Goldberg's musings on patriotism starts with the premise that it a desirable that love for ones country is an unquestionable good that every American should have. I have to admit that I have envied the selfless patriotism that I have observed amongst people of other nationalities. Patriotism that encourages people to dedicate their lives to their country.
There are several reasons why this kind of patriotism is almost entirely absent in the United States whether the person in question be conservative or liberal. The United States is not a country defined by a common ancestry, or common faith. In the United States citizenship is defined by a shared belief in a political document and political philosophy. Further while other countries stress a life a service to Crown, Country, or people, the United States does not. Government is expected serve the individual rather than the other way around.
Originally Americans didn't even think of themselves as Americans, they identified themselves by their states. This type of thinking actually survived the civil war. Patriotism aimed at the federal government was largely the product of government propagandists who were charged with stirring up nationalism in the service of America's participation in World War I. A war whose causes and for which the justification for America's involvement therein remain mysterious to this day.
As Goldberg himself has written progressives latched on to this new patriotism with a passion because they saw it as a vehicle to promote policies that promoted a collective rather than individual good. The height of this impulse was the 60's. Many Americans took Kennedy's exhortation to "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country seriously. Americans faced their demons of racism, sexism, and poverty.
But the conservative movement in the United States strongly rejected the more activist role of government inspired by this new patriotism. Reagan's answer to Kennedy's exhortation was "Are you better off?" From that moment on, the individuals' relationship with the government was almost always defined by the negative. The government wouldn't fight to repair the damage of slavery and segregation. The government wouldn't fight poverty. The government wouldn't protect labor organizers. Unsurprisingly poverty increased, segregation increased, and wages flat lined and began to fall. But an argument could be made that this was returning towards the original intent of the writers' of constitution.
But it developed a new entitled class. Those who were fortunate especially the investor class came to believe that they need not contribute to society at all. As Chaney said of military service during the Vietnam war they had other priorities. But though private charity rose it did not begin to match what was covered from the government. Many like Chaney also did not tithe to the church.
When 9-11 happened Bush exhorted the people to fight terrorism by shopping. It was reflective of how entitled conservatives had become. Bush could not ask them to pay more taxes, accept a draft, ration commodities needed for the war effort, or put the economy on war footing. As a result Bush was forced to field and army which was too small and lacking basic implements of war such as body and vehicle armor. The freedom from any responsibility expected by the wealthiest Americans came at a very high price for our soldiers and the Iraqis.
But even this was within the vision of our founders. But then Bush and Chaney went too far by suggesting that fighting terrorism was our first responsibility and proposing the theory of the unitary executive. For those who claim to be originalist this legal theory was truly ridiculous. It requires one to believe that the founding fathers declared independence because of the tyranny of King George and then turned around and empowered the Presidency with powers beyond the wildest dreams of the King and intended to confer on us citizens far fewer protections than they had under the monarchy. The founding fathers made it clear that their love of their country was very conditional. They demanded liberty or death. I am proud to say that I will not salute a flag of a dictator or give such a person any aid. We are not there yet, but if America chooses this path it will part ways with me.
No comments:
Post a Comment