patriotism 2

Nicholson rejects Rorty’s claim that patriotism should be seen in terms of the Aristotelian mean, instead claiming that it is itself an extreme. One of her reasons for making this claim is that she assumes, perhaps glibly, what I’ve been putting into question, that love of country implies a sense of its superiority, and pretty soon she’s talking about ‘fanatical delusions about the superiority of [one’s] country’ and the terrible things it can lead to.

Yet it seems that, though Nicholson describes ‘country’ as an abstraction, most people don’t see it that way. Certainly not when their country comes under attack, or feels itself subjected to external threat. I think more needs to be done to understand the feelings underlying patriotism. It seems to me that one of the elements of patriotism is simply love of ‘home’, and all that this implies in terms of the familiar and comfortable. If one thinks, for example, of the feelings a person has for his home town, the town of his birth, of his first memories and so on, one can see that love, or attachment, does not necessarily entail a sense of superiority. We may be able to see quite clearly that the town of x is not a beautiful town, or a sophisticated town, or a town that has produced anyone or anything of lasting value, but we may place a special value on it for all that, and we often feel wounded when it comes under verbal attack. In a complicated way it’s a part of us, and we’re a part of it.

I accept though that patriotism is more than simply love of home, and that it’s very much open to abuse and manipulation – the last refuge of the scoundrel. I also accept to some degree that ‘country’ is an abstraction, at least it has always felt that way to me. When in the past I’ve asked myself if I love my country, I’ve never been able to come up with a clear answer, partly because I’m an emigrant and so don’t even have a clear idea of which country is my own, and partly because I can’t clearly define what country is. Landscape, laws, culture, history, institutions, boundaries? Australia in particular has had a long struggle and debate, often self-conscious and cringe-making, about what constitutes Australianness, though it’s often said that Australians abroad are an instantly recognisable cultural type. I can say, with Nicholson, that I love many of the physical beauties of Australia, but I accept that there is beauty of landscape everywhere in the world. As there are laws and institutions elsewhere equally worthy of respect and of defending against attack. I also feel that the down-side of nationalism is a huge worry, and that internationalism is a more worthy ideal. However, arguments by philosophers or dilettantes such as myself that patriotism is ethically dubious and shallow aren’t going to make it go away. Nicholson’s claim that she doesn’t feel patriotic ‘at this point in time’ indicates, I think, that her grievance is more with a particular US administration and its interpretation of the national interest. My own sense of patriotism, such as it is, has always been tempered by the fact that national governments often act in a way I strongly disagree with, though I’ve always made a distinction between national governments and the nation itself, a complex, probably indefinable entity of which any particular government is but a small subset.