In comments to an early post, Timmer recently said that judging from my statements, I had clearly not done any time in the military. I've gotten this sort of reaction before in blog discussions. Ironically, I have been in the military as have many of my most ardently anti-Bush friends.
There's something about this sort of comment that I find troubling. The message I keep hearing from people is that there's some sort of litmus test for being "a true American" and "belonging here." People need to pass some narrowly defined citizenship test based on patriotic zeal. My own feelings on this is that everyone "belongs" wherever they were born (if not elsewhere as well), whether that be in America or abroad. These people who claim that you have to be patriotic, pro-military or from the "heartland" in order to be a true American have gotten things ass-backwards. Patriotism doesn't trump belonging. Rather, it's the other way around. Belonging to one's land, community, and point in history actually trumps country. "Country" could disappear tomorrow and we'd all still belong here.
To put this in more philosophical terms, patriotism is only good in so-far as a country participates in "the good." Seen in this light, patriotism isn't really good (or bad) at all, since it derives these qualities from something higher. Likewise, our sense of basic dignity as people isn't derived from the laws or institutions that aim to reflect this dignity. Timmer implies that there's something about being in the military (courage? fortitude?) that especially qualifies a person for full citizenship. I would argue that our society boasts many people of courage. A teacher willing to work in a dangerous section of town in order to help disadvantaged youth possesses courage--and probably faces much more physical danger everyday than 99% of the people in the military. No one should imply that I or anyone else do not belong or are not qualified to enter discussions about what's happening here.
7 comments:
People believe that I am pro Republican and Pro Bush because I served so long in the military.
People have been led to believe that supporting the Republicans and Bush is patriotic.
People need to start thinking and stop following.
Do you also believe that it is silly to require that the Commander In Chief be someone who has served in combat and that serving in combat somehow makes you more fit to make foreign policy decisions?
I for one, Glen, do think it's silly to demand that all presidents have former service, but I also think it's hypocritical for a president who has never served himself in a war call himself a "war president," stand on an air force carrier in a military jacket, and in other ways posture himself as a general who's led troops in battle when in fact he failed to show up for guard duty, and kept himself as far away from war as he could.
Every American has a right to an opinion. Unfortunately for the possible success of Bush's war plans, though, there are many, many Americans who support his wars but refuse to serve in the military. As a result, the military is nearly broken and over 22,000 soldiers are currently stop-lossed, unable to leave the "voluntary" army because there aren't enough soldiers to replace them. My husband is one such soldier. His contract has expired, yet he's still in Afghanistan and he will be until the middle of February. If a few Bush supporters got away from their computers, went down to the recruiting office and signed up for service, my husband and other soldiers like him could finally come home. We've got a chickenhawk president being followed by an army of chickenhawks here at home. There's no way his wars are sustainable unless his followers join up, unless of course we go back to a draft, which might be a very good idea...
A person's life-experiences will prepare them for leadership, but it strikes me as myopic to think that military experience is the only possible character-building experience that is available. I have known some service members who were truly inspired by service to their country. On the other hand, a lot of people in the military (from what I saw when I was in) probably stay in the service for less laudable reasons: e.g., because of the attraction of socialized benefits, lack of marketable job skills, easy access to foreign prostitutes, and a job where they won't get fired in spite of their alcoholism.
Million Dollar Haggis Tackles 007
Million Dollar Haggis Tackles 007 Academy Award-nominated writer Paul Haggis has been hired to do a rewrite of Casino Royale, Sony and MGM's upcoming 21st installment in the James Bond film franchise, according ...
i checked out your blog and i say... not too shabby ..lol.. care to do me the favour and check out mine about dui legal help .. lemme know what you think. Amanda
If we were truly patriotic we would have never reelected Bush in the first place. Patriotism isn't commander and chiefism. We would have voted on the basic principles of are government that has made it work for so long. Checks and Balances. The Republicans had control of the House and Senate a conservative Judicial Branch. One would only have hoped that a Check would be placed in the Presidential office. Anyways that’s my thought.
Re 17's comment: I think the meme that liberal policies are patriotic, while clever, has shown the extent to which the right still sets the parameters of discourse. Why should patriotism be an issue? Why should truth, justice, and love of our fellow man be any better when draped in a certain nation's flag?
Post a Comment