Oh, I think you owe it to yourself…
I’ll wait.
2 Likes
You seem to be using the word in the sense of a synonym for nationalism. In which case I vehemently disagree. Appealing to emotions of national identity is a tactic that appeals to base instincts, and the results of doing so have consistently diminished us all. Also, I think you’re drawing a false dichotomy. The choices aren’t nationalism or complaining. The choices are nationalism or responsible civic activism.
On the contrary. Ideological purity is the very driver of political polarization. Adhering to what your political tribe espouses because it’s what it espouses is precisely how we wound up in this mess. Principles, and standing by them, are the only thing that will get us out of it.
While I don’t want to feed the marketing myth of generations, my (very possibly incorrect) understanding is that the prevailing sentiment among the age groups normally lumped into millennials is to reject labels in general as overly simplistic.
3 Likes
I’m fairly Left by most people’s standards - though I arrived there by individual principles rather than identifying as being on the Left - but I don’t think the original sense of patriotism is about progressive vs central vs traditional. OTOH, actual conservatives (in the historic millennia-old sense) have all but vanished in US and now the American Right is dominated by fascists whose sole interest in tradition is in augmenting the racist and classist power structures protecting the ruling classes, tossing out the good and embracing the evils of the past.
I actually don’t think it’s important to reclaim or save the word’s original definition. In fact, I think fighting the evolution of words is a largely useless endeavor.
I do think it’s important, particularly with galvanizing words such as this one, to remember that not everyone is on the same edition of the dictionary, and so to judge people by their actions. In other words, instead of assuming whether or not someone who says they’re a patriot is a nationalist, look to their other words and actions to see what they mean by it.
All that said, I don’t go around promulgating the things I said above, and I largely just avoid the word itself. Mostly I don’t consider it worth spending much energy on. I’m quite happy to talk about it, but I generally only talk about it (in the hopes of offering some clarity as to why some seem to have a definition at odds with the more current one) when someone asks about it such as in your original comment.
4 Likes
I think all of this just boils down to what symbols mean to you. Ones concept of “country” is largely as a status as a symbol. I don’t think there is a problem with associating your country with “good”. In most cases those people are probably right, even those with some serious problems. I am pretty sure most people in Ireland associate Ireland with being a “good” thing, and even leaving a positive foot print overall in the world today.
The US, even with all the bad things it does, does to a lot of good things as well. I guess one can still make a case for ones’ base opinion to be “good” or “bad”. When people get upset about flag burning and the like, I remind them that they are just symbols. Symbols are mostly dependent on the VIEWER for their meaning. What a person takes away from viewing symbol largely depends on the context and their world view and experiences. So something like the American flag can represent America’s ideals (even if it doesn’t live up to them a lot of the times), and the ancestors who fought to maintain those ideals as well as defeat various factions who threatened it and its European neighbors. Or it can represent the America that has failed so many people with its various bad policies.
Any symbol can do this, even then hated Swastika. Most of the time it will illicit rage and contempt, when in relation to Nazis or current white power groups. But it can also illicit curiosity, neutral feelings, and even positive emotions when viewed in the context of things like its use as a Buddhist symbol, a good luck symbol and design element common even in America pre the 1930s, and a Native American symbol used as a healing symbol by the Navajo and other tribes until the 30.
And I’ll repeat, while having a baseline of “good” isn’t a bad thing, if one isn’t open to recognizing the “bad” things, then that is a bad thing. But I still contend, even if America maybe has a more warped/inflated view of itself, most people view their countries as “good”. I will even give you that some of them are “brainwashed” into believing this, but I am not arguing that. I am just saying if you polled these people more than 50% would answer yes to “Is your country ‘good’?”
Hmm. Mildly disappointing it wasn’t this guy dancing… but neat. Probably have seen this before with out knowing what it was called.
1 Like
But that’s simply not the issue here – you’re derailing again. The issue is the U.S. and its endemic, foundational racism, and how so many Americans believe, despite those foundations in theft and genocide, and despite the ongoing realities of division and exploitative abuse at home and abroad, that their country is the greatest that’s ever existed on earth.
Of course most people in some other countries view their countries as good; that’s both beside the point and obvious.
8 Likes
And that’s why it will fail. I know enough about Americans to know they won’t go for this. It will alienate the left from the masses of lazy couch potatoes who make up most of the populace.
American politics are a pendulum, and Trump, owing to the fact that he’s incompetent, will swing things back to the middle and left simply by being Trump.
