead of local-level should it not be headed towards planet-level?
Our obsession with owning land and borders will be the death of us all.
Like, without hyperbole, if we all die, it will be because of our attachment to the concept of "owning land" and having to draw imaginary lines across ground and rock and water to signify who owns what.
But when you step back and really think about it, it makes zero sense if you actually care about an equitable world where people aren't hurting each other. It makes zero sense from a cosmic perspective, as this is a rock flying around a star, it has been here longer than us and will outlast us to a degree that our presence here, no matter what we do, will be a brief blip in cosmic time. We have no legacy, no real connection to the dirt below us other than how it gave us life. And yet claim ownership over it?
It makes no sense from a material perspective either, all borders do is reduce the flow of goods and services, creates artificial limits on who can go where creating "pressure zones" that eventually explode over and become migration disasters, and of course the people who pretend to rule these patches of dirt and rock and water and will send millions of people to death to preserve this roleplay. And we all cheer and defend this concept with all our heart.
Make it make sense.
At the very least, yes.
There’s no “special” reason to view the adults you grew up with as better or worse caretakers. Statistically, it’s likely they’re equivalent to many others.
Still, this over application of logic refuses to let us be enthusiastic about anything unless there’s a scientifically documented reason towards it. It’s nice to have reasons to adore something, even if that thing is a country - but the comic is making the point that you should still want to find flaws in and improve that thing.
Sure! I just think that this particular flavor of enthusiasm often serves as a slippery slope towards nationalism, and is often intended that way.
Which is why I see it as a rather toxic kind of mentality. There are many things to be enthusiastic about - people's unity, new discoveries and achievements, or simply your cat coming for hugs.
None of them have terrible potential outcomes.
Patriotism also sucks, because it implements a bias that can then be exploited, and brings very little to the table.
patriotism is a very personal thing, by the very definition of it. You simply cannot apply it outside of yourself. If you are outwardly patriotic. You have already fucked up.
I would argue there is a valid reason to have some form of special relation to your country, your country is simply, not any other existing country. If you live in estonia, you have a fully digital government. If you live in america you have one of the foundational democratic governments of modern society, as well as a particular cultural history (though turbulent, rather remarkable) as well as a particularly unusual geography and land usage. If you live in europe, you live in a moderately to high density populated area, that is highly socialized, and cooperative. Etc. Etc. Etc.
The fundamental problem here is thinking that europe is worse than america, simply because it's different. What you're applying here is a soviet level utilitarian "collective" identity.
Though i agree with the state level patriotism, that's fucking weird, stop doing that.
It is one thing to acknowledge the positives of a place you're in, and other to be proud of some arbitrary landmass.
Europe is not worse than America, both have their upsides and downsides. I can say that as a Russian, and I also acknowledge the positives and negatives of living in Russia in general and my city in particular. All are good at something, and bad at something else.
At the same time, I do not want to leave my city. I have people here that I'm warmly related to and I feel safe and comfortable here; I know the city, know its unwritten rules, I feel myself at home. There are places in here I intimately know and adore. Moving cities would be a major pain for me, and at first I wouldn't feel at my place; moving countries is straight up insane for me.
But I know this is because I'm used to the place and know it deeply, and feel comfy with that arrangement; if I would leave, I would feel nostalgic of times I've spent here, and I would always react more to any events that happen here, even when I leave. This is all my bias, and it is something we all have. I guess this is the core of local-level patriotism.
But it doesn't make me hold special feelings towards the entirety of Russia. I have no ties with Siberia, to which I've never been, and to me it would be more foreign than, say, forests of Finland, which are way closer to what I see in my area and are more intimately familiar. Kamchatka is exotic to me, not familiar and warm. And I fail to understand why it should be different, other than for the will of the people in power who want to create some special Russian identity for me to be proud of.
Ah, a classic false dichotomy.
You see my kind of loyalty was loyalty to one’s country, not to its institutions or its office-holders. The country is the real thing, the substantial thing, the eternal thing; it is the thing to watch over, and care for, and be loyal to; institutions are extraneous, they are its mere clothing, and clothing can wear out, become ragged, cease to be comfortable, cease to protect the body from winter, disease, and death. To be loyal to rags, to shout for rags, to worship rags, to die for rags—that is a loyalty of unreason, it is pure animal; it belongs to monarchy, was invented by monarchy; let monarchy keep it. I was from Connecticut, whose Constitution declares “that all political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their benefit; and that they have at all times an undeniable and indefeasible right to alter their form of government in such a manner as they may think expedient.”
