Why are Americans so Patriotic?

[Tiger King]

it might be just an unfair stereotype, but it's generally believed that if you badmouth america, any nearby americans will go up in arms and get very angry, and i'm just wondering why. Just to clarify, i have nothing against america, but i hardly think it's anything to write home about. and don't say that anyone would be that way about their home country, because if someone came up to be and said "hey, england's crap!" i'd just say "yeah, it is a bit"

i think its quite positive.
nothing wrong with aspiring to be number 1.

take what you said
"hey, england's crap!" i'd just say "yeah, it is a bit"
just a bit negative. im not saying get all ultra, nationalistic style, patriotic and start a war over an insult but whats wrong with having an attitude, where you want your country to be of a certain standard?

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

If people in South Korean want to be Patriotic and dislike non South Korean culture, that's their right as South Koreans. If Iceland wanted to be Patriotic and dislike non Icelandic culture, again that is their right. But I digress.

All patriotism does is build more walls and we have a lot of fucking walls in need of destroying at the moment. We shouldn't encourage it. What a person can do and what a person can't do are two completely different things.

I think patriotism is fine as long as it doesn't lead to nonsense

Patriotism always leads to "nonsense".

I was kind of talking about multiculturalism actually. The idea that people should have to accept other cultures is complete nonsense.

Alright, obvious question, why is accepting other cultures complete nonsense? Surely it just makes society more accepting of people and breaks down racial and cultural barriers?

Because it can effect the native culture in a negative way. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying places like Japan shouldn't have Jeans sold there, but it would be weird for them to nationally celebrate Indian Independence day on August 15th.

Also my personal preference is that I like difference races. I think each one has its own attractive qualities and to see them all fade into one big mass would be a aesthetically unpleasing because everybody would just look the same (not like clones but you get the idea). But this is just my personal preference.

 

[Polyintrinsic]

Lots of brain washing from a small age.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

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.

Going along with this, you guys need to realize that the true American isn't the patriotic gun toting redneck.

It's the guy who straight up doesn't care. It's kinda how we're able to go to war with so many countries.

 

[orangeban]

If people in South Korean want to be Patriotic and dislike non South Korean culture, that's their right as South Koreans. If Iceland wanted to be Patriotic and dislike non Icelandic culture, again that is their right. But I digress.

All patriotism does is build more walls and we have a lot of fucking walls in need of destroying at the moment. We shouldn't encourage it. What a person can do and what a person can't do are two completely different things.

I think patriotism is fine as long as it doesn't lead to nonsense

Patriotism always leads to "nonsense".

I was kind of talking about multiculturalism actually. The idea that people should have to accept other cultures is complete nonsense.

Alright, obvious question, why is accepting other cultures complete nonsense? Surely it just makes society more accepting of people and breaks down racial and cultural barriers?

Because it can effect the native culture in a negative way. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying places like Japan shouldn't have Jeans sold there, but it would be weird for them to nationally celebrate Indian Independence day on August 15th.

Also my personal preference is that I like difference races. I think each one has its own attractive qualities and to see them all fade into one big mass would be a aesthetically unpleasing because everybody would just look the same (not like clones but you get the idea). But this is just my personal preference.

But surely multiculturalism stops cultures from molding into one giant soup? Rather than having people conform to the standard culture, they are free to celebrate their own. Though I do see your point, almost. I'm just tired I think.

 

[The_Echo]

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.

This is quite true. Out of my entire high school, which is to say about 1600-ish students, I can only say that one of them could be described as patriotic.

 

[Lethos]

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.

But the people want to be British. They voted to remain British.

 

[KelsieKatt]

There is a reason that every morning, public school kids are made to stand and read the Pledge like we're goddamn Hitler youths.

Actually, they are not FORCED to recite the pledge. The have the right to abstain.

It's certainly doable, although depending on where you live it may be quite difficult and is certainly not for the faint of heart.

I refused to recite the pledge of allegiance when I was in school, I didn't cause a fuss over it or anything, just sat quietly in my seat. However, one of my teachers took huge offense to it and punished me multiple times for doing so and finally brought me down to the principals office hoping to get me expelled, and was finally told she wasn't allowed to do any of this and this was a violation of my rights. My parents have also received numerous phone calls over the years for similar instances and even incredibly stupid cases where all I did was question the purpose of a particular activity we were told to do.

I also got thrown out of a religious school (which my mom enrolled me in because the location was convenient) when I was fairly little because I didn't follow or believe in their religious teachings. Again, I didn't make a big deal out of it, I just asked simple "why?" questions or sat quietly instead of joining in with the group. They were extremely angered by this because I was expected to follow orders to letter and not question any of it, so they threw me out after a few weeks and told me I was a "demon child" directly to my parents before we left.

That said, not every school I've been to was like this and some weren't even phased by my decisions/questions, but I've definitely seen these problems firsthand.