I think you’re misunderstanding me. I actually AM espousing responsible civic activism, but I’m trying to paint it as patriotism to make it more appealing to those who would criticize it. I want to show people that Colin Kaepernick kneels for the national anthem not because he hates the USA, but because he loves it and is disappointed in it. I can’t remember who said this originally (I suppose I should google) but saying “my country right or wrong is like saying my mother drunk or sober-- I want my country to be right, and I want my mother to be sober, but that doesn’t mean I don’t love them when I criticize them.”
3 Likes
No. He won’t.
This is not normal. You are in the latter stages of a fascist revolution, and Niemoller began reciting his poem quite some time ago.
You still have a brief window before the situation becomes totally irretrievable.
1 Like
I wish I could believe that. I think the only way US politics is getting any where near anything the rest of the world would consider the middle is with several generations of concerted campaigning. And I don’t see much sign of there being any group in the US doing that (although I have seen some stuff from the Democratic Socialists of America which looks like a damn good start.)
I agree with that.
I think appealing primarily to emotional motives in order to encourage principled action almost always backfire.
1 Like
I think it’s more about encouraging principled action by explaining the principles in language the emotionally invested can even let themselves hear.
2 Likes
I guess we’ll just have to wait and see. My own take on the situation is that the GOP is worried about losing mid-term elections, and there are already signs they may be right with Republican congressmen retiring rather than face re-election.
When the shit hits the fan in terms of economics and social problems the masses will rise up, but not before, and not because of civil disobedience they can’t immediately relate to.
The realist in me assumes that if they do it will be in a further shift to the right.
That was in reply to others who felt that 1) the assumption of the baseline of “good” might be the problem. and 2) that other countries don’t have that same baseline. They are “meh” at best. Not sure how an organic branch related directly the topic is derailing, but YMMV.
Furthermore, the original relevance in this was how ones baseline might affect how one interpreted the message. As I said, I, and others, felt the message initially had a pro-racism message - not an anti-racism one. While our baseline might skew our perception of the message, I still contend it was a poorly thought out message. As someone else pointed out, this was compounded by it being presented only by white people. Yes with context and some thought the message became clearer, but if one is going to make a huge sign, they need to work on making it crystal.
I started from comment one, and repeated, that having a base line of “good” to the exclusion of acknowledging the “bad” was bad. And while I agree with the now understood message of the banner - that racism is part of America - that wasn’t what the comments were about. I don’t think anyone is/was disputing Racism isn’t common and not a problem, rather they were commenting on the confusing message.
I never knew there was blackface morris dancing. I’m sad now.
1 Like
The context is that America is racist. That context is visible to everywhere else but invisible (apparently) to much of America. If the flag said “racism is as Belgian as beer and moule frites” it wouldn’t be ambiguous, nor if it said as German as wurst, as French as fromage, as Greek as dolmades…
The banner has unpacked something in a manner unpleasant but necessary to Americans.
8 Likes
If it helps, there are various reasons put forward for why people still do it. Not all of it goes back to, this is a dance black people did so we black up now even though we’re not black.
For example:
1 Like
I’ll be fine with what you’ve been saying here when you stop with the false equivalency and Whataboutism. Oh wait, that’s pretty much all you’ve been saying.
2 Likes
It wasn’t confusing that it was calling America “racists”. Either way you read it, that is what you came away with.
It was confusing whether it was a proud, matter of fact statement - i.e. America is racist, get over it/deal with it/thats what we do. - or - a shaming/awareness statement, i.e. America is racists, acknowledge and fix it.
“Chim-chim-er-nee, chim-chim-er-nee, chim chim cheroo, if you shakes my and then that’s good luck to you…”
Not being English I can tolerate Dick’s cockerney accent, I’m told it’s positively accurate compared to mine. I sang that to my children in a medley with “Favourite things” every night for years. As a stealth mechanism to get them to dig John Coltrane (though the truth is I actually listen to Alice more…)
The connection, of course, is that touching black people was considered good luck, and here it’s sweeps. I don’t know which came first or how historically accurate. Different times. You know like how, for example, a song about killing British people could be cosidered a vital part of your cultural heritage or maybe something you should stop the fuck singing right now while accepting it’s part of your history? Like in the past part.
Folk traditions are vital and reactive, responding to the now, transforming and adapting new material and cultural influences. Or they are in danger of ossifying and becoming a signifier for cultural nationalism (i.e.racism) and time to move on.
Morris dancing looks cool, it’s brilliantly English and bonkers. No need for blackface now though and I think Morris dancers should allow themselves to be persuaded of that.