Under that gospel, the citizen who thinks he sees that the commonwealth’s political clothes are worn out, and yet holds his peace and does not agitate for a new suit, is disloyal; he is a traitor. That he may be the only one who thinks he sees this decay, does not excuse him; it is his duty to agitate anyway, and it is the duty of the others to vote him down if they do not see the matter as he does.
- Mark Twain, "A Connecticut Yankee In King Arthur's Court"
Conservative's patriotism is mostly virtue signaling in my experience.
I am the queen of France (drums start) (wavy arm dance begin)
But you know as well as I, patriotism is a word; and one that generally comes to mean either my country, right or wrong, which is infamous, or my country is always right, which is imbecile. - Patrick O'Brien
What a dumbass take.
The difference is much simpler. Patriotism for internal conflicts, nationalism for external conflicts. Both for manufactured Boogeymen fueled by malicious propaganda.
imo, actual patriotism would be more like "I want to make my house as good as I can."
You don't have to think your country is the best to be patriotic with respect to that country.
Nah, it's very subjective. Idealistically patriotism is more like "I want to make the common house everyone on the street lives in more pleasant to live in for everyone."
Realistically it's more like "I want to make my house how I think it should be better. Why doesn't everyone else do the same?"
Each individual has their own idea about what's the patriotic thing to do, even if that ends up to be the wrong thing in someone else's view. That's why I say it's about internal conflicts. Your patriotism and your neighbor's can come at odds with each other in various points. Neither of you might be wrong, but you'll still have to pick something that goes against those beliefs eventually. Better for you, worse for someone else, but pat oneself on the back with the excuse "the good of the many".
Talk about dumbass takes..
I did talk. You didn't. This comment of yours.... Zero substance. Not even dumb, just empty.
Chauvinism ≠ nationalism
Ireland and quebec are nationalist, they want to become independent from englad. Its about sovereignty.
Chauvinism is fanatical adoration of a person, a group or a belief like the maga side of the republican.
How many languages outside of English even have a word for patriotism?
Patriotism and Nationalism are basically the same thing. The distinction is nonsensical, especially in this context.
good ol' Lemmy's lack of nuance.
Also, if you vote, you are ethnically tied to, and guilty of, every decision and moral misstep of that politician until the end of time.
You'll have to explain, since in the comic the main premise of both Nationalism and Patriotism is that "this house is mine ergo it is the best".
(Also historically the distinction would be that Nationalism is about establishing an ethno-state, while Patriotism is the basically-unconditional loving of your state, be it ethno or otherwise.)
I would say patriotism is when you love the ideas a nation is built on and stands for, while nationalism is when you love the people and history of a nation.
As a european it's very hard to love the former, since we've been here for more than a thousand years meaning whatever ideas our forefathers might have had in mind are rightfully gone now. However over this time we developed our own culture and became a nation of people which we can love instead.
Nationalism doesn't have to be toxic as it's often depicted, if someone belives their nation is "better" that's called chauvinism. Nationalism is just when you feel your nation is special for you at least and that makes you want to better it.
if you want to make up new definitions for your own language that is similar to, but not quite like English, that's up to you.
I don't think that your differentiazion between patriotism and nationalism is correct. Nationalism always began with the invention of nations through national movements. The nation building in europe began in the 18th century, not a thousand years ago. Nationalism always refers to the invented history of a nation ("a thousand years ago"), while patriotism can refer to the political system or the constitutional documents.
I think both are awful because there is a really fine line to chauvinism. The positive view of oneselfes too often comes with the devaluation of others.
Ironic if P had a bit more of N he wouldn't be absorbed that easy
Can we not do politics? I generally like the comics sub, but my exposure to politics on lemmy, social media, wherever is at such all time peak nonsensical levels that I just block all politic related subs, and would like this not to be one of them.
That's a fair point. I can try to avoid politics in this community in the future.
As for this post, I'll defer to the community mod to either leave it up or take it down. No hard feelings from me either way.
Anybody know if there's a political cartoons community? Then I can subscribe to both.
Also patriotism: This house sucks, and it's because of these fucking immigrants
Are you voting Republican or Libertarian?
The liberal fear of these concepts and fear of showing these beliefs is part of why establishment liberals have become such bad orators and such weak and unconvincing political parties.
These concepts have to be harnessed, that's just the nature of drawing in the middle of politics.
Politics is a luxury to focus on, there are huge swaths of work a day people who don't and can't focus on it. They need certain messages as short hand for doing the "right thing" - that's just how politics is, not everyone can afford to live with the burden of political awareness, it's not necessary healthy.
You have to give the devil it's dues, and do so willingly and happily. That's just how political campaigns are under this system.
