Happy 4th of July

"I despise my own nation most. Because I know it best. Because I still love it, suffering from Hope. For me, that's patrotism." -- Edward Abbey

Patriotic Morons

Sorry if I don't fall all over myself honoring our veterans today. It's not that I don't value their sacrifice. It's that I've already given at the office. You can only draw from the well so many times. Every single major holiday has been co-opted to honor our military. Our ballgames have been co-opted to honor the military. I can't go to the corner convenience store without having to wade through flags and be asked to donate to some vaguely military organization.

Of course, none of it really has anything to do with honoring our military. It has to do with easing our collective guilt. Deep down, we know we have sent them off to fight in unjust wars. Deep down, we know we don't really take care of them when they get back - no jobs, no healthcare for the psychological problems they get from fighting these wars.

One of my Facebook "friends" ... using the term loosely ... actually posted this about the shootings this week at Fort Hood: "WTF is going on in this country? Shootings everywhere." Really? You have no idea? That's the problem. You have no idea why men come back from war and blow their own brains out or kill their families. It's more important for most people to spout patriotic cliches than to really think about what we are doing to our country and to our young men and women.

As I've said before, this is not an abstraction for me. I come from a military family. My brother and dad would certainly qualify as "patriotic morons". My brother was in a "war" that was a glorified police exercise (Desert Storm), yet still hasn't adjusted to the real world over 15 years later. Imagine those that have actually had to kill someone.

You think if you keep gushing about our veterans at every chance that it will actually help the veterans? Honestly people, get a clue. Let's have a Veteran's Day where none of our men were on foreign soil. If we honored our soldiers, we'd bring them back.

Ignorant boisterous free speech is OK, but silence is not?

You'll have to forgive me, I'm confused. It's OK to for an elected official to yell at the President during a speech, and it's OK to carry guns, be rude and yell at town hall meetings, but it's not OK to exercise your free speech by not saying anything and by merely staying seated? What kind of bizarro country are we? I didn't sign up for this.

TRENTON, N.J. — Three teenagers who say they were tossed from a New Jersey ballpark over their refusal to stand during the song "God Bless America" are suing the minor league Newark Bears.

The boys argue that their constitutional rights were violated when they were asked to leave Newark's Bears and Eagles Riverfront Stadium on June 29 by Bears' president and co-owner Thomas Cetnar.

Cetnar acknowledged the boys were asked to leave but declined to say why. He also has denied making some statements attributed to him in the lawsuit.

The boys — Millburn High seniors Bryce Gadye and Nilkumar Patel, both 17, and junior Shaan Mohammad Khan, 16 — sued in federal court on Friday seeking unspecified damages.

According to the lawsuit, the boys were seated behind home plate when the song began playing. Once it ended, they say Cetnar approached them yelling.

"Nobody sits during the singing of 'God Bless America' in my stadium," the lawsuit quotes Cetnar as saying. "Now the get the (expletive) out of here."

... "The boys weren't trying to make any political statements, they just didn't get up," he said. "No one gave them an ultimatum. The song was sung, it was finished, then they were thrown out."

..."I think what makes it so horrible is that they were publicly humiliated for exercising a right that was guaranteed to them by the United States Constitution," Gadye said ...

And don't tell me it's the national anthem. God Bless America is not our anthem. I do stand during the Star Spangled Banner. I've got no problem with that. It's a matter of civic participation, rooted in ritual and has been performed at least semi-regularly at ballgames since the 1890's. God Bless America, however, is overtly religious and has only been played with any type of regularity at ballgames since 9/11.

If you ask me, Woody Guthrie's This Land is Your Land is a much more fitting anthem. Let's see ... on the one hand, we have a couple of "anthems" that glorify religion (specifically Christianity) and war. On the other hand, we have a song that talks about the natural beauty of our country and of brotherhood. The last couple of verses of This Land is Your Land are even oddly prescient (considering they were written in 1956):

"... As I was walkin' - I saw a sign there
And that sign said - no tress passin'
But on the other side .... it didn't say nothin!
Now that side was made for you and me!

