Why are Americans so Patriotic?

[repeating integers]

Patriotism only serves to breed distrust between different cultures. We should attempt to unite under one banner and relinquish our imaginary differences rather than enforce and encourage them. Patriotism is dangerous, plain and simple.

hhmmm...no. I rather not because that sounds like a gateway to have a single monolith government/country that spans the globe and I don't want that.

Why not?

Seriously, what are the downsides?

To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.

Hmm... yes, I can definitely see that downside. This is why we must get to work on benevolent (and we'd better make really motherfucking sure they are completely benevolent) computers to govern this theoretical all-encompassing country as quickly as possible. I imagine they'd work better than all the other forms of governance that have been tried...

I don't know the name, but there was some book in the 1980's about two super computers, one in Russia and one in America. They were to protect their countries and ended up enslaving the population to do so. So...... I rather have people run governments, because at least their rule isn't forever, which I can't say the same about computers. Also I have some irrational fear that the computer might turn into the computer from the story, I have no mouth and I must scream.

Yeah, so I imagine we'd have to be veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful when coding said computers. I'm still convinced it would work better than the current best (Democracy).

lol, yes we would have to be "veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful" when build and coding the computer. Also it would be good if it didn't have absolute power and if we had a self destruct switch built in as well.

Well yes... but if you include a self-destruct button, the laws of fiction dictate that the computer will render it useless and take over the world out of spite and disrespect for humans.

True story.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

It's just the vocal minority. Which unfortunately (as always) are far more in the spotlight than most Americans, who plainly don't give a crap.

Sorry, but its NOT the vocal minority. The vocal minority are actually the ones who are NOT patriotic.

 

[C2Ultima]

Why do all non-americans question Amaerica's patriotism?

See what I did there? That's a generalization, which is exactly what you did in the title of this thread

 

[Vault Citizen]

Unfair stereotype. And contradictory to the stereotype that all Americans pretend to be Canadians when they are abroad.

Do any Americans still do that? I heard that was something that happened during the Vietnam war but I don't know if it was something that was continued.

Why do all non-americans question Amaerica's patriotism?

See what I did there? That's a generalization, which is exactly what you did in the title of this thread

Damn you are crafty.

 

[boyvirgo666]

It's just the vocal minority. Which unfortunately (as always) are far more in the spotlight than most Americans, who plainly don't give a crap.

Pretty much this. As an American i dont really like America, I feel the country is going in the wrong direction very quickly for numerous reasons. The freedoms we get are all well and good but they are rapidly vanishing with idiotic laws that just take away more and more of what made this a fairly decent country.

 

[Yoshemo]

We're taught at an early age that if we're not super patriotic and support everything our country does 100%, then we're communist, socialist, fascist, nazi, anarchist, hippie, liberal, evil, terrorists.

 

[CATB320]

What's wrong with being patriotic? Geez, people.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Never use wikipedia as a source. Never.

That's just a silly thing to say. Wikipedia works as a source.

Try telling that to a college professor.

Try considering the reasons instead of just mimicking them. Life is not an academic paper where people should be using more direct sources.

The reason is that anyone can edit Wikipedia. Giving people the freedom to do whatever rarely ends well.

 

[kane.malakos]

It's just the vocal minority. Which unfortunately (as always) are far more in the spotlight than most Americans, who plainly don't give a crap.

Sorry, but its NOT the vocal minority. The vocal minority are actually the ones who are NOT patriotic.

It really depends on your point of view and your definition of patriotism. A lot of people seem to consider patriotism blindly ignoring the faults of America, but I tend to define it differently. I consider myself a patriot, because I care a lot about America, but a lot of people would call me unpatriotic because I criticize many of the directions that we are taking.

 

[jbchillin]

I love my country and will always be proud of it. I find it sad when people don't care about the place they were born and raised. My country has its flaws but in all honesty which country doesn't? In essence i bleed red white and blue and will chant "USA" at any given moment.

 

[kane.malakos]

Never use wikipedia as a source. Never.

That's just a silly thing to say. Wikipedia works as a source.

Try telling that to a college professor.

Try considering the reasons instead of just mimicking them. Life is not an academic paper where people should be using more direct sources.

The reason is that anyone can edit Wikipedia. Giving people the freedom to do whatever rarely ends well.

Your point would work if not for the fact that Wikipedia is heavily, heavily moderated. Seriously, try putting up some inaccurate information and see how long it lasts.

 

[Grey_Focks]

Eh, to be fair, what you're describing isn't really Patriotism, it's Nationalism, which is just an extreme form of the former. I'd say yes, most of us are happy or proud about our home, but we really don't go much beyond that, and we're still more than able to see and point out the flaws, and speak out against our government when they herp-a-derp. It's the vocal minority who tend to get annoying about it.

Oh a similar note, I have to ask....how do you (the rest of the world), judge us in relation to people like Sarah Palin, and the Tea Party? I promise she is in a VAST minority, really, the most of us are nothing like that...

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.

Not disputing your argument (which I mostly agree with), but what exactly did England do to Argentina?

Be among the first to recognise their sovereignty as a nation? Invest heavily in their economy when they most needed it? Lose to their football team due to an illegal handball (and constantly thereafter)? Or defend themselves in the Falkland Islands when the Argentines invaded?

The British Empire did not have a great Human Rights record, but I don't think Argentina is generally included on the list of abuses...

The issue with the Falkland Islands, England has no right being there anymore than they did being in Hong Kong.

