Anarchy and Patriotism
Most people will tell you that anarchy and patriotism are mutually exclusive. I would go so far as to say that most anarcho-capitalists, well educated in the nuances of anarchy and libertarian theory believe that a consistent anarchist cannot be a patriot.
I would argue otherwise. I would argue that the meaning of the word “patriotism” has been polluted by “nationalism” and as a result the anarcho-capitalist community has unnecessarily rejected patriotism, which I will argue is not only compatible with natural law and the Zero Aggression Principal, but will be a critical tool for liberty if we are ever to succeed building a free world with free markets and free individuals.
To make my point, consider if the word ‘nationalism’ were represented by the phrase ‘team spirit’ and the word ‘patriotism’ by the phrase ‘friends, family, and community’.
Disclaimer: Like most everything else in life, I see nothing wrong with sports or with having a favorite team when done in moderation. I like American football and “my team” is the Miami Dolphins even though I have never visited Florida and have no desire to ever do so.
So back on target, when you’re a sports fan and you have a team that you’re attached to, your loyalty to that team is not based on the team’s performance or behavior. Fans of the Cincinnati Bengals football team buy-out the season tickets every year. Most games are sold-out in advance and the games and team related discussion dominate local radio year around. Yet the team is almost always a dismal failure on the field of play. The owner shows little understanding of the game and even less interest in the team’s performance. The players are a collection of amazing athletes and criminals who only seem to have one thing in common, an over inflated opinion of their own importance. The disconnect between the team’s performance and the fan bases’ loyalty can be entertaining to observe.
Another example of this odd team devotion can be observed by examining the New England Patriots football team and its fans. The team management is consistently some of the best in the NFL, the individual players are consistently top performers, and yet the team was busted red handed systematically and repeatedly cheating. But don’t bring that up to a “Pats” fan unless you’re prepared to defend yourself physically. Even if that fan is an otherwise moral upstanding person, he will find layers of reasons to remain loyal to the cheating team.
So then I say team spirit is like nationalism.
I remember the team spirit that swept America during and after the First Gulf War. It was like being in Cincinnati if the Bengals had just beat the Detroit Lions 56 to 3. Or perhaps like being in Boston if the Patriots had just beat the Bengals 56 to 3. America was in frenzy and frothing nationalism spewed forth like a putrid fountain at a demonic version of Creaser’s Palace. And why such nationalism? Well, the best trained, best equipped, most technologically advanced military the world has ever seen took on a small third world nation’s outdated under supplied poorly lead military that happened to be using 50 year old technology. Iraq had as much chance against the US as a frail meth addict has against her 300-pound pimp once he decides she’s due a good beat down.
At that moment in time, as the American State reveled in its superiority, there was something odd happening deep in the heart of the American patriot. Seeing photos of slaughtered Iraqi troops wiped out before they even knew the battle was on, and miles of highways littered with the burned corpses of Iraqis trying desperately to retreat, didn’t quite settle well with the American public. State driven media broke into a Hallelujah chorus at the slaughter, but American patriots felt joy and relief that the whole mess was over quickly and the troops could be safely coming home, but still there was just something not right.
Lets pause here and examine this key difference. The American State was elated at the defeat and subsequent humiliation of the Iraqi State. Papa Bush looked strangely out of place as he played the role of tough guy, yet you could tell he loved every moment of it and thought for sure it had sown up the next election for him. However the overwhelming slaughter of the Iraq military followed by a sudden pull back right when complete victory was at hand sent a confused wave through the minds of Americans. What happened? Why was victory so easy, unlike what we had been told to expect, and why did we stop before we finished? We were clearly lied to about the strength of the enemy, and then we were given this bizarre explanation for stopping. The oddity of the moment couldn’t be hidden on the faces of prominent warriors such as Norman Schwarzkopf, as he fiddled and mumbled behind microphones and before cameras, trying to make it all sound legitimate.
