10

A lesson which needs repeating from Mark Twain.

Posted by $ AJAshinoff 11 years, 7 months ago to Education
29 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

"My kind of loyalty was loyalty to one's country, not to its institutions or its officeholders. The country is the real thing, the substantial thing, the eternal thing; it is the thing to watch over, and care for, and be loyal to; institutions are extraneous, they are its mere clothing, and clothing can wear out, become ragged, cease to be comfortable, cease to protect the body from winter, disease, and death." - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by DrZarkov99 11 years, 7 months ago
    "Country" is open to interpretation. For Americans it represents the principles of individual freedom of the Founders, not a geographic location. If that societal condition changed to a Fascist state, suppressing the rights of the populace, would it be the same "country?"

    What we're seeing in the Middle East is loyalty to tribe. Most of the world has never moved beyond tribalism, so their "country" is determined by the extent and location of the tribe. Given free rein, even well-established European countries could easily break up into tribalist regions (Catalonia, in Spain, is on the verge of this now).

    Since America is a conglomerate of "tribes" too diverse for any one to dominate, we've developed a collective sense of "country" unique in history. Part of our failing internationally is that we've ignored this seminal difference in our world view. Trying to export our culture too aggressively into the tribalist cultures of the rest of the world is a dead end, as tribal leaders see our non-tribe culture as a threat, and will resist us with all their will.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 7 months ago
      Our mistake was herding natives onto reservations where they maintained their tribal identity. They should have been assimilated along with all the others who have come here. They are legally separate nations inside the US. This will end up being the spark that causes final balkanization. Some will be on tribal lines (Hispanic - across the south from Texas to California) and some on regional lines (south-east, north-east, mid-west, Rocky Mountain West, north west). The other possibility would be the large cities might be circumcised from the rural areas.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years, 7 months ago
        Yup, but again... politics. It's difficult to assimilate after all the animosity generated by the various conflicts between the tribes and the US settlers.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • -1
      Posted by Hiraghm 11 years, 7 months ago
      "What we're seeing in the Middle East is loyalty to tribe. Most of the world has never moved beyond tribalism,"

      Most mammals have never moved beyond walking on all-fours. Most humans have never moved beyond eating other life-forms; most humans have never moved beyond procreation via bisexual reproduction.

      Few wolves have moved beyond pack-ism... if that makes my point any clearer.

      Few cows have moved beyond herd-ism.

      America is not a conglomeration of diverse tribes. It was once one tribe, but multiculturalism has balkanized us. The very thing you praise as a virtue is one of the seeds of our destruction.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 11 years, 7 months ago
    What does this mean? It sounds nice, but the actual content is not just vacuous, but dangerous. Apart from its institutions, what is a country? The land? Someone here was touting the anniversary of "America the Beautiful." Big mountains, open skies, fruits and grains.... That song and Twain's paragraph both come from Hegelian Idealism which attaches mystical importance the "country" (land) apart from its institutions.

    What is a nation apart from its constitution (small-c), the cultures of its inhabitants, their laws, languages, technologies and tools, their poems and musics, their modes of education and learning, the ways they transmit their cultures over times and across spaces - by war? or by trade?

    A nation _is_ the sum total of its institutions and that is a complex, changing interplay of factors and forces. You can analyze the sum and decide if it is pro-life or anti-life, pro man-qua-man or against that. Absent those creations of human action, a nation is just empty land, open skies, running waters, ...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ puzzlelady 11 years, 7 months ago
      A nation is an advanced evolutionary stage of unification of its inhabitants, from the earliest tribal/clan groupings of people held together by a common need for survival. The land (country) is foremost in what they need for raising their food and accommodating their settlements. Nomads need more land to follow their herds as the weather changes. So fertile land is paramount, and groups will fight over territory with an unyielding fierceness. Humans are no different from animals in following this instinct.

      Why do invaders invade to take land from the natives? First for resources on top of the land, and then for resources discovered underground. Those who hold the land by force only later develop a unifying culture, all the trimmings of art and science, language, complex rules and laws enforced by authority or consent (extensions of the power of the original tribal chief). Institutions build up like moss on a rock or vines on a tree. Yes, they are "creations of human action" that bind society towards a shared purpose, until they are outgrown and no longer adequate to serve.