Chorus

In the squares of the city - In the shadow of the steeple
Near the relief office - I see my people
And some are grumblin' and some are wonderin'
If this land's still made for you and me."

I'm grumblin' and wonderin' indeed.

God Bless America?

What is the line of patriotism past which it becomes jingoism and blind nationalism? When does honoring your own religion turn into the exclusion of all other viewpoints?

And when you get to that point, do you realize you are not representing the things this country stands for any more?

I think we've gotten to that point. From the Dan Patrick Show (ESPNRadio) and NY Daily News:

A baseball fan is suing the NYPD for kicking him out of the old Yankee Stadium last summer because he tried to use the restroom during the playing of "God Bless America," lawyers said.

Bradford Campeau-Laurion, 30, a lifelong baseball fan, claimed he was the victim of religious and political discrimination on Aug. 26, 2008 when police officers booted him from the ballpark.

"The role of police officers is to enforce the law," NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman said.

"New York's finest have no business arresting someone for trying to go to the bathroom at a politically incorrect moment," Lieberman said. "That is an abuse of authority and a violation of the constitutional principles that our country is founded on."

Besides the cops, the lawsuit names the Yankee Partnership, for a policy that restricts fan movement during the playing of "God Bless America."

Campeau-Laurion said his clash with cops began when he decided to use the bathroom at the start of the seventh-inning stretch. He got up and made his way down the aisle as the song began playing.

A police officer blocked his path and told him he couldn't leave during the song, the lawsuit alleges.

I got that "God Bless America" was played during the 7th inning stretch of some ballgames after 9/11. I didn't agree with it, but I at least understood it ... for that year. It's 8 years later and most teams are still doing it at one point or another. It's time to move on. Get over it. We are not honoring anyone by continuing to play it. We're trivializing that people died and instead making them into a recruiting poster for the military and police. I used to be halfway patriotic and more respectful of law enforcement, but the things I've seen and heard over the last few years make my blood boil. If you think 9/11 is about the need to make the country more patriotic and more religious, then you haven't a clue and haven't learning a thing.

I don't mind standing for the Star Spangled Banner at the start of games. Though some would have you think that the Banner has always been played before games, it didn't start till after WWII. But, OK, that's fine. I'm not going to make a big deal about that. But let's cut out all the extra BS. Baseball games are not indoctrination meetings.

Freedom IS Free

One of my biggest pet peeves is those mini-propaganda films by the National Guard that you get when you are waiting for your movie to start at the theater. They get some pop act to make a "music video", but in reality, they are thinly veiled advertisements pimping patriotism and armed service. Last year, it was 3 Doors Down with "Citizen Soldier". This year it is Kid Rock with "Warrior" . Now, I don't have anything against Kid. I've even liked some of his songs. He seems to have a sense of humor. Or I had thought that in the past. I'm sitting there in the theater tonight, waiting to watch Religulous (I'll review tomorrow), and "Warrior" comes on:

... So don't tell me who's wrong and right
When liberty starts slipping away
And if you ain't gonna fight
Get out of the way

'Cause freedom ain't so free
When you breathe red, white and blue
I'm giving all of myself
How 'bout you?

Holding back the urge to vomit in my mouth, I reflected on how big a hypocrite Kid Rock is. I saw an interview with him recently:

"I truly believe that people like myself, who are in a position of entertainers in the limelight, should keep their mouth shut on politics.Because at the end of the day, I'm good at writing songs and singing. What I'm not educated in is the field of political science. And so for me to be sharing my views and influencing people of who I think they should be voting for ... I think would be very irresponsible on my part.I think celebrity endorsements hurt politicians. As soon as somebody comes out for a politician, especially in Hollywood, when they all go, 'I'm voting for this guy!' – I go, 'That's not who I'm voting for!' "

So ... you won't endorse a political candidate but you will co-opt a political slogan from one ("freedom isn't free") and, in your songs, will criticize people ("don't tell me who's wrong and right") who don't just blindly follow.

I don't mean to belittle the military. I understand the value of service to one's country. I have a father and brother who both served. But criticizing people who don't serve, questioning their patriotism, and serving up a slice of propaganda that the Third Reich would be proud of, is not the answer.

