BuzzMachine

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

The new patriotism

32 comments on The new patriotism

The new patriotism
: Jonathan Alter in Newsweek is right to make a call for a “new patriotism.” He’s wrong about most of the rest.

: September 11th changed my view of patriotism, of course. It also changed my view of politics. And weblogs have had an impact, too.

: I was not a George Bush fan, probably never will be. I didn’t vote for him and thought he stole the election (spare me your comments; we’ve covered this turf already; let me just set the scene and we’ll move on). I think that his tax cut is the most cynical possible act: borrowing our money from us to to bribe us to vote for him (and it’s no way to fix the economy). I wish he had accomplished anything to fix health care. Half his appointments frighten me.

But I support him on homeland security, even considering the missteps, because we have to … and on going to war in Afghanistan because we had to … and on Iraq because it was the right war even if he justified it on the wrong reasons (WMD was a bet on the come; humanitarianism was the sure thing).

I did that because I was motivated by a new patriotism that said it was time to see myself as an American — an American at war — first, and a partisan second. That, clearly, is how 9.11 changed me.

Weblogs changed me as well, because I find now that I more often take on issues individually, not in party packages and I judge our leaders similarly, an issue at a time. That’s why Roger L. Simon says, often and eloquently, that the labels left and right — and presumably, Democratic and Republican — are obsolete.

: Now go read Alter’s view of patriotism and partisanship and you’ll find that he mixes up patriotism and politics in a simplistic stew.

He quotes Britney Spears —

32 responses to “The new patriotism”

  1. Reid Avatar
    Reid

    Well said (the first part). If the President’s opponents were all as principled and placed the country’s interests ahead of the party, I would respect them.
    As for Alter, I cancelled my subscription to Newsweek because I could no longer accept his slanted journalism. I miss the quotes and cartoons section at the front but, it was necessary for my blood pressure.

  2. jason Avatar
    jason

    I also cancelled my subscription to newsweek a year or two ago because i couldn’t stand alter and fineman.
    seriously, I find it totally outrageous that jonathan alter has a national column and mr. jarvis does not. in a way, it’s better anyway though- because buzzmachine is a thousand times better than Leftweek could ever be, and in a year or two you could make the case that it may be read more than leftweek is.

  3. sheila Avatar
    sheila

    Bravo!

  4. Eric Deamer Avatar
    Eric Deamer

    It’s absolutely dumbfounding that he really thinks all Repubicans, and, in fact, anyone who is a shade more patriotic than he is, is as stupid and shallow as Britney Spears. Is that what he really thinks of the majority of Americans? If he really has such contempt for his audience why write for such a mass-market publication?

  5. Richard Aubrey Avatar
    Richard Aubrey

    The liberals fear patriotism of the kind Jarvis describes because it may well trump their partisan positions.
    Their views on the war remind me of an old saying I heard from a funeral director.
    “When things are bad, that’s good.
    When things are good, that’s bad.”
    The dems and liberals will lose day after day, year after year, unless there is a catastrophe in the war on terror. Failing that, they pretend that normal incidents of war are catastrophes.
    They hope to impress the unwary.
    It’s happened before. They may get lucky.

  6. Roger L. Simon Avatar
    Roger L. Simon

    Great post. Alter is simply an example of old thinking (and thanks for the plug).

  7. A.W. Avatar
    A.W.

    What has been lost on the part of the left is the concept of a loyal opposition. You have the right to dissent, but at least when you are talking about war, in a time of war, you have a duty to be loyal, in your opposition. But too much I feel like the anti-war left is gleeful at every setback, and disappointed at every victory. And the New York Times and the BBC feed this desire by portraying Iraq as being much worse than it actually is.
    The opposition too often acts in a manner that is irresponsible. Like the argument that because thousands of innocent Iraqi died in the war, this somehow means we should not have gone in. I debunk that one on my site, here: http://mysite.verizon.net/res1uo0x/id12.html
    Or the stunning intellectual and factual dishonesty over the 16 words and John Dean at Findlaw.com

  8. Pele Avatar
    Pele

    “… and on Iraq because it was the right war even if he justified it on the wrong reasons (WMD was a bet on the come; humanitarianism was the sure thing). ”
    So it doesn’t really come under the ‘War on Terror’ umbrella. Would you say that?
    If so do you think the Government has abused your patriotism?

  9. James Stephenson Avatar
    James Stephenson

    But it does come under the ‘War on Terror’, if for nothing else, Saddam paying off the families of Suicide bombers. And probably helping fund terrorist organizations in Syria.
    Or are those not terrorists?