I propose the contradicting feelings in America at that time were the effect of patriotism and nationalism clashing.
Think of the American State as a giant nationalistic cat teasing a small mouse. The American State thrilled at each claw mark on the mouse’s nose. But the big cat didn’t need to kill Iraq; she just took pleasure in watching it struggle and tasting its blood.
Patriotism has no place for such cruelty. Patriotism is based on the warrior spirit and the appreciation of the warrior spirit both in ourselves and in an honorable opponent. The warrior is proud to defend his family, his friends, his tribe, and his country but the warrior takes no pleasure in the deed when war is the task. The warrior/patriot has pride in his ability and develops honor through his actions. But he takes no pride and builds no honor by dominating the weak and toying with the beaten. Only cowards, bullies, and thugs take pleasure in hurting the weak. The patriot’s natural reaction is to defend the downtrodden.
Read that again; “Only cowards, bullies, and thugs take pleasure in hurting the weak. The patriot’s natural reaction is to defend the downtrodden.” So we see the difference in the State and the patriot and we begin to see the source of confusion. As we have watched the current manifestation of the State developing in Washington DC more of its true nature is exposed. The State is a cowardly thug. The State will never again purposely take on a strong opponent. It seeks small weak States to lord over. It desires constant low-level war because that kind of war feeds the State and allows it to grow. The patriot/warrior, in contrast, takes pride in defending what is good. Standing strong against aggression honors the patriot. And the patriot is ready to stand against any aggression, no matter how daunting. The patriot is instant to defend his friends, family, clan, tribe, or country against aggression and dishonor. And yet, on a personal level, the patriot is the least likely to be aggressive to others.
So the State is the source of nationalism, while the warrior is the source of patriotism. The State has spent 9,000 years attempting to disguise nationalism as patriotism. And at many times good patriots have been confused by the tricks of the State. Considering patriots have only had a few good teachers, a few scattered writings, and a still small voice that urges them to make things right while the State has brass bands and uniforms, clashing cymbals and banners waving to the rhythm of national song.
Some items the State has stolen and perverted:
The National Flag is a perversion of the warrior’s banner, a symbol of the nobility of his heritage and his independence.
The National Song is the socialist version of the many spontaneous songs that would break out as warriors arose to defend their honor, singing songs of bravery and victory.
The Salute as a military gesture was once a source of common respect and trust among warriors, but twisted by the State it has become a tool for lesser men to show authority over true warriors.
These are only a few examples and I would take great joy in examining each one in a separate article, but for now let it suffice to say that the heart of the patriot is naturally stirred as he sees the National Flag unfurled or as he hears the National Song because these things were once the property of the warrior. However they have been largely usurped by the State with the express intention of confusing the patriot. And we must see this: the State stole these things because nationalism is false and empty and it is only by theft and deception that the State can convince patriots to support its ongoing aggressions. It is only through deception and theft that the State can convince true warriors to fight its wars. Nationalism is devoid of bravery because nationalism sits behind a desk and sends others to fight. Nationalism is quick to wave a flag and just as quick to drop it on the ground as soon as the parade passes. Nationalism sees to it that the National Anthem is trumpeted at every meaningless sports gathering by dimwitted pop stars who don’t even know the words and couldn’t hit the tune if it were duct-taped to a board and they were given a hammer. Nationalism is the hollow dead emotion the State wants patriotism to become. Nationalism is the false pride in one’s self at the accomplishments of others, while patriotism is pride in individual accomplishment. For example, I have no right to pound my chest in pride because the US was the first nation to reach the moon. However when I see the grainy images of Neil Armstrong stepping out onto the surface of the moon my heart swells with pride in that brave man and the individuals that worked and dedicated themselves to making that moment happen. A different example of the contrast between nationalism and patriotism comes in the way we look at war. If I say something like, “We kicked Japan’s butt back in WWII” I am expressing false pride in something in which I was not involved. But if I say, “Americans are resilient, and even when we get knocked down, we get back up. Remember how brave Americans stood up to and defeated Imperial Japan.” Then I’m expressing patriotism and legitimate pride in the accomplishments of others while saying I too will act this way when the chips are down.