And don't get me started on the "freedom isn't free" thing. I read a great article this week on that overused, contradictory, and meaningless slogan:

It's one of those Orwellian phrases that re-emerged out of 9/11 mania: "Freedom is not free." ... freedom itself, far from being costly, was cheapened to a slogan in whose name sacrifice at home was for fools and war abroad freedom's calling card.

The dogmatic negative at the heart of "freedom isn't free" should have been a clue. The phrase has been attributed to Dean Rusk, secretary of state under John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, though The New York Times used it in a small headline in 1945 to describe an American cemetery in Normandy. Gen. Matthew Ridgway, Army Chief of Staff in 1953, used it to define freedom as the difference between those who "torture their captives" and "those to whom the individual and his individual rights are sacred."

But the phrase really took off as a national verbal tick after 2001. George and Laura Bush and Dick Cheney have used the phrase at least nine times since 2001. For understandable reasons, they never defined it the way Gen. Ridgway did. They never defined it at all.

Ridgway's nuances aside, the phrase is fortune-cookie bunk anyway. Of course, freedom is free, and self-evidently so. Unless Thomas Jefferson had it wrong in the Declaration of Independence, freedom is one of the "unalienable rights." It's not a privilege. You're born with it. If you're in an unfree country, as most people are, you're owed it.

If you're in a free country, by all means, count your blessings, but you're entitled to your freedom. You shouldn't have to justify it, qualify it, tailor it to someone else's idea of it (unless you live in a homeowners association) let alone buy it, as countless slaves in this country had to.

Unless you infringe on somebody else's freedom, it's not even conditional. Those who make conditions are the chain-wielders who dangle freedom by the reins of its antonyms. They're those to whom "freedom is not free," by which they mean to say -- you're not.

Unquestionably, the way the phrase may have been intended -- the way Martin Luther King Jr. supposedly said it when he was hauled off to jail in Birmingham, the way it's inscribed on the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C. -- is to point out that sometimes there's a price to pay to preserve what we cherish or to claim what we're owed.

Those soldiers in Normandy's sands died protecting civilization. King and countless civil rights activists died claiming the right they'd been denied for three centuries. A price was paid for freedom's sake, but never to diminish the value of freedom itself, let alone to use freedom to diminish that of others ...

Patriotism or Pablum?

Got this in my e-mail inbox yesterday:

In September of 2005, a social studies schoolteacher from Arkansas did something not to be forgotten. On the first day of school, with permission of the school superintendent, the principal, and the building supervisor, she took all of the desks out of the classroom. The kids came into first period, they walked in; there were no desks. They obviously looked around and said, "Where's our desks?"

The teacher said, "You can't have a desk until you tell me how you earn them."

They thought, "Well, maybe it's our grades."

"No," she said.

"Maybe it's our behavior."

And she told them, "No, it's not even your behavior."

And so they came and went in the first period, still no desks in the classroom. Second period, same thing. Third period. By early afternoon television news crews had gathered in the class to find out about this crazy teacher who had taken all the desks out of the classroom. The last period of the day, the instructor gathered her class.

They were at this time sitting on the floor around the sides of the room. She said, "Throughout the day no one has really understood how you earn the desks that sit in this classroom ordinarily. Now I'm going to tell you."

She went over to the door of her classroom and opened it, and as she did 27 U.S. veterans, wearing their uniforms, walked into that classroom, each one carrying a school desk. And they placed those school desks in rows, and then they stood along the wall. By the time they had finished placing the desks, those kids for the first time I think perhaps in their lives understood how they earned those desks.

Their teacher said, "You don't have to earn those desks. These guys did it for you. They put them out there for you, but it's up to you to sit here responsibly, to learn, to be good students and good citizens, because they paid a price for you to have that desk, and don't ever forget it."

