Patriotism in America is love of a country that protects my freedoms. Like the old saying goes, I may not like what you say but I will protect your right to say it. If that is gone, so is my country. I find the left uses patirotism as a nagative and associates it with blind faith like they have with their leaders.

Objective patriotism seems compatible. Love and pride of country need not be blind.

I heard I'm Proud to be an American all the time. My wife is ex-Air Force, and we live next to Patrick AFB.

This is a question that different people will answer correctly in opposite ways, depending on word definitions.

If patriotism means to you love for a government, then it is indeed opposite to belief in freedom (and probably to objectivism).
If patriotism means to you love for a place or people, it is quite compatible with objectivism, but will often go against the government.

I'm not wedded to one definition or the other, but when someone expresses "patriotism" in a way that could be either version, I ask questions.

The notion of American exceptionalism, though, has always been misguided in my view. I believe in capitalist exceptionalism, and would like to see capitalism take root anywhere and everywhere.

Education then and now are two diametrically opposed things. Logic and reasoning have been replaced with need, feelings and emotions. Now they attack you (generally using words like selfish and racist) instead of your logic, which makes sense to them since they cannot think logically.

Indeed. There is a trend towards less freedom and fewer brave. More partisan, pablum, propaganda parasites.

I suppose that, before the United States existed,
there might be some reason to be patriotic towards
one's own country, as in the case of the Hundred
Years' War; French or English, the people were
going to be under tyranny; and I guess there was
a slight chance that a foreign tyrant would be
worse,being more likely to think of the subjects
of the conquered country as inferior, etc.; so,
given the medieval situation, it was slightly bet-
ter to be under your own tyrant than a foreign
one. (Still, the British judicial system is better
than the French--innocent until proven guilty,
etc.).
But, for an American, patriotism is patriotism
because of the ideas upon which this country
was founded;"That, to secure these rights, gov-
ernments are instituted among men..."

The notion that conscription is justifiable on
the grounds of "service to one's country", is a
sickening attempt to abrogate the rights of man.

As to this being a contradiction of Objectiv-
ism, far from it; Ayn Rand was very patriotic to
this country, often extolling it as the greatest
on earth. She made a remark once about peop-
ple who failed to distinguish between "rational
patriotism and blind, racist chauvinism".

Hear hear

I am feeling the confusion. In some ways I am extremely patriotic. It feels particularly dissonant when I am supposed to be singing "the land of the free and home of the brave".

Some very good comments here, and a very good subject.

I think that patriotism is, or has become, overrated. Maybe it always was. I use the "qualifier", I think, because, as OA said, "the dictionary definition is vague and wanting": "love that people feel for their country : Love for or devotion to one's country". By today's standards this would imply a blind dedication of one's life to the support of the country and by all accounts this is the way it is used and normally understood. If you refuse to stand and recite the pledge of allegiance you are being unpatriotic. (I prefer to remind people that a country that is worth pledging allegiance to needs no pledge of allegiance.)

But from Francisco's money speech we know that to love something is to understand it's nature. This is the step that is forgotten or deemed unnecessary. The Germans under Hitler were said to be patriotic for supporting and/or fighting for their country. I find it hard to believe that more than a few actually understood the nature of Nazi Germany.

If the word was hijacked like so many others it would be difficult to say when so, perhaps, it was coined with the purpose of blurring lines with the sole purpose of manipulating people. Either way, it should not be confused with being an American, and what it means to be an American.

I was browsing through my Ayn Rand books looking for some unrelated info the other day and got caught up in the last chapter of "Philosophy: Who Needs It" called "Don't let it go". Worth re-reading for everybody. She talks about sense of life and specifically the American sense of life. IE; what it means to be an American. Too much to fit here but this paragraph seemed particularly fitting;
"A European is disarmed in the face of a dictatorship: he may hate it, but he feels that he is wrong and, metaphysically, the State is right. An American would rebel to the bottom of his soul. But that is all that his sense of life can do for him. It cannot solve his problems."

Now, re-think what you know of the riots in Baltimore. Generations living under the thumb of the state. More and more and more intrusion into their lives. More and more controls. They don't know why, or how to fix any of it. They have generations of conditioning and yet they resist. They Will Not Live Under A King! I think that Ayn Rand would say that that is a uniquely American sense of life. Even if they are completely bass-akward about it.

