patriotism

[Guest guest]

Patriotism and the Fourth of July

By Howard Zinn

AlterNet

04 July 2006

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/070506C.shtml

 

The Declaration of Independence gives us the true meaning of a patriot,

someone who supports a country's ideals, not necessarily its government.

 

In celebration of the Fourth of July there will be many speeches about

the young people who " died for their country. " But those who gave their

lives did not, as they were led to believe, die for their country; they

died for their government. The distinction between country and

government is at the heart of the Declaration of Independence, which

will be referred to again and again on July 4, but without attention to

its meaning.

 

The Declaration of Independence is the fundamental document of

democracy. It says governments are artificial creations, established by

the people, " deriving their just powers from the consent of the

governed, " and charged by the people to ensure the equal right of all to

" life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. " Furthermore, as the

Declaration says, " whenever any form of government becomes destructive

of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it. " It

is the country that is primary-the people, the ideals of the sanctity of

human life and the promotion of liberty.

 

When a government recklessly expends the lives of its young for crass

motives of profit and power, while claiming that its motives are pure

and moral, ( " Operation Just Cause " was the invasion of Panama and

" Operation Iraqi Freedom " in the present instance), it is violating its

promise to the country. War is almost always a breaking of that promise.

It does not enable the pursuit of happiness but brings despair and

grief.

 

Mark Twain, having been called a " traitor " for criticizing the U.S.

invasion of the Philippines, derided what he called " monarchical

patriotism. " He said: " The gospel of the monarchical patriotism is: 'The

King can do no wrong.' We have adopted it with all its servility, with

an unimportant change in the wording: 'Our country, right or wrong!' We

have thrown away the most valuable asset we had - the individual's right

to oppose both flag and country when he believed them to be in the

wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it, all that was really

respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism. "

 

If patriotism in the best sense (not in the monarchical sense) is

loyalty to the principles of democracy, then who was the true patriot?

Theodore Roosevelt, who applauded a massacre by American soldiers of 600

Filipino men, women and children on a remote Philippine island, or Mark

Twain, who denounced it? Today, U.S. soldiers who are dying in Iraq and

Afghanistan are not dying for their country; they are dying for Bush and

Cheney and Rumsfeld. They are dying for the greed of the oil cartels,

for the expansion of the American empire, for the political ambitions of

the president. They are dying to cover up the theft of the nation's

wealth to pay for the machines of death. As of July 4, 2006, more than

2,500 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq, more than 8,500 maimed or

injured. With the war in Iraq long declared a " Mission Accomplished, "

shall we revel in American military power and insist that the American

empire will be beneficent?

 

Our own history is enough to make one wary. Empire begins with what was

called, in our high school history classes, " westward expansion, " a

euphemism for the annihilation or expulsion of the Indian tribes

inhabiting the continent, in the name of " progress " and " civilization. "

It continues with the expansion of American power into the Caribbean at

the turn of the 20th century, then into the Philippines, and then

repeated Marine invasions of Central America and long military

occupations of Haiti and the Dominican Republic. After World War II,

Henry Luce, owner of Time, LIFE, and Fortune, spoke of " the American

Century, " in which this country would organize the world " as we see

fit. " Indeed, the expansion of American power continued, too often

supporting military dictatorships in Asia, Africa, Latin America, the

Middle East, because they were friendly to American corporations and the

American government. The record does not justify confidence in Bush's

boast that the United States will bring democracy to Iraq.

 

Should Americans welcome the expansion of the nation's power, with the

anger this has generated among so many people in the world? Should we

welcome the huge growth of the military budget at the expense of health,

education, the needs of children, one fifth of whom grow up in poverty?

Instead of being feared for our military prowess, we should want to be

respected for our dedication to human rights. I suggest that a patriotic

American who cares for her or his country might act on behalf of a

different vision. Should we not begin to redefine patriotism? We need to

expand it beyond that narrow nationalism that has caused so much death

and suffering. If national boundaries should not be obstacles to trade-

some call it " globalization " -should they also not be obstacles to

compassion and generosity? Should we not begin to consider all children,

everywhere, as our own? In that case, war, which in our time is always

an assault on children, would be unacceptable as a solution to the

problems of the world. Human ingenuity would have to search for other

ways.

 

--------

Howard Zinn is a veteran of World War II and author of the bestselling

book, A People's History of the United States. The preceding essay is an

excerpt from Zinn's forthcoming book, A Power Governments Cannot

Suppress.

 

 

" NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency may

have read this email without warning, warrant, or notice. They may do this

without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse nor

protection save to call for the impeachment of the current President. "