Snopes even says it's a true story. It's almost worse that the event actually happened. That means it's not just some constructed e-mail intended to influence people. Someone actually took the time to try and inculcate kids with an inaccurate worldview. If a teacher of my child tried to pull that kind of crap, I'd pull him out in a New York minute. You can teach and you can honor without scaring kids with tricks like this that don't even make any sense. By this teacher's logic, you could reason that anything we do on a daily basis is only "because they paid a price for you to have that ____". In what way is a soldier fighting in Iraq making it easier for my child to learn here? I'd suggest that it is exactly the opposite. With the amount of money spent on an unjustified and unneeded war, less kids are able to get the best education they could. There have been no wars in my lifetime that helped preserve any rights we hold here.

I understand the sacrifice that our men in uniform have made and do make. But do incessant, trite anecdotes like these honor them in any way? I think it trivializes them. It makes service into a Hallmark greeting or a punchline. Real soldiers wouldn't seek or value this kind of recognition.

When I get an e-mail that begins, "You have to read this", or "Please forward this to everyone you know", or that says that someone is trying to take away the flag, Christmas, guns, etc. [fill in the Right Wing topic of the day] -- I can't delete that e-mail fast enough. Sometimes I wonder what type of people are influenced by this type of manipulation. But it's obvious what type of people are influenced by this. There are 60 million of them. They all voted for Bush. Hopefully in the last 8 years, enough of them have grown a brain and won't make the same mistake. I just quoted this last week, but it deserves repeating: "The wise understand by themselves; fools follow the reports of others".

So, who was this easily-duped reader who sent me this e-mail? Who was this person, despite having known me for a long time, that actually thought that this was something that I'd find poignant or inspiring? I'll tell you. It was a veteran of the first Gulf War. A veteran, to this day, still suffering from PTSD. A person in the middle of an ugly divorce, unable to see his daughters, out of work, and relying on the largess of strangers. Someone who has found it hard to cope in the non-military world, yet harbors no ill will towards those who would put him in harm's way for no reason. Quite the contrary, he finds meaning and comfort in the banal. Who is he? My one and only sibling, my brother. I didn't have the heart to shatter his illusions.

Why I'm Not Patriotic

Why I’m Not Patriotic
by Matthew Rothschild
(In memory of George Carlin.)

It’s July 4th again, a day of near-compulsory flag-waving and nation-worshipping. Count me out.

Spare me the puerile parades.

Don’t play that martial music, white boy.

And don’t befoul nature’s sky with your F-16s.

You see, I don’t believe in patriotism.

It’s not that I’m anti-American, but I am anti-patriotic.

Love of country isn’t natural. It’s not something you’re born with. It’s an inculcated kind of love, something that is foisted upon you in the home, in the school, on TV, at church, during the football game.

Yet most people accept it without inspection.

Why?

For when you stop to think about it, patriotism (especially in its malignant morph, nationalism) has done more to stack the corpses millions high in the last 300 years than any other factor, including the prodigious slayer, religion.

The victims of colonialism, from the Congo to the Philippines, fell at nationalism’s bayonet point.

World War I filled the graves with the most foolish nationalism. And Hitler and Mussolini and Imperial Japan brought nationalism to new nadirs. The flags next to the tombstones are but signed confessions-notes left by the killer after the fact.

The millions of victims of Stalin and Mao and Pol Pot have on their death certificates a dual diagnosis: yes communism, but also that other ism, nationalism.

The whole world almost got destroyed because of nationalism during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The bloody battles in Serbia and Bosnia and Croatia in the 1990s fed off the injured pride of competing patriotisms and all their nourished grievances.

In the last five years in Iraq, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died because the United States, the patriarch of patriotism, saw fit to impose itself, without just cause, on another country. But the excuse was patriotism, wrapped in Bush’s brand of messianic militarism: that we, the great Americans, have a duty to deliver “God’s gift of freedom” to every corner of the world.

And the Congress swallowed it, and much of the American public swallowed it, because they’ve been fed a steady diet of this swill.

What is patriotism but “the narcissism of petty differences”? That’s Freud’s term, describing the disorder that compels one group to feel superior to another.

Then there’s a little multiplication problem: Can every country be the greatest country in the world?

This belief system magically transforms an accident of birth into some kind of blue ribbon.

“It’s a great country,” said the old Quaker essayist Milton Mayer. “They’re all great countries.”

At times, the appeal to patriotism may be necessary, as when harnessing the group to protect against a larger threat (Hitler) or to overthrow an oppressor (as in the anti-colonial struggles in the Third World).

