Patriotism has facilitated the prolifersation of tyranny

Ca Patriot said:

I wasnt aware that science has proven the earth isnt the center of the universe.

Click to expand...

I see, what you are getting at.

Proved the the sun doesn't revolve around the Earth.....

Aknazer said:

Exactly. And the same needs to be done in regards to the flag and a lot of other things. The flag isn't a symbol of the government, or military, or anything like that. It is the symbol to the world of what our country was founded on. When I salute the flag I'm not saluting my government. I'm saluting the ideas that our country was founded on. I'm saluting freedom, liberty, and those that came before me and have given their lives to defend such things in order for us to remain free(er than the majority/rest of the world); NOT the government who works to take away such things.

Also Citizen I would be careful with what you say in regards to why other countries hate us and/or the U.S. While meddling can very much be a reason (and I feel we do it FAR too much), our freedoms/liberties can also be a reason for it as it threatens their power (especially with things like the internet to spread around such ideas). After all, things like the various witch hunts, the Holocaust, etc weren't because of meddling.

Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying.

But, keep in mind, its just the reverse of what we're arguing against here: its not the other country that hates us--its the government of the other country. For example, the Iranian theocracry. A film maker made a documentary last year. He visited Iranian people in their homes, toured their country. Best damn way to undermine the anti-Iranian rhetoric spewing from the US gov I ever saw. The evil, freedom-hating Iranians turned out to be people just like you and I.

Its the governments that hate our freedom. And, don't overlook that there are plenty of people in this country that hate our freedom--Christian conservatives hate the freedom of choice regarding abortions, tons of WASPs hate drugs, tons of liberals hate what they think is capitalism (actually crony capitalism), tons of people hate the idea that you should be able to get medical care without government stealing money from you to pay for the other guy's medical care, etc., etc., etc. (add ten more etc's here).

Personally, I would like to go back about ten years and ask a question. Whoever was the first to spew this idea that other societies hate us because of our freedoms--I just want to ask him one question: oh? You got some concrete, factual examples? I got ten dollars says whoever spewed that concept into the national media and the others who picked it up and shoveled it around further didn't have three real-life examples. Certainly I never heard one single solitary example of a non-government Iranian, N. Korean, or Saudi saying he hated us because of our freedom, much less an entire culture. Think about it. That would have been the Harris Poll of the century.

sudden valley gunner said:

Rothbard was great at pointing out it is them vs. us., something I have been working hard to remember too, that my government is not me or us. It is them. Great post!

Click to expand...

I is proud of myself. I recognized it before reading Rothbard on it.

I do want to read his book on the anatomy of the state. Ought to be very good.

mohawk001 said:

Who says you have that right? It can't be the country of the papers it is founded on since you do not support or seem to believe in them at all. As for propaganda, I am seeing you flow forth with a bunch of it in this thread. This particular post kind of shows what at least part of your hidden agenda seems to be, bashing one of the parties. The word "hypocrite" comes to mind.....

Click to expand...

He bashes the other party, too. Seen him do it.

minarchist said:

I have a right to complain when I have to suffer because of others. Do you really think that only a few subscribe to this propaganda when militaristic patriotism, by all appearances, is standard ideology for establishment Republicans?

Click to expand...

Oh, puh-leeze. Show me where I said you didn't have a right to complain. I'm talking about your whining instead of rolling up your sleeves and doing something about it.

Instead of asking bitter questions, just start dissassembling their arguments. Start changing minds.

And, side-note, whatever you wrote that Grapeshot deleted, please don't do it again. It just undermines the many great ideas you have written here.

Aknazer said:

Exactly. And the same needs to be done in regards to the flag and a lot of other things. The flag isn't a symbol of the government, or military, or anything like that. It is the symbol to the world of what our country was founded on. When I salute the flag I'm not saluting my government. I'm saluting the ideas that our country was founded on. I'm saluting freedom, liberty, and those that came before me and have given their lives to defend such things in order for us to remain free(er than the majority/rest of the world); NOT the government who works to take away such things.