  10. Tom Grey Avatar
    Tom Grey

    I certainly think Bush’s gov’t has been, is, and will abuse my patriotism, and that of most who will vote GOP. But the Dems seem more eager to score little anti-Bush rhetorical points than to make America safer, or the world better.
    Iraq, and surviving Iraqis, are better for the liberation from an evil. That’s good. No matter how terrible Bush is in other ways, Bush did a really big, good thing.
    If (when?) North Korea uses a nuke, will that justify a pre-emptive strike against Iraq? I think so, and fear so, but am certain the idiotarians will blame the US. Iraq was a threat. I sort of wish Clinton had pushed and shoved harder on NK, so that it could have remained a smaller threat. Iraq is certainly part of the WOT, though not certainly requiring an invasion. But the goodness of the liberation is based on sure humanitarian grounds.

  11. JorgXMcKie Avatar
    JorgXMcKie

    All I can say is “Thank God for people like Jeff Jarvis and Roger Simon.” If it weren’t for them I’d think the kind of liberalism I believed in had died. Late in the 1960’s I discovered that most of the lefties I knew were hardly liberal, but most on the left still were. I was at university. Today, I teach at a university, and all the left here are barely closeted elitist tyrants. Hardly any of them put any faith at all in the public, especially when the public dares disagrees with them. As for principled debate, it soon degenerates into “Bush lied, people died.” Fingers in their ears chanting “yah, yah, yah, I can’t hear you” they expect to control policy and issues.
    Please, there is better and worse. Can’t we discuss it? Not everyone who opposes is evil. If this doesn’t change, I’ll hold my nose and vote for Bush, and I’ll bet I’m not the only one.
    I think that Lieberman’s current problems as a candidate only exemplify the problem for people like me.
    I know it’s hard work guys, but keep it up. I’m hanging by a thread here.

  12. A.W. Avatar
    A.W.

    James, Pele,
    Iraq was part of the war on terror because of the link between Al Qaeda and Iraq, which has been proven in the press (and who knows what intel Bush had he hasn’t shared). You can find it in a long back and forth between me and an email responder here:
    http://mysite.verizon.net/res1uo0x/id33.html
    if you don’t feel like reading the whole post, just do a control-F find for the word “crack” and it will jump right to it. And the white house has unconfirmed reports of more linkage.
    And that neglects the flypaper theory, which instapundit has been following.
    A.W.

  13. Maciej Ceglowski Avatar
    Maciej Ceglowski

    Patriotism is nationalism with a nicer-sounding name.

  14. HH Avatar
    HH

    Franken gets sued by Fox, gets tons of publicity and therefore sells a lot of books. Yes the evidence of “resurgent liberalism” is crystal clear.

  15. scott h. Avatar
    scott h.

    Jeff, there is an pretty damn good monologue about patriotism in the beginning of the trailer for “The Alamo”. I’d quote it, but I think it’s better to listen to it. Quicktime trailers here: http://www.empiremovies.com/movies/2003/the_alamo.shtml

  16. Starhawk Avatar
    Starhawk

    “I think that his tax cut is the most cynical possible act: borrowing our money from us to to bribe us to vote for him (and it’s no way to fix the economy). ”
    I think someone is a little confused here about who the money belongs to. Letting us keep more of our own money is hardly bribing us.
    You may not agree that tax cuts stimulate the economy but there are plenty of people that do.

  17. jerry Avatar
    jerry

    Patriotism means defending the principles of America over politics. Patriotism means being willing to protect those principles where and when it’s necessary. Patriotism means defending your children and your neighbors against those who would attack us because we are American. Patriotism means being willing to go it alone even when your former friends (read: Europeans) snipe at you.
    Yes, I agree, that this is a wonderful description of what I see from Franken, Ivins, Dean, Josh Marshall, and many of us loyal, patriotic Americans that are viciously attacked, daily, by the Ashcrofts, Rushs, Coulters, Hannitys, Reagans, Hatchs, Delays, Lotts, O’Reillys, Reynolds, and many of the bloggers I encounter.
    Thank you for acknowledging my patriotism, and the patriotism that I know is in 99% of all Americans regardless of what they think about election 2000, or the war, or politics, free trade, environmentalism, or ….
    What is your point then? Apparently you are still just trying to find yet another way to shout on the schoolground, “my group is better than your group.” A tired message at best.