But it is always a dangerous toxin to play with, and it ought to be shelved with cross and bones on the label except in these most extreme circumstances.

In an article called “Patriot Games” in the current issue of Time magazine (July 7), Peter Beinart, late of The New Republic, inspects his navel for seven pages and then throws the lint all around.

“Conservatives are right,” he says. “To some degree, patriotism must mean loving your country for the same reason you love your family: simply because it is yours.”

And then he criticizes, incoherently, the conservative love-it-or-leave-it types.

The moral folly of his argument he himself exposes: “If liberals love America purely because it embodies ideals like liberty, justice, and equality, why shouldn’t they love Canada-which from a liberal perspective often goes further toward realizing those principles-even more? And what do liberals do,” he asks, “when those universal ideals collide with America’s self-interest? Giving away the federal budget to Africa would probably increase the net sum of justice and equality on the planet, after all. But it would harm Americans and thus be unpatriotic.”

This is a straw man if I ever I saw one, but if the United States gave a lot more of its budget to eradicating poverty and disease in Africa and other parts of the developing world, it might actually make us all safer.

At bottom, note how readily Beinart disposes of “liberty, justice, and equality.”

He has stripped patriotism to its vacuous essence: Love your country because it’s yours.

If we stopped that arm from reflexively saluting and concerned ourselves more with “universal ideals” than with parochial ones, we’d be a lot better off.

We wouldn’t be in Iraq, we wouldn’t have besmirched ourselves at Guantanamo, we wouldn’t be acting like some Argentinean junta that wages illegal wars and tortures people and disappears them into secret dungeons.

Love of country is a form of idolatry.

Listen, if you would, to the wisdom of Milton Mayer, writing back in 1962 a rebuke to JFK for his much-celebrated line: “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

Mayer would have none of it. “When Mr. Kennedy spoke those words at his inaugural, I knew that I was at odds with a society which did not immediately rebel against them,” he wrote. “They are the words of totalitarianism pure; no Jefferson could have spoken them, and no Khrushchev could have spoken them better. Could a man say what Mr. Kennedy said and also say that the difference between us and them is that they believe that man exists for the State and we believe that the State exists for man? He couldn’t, but he did. And in doing so, he read me out of society.”

When Americans retort that this is still the greatest country in the world, I have to ask why.

Are we the greatest country because we have 10,000 nuclear weapons?

No, that just makes us enormously powerful, with the capacity to destroy the Earth itself.

Are we the greatest country because we have soldiers stationed in more than 120 countries?

No, that just makes us an empire, like the empires of old, only more so.

Are we the greatest country because we are one-twentieth of the world’s population but we consume one-quarter of its resources?

No, that just must makes us a greedy and wasteful nation.

Are we the greatest country because the top 1 percent of Americans hoards 34 percent of the nation’s wealth, more than everyone in the bottom 90 percent combined?

No, that just makes us a vastly unequal nation.

Are we the greatest country because corporations are treated as real, live human beings with rights?

No, that just enshrines a plutocracy in this country.

Are we the greatest country because we take the best care of our people’s basic needs?

No, actually we don’t. We’re far down the list on health care and infant mortality and parental leave and sick leave and quality of life.

So what exactly are we talking about here?

To the extent that we’re a great (not the greatest, mind you: that’s a fool’s game) country, we’re less of a great country today.

Because those things that truly made us great-the system of checks and balances, the enshrinement of our individual rights and liberties-have all been systematically assaulted by Bush and Cheney.

From the Patriot Act to the Military Commissions Act to the new FISA Act, and all the signing statements in between, we are less great today.

From Abu Ghraib and Bagram Air Force Base and Guantanamo, we are less great today.

From National Security Presidential Directive 51 (giving the Executive responsibility for ensuring constitutional government in an emergency) to National Security Presidential Directive 59 (expanding the collection of our biometric data), we are less great today.

From the Joint Terrorism Task Forces to InfraGard and the Terrorist Liaison Officers, we are less great today.

Admit it. We don’t have a lot to brag about today.