Also Citizen I would be careful with what you say in regards to why other countries hate us and/or the U.S. While meddling can very much be a reason (and I feel we do it FAR too much), our freedoms/liberties can also be a reason for it as it threatens their power (especially with things like the internet to spread around such ideas). After all, things like the various witch hunts, the Holocaust, etc weren't because of meddling.

Click to expand...

That is a tricky argument to sustain. I'm not saying its wrong; I'm saying those who are familiar with previous wars and the fedgov can shoot it full of holes. You want to qualify it just a little bit, or leave out the veterans/war angle altogether.

For example, its already been established that the Spanish American war was started by the media and fedgov over a coal bunker explosion on the USS Maine, not spanish sabotage. This was a few years ago. Engineers took a look at the wreckage photos and did experiments to show how water rushing into the hole in the hull was the probable cause of the inward-bent metal.

It was long ago established that Wilson lied us into WWI.

Read USMC General Smedley Butler's book War is a Racket to find out how much freedom protecting was going on during the Banana Wars.

Have a deep look at Curtis LeMays utter destruction of Japanese and German cities--civilian populations. LeMay himself said that if the US lost WWII, he'd be hanged as a war criminal.

Of course, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan have their own slimey government angles.

Yes, there were wars where the military was fighting to preserve freedom; but, the concept is cluttered up with wars where the troops were not fighting for our freedoms. You also get tangled up in having to defend the troops for being misled by the government abusing their sense of patriotism, etc.

I just say I respect the flag because its a symbol that represents the nation--the individual citizens. When you think about it, even when the government flies the flag, its flying it as a symbol of all the individual people in this nation, rather than as a symbol of itself.

Citizen said:

That is a tricky argument to sustain. I'm not saying its wrong; I'm saying those who are familiar with previous wars and the fedgov can shoot it full of holes. You want to qualify it just a little bit, or leave out the veterans/war angle altogether.

For example, its already been established that the Spanish American war was started by the media and fedgov over a coal bunker explosion on the USS Maine, not spanish sabotage. This was a few years ago. Engineers took a look at the wreckage photos and did experiments to show how water rushing into the hole in the hull was the probable cause of the inward-bent metal.

It was long ago established that Wilson lied us into WWI.

Click to expand...

Oh I know this stuff happens. I also believe that we likely got pulled into WWII because the POTUS didn't act on information purposely just to have a reason for us to join the war. While on one side I highly disagree with such actions, on the other hand I'm torn by the fact that it can take such an action to get a nation to stop an issue before it gets out of hand. For example in WWII had we not entered the war when we did and waited, we very easily could have found ourselves with the Japanese on one side and the Germans on the other. I don't have a good answer, though I can see why they would lie or let an attack happen in order to get involved before the situation got to where there was a far less likely of a chance to recover.

Read USMC General Smedley Butler's book War is a Racket to find out how much freedom protecting was going on during the Banana Wars.

Have a deep look at Curtis LeMays utter destruction of Japanese and German cities--civilian populations. LeMay himself said that if the US lost WWII, he'd be hanged as a war criminal.

Of course, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan have their own slimey government angles.

Click to expand...

I agree that there are far too many wars aren't actually about protecting our freedoms or even really helping our allies. Not to mention how the people "leading" the wars often make bad choices due to a political agenda.

Yes, there were wars where the military was fighting to preserve freedom; but, the concept is cluttered up with wars where the troops were not fighting for our freedoms. You also get tangled up in having to defend the troops for being misled by the government abusing their sense of patriotism, etc.

Click to expand...

It's a Catch 22. For example, I agree with the initial reason for going to Afghanistan. An organization from there attacked us here (not going to get into the provocation or reasons behind the attack as one could write a book or five on it), and the government was effectively harboring them. Go in, decimate their ability to do so again, then LEAVE. Only we didn't leave. So then as a military member do I refuse to go because I disagree with how the "leaders" are handling the war? Or do I go even though I think the political leaders have turned an otherwise justified action into something that goes against what I think? With one I risk having my family out on the curb and potentially even have my rights infringed upon depending on how they discharge me, on the other I enable the gov to keep on doing their irresponsible and reckless actions.

I just say I respect the flag because its a symbol that represents the nation--the individual citizens. When you think about it, even when the government flies the flag, its flying it as a symbol of all the individual people in this nation, rather than as a symbol of itself.