      Change always brings turmoil, but unless a large part of the population decides to leave and find a better place, as they did historically but have now run out of places to flee to, it is the land on which survival can be provided that remains the starting point. This insistence on land may get sugarcoated with beautiful idealisms or with claims of prior possession, but strip away the slogans and it all comes back to: "We have to eat."

      We swathe loyalty to the land in emotional language: the fatherland, the motherland, and now the homeland. See how powerful these words are, that in the name of homeland security we allow our freedoms to be curtailed and our humanity to be brutalized. It no longer occurs to us that other peoples may feel protective of their homelands and will resist invaders and aggressors as passionately as we do.

      Refugees (including my family) prize life above land and will seek safer places at great risk. Why do immigrants (legal and illegal) swarm to America? Because America has land on which survival can be preserved and lives improved, thanks to generations of Americans who have built up a society in which the majority can make their lives count. Land, plus ideals. But the land comes first.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jlc 11 years, 7 months ago
        Poetically spoken and well founded in the reality of "We have to eat." But I think that - even as you describe it - it is not the land per se but the culture on the land that makes a nation a place where survival could be preserved.

        If arbitrarily advanced space bats vacuumed up the inhabitants, buildings, and infrastructure of the US and of a comparable chunk of, say, Russia and then spewed us back out in the opposite geographic locations, the US and Russia would not have their cultures conflated simply because they were on different soil.

        So I think that while, right now, having 'some soil, some arable soil' is an integral part of a Land, it is not the essential part of a Land.

        Jan
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 11 years, 7 months ago
          Space bats? :)

          I would contend that the returned folks would have their values influenced heavily by the abundance or lack of natural resources. Why would anyone stakeout land that held no potential value for growth, minerals, or water? Wouldn't laws, rules and even the conduct of individuals be dictated in whole or in part by their private holding of such resources?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ jlc 11 years, 7 months ago
            Not just Space Bats, but Arbitrarily Advanced Space Bats (complements of SM Sterling's books). A new reformulation of deux ex machina for whenever you need it. Them. Whatever.

            Of course you are correct, but I believe you miss my point: If one holds all of the other variables steady except for the 'hunk o'dirt' aspect then one can evaluate the role of said dirt. I think that having something that fills the "We have to eat" role is essential (potentially, in the future this role could be filled by direct matter transformers) so that in our current reality Some land (arable) is necessary. But the physical location of the land is not what is worthy of loyalty.

            Jan
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years, 7 months ago
    "As one drives through the bushveldt of East Africa it is easy to spot herds of baboons grazing on the ground. But not by looking at the ground. Instead you look up and spot the lookout, an adult male posted on a limb of a tree where he has a clear view all around him — which is why you can spot him; he has to be where he can see a leopard in time to give the alarm. On the ground a leopard can catch a baboon. . .but if a baboon is warned in time to reach the trees, he can out-climb a leopard.

    The lookout is a young male assigned to that duty and there he will stay, until the bull of the herd sends up another male to relieve him.

    Keep your eye on that baboon; we’ll be back to him.
    ...
    "The simplest form of moral behavior occurs when a man or other animal fights for his own survival. Do not belittle such behavior as being merely selfish. Of course it is selfish. . .but selfishness is the bedrock on which all moral behavior starts and it can be immoral only when it conflicts with a higher moral imperative. An animal so poor in spirit that he won’t even fight on his own behalf is already an evolutionary dead end; the best he can do for his breed is to crawl off and die, and not pass on his defective genes.

    "The next higher level is to work, fight, and sometimes die for your own immediate family. This is the level at which six pounds of mother cat can be so fierce that she’ll drive off a police dog. It is the level at which a father takes a moonlighting job to keep his kids in college — and the level at which a mother or father dives into a flood to save a drowning child. . .and it is still moral behavior even when it fails.

    "The next higher level is to work, fight, and sometimes die for a group larger that the unit family — an extended family, a herd, a tribe — and take another look at that baboon on watch; he’s at that moral level. I don’t think baboon language is complex enough to permit them to discuss such abstract notions as “morality” or “duty” or “loyalty” — but it is evident that baboons DO operate morally and DO exhibit the traits of duty and loyalty; we see them in action. Call it “instinct” if you like — but remember that assigning a name to a phenomenon does not explain it.