It is time, it is long past time, to get over the American superiority complex.

It is time, it is long past time, to put patriotism back on the shelf-out of the reach of children and madmen.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Patriotism Education

"It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen." -- Aristotle

Arizona, ever the center of enlightened conservative thought, has done it again:

Arizona public schools would be barred from any teachings considered counter to democracy or Western civilization under a proposal endorsed Wednesday by a legislative panel.

Additionally, the measure would prohibit students of the state's universities and community colleges from forming groups based in whole or part on the race of their members, such as the Black Business Students Association at Arizona State University or Native Americans United at Northern Arizona University. Those groups would be forbidden from operating on campus.

The brainchild of Rep. Russell Pearce ...

Pearce, a Mesa Republican, said his target isn't diversity instruction, but schools that use taxpayer dollars to indoctrinate students in what he characterized as anti-American or seditious thinking ...

SB 1108 states, "A primary purpose of public education is to inculcate values of American citizenship. Public tax dollars used in public schools should not be used to denigrate American values and the teachings of Western civilization."

For schools that violate the anti-Western-teachings provision, the bill provides the state superintendent of public instruction with the authority to withhold a portion of state funding.

Rep. John Kavanagh, a member of the Appropriations Committee, said he hopes the measure helps return cultural studies in the state's schools to a "melting pot" model.

"This bill basically says, 'You're here. Adopt American values,' " said Kavanagh, a Fountain Hills Republican. "If you want a different culture, then fine, go back to that culture ..."

It's almost too easy to make fun of Pearce and Kavanagh. The closing quote by Kavanagh is jaw-droppingly offensive and stupid. "American values" -- exactly what does that mean? White, religious, conservative ... I'm sure that's their idea of what it means.


The drive to define and force patriotism is similar to a drive by the Chinese to keep Tibet in line:

China scholars vow patriotism drive for Tibet

Is it more noble to be patriotic than good? Are loyalty oaths going to be a requirement of citizenship? The day that happens is the day that you can kindly have my U.S. citizenship back. Fascism, here we come.

"If I knew something that would serve my country but would harm mankind, I would never reveal it; for I am a citizen of humanity first and by necessity, and a citizen of France second, and only by accident" -- Charles de Montesquieu (French Politician and Philosopher, 1689-1755)

Political Song of the Day

My Political Song of the Day is usually anti-war, environmental or otherwise left-leaning. But I was flipping channels in the car the other day and came upon a country station and heard a song so innane, so misinformed and so perfectly representative of the attitude of a large percentage of Americans that I had to share it with you:

Have You Forgotten? by Darryl Worley

I hear people saying we don't need this war
But, I say there's some things worth fighting for
What about our freedom and this piece of ground
We didn't get to keep 'em by backing down
They say we don't realize the mess we're getting in
Before you start your preaching let me ask you this my friend

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And you say we shouldn't worry 'bout bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

They took all the footage off my T.V.
Said it's too disturbing for you and me
It'll just breed anger that's what the experts say
If it was up to me I'd show it everyday
Some say this country's just out looking for a fight
Well, after 9/11 man I'd have to say that's right

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell
And we vowed to get the one’s behind bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

I've been there with the soldiers
Who've gone away to war
And you can bet that they remember
Just what they're fighting for

Have you forgotten all the people killed?
Yeah, some went down like heroes in that Pennsylvania field
Have you forgotten about our Pentagon?
All the loved ones that we lost and those left to carry on
Don't you tell me not to worry about bin Laden
Have you forgotten?

Have you forgotten?
Have you forgotten?

Have you forgotten ... indeed. Darryl Worley, have your forgotten that 9/11 has nothing to do with Iraq? Have you forgotten that it was George W that forgot about Bin Laden and started a new war, not us? Have you forgotten that meat-headed bravado like your stupid song is why most of the world hates us?

The fact that someone wrote a song like this isn't that big a deal. It's that a vast majority of the NASCAR, bible-belt, pick-up truck, NRA set eats this stuff up as truth that bothers me.