 

[StarsintheBlood]

My mother immigrated to this country from Malaysia because she loved what America stood for. She lived a very restricted life back there, and this was a land of opportunity and freedom. I love the values that this country was built upon also, but we both agree that the politics suck, and none of the coming presidential candidates are at all promising.

America is a young nation, but it's accomplished a lot (though I will attribute a bit of that to it's size), so there is reason to be proud. It has hard working people, lots of diversity, and quality plumbing. Still, I must confess to be considering leaving the U.S., and it does frustrate me to see the direction the country is going.

To put in simple terms- our nation is awesome, our leaders are meddlesome assholes, and it does not surprise me that the world looks at us the way they do. I had a foreign friend of mine tell me that America reminded him of a massive dog- really powerful and loyal to it's home, but young, not too bright, and willing to eat anything. Make of that what you will.

 

[Manji187]

Conditioning and propaganda. Truckloads of the stuff. 24/7.

 

[Vault Citizen]

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.

The difference there is Hong Kong is no longer British where as the people of the Falklands are British citizens (by choice). I'd say protecting one's citizens from an invading force doesn't count as butting in.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

If people in South Korean want to be Patriotic and dislike non South Korean culture, that's their right as South Koreans. If Iceland wanted to be Patriotic and dislike non Icelandic culture, again that is their right. But I digress.

All patriotism does is build more walls and we have a lot of fucking walls in need of destroying at the moment. We shouldn't encourage it. What a person can do and what a person can't do are two completely different things.

I think patriotism is fine as long as it doesn't lead to nonsense

Patriotism always leads to "nonsense".

I was kind of talking about multiculturalism actually. The idea that people should have to accept other cultures is complete nonsense.

Alright, obvious question, why is accepting other cultures complete nonsense? Surely it just makes society more accepting of people and breaks down racial and cultural barriers?

Because it can effect the native culture in a negative way. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying places like Japan shouldn't have Jeans sold there, but it would be weird for them to nationally celebrate Indian Independence day on August 15th.

Also my personal preference is that I like difference races. I think each one has its own attractive qualities and to see them all fade into one big mass would be a aesthetically unpleasing because everybody would just look the same (not like clones but you get the idea). But this is just my personal preference.

But surely multiculturalism stops cultures from molding into one giant soup? Rather than having people conform to the standard culture, they are free to celebrate their own. Though I do see your point, almost. I'm just tired I think.

True, if lets say there are 1 million Kenyans globally and two hundred want to celebrate Indian Independence day, thats fine. I think it only becomes an issue when more than 51% of Kenyans want to celebrate it and forget about Kenyan culture. I think we agree but for different reasons, lol

 

[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.

But the people want to be British. They voted to remain British.

I'm sure if they were under Argentinian rule for just as long, they would want to remain Argentinian. I think that vote has to do more with people not wanting to change.

It's like North Ireland, in that England is sticking its nose where it doesn't belong. Hong Kong could have voted to remain British, but that doesn't change the fact that it's part of (PRC)China.

 

[FFHAuthor]

American Patriotism is different from other nationalities, I feel it's due to the fact that American patriotism and American 'national loyalty' is entirely based upon loyalty to an idea, not a land or leader.

The US Military and Government swear their allegiance and loyalty to the Constitution, not to the President or Congress. We're the only nation in the world whose loyalty oath demands that our soldiers serve and protect an idea, not a land or leader. Even American Patriotism isn't based upon a charismatic leader or a national history or national culture. Germany, Russia, Britain, China, other major nations who have patriots trace that loyalty back to histories, lands, cutlures and shared experiences.

American Patriotism on the 'Left' and the 'Right' holds it's roots in views of the Constitution and what it represents, a common thread for everyone in this country. It's a paradigm shift that the rest of the world cannot comprehend too much. Millions of men and women vowing to die for an idea is far different from being loyal to the Queen, or loyal to Mother Russia, or what have you. We Americans simply view patriotism as different because it stems from a radically different root.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

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.

Well said, sir.

 

[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.

The difference there is Hong Kong is no longer British where as the people of the Falklands are British citizens (by choice). I'd say protecting one's citizens from an invading force doesn't count as butting in.[/qu

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.

The difference there is Hong Kong is no longer British where as the people of the Falklands are British citizens (by choice). I'd say protecting one's citizens from an invading force doesn't count as butting in.

Nope, but applying Colonialism to a part of the world that isn't even near you is "butting in". The Falklands have no right to "belong" to the British anymore than North Ireland does. They are the aftermath of British Imperalism/Colonialism.

 

[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.

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.

My personal opinion is that if we blindly ignore our faults, we cannot improve. We do have our faults, sure... but damn, I love this country. I'm not happy with the direction we are heading right now, but thats only because I care and I want this country to be as great for my children as it was for me.

 

[SilentCom]

It is a bad stereotype. Also, it isn't bad if people are proud of where they are from, unless they go about stomping on other countries...

I'm playing the devils advocate here, why are people from other countries not patriotic about their countries?