The point I am hammering on and hope I haven’t butchered, is that even though there is no place for nationalism in a free society, patriotism and the warrior spirit are a natural and needed aspect of freedom. The trick is in separating the two, as Paul the apostle once said, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”
At some point in time, it will become critical for the anarchists and the libertarians to understand and embrace patriotism and loudly proclaim the falsity of nationalism. I hope the writing of this article will help this along to some extent before necessity demands it.
Ben Stone
2011
First I think your article is well written and I agree with it. We are however also in an era where people make assumptions and plays upon the words you state. For even though you clearly stated and defined what you were calling nationalism and patriotism in the article, I have zero doubt some people would read your statements on nationalism and instead of listening to what you say they will say "See, Globalism is the way to go" which is not what you said, or implied anywhere in that article. Yet, I assure you it will happen. Words are so clear, especially when someone takes the time to identify/define them like you did. That does not stop a largely irrational world from ignoring parts of what people say and taking the definition they want and acting on it.
Yet, I suspect those people are not your primary audience. I suspect you were reaching out to those rational people that will listen to you and not then hijack your words to satisfy their preconceived bias.
I could be wrong, as I often am. ;)
There are a lot of different things going on in the world today. I believe you have described one of the conflicts.
There is also the conflict between those that treat feelings like proof that something is true, and those that require actual proof.
There are many things clashing.
I have never spoken to you before as I only found about you the other day I believe from @richq11 but I've written a number of anarchism/voluntaryism posts since I joined steemti. I too strive towards this...
I tend to approach it as a long term goal. I do not believe it will work in my generation, perhaps not even the next.
Freeing peoples minds, teaching them critical thinking, etc so they understand how to argue (the good kind) and view it as a good thing rather than a bad thing. Critical Thinking so they can notice when someone is using Appeal to Authority, Appeal to Tradition, False Dichotomy, Red Herring, Haste Generalization, Ad Hominems, etc against them. We get better at recognizing such things, and reducing our own use of them with practice. If we have those tools then the majority of the current media narrative quickly falls apart.
Yet I do think these tools are also critical to helping us be lead by reason based around facts as opposed to emotions and what "feels" right to us. I personally believe that the majority of the population would need these tools before anarchism could really work. Though that does not mean impossible. Quite the contrary. That gives a goal to strive towards.
Well put (as always). In the words of Rage Against The Machine: "It has to start somewhere...What better place than here...What better time than now?" We're here to plant the seeds. You're right, it won't happen in our lifetime (not mine for sure), but we can get things started. The more of us that write, the more that read. I've become optimistic about the Millennials... they're waking up. They're tired of the corruption and the status quo. They're looking for direction. The whole counter culture/collectivist movement began as an "underground" movement. It went on beneath the surface. I believe the Anarchist movement will happen the same way. Keep writing...the more of us that get the truth out there, the bigger the movement will become.
Yes, it just will take time and effort. The hard paths are generally more rewarding.
As to millenials. It is sad that their true education tends to begin when they realize they were not taught that much. They were not equipped with the tools education should have provided them. Once they realize this they often become excited and begin to learn at a rapid pace. The internet is an amazing tool for this. It goes far beyond simply having a library at our finger tips at any time. If people have the desire they can learn most things thanks to it. Though critical thinking is something that doesn't always come to mind. History, Psychology, Philosophy, etc are all great things. Science as well. Yet without an understanding of critical thinking it can prevent dialog and understanding. It also makes us susceptible to logical fallacies if we have not learned to identify the techniques.
This is why I speak about them often. That is me doing what I can. I am far from an expert on critical thinking and logical fallacies, but I get better the more I talk about them. I am more prone to notice when I've used one myself, so while trying to help others I am also helping myself.
