Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: An Enduring Problem Link: http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article/an_enduring_problem#30267 Post contents: A thought towards a clear definition of nationalism and patriotism. I'm tempted to involve the loyalty to a geographic region, but I don't think it is correct. Rather, the two 'isms' involve a loyalty to country and culture when sufficiently presented together. I will ignore the patriotic/nationalistic sentiment over international athletic rivalries, and simply consider the political uses and sentiments of the 'isms'. I think the confusion may stem from two different definitions of 'country and culture', and role played by government in a patriot's mind versus that of a nationalist. For a patriot, the whole 'apparatus of the state' exists to serve the interests of country and culture, but he is cognisant that this may not always be true. The nationalist sees the government as representatives of 'country and culture', and being so, they must always act in the interest of 'country and culture'. That is to say, the nationalist does not differentiate between private and public. The latter is the representative of the former. This mental block would cause patriots and nationalists to view international events differently. The nationalist distributes the effects of some event (eg war, loans, aid) to all members of 'country and culture; the patriot divides public action to public figures, and private to private. This division also allows for the existance of a patriot within 'country and culture' to oppose or support certain public action, condemning or condoning individuals or organizations. You rarely find hear an outcry over this or that (domestically) because of nationalistic sentiment. Again, this is because the nationalist does not differentiate between the public and private within his 'country and culture'. Of course, this is just a theory that forced its way out of my head. Respectfully yours. Sent at: 2008 12 01