Click to expand...

I can see that and it makes sense. The flag represents us, while a seal more represents the gov.

Aknazer said:

SNIP Oh I know this stuff happens. I also believe that we likely got pulled into WWII because the POTUS didn't act on information purposely just to have a reason for us to join the war. While on one side I highly disagree with such actions, on the other hand I'm torn by the fact that it can take such an action to get a nation to stop an issue before it gets out of hand. For example in WWII had we not entered the war when we did and waited, we very easily could have found ourselves with the Japanese on one side and the Germans on the other. I don't have a good answer, though I can see why they would lie or let an attack happen in order to get involved before the situation got to where there was a far less likely of a chance to recover.

Click to expand...

This is where a more in-depth familiarity with the histories comes into play. Not holding myself up as a history whiz or anything; just saying.

For example, the Germans were stopped by the English Channel and the Spitfires in the Battle of Britain. We could have maybe beat the snot out of their pathetic Navy to continue legitimate non-war trade with Britain, meaning a quasi-war of navies. Churchill had to manuver the US into the war when repeated asking didn't work.

Regarding Japan, take a look at US actions in the year before the war. Among other things, our government cut off their oil. If another government did that to our government, our government would go to war, too. In fact, our government did exactly when Saddam Hussein merely threatened to destablize our oil supplies when he invaded Kuwait.

I'm not saying those are the only reasons. I'm saying that I too went through a period where I was "torn". Further information then brought home the realization that I haven't been told everything about WWII. Lots of very interesting stuff was left out. Basically, we were lied to so much, it is totally legitimate to wonder and even assume we were lied to about the most important stuff that contributed to causing the war. Those omissions, coupled with further experience with government, led me to invoke the philosphical rule that literally almost every war could have been avoided. Our government is so thoroughly proven a liar on domestic matters, its no leap at all, not even a baby step to assume they routinely lie about foreign affairs. Let the liars in government prove the next war is completely unavoidable. Let them prove that every avenue of avoidance has been exhausted, contrasted with handing out pro-war rhetoric and anti-"them" propoganda a year in advance ala Iran.

PS: Don't forget that you can't trust the American media, neither. Wasn't Randolph Hearst who said, "You supply the pictures, and I'll supply the war"? (Spanish-American war?). And, don't forget the revelations some years ago that the Central Disinformation Agency had assets in many major newspapers.

For those who have been following the discussion between Aknazer and I:

Regarding the Spanish-American war, don't forget that it led the US into involvement in the Phillipines. As though annexing/treaty-ing the territory wasn't bad enough, it led directly to the Morro Insurrection where the Morros were fighting for their freedom from our government.

Aknazer said:

SNIP It's a Catch 22. For example, I agree with the initial reason for going to Afghanistan. An organization from there attacked us here (not going to get into the provocation or reasons behind the attack as one could write a book or five on it), and the government was effectively harboring them. Go in, decimate their ability to do so again, then LEAVE. Only we didn't leave. So then as a military member do I refuse to go because I disagree with how the "leaders" are handling the war? Or do I go even though I think the political leaders have turned an otherwise justified action into something that goes against what I think? With one I risk having my family out on the curb and potentially even have my rights infringed upon depending on how they discharge me, on the other I enable the gov to keep on doing their irresponsible and reckless actions.

Click to expand...

On the surface, it does seem like a Catch-22, but I think the solution is that the problem won't happen very often in the first place. Meaning, anybody who really understands the criminality and propensity for lies on the part of government won't be in the military or won't stay in it (see the occassional letter of a vet who refused to re-enlist after wising-up to the government's lies.)

If you're caught mid-enlistment, that is to say, if a fella realizes mid-enlistment what the government is up to, then it would be a really tough decision--desertion or murder. Either I go and try to murder somebody else, or my government imprisons or murders me for desertion.

Our job is to bring about the situation where such a fella has lots of public support should he refuse to murder at government's orders.

sudden valley gunner said:

The constitution doesn't put government on a pedestal either, people have done that.

Dissent is the highest form of patriotism, the bastardization of what being a patriot means is like you point out a major symptom of the plague of nationalism.

Click to expand...

minarchist said:

Exactly. I was using the contemporary colloquial meaning of the word.

Why do you think that expressing views in the OP is treated as heresy in such a supposedly free country? :question:

Click to expand...

First of all, great post by the OP. I miss the days when I'd read that kind of stuff daily on OCDO. Thanks for bringing some of it back. I could not agree more.

Regarding "patriotism", never forget that a couple centuries ago "patriots" were radical folk who placed the love of their country above government, and in doing so inexorably shattered the connection therebetween (either that or they never observed it in the first place). Since their country was distinct form its government, they had no reason not to love the one and oppose the actions of the other.

I, personally, still hold this definition of patriotism dear, much as I hold the classical definition of "liberalism" dear. I am a patriot: I love my country, its people (as individuals, though not as voters ), its culture (so, so much of it. If only you guys could possibly imagine... ), its language, its economy, its values (Mel Gibson voice: frrrreeeeeeedoommmm!), its food (gets back to culture), and even, yes, the liberties it offers me as an individual (where else on Earth could I be the person I am? Truly: nowhere.)

I do not however hold any special attachment to government, which I view as distinct from (really a parasite upon) the country.

That flag? The silly one with the gaudy stars and stripes? Yeah. That's not my flag. That's the US Government's flag.

My flag – the one flying right now on my house – bears the words for all to see: Sic Semper Tyrannis.

Why is that my flag? Is it because it represents the government of my state? No, because it represents the history, the people, the intellectual heritage and culture, of the place which I call home. Right on it are words which, in some small way, represent me. Any government is incidental to all that.

What you call patriotism, I call jingoistic nationalism. Chauvinism. That nationalists have insinuated their despicable ideology – the fundamental and permanent conflation of a place with its government – into the popular use of the term patriotism is no good reason, I say, to allow them to subvert it completely.

For, there is no better word for what I am.

But then, I know I've made a similar argument about liberalism to this very audience – and on no single occasion at that. I guess that makes me something of a conservative when it comes to such "technical" language. (I do say "pwnd" in actual speech so I guess I can't be too unrealistic here. )

mohawk001 said:

You can't mean that freedom of speech that is protected by the government, and I'm thinking country, that you seem to hate so much can you? Without that government backing up that freedom, who says you really have it?

Click to expand...

My rights don't exist thanks to government, thankyouverymuch. And being that government is so frequently (read: always) engaged in trying to abrogate them, I have a hard time seeing any connection to reality when you talk about it "protecting" my rights.

I protect my rights.

Or let me put it another way: who, exactly (aside from a government), is going to tell me I don't have the right to speak my mind? You? I seriously doubt you're prepared to make that happen.

Incidentally, the whole concept of rights derives from a notion of necessary limitations on government. Rights were initially formulated to explain the need to limit government's actions, not because folks needed to think of another way to justify government's existence. "Well, you see, we have these rights, but we're never able to exercise them, so clearly we need a government to protect them!" :lol:

I don't believe I possess language to convey the magnitude of the irony of this silly little remark.

If government worship isn't a widespread problem in this country, then why do many people get so butthurt when some people claim that 9/11 was an inside job (see the video for an example of this behavior)?

[video=youtube;vCOCRkOWs_A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCOCRkOWs_A[/video]

marshaul said:

My rights don't exist thanks to government, thankyouverymuch. And being that government is so frequently (read: always) engaged in trying to abrogate them, I have a hard time seeing any connection to reality when you talk about it "protecting" my rights.

I protect my rights.

Or let me put it another way: who, exactly (aside from a government), is going to tell me I don't have the right to speak my mind? You? I seriously doubt you're prepared to make that happen.

Incidentally, the whole concept of rights derives from a notion of necessary limitations on government. Rights were initially formulated to explain the need to limit government's actions, not because folks needed to think of another way to justify government's existence. "Well, you see, we have these rights, but we're never able to exercise them, so clearly we need a government to protect them!" :lol:

I don't believe I possess language to convey the magnitude of the irony of this silly little remark.

Click to expand...

- 5 points for using a "big word."

Dammit, where'd I leave my dictionary.