Patriotism

"Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all others because you were born in it." - George Bernard Shaw

Rethinking Patriotism
by Lucinda Marshall
Several months ago when I wrote an essay questioning the appropriateness of military air shows as a form of community-sponsored family entertainment, I received a number of responses. The gist of most of the letters was that the military defends our freedom and without it, I could not write these words. Indeed, I was told that to criticize militarism is unpatriotic and how dare I impugn the honor and integrity of those who serve in the armed forces defending the American way of life.

But what precisely is this American way of life that our military purportedly defends? We live in the richest country in the world, yet unlike other developed countries that have universal health care, tens of millions of people in this country do not have health insurance and our medical care system comes in dead last behind comparable countries. Millions of children go to bed hungry every night and our educational system is leaving far too many children behind. The standard of living of all but the rich has fallen and people are losing their homes. Our energy use and wastefulness is a toxic disgrace.

In the name of all this, we squander trillions of dollars to send our troops to fight a war that was justified by lies. In Iraq we have killed an uncountable number of innocent people and so destroyed the infrastructure of the country that millions of children are starving to death and one in eight children will die before their fifth birthday. Going to school or feeding one’s family is all but impossible and millions have now become refugees living in unspeakable conditions. The result of all this is that violence continues to escalate, more and more people hate our country and the world is a far more dangerous place. And when all is said and done, we bring our wounded warriors home to the squalid conditions of Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

To defend a government that claims these actions in the name of “democracy” is hardly patriotic. At best, it might be construed as nationalism. As George Orwell once put it, “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.”

Indeed in the aftermath of the atrocities that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, in a scene that seemed scripted by Orwell himself, American flags started to appear everywhere–on cars, lapels and babies’ bottoms. That defecating on the flag to which we pledge allegiance could be construed as patriotism should surely have given us pause to wonder if perhaps the true meaning of patriotism has been hijacked.

Clearly what was conveniently forgotten in this unquestioning, reflexive flag-waving is that dissent in the face of tyranny is the ultimate act of patriotism, it is in fact how this country was founded. We Americans are long overdue for a very serious discussion of just what it is that we are defending, which by any definition is a far cry from democracy or freedom.

There is no excuse for putting the interests of our way of life over that of any other country or people and in doing so we only harm ourselves. To continue to misconstrue militarism as defensible in the name of patriotism is bankrupting our country and imperiling the planet, its resources and all of its citizens. If we continue along this path, there will, in the end, be nothing left to defend.

As July 4th approaches, it may well be time to consider whether patriotism and the defense of national borders is in fact an outmoded concept. Instead of Independence Day, perhaps it is time to declare an Interdependence Day and to pledge allegiance as global citizens, to build our strength by nurturing our resources rather than plundering them, by nurturing all of the world’s citizens, especially the young. Most of all, it is time to pledge to end the wanton destruction of the planet and the politics of hatred and greed that divide us.

Have we reached the point where patriotism is just a quaint ideal? It seems to serve no useful purpose other than to herd the "sheeple". Patriotism attaches a moral justness to the nation that it doesn't deserve. Maybe patriotism isn't dead. But the way in which Republicans define it, it is. Patriotism isn't something that is measured to determine your level of commitment to the country in which you live.


I know it's probably not right but I'm usually embarrassed when I see overt signs of patriotism -- whether it be a bunch of ribbons on a car, too many flags on your house or just the way someone talks. Mostly it's because I don't feel that they really understand what patriotism is. Some are overly patriotic because they served in military and they don't want to feel that their service was in vain. Others are patriotic because they have a very low sense of self and the only way that they have any pride is through a group. Hell, I've seen both of those just in my own family.

I'm not trying to be a downer, but I'd just like to see a few people remember the real reason for the holiday -- to commemorate our actual Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain Inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness ...". It's not to celebrate the military. There are enough other holidays to do that. I get it -- "Support the troops" -- blah, blah blah. I'm sure the troops are starting to see it's a bunch of bullshit. These so-called patriotic types that keep sending them overseas for endless periods of time for pointless wars are not "supporting the troops". If we want to prove we support them, then bring them home.

I'd even be happy if people just enjoyed their families, cooking out and baseball on the 4th. To me, that's way more American than honoring a gun or tank.

