Skip to main content

Patriotism or Nationalism

Do you know the difference?

People who are uncomfortable with the idea of patriotism should think about this. They aren't the same thing. The things that make American worth loving are things that ought to move all citizens to cheer for this country. Freedom and liberty. Equality and tolerance. Individual responsibility and an ethos of mutual purpose. It shouldn't be even a little bit difficult to love what this country stands for.



(Props to paco.)

Comments

Ymarsakar said…
Emperor Hirohito was the one who set the standard between patriotism and nationalism. Von Stauffenberg did this as well, but he failed.

In the end, it comes back to that old Japanese philosophy.

Death is lighter than a feather, duty heavier than mountains.

If a person feels his duty is to the leader, and not the people, then he will do much harm via nationalism. If a person feels his duty is to the people by honoring the sacred trust the people have put into him, then that person will do much good in his life.

When Hirohito had to make a choice between the honor of his race, his nation, and his person and the safety and peace of his people, he decided what his duty truly was and henceforth set the destiny of all Japanese into the future rather than the fires of nuclear annihilation.

Because Hitler cared nothing for his people, regardless of his master race rhetoric, Hitler brought his people down into the hell of destruction itself with no path out.

Popular posts from this blog

Some times some people.

 

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism, ...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...