  18. jerry Avatar
    jerry

    With reflection, It seems that what you are trying to accomplish is to stifle debate, and you are trying to achieve this through name calling and smearing. (Don’t feel bad, Rummy did that today too, so you’re in good company!)
    After 9.11, it is in our hands, for we are all Americans and we are all targets on this new battlefield. We know what it means to be patriotic and it has very little to do with partisanship or politics
    How do you reconcile this with Rummy’s statements today, and Ari’s statements back then?
    Also, your argument appears to be that before 9/11, the definition of patriotism was in the politicians and pundits hands, but today, post 9/11 it is in the hands of the public.
    Assuming the premise is true, doesn’t history show us time and again, that after being attacked as we were in 9/11, people do tend to throw their support to their leaders?
    If so, I can’t accept your conclusion. I want it to accept it. I think it might be true and I hope it is true. But it doesn’t follow logically from the argument you have stated here.

  19. Ryan Avatar
    Ryan

    “Yes, I agree, that this is a wonderful description of what I see from Franken, Ivins, Dean, Josh Marshall, and many of us loyal, patriotic Americans that are viciously attacked, daily, by the Ashcrofts, Rushs, Coulters, Hannitys, Reagans, Hatchs, Delays, Lotts, O’Reillys, Reynolds, and many of the bloggers I encounter.”
    Oh please the persecution rant. Politics have gotten nastier of late but hardly fall on one side of the aisle. The only gripe can be that those above seem to have a bigger megaphone. If you want your fair share of name calling from the left, Atrios, Hesiod, Kos and Alterman will be more than happy to assist you.

  20. Howard Owens Avatar
    Howard Owens

    More and more, I see my fidelity to Western Civilization, and the to the ideals of an open society, the systems and processes (rule of law, mainly) by which freedoms are secured. The United States is just the strongest, most logical nation to protect, defend and extend those ideals.

  21. Dann Avatar
    Dann

    Paraphrasing what I read here first:
    It would be easier to recognize liberal patriotism amid criticisms of our foreign policies if they would recognize my humanity when I criticize our burgeoning social programs.

  22. A.W. Avatar
    A.W.

    Maciej Ceglowski is wrong.
    In America, patriotism is not the same as nationalism. You know why? Because America is not properly termed a nation. I wrote this at my site, too.
    “The dirty little secret of nationalism is that it is really a “happy face” word for racism. And so long as we entertain the nationalist impulse, we will never have an end to racism.
    “[For lay persons do not get confused on these terms. America is not properly considered a nation. A nation is not a political unit so much as a group that believes it is bound by blood and language. France is a nation by these standards. America is not. Now, some people have argued that the American ideology takes the place of blood ties and thus America is a nation. That is fair enough, but it is not how I am using the words nation, and nationalism here.]”
    And I believe that is not how Maciej Ceglowski uses the term either.
    Patriotism, then, in the American context, is the support for the idea of america, which stands for all those nice inalienable rights. Nothing wrong with that.
    A.W.

  23. Maciej Ceglowski Avatar
    Maciej Ceglowski

    A.W, I agree that American nationalism is not based on ethnic or linguistic identity, but rather a shared ideology. But it’s still nationalism – a sense that ours is the exalted country, that we have a special mission, a set of venerated myths and symbols (the Founding Fathers, the American Dream, the flag), a calling from God. It still plugs in to the same irrational, emotional currents that fuel ethnic nationalisms elsewhere. And it has a deep religious undertone, with roots going back to Puritan times.
    Nationalism can be a cohesive and positive force (as it was in Poland during the 19th century) or it can be divisive and murderous (as it was in Yugoslavia in the 90’s). Failing to recognize it for what it is just leaves us all the more vulnerable to its excesses.
    Do you think the wave of post-9/11 flag fetishism, France-bashing, and war bombast is all rationally grounded in a dispassionate esteem for Enlightenment political philosophy? It’s not unpatriotic to call shenanigans on your own country, when it starts to go all jingo. Patriotism is a nice word that can hide much darkness.

  24. ed cone Avatar
    ed cone

    Jona Hansen’s book about patriotism is worth reading
    http://radio.weblogs.com/0107946/2003/07/08.html#a594

  25. David O'Connor Avatar
    David O’Connor

    Interesting post, some of which I agree with and some of which I don’t. Jeff’s post made me think, though, and I wrote a response to it at my blog. An excerpt:
    I would posit FREEDOM as a more important value than patriotism. Freedom from the threat of death-by-fanatic, which (as Jarvis writes) is essential . . . but also freedom from oppression by the government or from wrong-headed fellow citizens . . . especially since patriotism is so open to definitional and substantive (political) abuse.