One of the reasons that I homeschooled my 4 kids. My wife and I sacrificed a lot financially, she worked days and I taught at a community college at night. My boys were reading Plato and Aristotle at 12 and 14. Critical thought is the one gift that I gave my kids and have made sure that they pass it on to my 13 grandkids. Lamentably, the public education racket stifles thought...this is the biggest hurdle we must overcome.
I was surprised how little I actually was exposed to Critical Thinking and I graduated in 1989. In high school they barely touched upon it. I encountered it in two classes in College. TWO. These were classes easily avoided and most people do not take them.
The first was an Argument and Conflict Resolution class. It didn't focus on it a lot, but it did reference some of it.
However, there was a required Public Speaking and Critical Thinking class that a lot of people seemed to put off until their 4th year. I kept hearing people say "don't take professor Johnson", as he was an older guy and supposedly that class was one of the hardest in the entire curriculum if you took it from him.
I took that class, from him. It is perhaps the most valuable class in my entire college studies.
He was brutal in a very good way. I had two things when I left that class. Prior to that class I had a lot of problems with public speaking. I never really did have problems with speaking in public again after that.
The second value was the intense exposure to critical thinking in an extremely personal way.
We would not only give speeches in this class. While we gave them he would outline them on a blackboard. At the end if you used Haste Generalizations, or other logical fallacies to support your claims he would eviscerate you using that outline and explaining WHY it was a fallacy in front of the entire class. I had this done to me, but not too bad, but I also witnessed it done to others many times.
The best way I can describe it is mentally we are taught that our tools are memorization and rocks. If you want to hammer something together pick up rocks. If you want to hammer something apart hammer it with rocks, or perhaps be advanced and use a stick and a rock to form a lever.
His class was like suddenly learning about hammers, prybars, pullies, saws, etc. We are as a society largely not being given the tools that are perhaps some of the most important tools we can have.
I do think that is largely deliberate. It is easier to control, and divide people who do not know how to use these tools. Propaganda that is lies does not work too well on people that have these tools.
So if your goal is to control the population, then this is one set of tools it is advantageous to limit exposure to.
Hitler said: "Give me control of a nation's youth and I'll own the nation." (Or something to that effect) I had a similar experience in college with Dr. Stengren who taught The History of Philosophy. On the first day of class he said "If anybody tells me how they feel, they fail the class. I'm interested only in what you think." He wound up being my favorite professor. His son was the one who told me to avoid his classes!
I never thought about the word patriotism this way, but you definitely struck a nerve with me. I've always had a kind of warrior mentality, but was always drawn to the characters in stories who stood up to the bully, tyrant, invading army, etc. I joined the national Guard when I was young because I thought, "if the commies come here, I'll be there to stop them."
Problem is, when I stuck around too long, the "Guard" became an invading army. So, I kept telling myself that I was "doing it for Freedom" and other such nonsense. I didn't really have the concept of cognitive dissonance worked out yet, but I was sure as heck experiencing it.
I think there's something inside us as men, at least some of us, that is drawn to the idea of being a warrior. We have it in us to fight, and the State capitalizes on that drive better than any other entity.
I'm doubtful we'll achieve a non-interventionist society while I'm alive, but I sure like the idea. Thanks for the post, I like your insight.
Very well said! I don't know why patriotism is so often associated with violence, except that oppression/oppressive states make it necessary. All of the Anarchists I know are patriots. In fact they are Anarchists because they are patriots. Violence is and always should be the very last resort...Like my Uncle Arthur always said "Never throw the first punch...Throw the last!"
Beware of Impossible Rules of Engagement.
Nice...But I made it 71 years on Uncle Arthur's advice.
spoken like a statist, trying to justify their violence
Patriots (by definition) are statists and therefore they are mutually exclusive and anyone who tells you otherwise is either ignorant or they're being intellectually dishonest.
Ben is just trying to use existing language to describe separate distinct ideas to statists. What terms would you suggest instead?