Ask that to the people who live there.

The islands were uninhabited when they were discovered, so it was fair game.

When soverignty came into dispute, they even let the islanders vote on who they wanted to be part of.

The British did many terrible things in their colonial days, but the Falklands was not one of them.

"Fair game"? Really? Sounds more like Imperialism to me. Why would a country that is 777.8 miles away from the Faroe Islands, need to go there? Honestly?

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Patriotism only serves to breed distrust between different cultures. We should attempt to unite under one banner and relinquish our imaginary differences rather than enforce and encourage them. Patriotism is dangerous, plain and simple.

hhmmm...no. I rather not because that sounds like a gateway to have a single monolith government/country that spans the globe and I don't want that.

Why not?

Seriously, what are the downsides?

To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.

Hmm... yes, I can definitely see that downside. This is why we must get to work on benevolent (and we'd better make really motherfucking sure they are completely benevolent) computers to govern this theoretical all-encompassing country as quickly as possible. I imagine they'd work better than all the other forms of governance that have been tried...

I don't know the name, but there was some book in the 1980's about two super computers, one in Russia and one in America. They were to protect their countries and ended up enslaving the population to do so. So...... I rather have people run governments, because at least their rule isn't forever, which I can't say the same about computers. Also I have some irrational fear that the computer might turn into the computer from the story, I have no mouth and I must scream.

Yeah, so I imagine we'd have to be veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful when coding said computers. I'm still convinced it would work better than the current best (Democracy).

lol, yes we would have to be "veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful" when build and coding the computer. Also it would be good if it didn't have absolute power and if we had a self destruct switch built in as well.

Well yes... but if you include a self-destruct button, the laws of fiction dictate that the computer will render it useless and take over the world out of spite and disrespect for humans.

True story.

lmao, yep I forgot about that part. Skynet would also probably appear too.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.

Not disputing your argument (which I mostly agree with), but what exactly did England do to Argentina?

Be among the first to recognise their sovereignty as a nation? Invest heavily in their economy when they most needed it? Lose to their football team due to an illegal handball (and constantly thereafter)? Or defend themselves in the Falkland Islands when the Argentines invaded?

The British Empire did not have a great Human Rights record, but I don't think Argentina is generally included on the list of abuses...

The issue with the Falkland Islands, England has no right being there anymore than they did being in Hong Kong.

Ask that to the people who live there.

The islands were uninhabited when they were discovered, so it was fair game.

When soverignty came into dispute, they even let the islanders vote on who they wanted to be part of.

The British did many terrible things in their colonial days, but the Falklands was not one of them.

"Fair game"? Really? Sounds more like Imperialism to me. Why would a country that is 777.8 miles away from the Faroe Islands, need to go there? Honestly?

The Islands didn't belong to anyone, and that was pretty much the 'in thing' at the time. You know. Finding places.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.

Not disputing your argument (which I mostly agree with), but what exactly did England do to Argentina?

Be among the first to recognise their sovereignty as a nation? Invest heavily in their economy when they most needed it? Lose to their football team due to an illegal handball (and constantly thereafter)? Or defend themselves in the Falkland Islands when the Argentines invaded?

The British Empire did not have a great Human Rights record, but I don't think Argentina is generally included on the list of abuses...

The issue with the Falkland Islands, England has no right being there anymore than they did being in Hong Kong.

Ask that to the people who live there.

The islands were uninhabited when they were discovered, so it was fair game.

When soverignty came into dispute, they even let the islanders vote on who they wanted to be part of.

The British did many terrible things in their colonial days, but the Falklands was not one of them.

"Fair game"? Really? Sounds more like Imperialism to me. Why would a country that is 777.8 miles away from the Faroe Islands, need to go there? Honestly?

The Islands didn't belong to anyone, and that was pretty much the 'in thing' at the time. You know. Finding places.

I meant to type Falklands not Faroe Islands, my bad. Anyways, the whole issue should be between Argentina and the Falklands, England has no right to but in between the two places anymore than it does butting in between any issues Hong Kong has with Mainland China.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Patriotism only serves to breed distrust between different cultures. We should attempt to unite under one banner and relinquish our imaginary differences rather than enforce and encourage them. Patriotism is dangerous, plain and simple.

hhmmm...no. I rather not because that sounds like a gateway to have a single monolith government/country that spans the globe and I don't want that.

It sounds like people being more receptive to other cultures. Patriotism breeds distrust.

 

[antigodoflife]

Every country is patriotic, patriotism is a love for your country or the potential for your country. I'm a patriot of my country because environmentally it's one of the best countries in the world, I just don't agree with it's piss-poor excuse of people and their moralities and our politics and policies. It's my patriotic duty to try and fix what I don't like in my country to find my utopia and everyone is the same in different levels of extremities.

Americans are patriotic like anyone else, they on the other hand have an alarming number of Nationalists they agree with what ever their president agree upon even if it's bad, as long as they're in the same major political party, otherwise they protest that their country is heading towards the destruction.

In all honesty, if you're a Republican or Democrat you need to do some soul searching, you're both in the wrong political party, both of which don't even know what they believe in anymore. You should instead look at alternative parties that focus more on as many your beliefs as possible. I myself have not found my political party, all I know is I'm some form of Middle-Left, Economic Social Libertarian, Environmentalist (anyone want to help me discover my political party is more than welcome.)

Individualism is one's most important trait and with it ends Nationalism, which is your problem. Be individual without conforming to indie culture you dirty hipster.