    "But that baboon behavior can be explained in evolutionary terms. Evolution is a process that never stops. Baboons who fail to exhibit moral behavior do not survive; they wind up as meat for leopards. Every baboon generation has to pass this examination in moral behavior; those who bilge it don’t have progeny. Perhaps the old bull of the tribe gives lessons. . .but the leopard decides who graduates — and there is no appeal from his decision. We don’t have to understand the details to observe the outcome; Baboons behave morally — for baboons.

    "The next level in moral behavior higher than that exhibited by the baboon is that in which duty and loyalty are shown toward a group of your kind too large for an individual to know all of them. We have a name for that. It is called “patriotism.”

    "Behaving on a still higher moral level were the astronauts who went to the Moon, for their actions tend toward the survival of the entire race (sic) of mankind. The door they opened leads to hope that h. sapiens will survive indefinitely long, even longer than this solid planet on which we stand tonight. As a direct result of what they did, it is now possible that the human race (sic) will NEVER die."

    - from Robert A. Heinlein's address to the Naval Academy, "The Pragmatics of Patriotism"
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by johnpe1 11 years, 7 months ago
      I grew up with Heinlein before I found Rand, and
      the agreement between their approaches to life, in
      my youthful mind, was very harmonious. Thank
      You for bringing this quote to us, Hiraghm! -- j

      p.s. I just found the entire text, I think ........!
      http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1165294...
      p.p.s. read it -- dated, but great. Thanks Again!

      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Hiraghm 11 years, 7 months ago
        You're welcome. I just created a post entitled "Heroism" which links to a Heinlein story called, "No Bands Playing, No Flags Flying". You might like it, as well.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 11 years, 7 months ago
    Mark Twain once said to a senator "suppose you are a senator and then suppose you are an idiot, but I repeat my self"!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 11 years, 7 months ago
      He also said,

      "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.”

      "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it."

      Wise American.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 11 years, 7 months ago
    Greetings AJAshinoff,
    To me it means loyalty to an Ideal. E pluribus unum... the coming together of many to embrace a common set of principles. To assimilate into one group, respecting the benefits and principles that the founders in their wisdom provided us. Those basic principles and a culture that once reached a pinnacle that was the envy of Liberty loving people around the world, where peace and prosperity could flourish while those that came here respected those principles and worked hard to fit in and make them work for themselves. This is a a rosy picture, I know, but it is the American Dream and that is what I am loyal to.
    Respectfully,
    O.A.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 11 years, 7 months ago
      Sounds right to me. I share in that view and wish to conserve it for my children.

      I'd add to your definition of the American Dream the knowledge that a persons ambition and handwork will lead to success no matter where he/she started out in life.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 11 years, 7 months ago
    I think it actually goes a little deeper, however. Loyalty can be to an individual or a country, but truly motivating loyalty comes from the principles espoused by that person or country. It is that set of principles laid out by the Founding Fathers that inspire loyalty in me - definitely not the fallible people occupying the various positions of the halls of government.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 11 years, 7 months ago
    Dr. Zarkov99 is partially correct, the area's of the world that countries were put together was first tribal groups, regional, then religious affiliation. Europe is slightly different but along similar lines. You had Clans in geographical areas they inhabited and fought each other just to raise their clan status over another. Language was another larger grouping of the Clans. Language was a very large factor in separating the same ethnic population. It wasn't till the rise of monarchs that dragged by force these groupings together into a nation-state. Many immigrants of that last 100 years to the US who have become citizens see themselves as Americans first and their foreign heritage second as I do. It gives people like myself a sense of origin. Our Representatives and Senators no longer represent their constituents they no longer listen. I believe that we the people will have to change this country in to regions. Yes, I'm talking about secession form the union. Sorry to say that I don't see anyway the US is going to survive as one nation. I'd rather have this happen than live under a Fascist government. If it comes to a Civil War, so be it!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 11 years, 7 months ago
    Old Sam was right on the money. He was a great American writer -- perhaps the greatest, and the depth of his writing isn't always observed by the casual reader. He would toss out some really deep insights that are worked so casually that the reader tends to just say, "uh huh" and go on. No one that I have ever read could point out what's hidden just below the surface better than Mark Twain and yet make you think you were just reading humor.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 11 years, 7 months ago
    Its the dissection of certain words which causes me to call myself 'Conservative' rather than 'Objectivist'.

    When anyone passes on (dies), regardless of afterlife, the ONLY things that persevere are offspring, Nation, and legacy of works. If you care for one - offspring, then the other 'Nation' is something you value since its the one lasting thing you can hope to pass on to future generations in your line.

    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo