Should we really do whatever we please?

So, my definition of patriotism has always been different than that of most other Americans. It is hard for me to accept the proud flag-waving and "USA # 1" sentiments common among fellow Americans, and it has long seemed to me that there was a sinister side to this, if even usually underneath the surface.

Most people think nothing of such displays of patriotism – something which, itself, alarms me. It is something that everybody does (here in this country, anyway), and it has seemingly always been the case, so what is there to think about? What's the problem, anyway?

In the last few weeks, I have heard this sentiment repeated in different ways, and think I can identify the problem more readily. Every now and then, it can be helpful to receive reminders of what you exactly believe in.

There have been a couple of news stories that came on, and one conversation just prior to Memorial Day weekend that I heard some of the sentiments expressed that, to me, have been alarming  although a lot of people, surely, would shrug and wonder what the big deal is. That, too, is the problem when everyone seems to be doing it – that there is a lack of objectivity and distance, and no one scrutinizes possible excesses. By now, in our consumer society, it is clear that we tend to gravitate towards extremes, right?

The conversation came first. It was at work, and the manager, a rather grumpy and old-fashioned sort of man, a cynical conservative, tried and true, was complaining about the excessive use of the flag everywhere. Hold on, not so fast. He was not complaining about the flag itself, but it being misused, disrespected. In other words, that it should be worshipped properly, rather than so liberally as it presently is. He said that there were rules that were meant to be followed in order to pay respects for the colors properly. He scowled at the use of the flag on napkins, and claimed that he could not help but collect them after they had been used and discarded. He also complained about flags on clothing, particularly underwear.

In that, he is absolutely right, actually. I remember having read the rules of respect for the flag when younger, and there are certain rules. The flag was never supposed to be worn as clothing. It certainly was not supposed to adorn napkins and such, or toilet paper, which was one of the main areas that his complaints were directed at. He also railed against underwear with flag design.

His complaints were all about how the flag should be properly revered, and not so indiscriminately as it is. It should be held to a higher standard, in other words. His anger was making everyone in the room a bit uncomfortable, and when he left, there was a collective exhale among the group. One of the guys present even admitted to wearing the very flag underwear that this boss was railing against, and he proved it by showing it off to everyone.

Such was the conversation, but there were news stories that came out that game me pause, as well. The first such incident came during a news story on NPR, focusing on the race for Arizona's 8^th Congressional District, the one vacated by the departure of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The Republican candidate, Jesse Kelly, is a 30 year old war veteran and Tea Party sympathizer. In criticizing his opponent, Ron Barber, Kelly mentioned something that caught my ears, and made me shake my head. Let me give the exact quote, so I do not skew this message, or give it purely my own interpretation. Kelly, criticizing Barber and advocating an American exceptionalism attitude that is growing more common these days, when American power and influence seems to be waning on some levels, explained his views:

"This is not Europe, this is not Russia. This is not some crazy place where our government allows us to do things. We are the land of the free. We do as we please in this nation."

That doesn't sound so bad, does it? Well, that depends on your viewpoint, of course. Many skeptics would dissect this sentiment, and take it to mean a continuation of the trickle down economic policies that have been failing us now for decades, and which directly preceded the Great Depression, and which most economic experts seem to believe were responsible for the major catastrophe of the 1930's. But that is an economic issue strictly, whether it would be a valid argument or not.

All that aside, what struck me about this quote was the easy and quick dismissal of something foreign, and also a remarkable display of either ignorance towards history, or a suspiciously selective interpretation of it. To sweep "Europe" under the same brush as "Russia", pretty much outright implying old school Communism. This is deceptive and manipulative, and outright serves to divide "US" and them. It relies on an old prejudice that we are just so much better than everyone else, that they should be following us. I will get more into that later on, because this is an important point, not a minor one, and it would probably be better if more Americans understood it.

But the other part of that sentiment that also blows me away with the pure arrogance attached to it. That is the "we do as we please" part. The suggestion that anything goes in this country, and you can do whatever you like to try and get rich, which puts the onus on the victim for being so stupid and ill-prepared in a dog eat dog world, the economic argument that I mentioned in an earlier paragraph. But more than that, since this sentiment came when comparing the freedom of the United States with the tyranny apparently commonly found outside our borders in, say, Europe. It implies that these countries are somehow backwards and foolish, and freedom haters.  When mentioned in the same sentiment as "we do as we please", and this by an Iraqi war veteran –the very war that the United States opted to do as it pleased, even against the world's wishes – that is alarming to me. The very divisiveness of this tone seems almost a poster child of the polarizing nature of these sentiments not just in politics, this time, but also in terms of national attitudes. It seems almost to be willingly setting up a rivalry, and displaying a wealth of arrogance. It inherently implies that the United States is the role model for the rest of the world, and if the rest of the world does not recognize that, it is out of sheer stupidity. Again, more on that later, because this is a very important point, and it bears repeating, which I will get to at some future date.

The second news story came just yesterday. New York City Mayor Bloomberg is trying to make illegal the supersize soda drinks any larger than 16 ounces. Now, I do not know about the arguments back and forth, and the legality of it. I personally remember when the drinks that now pass as "small" in Wendy's today used to be the big sizes not all that long ago, as a child when growing up in the 1980's. There is an obesity problem in the country, and something needs to be done. I do not know if this is the right step to take or not, but it is an issue that should be addresses at some point.

Yet, the response to such things is always the same, always predictable. Always the same story: they are attacking our freedom. When you are convinced that any measures by the government are an attack on freedom, than essentially, then everything the government does is tyranny, and so there cannot possibly be any validity in it. One of the people interviewed for that news story echoed the sentiments about American exceptionalism, and said it was "un-American" to ban soft drinks. He seemed to advocate giving people the choice, which sounds reasonable enough. Yet, to suggest that any government attempts to try and inform it's citizens, or even limit their choices if it might be to their short or long-term health risk, is a bit excessive. Does the government really have no role or say in the well-being of the citizens who elect it? For that matter, should we accept that the government is powerless because it is American, that here, government is systematically evil, and thus should not be trusted? Is that what believing in capitalism amounts to nowadays, the freedom to choose enormous soft drinks? Is this what people are up in arms about? All this, because we want to believe in principal, that we are the greatest country in the world, and the government here has no power, even to assist it's own citizens, and that foreign people allow their governments to do so out of sheer stupidity?

I wonder if that is what patriotism is deemed as now. It seems to be just another popular brand that people flock to, and a mindset that people have chosen for too long, but will not be able to afford to choose for very much longer.

As stated earlier, this is an important topic – I would even suggest, without exaggerating, that it is the number one problem that America faces right now. This national arrogance is the root of pretty much all of the problems that it now faces, because the people and the country both have been led to believe that they can do as they please, do whatever the hell they want, when they want. Since corporations are officially, legally considered people, that implies them, as well. More on that later. This will be the first installment in a series of blogs about this topic. 

Here is the link to an article from National Public Radio about the race in Arizona, with the quote I used earlier:

http://www.npr.org/2012/05/25/153673182/early-ballots-could-decide-who-replaces-giffords?ft=1&f=1014