Jump to content
Toldya

Why don't libruls embrace patriotism?

Recommended Posts

On 3/28/2019 at 9:53 AM, Renegade said:

I think concerns about liberal patriotism grew out of opposition to the Vietnam war.  Some of the anti-war people became anti-military and, to some extent against all manifestations of American power abroad.  When some of the anti-war folks burned flags and spit on the returning vets while calling them 'baby-killers', that was seen as anti-American by many.  That's an image liberals have been working to escape ever since. 

 

Once a party gets a reputation, it's extremely hard to reverse, even if  it's no longer accurate.  A Republican can talk about helping minorities all day long, but in the end, he's still a Republican and the words aren't trusted.  It's much the same for Democrats and patriotism/support for the military.  No matter how many times Democrats speak up for military benefits, weapons programs, or whatever, they're still Democrats. 

 

The current President may help the Democrats on this issue more than anyone else has.  For example, he's raiding military construction budgets to build the border wall.  He's also doing damage to international relations with our allies.  He's shown no respect for the international institutions that generations of patriots spent their lives building.  Too much of this, and the D's may become the new 'patriotic party'.

There are NO contemporary accounts of ANYONE spitting on soldiers when they came home. That is a meme that began AFTER the movie Rambo. A book written ABOUT this talking point  says the author was NEVER able to find a SINGLE legitimate example of someone claiming first hand of them being spit on.  This is a rightwing talking point and if it EVER happened it was NOT a widespread phonomena. That they left was anti military is something I also NEVER saw in the lefty groups I was in and I read a letter from a Vietnam Vet who THANKED a lefty group I knew for helping him get certain medical benefits he said he went to a bunch of rightwing groups and they ignored him then our group HELPED him getting in touch with his congressman and getting action on his benefits.

 

The thing is propaganda in its most useful form is repetitively repeating meaningless but emotionally provocative things like I support the troops while doing nothing but SAYING it. They certainly don't vote to increase their pay or benefits like the left does. Saying you support the troops is a useless thing without the actions that show it. It is like saying I support the people of Nebraska. Good for you. WHO DOESN'T? This is why the right wraps itself in the flag and wears flag pins and does all the MEANINGLESS things while keeping their so called support to TALKING about it. Meanwhile everytime the rights support runs up against their HATE for poor and working class people they will throw the troops under the bus in a heartbeat. 

 

The left doesn't just say we support the troops we try to get THEM the equipment they need rather than another aircraft carroer the Navy doesn't want. They try to get them raises.  More money to VA and better care AFTER they come home. The right just chants how patriotic they are and wear pins and that is the EXTENT of their support

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Debs said:

There are NO contemporary accounts of ANYONE spitting on soldiers when they came home.

 

Although you can find many people claiming (today) that this behavior never happened, you can also find others claiming that it did (for example: Disrespect for Vietnam vets is fact, not fiction).  I didn't actually see anyone spit upon, however I do remember seeing (in the news at that time) how vets were treated after Vietnam, and it wasn't good.  Vets coming back from Vietnam were met by angry protesters.  This 'meme', as you call it, far predates Rambo.  But, whether actual spitting happened or didn't wasn't the point of my statement.  I brought up the Vietnam War as the seminal event when liberals lost the patriotism issue to conservatives.  In the public perception, this is where it all started.   

 

6 hours ago, Debs said:

They certainly don't vote to increase their pay or benefits like the left does.

 

Absolutely true.  This doesn't go unnoticed, either.  Republicans like to spend money on expensive weapon systems that keep their corporate supporters busy.  They sell this as giving troops the weapons they need to succeed, which is partially true.  But, when it comes to honoring commitments to retirement pay and healthcare, the R's (not all, but most) are completely unreliable.   As a result, today's military is as politically diverse as the nation.  I think the 'patriotism issue' is something that will mostly disappear when the Vietnam era folks die off.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2019 at 11:33 PM, Renegade said:

 

↑ liberal patriotism issue

 

Sure there is.  Vote, volunteer, do good things, talk about the outcomes you want to achieve, and motivate others in a positive way.   On the other hand, telling people how you're ashamed of your country isn't going to help with the liberal patriotism issue.   When you oppose a policy, a politician or an issue, people are more likely to engage with you.   But, when you attack 'the country', you're going to get instant resistance from most people.  I don't imagine that's any different whether you're talking to people in Russia, Switzerland, or the USA...citizens generally don't like it when you demean their whole country.

 

The reason it isn't going to help is because too many Americans are pathologically unable to accept or deal with criticism of any kind.

I just told you my reasons and you ignored them so you could talk about how I dared to suggest we should be ashamed and how wrong it is.

 

Well, it's how I feel.

And I think a lot of others who should feel the same way but don't are the ones who have the problem.

 

Like I said, I take issue with what the nation's identity is currently tied to, not with what it COULD be tied to.

If it were tied to more constructive things, I would be proud.

 

It isn't demeaning something to say you're disappointed with it, FFS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Toldya said:

... many Americans are pathologically unable to accept or deal with criticism of any kind.

 

This part is absolutely true.  But, that doesn't mean the constructive actions I suggested won't help.  In fact, this aversion to criticism makes it even more important that we use carefully targeted criticism.  Broad and confrontational statements, like saying you "feel ashamed of" (your words) your country, play right into the 'liberals hate America' narrative.  Would it still get your point across to say something like "I love America, but we should not have invaded Iraq"?   