"The time is fast approaching when to call a man a patriot will be the deepest insult you can offer him. Patriotism now means advocating plunder in the interest of the privileged classes of the particular State system into which we have happened to be born." - Tolstoy

"Patriotism means unqualified and unwavering love for the nation, which implies not uncritical eagerness to serve, not support for unjust claims, but frank assessment of its vices and sins, and penitence for them." - Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Rumsfeld

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." -- Samuel Johnson

Johnson was purported to have been referring to those who use patriotism falsely or as a crutch. Patriotism in and of itself isn't necessarily bad. It may be silly, though, since none of us really own anything. We're just temporary stewards. In a thousand years, will it really matter whether we were patriotic? How we cared for our planet and each other will end up being a lot more important than whether we cared about some arbitrary border.

To be sure, Johnson's quote is an often misused one. But I thought it fitting to describe the ridiculous posturing of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld this past week. Anyone that criticizes our administration's handling of the Iraq or Afghanistan wars are "self-defeating pessimists". Rumsfeld compared the Iraqi war to the war against Nazi Germany. Those that would critize now are just like those that appeased Germany, he intimates.


In an unintentional bit of candor, he complained of the "real problem" being that the media tells "lies" and "myths" when reporting the war. Now that's not very nice, Donald ... criticizing FOX News like that.

Some other tasty nuggets:

"What bothers me the most is how clever the enemy is ... "

"They are actively manipulating the media in this country ..."

"They can lie with impunity ..."

"The enemy lies constantly — almost totally without consequence ..."

"Actively manipulating the media", "lie with impunity", "lies constantly ... without consequence" -- Wow. If that is not the pot calling the kettle black, then I don't know what is. I think those three are the first three chapters of Karl Rove's political playbook.

Rumsfeld complains ...

The secretary's ghastly speech ...

July 4th

"... What? the land of the free?
Whoever told you that is your enemy?" -- Rage Against the Machine

July 4th reminds us of what was going on in the heads of our founders when they established this country. Like an independent judiciary:

Did Bush Commit War Crimes?

Those that love this country would respect the checks and balances supposedly inherent in our system. Not the Republicans. Senator Lindsey Graham feels the need to "rein it in" (Supreme Court). They feel that the Geneva Convention should not apply to the U.S.:

Gonzales, top Republicans anticipate law authorizing Gitmo military commissions

But it doesn't end with just crippling our judiciary and ignoring international law. It extends to the President consciously and openly ignoring our own laws:

Signing Away the Constitution

" ... more than 100 signing statements containing over 500 constitutional challenges President Bush has added to new laws passed by the Congress -- many times more than any of his predecessors.

While he has never vetoed a law, many constitutional scholars say the president is, in effect, exercising a "line item veto" by giving himself authority to waive parts of laws he doesn't like.

The practice has infuriated members of Congress in both parties because it threatens to diminish their power. They consider it an assault on the notion that the constitution establishes the United States' three branches of government -- legislative, judicial, and executive -- as co-equal ..."

Chris Durang has a great column on Huffington Post about how the right has hijacked July 4th and patriotism through history:

July 4th -- Now and in the '50's

"... Starting around the time of the Vietnam war, and the protests against that war, the flag was claimed by the conservative, pro-Vietnam war people as Their Flag. They hijacked that symbol so it represented their point of view. If you loved America and loved the flag, you supported your country whenever they said it was time to go to war. Criticizing the war was seen as disloyal ..."

Abraham Lincoln once said:

"I like to see a man proud of the place in which he lives. I like to see a man live so that his place will be proud of him."

Bush and this administration may be proud of America but America should not be proud of them. History will mark the true patriots of this generation as Jack Murtha, Cindy Sheehan, etc. and those that weren't afraid to speak up when they saw our flag being trampled on by those who don't respect the rights that this country were established on. These Mayberry Machiavellians in the administration are so worried about desecration of the flag that they forget what it actually represents.

What does it matter that we have these documents and these institutions if the government will just bypass them? We have a government that has mistaken nationionalism for patriotism, suppresion of rights for security. I'll fly my flag again when this country is not hijacked by the Right. When "one nation" has meaning again.