  26. Andy Freeman Avatar
    Andy Freeman

    > Do you think the wave of post-9/11 flag fetishism, France-bashing, and war bombast is all rationally grounded in a dispassionate esteem for Enlightenment political philosophy?
    The answer to those three questions are mu, (throwing out dispassionate because it’s irrelevant) yes, and mu.
    Trying to keep thugs in power, as France does consistently (and the US does intermittently) is not enlightened, even if the thugs pay you.
    Yes, there’s a good chance that Iraq will go back to barbarism, but without the US, Iraq wouldn’t have the chance it has to avoid barbarism.
    The difference between Americans and old Europe is that Americans will spend their money to give someone else a chance. Maybe not often enough, but far more often, and far more money, than who ever is in second place.
    If France wants the respect of ordinary America, all it has to do is be respectable….

  27. Marcus Lindroos Avatar
    Marcus Lindroos

    > We know what it means to be patriotic and it
    > has very little to do with partisanship or
    > politics. We know the price of patriotism.
    > Patriotism means defending the principles of
    > America over politics.
    As if the ideologically correct definition of “the principles of America” somehow were separated from ideology or politics… Who the hell gets to define whose ideology is “un-American?” The Republican “patriots”? Why not Michael Moore or Susan Sarandon?
    MARCU$

  28. Tom Grey Avatar
    Tom Grey

    In my blog, I call it:
    the Human Rights War (on the discussion about cheering, or not, the bombing of the UN).
    Because I want to ground what the US is doing in the UN Declaration of Human Rights — even without the UN SC, itself including counries who violate Human Rights. The Dec’l, by itself, has no enforcement mechanism.
    Much of the best of US ideals are repeated in the UN Dec’l. The single most easily monitored and objective right is Article 19 (free speech). Bad countries don’t have it.
    France, with respect to Jews and Israel, might be losing it.
    America has it: freedom, and enough to burn (even the flag (if you’re an idiotarian)).
    Just today I read (where was it???) a socialist afraid for the Left, with great advice: “Don’t burn the flag. Wash it.”

  29. DaveC Avatar
    DaveC

    You all act like Jonathan Alter wrote an editorial.
    Well I must disagree with that. I am looking at the Newsweek article and ther is no indication that it is an editorial. Zakaria’s and Will’s columns are editorials. You can see that by the page layout. “Packaging Patriotism” is strictly factual reporting, with some photos of that chimp Bush rallying his stupid supporters.
    See, Brittney Spears supports Bush and she is stupid. And all these people with flags and all that, they are stupid, and bullies too. Newsweek merelty reports the facts. If you don’t understand this, then you must be stupid too.
    Thats the gist of this example of fine unbiased reporting.

  30. Starhawk Avatar
    Starhawk

    Dave,
    How do you know Brittney is stupid? Do you know her? I don’t but I know she has done more with her life and made a lot more money than I have over a longer period.
    Which people with flags are you referring to? The people from answer holding UN and Palestian flags? If so then I agree with you 100%.

  31. Chuck Olsen Avatar
    Chuck Olsen

    Liberals have balked at calling themselves patriots, because of all the flag-waving, war-mongering, chest-pounding associations post-9/11. Maybe that’s not what patriotism is supposed to mean, but it’s the perception. That’s why we need to redefine and reclaim patriotism. Here are my thoughts on that from earlier this year:
    I think it’s our job to draw attention to the wrongs of America, and want to fix it. Because we want America to be good, and we CAN imagine better ways. More than that, we want humanity and our planet and our souls to be good. In my mind, this is “the new patriotism” – we need to redefine patriotism to be a good thing, to see all sides and simply want to make this a better place.

  32. Al Hill Avatar
    Al Hill

    Patriotism, what a word. Our country is not a thing, it is a belief, a belief that all people are created equal, a belief that people are innocent until proven guilty, a belief that the individual counts and a belief that the majority should never abuse the minority. People with agendas try and change the meaning into a belief in government. You say you are an American at War, if we are at war (a line that has been used to discribe the fight againt everthing from drugs to weight loss) what besides a few rights have you been asked to contribute? We say we are fighting a war but we insist on lower taxes, more things to buy and bigger portions at our meals. I am not right or left, I read everthing I can get my hands on about the world and the state of politics and I enjoy your writing, but lets always remember that if someone truly believes that something is wrong he or she should not just shut up and let it pass just because we are in the middle of doing it. I fought in one war that was based on a lie and even though we did a lot of good things and saw the enemy do a lot of truly truly horrible things, the fact is that our government lied to us about why we were there and how it was progessing almost everyday. To watch and question is just one of the jobs of an active citizen.