This discussion seems to be centered or limited to the understanding of patriotism is America. But as America is losing its “exceptionalism,” and patriotism is lauded by the same people that are responsible for the destruction of America, perhaps we should consider the meaning of “patriotism” historically and globally. And historically, patriotism has been interwoven with nationalism – my country, right or wrong, and defined by the borders of the country or its interests (which often reach out far outside the borders). I would propose that this concept is instinctive, dating back to prehistoric times and development of man’s religions. The pagan concept of god has been tied to a physical location, item or geographical feature – the god of the river, the god of the mountain, the gods on Olympus. People have revered and submitted to the gods of location, but only while being at that location. If they moved, they acquired new gods and felt no allegiance to the old ones. The Hebrews were the innovators who created a portable god, but tens of thousands of years of practice made its way into our spinal cords. Thus, when our illustrious leaders call out for patriotism, beware – those are calls toward your very basic instincts; reason has no place here.

Agreed O.A.

Hello philosophercat,
Quite so!
Nationalism seems to be blind allegiance and devotion to a piece of dirt... to land... not ideals. I would not see this as true patriotism, just emotional attachment to a homeland.
Respectfully,
O.A.

Good post. Regarding your last question, I think the answer has to be no, because a significant number of people, and I think I would include Obama and his ilk, consider it wrong, or, in "modern" terminology, politically incorrect to be patriotic. I don't think you could define it in any way that would satisfy them and have them utter the words "I'm patriotic". And even in this thread, there are those who point out, and I agree, that true patriotism is a devotion or respect for the original founding ideas of America, rather the the "blind faith" version.

Hello DB,
Interesting question. I'm sure many also share a devotion to country, but I would find that alone wanting. There are many fine historical achievements and figures of their respective countries, but I would suggest their patriotism is more nostalgic or oriented as a devotion to their fellow citizens still desirous, hopeful of a better future. If it is to their governments then they are patriotic to governance in ways I would find objectionable. No doubt those that benefit at the expense of others because of local politics are more devoted. Of course if one is born to a more paternalistic government, what frame of reference do they have? To the degree that many from these nations still wish to immigrate here I believe they demonstrate a lack of patriotism and an enlightenment that redirects their devotions and thus eventual patriotism.
Of course once here, they may find we no longer fully live up to the ideals they desire, though it may still be better than from whence they came.

Respectfully,
O.A.
Edit: P.S. I believe philosophercat has put his finger on this question. To a degree what these citizens of other nations exhibit could be colored by nationalism. How does one weigh the level of each? Are we not experiencing a great deal of this same confusion here?

Your key term is "citizens" which denotes a person born here or who became a citizen by taking an oath to uphold the principles of the Constitution. the presumption is then that all citizens have agreed to uphold the constitution as a personal value and that should make them patriots but most take the oath without the emotional commitment that comes from identifying why these principles are important for their life. Thus patriotism is the personal commitment to the values of the Constitution by a citizen in action.

I would like to distinguish between patriotism and nationalism to get a handle on this debate. Nationalism in holding the country as it is as a value. Patriotism is holding the values the country stands for as a value. I served in the Army and was proud to take the oath of allegiance to the Constitution as an expression of my highest values in politics. The expression in action of the values represented by the US is patriotism and I celebrate the opportunity to represent with pride my values in my country.
there are nationalist every where with no value higher than corrupt cultures. Patriots stood at Lexington and Concord not for a government but the idea of individual sovereignty. That is worth fighting for. thanks John Locke.

The very fact that there is SO MUCH discussion about what's happened to the country, and so many groups of people working on that -means it is NOT lost. Change will come from the ground up. What's going on with the Feds is the last thing we'll see changed.

Hear, hear. And what made that possible? They were all highly educated in the Classics and Enlightenment ideas and skills of reasoning. Where are young people getting that kind of education today? BTW - most of them intensely studied The Port Royal logic, i.e. Logic and the Art of Reasoning by Arnaud and Nicole - definitely a book worth knowing.

To make a distinction between nationalism and patriotism: nationalism is devotion to a geographical area - 'my country, right or wrong'; patriotism is devotion to certain principles. Does that make sense?

My patriotism if for the country that was America and is almost lost today. It stands for my desire to bring back that lost land. Patriotism for this America, and this government would be a joke.

I think one way to restate your question is to ask the following: where do your loyalties lie? Do they lie with the principles established by our Founding Fathers and the Constitution, or with what this nation has been morphed into by a century or more of political chicanery?

I believe in the principles our nation were founded on: liberty of thought, protection of personal rights, and freedom to pursue ideas. My patriotism extends to those. It does not extend to those who currently occupy the seat of government.

I believe it is a mischaracterization or misnomer to state that one is patriotic to one's country, because when you ask anyone to explain, they never talk about lines on a map, but ideals. Quantify the ideals you have in mind and whether or not you identify with them as being "American" ideals one can be "patriotic" to and you will answer your own question.

hear hear

Excellent points. What founding ideas does a Frenchman, or German or Chinese feel patriotic to?

"They were patriots for ideas. When it came down to it they were fighting for self ownership and everything that goes with it."

hear hear