ETA: Hey! I learnt sumthin': abrogate--Repeal or do away with (a law, right, or formal agreement).

minarchist said:

If government worship isn't a widespread problem in this country, then why do many people get so butthurt when some people claim that 9/11 was an inside job

Click to expand...

because 9-11 wasnt an inside job.

Ca Patriot said:

because 9-11 wasnt an inside job.

Click to expand...

Regardless of whether 9/11 was an inside job, a lot of people are taking this accusation against the government personally, as if their own family was insulted. Ergo, this behavior clearly shows that people love Big Brother. Contrary to what you may think, it is not reasonable for people to become enraged when someone else professes an incorrect theory (even one that is incorrect to the point of being kooky).

minarchist said:

Regardless of whether 9/11 was an inside job, a lot of people are taking this accusation against the government personally, as if their own family was insulted. Ergo, this behavior clearly shows that people love Big Brother. Contrary to what you may think, it is not reasonable for people to become enraged when someone else professes an incorrect theory (even one that is incorrect to the point of being kooky).

Click to expand...

I dont think anyone gets offended because of love for America. They get offended because of love for intelligence and common sense.

Personally I dont get offended. However, my next door neighboor and family friend was on the plane (or missile according to some) that hit the Pentagon. She flew that route regularly and I havent seen her since then.

I dont know the motives behind the 9-11 truthers but I do know that the truth is 9-11 wasnt an inside job. I think that fact offends many lunatics.

Citizen said:

For those who have been following the discussion between Aknazer and I:

Regarding the Spanish-American war, don't forget that it led the US into involvement in the Phillipines. As though annexing/treaty-ing the territory wasn't bad enough, it led directly to the Morro Insurrection where the Morros were fighting for their freedom from our government.

Click to expand...

Much of this was helped along by the machinations of the that asshat Theodore Roosevelt.

Ca Patriot said:

I dont think anyone gets offended because of love for America. They get offended because of love for intelligence and common sense.

Personally I dont get offended. However, my next door neighboor and family friend was on the plane (or missile according to some) that hit the Pentagon. She flew that route regularly and I havent seen her since then.

I dont know the motives behind the 9-11 truthers but I do know that the truth is 9-11 wasnt an inside job. I think that fact offends many lunatics.

Click to expand...

Are you purposefully not addressing his point?

Aknazer said:

Exactly. And the same needs to be done in regards to the flag and a lot of other things. The flag isn't a symbol of the government, or military, or anything like that. It is the symbol to the world of what our country was founded on. When I salute the flag I'm not saluting my government. I'm saluting the ideas that our country was founded on. I'm saluting freedom, liberty, and those that came before me and have given their lives to defend such things in order for us to remain free(er than the majority/rest of the world); NOT the government who works to take away such things.

Also Citizen I would be careful with what you say in regards to why other countries hate us and/or the U.S. While meddling can very much be a reason (and I feel we do it FAR too much), our freedoms/liberties can also be a reason for it as it threatens their power (especially with things like the internet to spread around such ideas). After all, things like the various witch hunts, the Holocaust, etc weren't because of meddling.

Click to expand...

The flag salute invented by the national socialist Bellamy? This is part of the problem it wasn't our "nation" or government that did this, it was our ancestors, people, individuals that did this. They felt no necessity to salute or pledge allegiance to a nation.

sudden valley gunner said:

The flag salute invented by the national socialist Bellamy? This is part of the problem it wasn't our "nation" or government that did this, it was our ancestors, people, individuals that did this. They felt no necessity to salute or pledge allegiance to a nation.

Click to expand...

Who said it was necessary to do so? While I know some people might feel that way, I do not. As for pledging allegiance to a nation, I consider the people and the ideas on which the country was founded to be the "nation" and not the government. So our ancestors, people, and individuals would all be a part of our nation to me. Though if you have a better word to describe what I'm talking about besides "nation" I'm willing to consider using it instead.

Also I personally don't consider ALL things thought of or invented by nationals, socialists, communists, etc to be wrong or evil. So just because the national socialist Bellamy invented the flag salute doesn't mean I'm instantly going to think it's a horrible thing to do.