 

I'm suggesting that, when it comes to their country, liberals should throw blankets of love and darts of criticism; not the other way around.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2019 at 9:11 AM, Renegade said:

...Broad and confrontational statements, like saying you "feel ashamed of" (your words) your country, play right into the 'liberals hate America' narrative.  Would it still get your point across to say something like "I love America, but we should not have invaded Iraq"?   

 

I'm suggesting that, when it comes to their country, liberals should throw blankets of love and darts of criticism; not the other way around.  

Conservatives have successfully marketed patriotism as a trademark for many years. In some cases they have weaponized the term , (Joe McCarthy, ...."Love it, or Leave it",...etc).

 

Is nationalism the new patriotism? If so, you can count me out.

 

There may be a difference between:

  • Loving America as a nation, country, or some vague nationalistic concept while the actual population, or citizenry as a whole, is loved, ...uhh perhaps not so much.

and...

  • Loving America as a diverse, inclusive group of people. The idea of "America First" exceptionalism, or infallibility, is loved perhaps not so much.

Patriotism, (like many -isms), is in the eye of the beholder, and can be used to unite, or to divide.

 

As a kid, I used to watch old cowboy films......

Things have changed a bit I think.

cowboy-code-columbia.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ExPDXer said:

As a kid, I used to watch old cowboy films......

Things have changed a bit I think.

cowboy-code-columbia.jpg

 

If numbers 1 thru 9 are embodied by number 10, then Gene Autry's definition of patriotism is a code of personal values, instead of loyalty to the state.

 

When I was small, the top cowboy heroes in my little kid pantheon were Roy Rogers, Hopalong Cassidy and Gene Autry.  I  remember the spirit of this code if not the letter.  And I guess I bought into it, in some way.  I wonder if today's kids get the same impression from the new ring of superheros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2019 at 9:01 AM, Renegade said:

 

.   But some blamed the war on the soldiers who had no say in it. 

 

in other words, the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2019 at 9:11 PM, Renegade said:

 

This part is absolutely true.  But, that doesn't mean the constructive actions I suggested won't help.  In fact, this aversion to criticism makes it even more important that we use carefully targeted criticism.  Broad and confrontational statements, like saying you "feel ashamed of" (your words) your country, play right into the 'liberals hate America' narrative.  Would it still get your point across to say something like "I love America, but we should not have invaded Iraq"?   

 

I'm suggesting that, when it comes to their country, liberals should throw blankets of love and darts of criticism; not the other way around.  

 

It's not just about Iraq, though... it's about identity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2019 at 3:35 PM, Debs said:

Because there has never BEEN two competing ideologies that needed a dialectic MORE than Socialism and capitalism and neither has ANYTHING to do with patriotism. They are both ECONOMIES they are about how we divide the cookies the question is why do YOU buy into the ignorant rightwing talking point about there being any dichotomy between some measure of socialism and patriotism. Public education is socialistic SS is Medicare is , the railroads were the CDC, and so on.

 

As for the other it is silly propaganda when you are talking about emotionally powerful but really meaningless bumper sticker talking points its PROPAGANDA. Like when they say do you support the troops. Who DOESNT? It is like saying do you support the people of Nevada. Why wouldnt I? Why wouldnt anyone it is MEANINGLESS

Same with do you support the flag. the set of people who have anything against the flag is so miniscule as to be ridiculous to even talk about.  Buy into THEIR propaganda if you want but it wont help society or America in ANY WAY. People

 

Quote

The way to go after the socialist attack from the right, is go after it straight on with the truth, that there is not and never was any interest in socialism in this country. You are letting the right have it's own definition of socialism and every last one of them make up their own private definition of what socialism and communism is. It has it definition already, and if the prime tenet of socialism and communism isn't present it is not socialism or communism. Simply that their prime tenet of socialism/Communism is that the means of production is owned and operated by the state and that the sales of that production is also charged to the state.  If that isn't present then it's not socialism or communism. Tell me  the last time someone came up to you and said "you know I think it would be a good idea if the government owned and operated all business's" Don't be a idiot and play their game , if you do your simply supporting stupidity. Labeling things that are socialist that existed before socialism is stupid. Health care paid for by the government goes back to Rome, around the time of Christ. Giving money from the government to help the needy goes back even further then that. If it is a tenet of all government directions , it is then ridiculous to charge someone for being socialist if you support government helping the needy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jbander said:

 

 

What you say is true of course. I did exactly that when a rightwinger made a gratuitous and flippant remark about lefy socialism on the no holds barred side.  I do like to make this point however and it seemed a relevant place considering it was a moderate liberal talking about why dont we lefties act the way he wishes we did which I take to be accept our place as punching bags and do what the rightr WANTS for the most part and dont get too lefty for his comfort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jbander said:

It has it definition already, and if the prime tenet of socialism and communism isn't present it is not socialism or communism. Simply that their prime tenet of socialism/Communism is that the means of production is owned and operated by the state and that the sales of that production is also charged to the state.

 

This describes state capitalism, not socialism and DEFINITELY not communism.

I don't know how anyone could ever hope to explain the difference to a typical ignorant RWNJ... they hear the word 'capitalism' and think 'FREEDOM'.

 

They're not even worth debating 98% of the time, because nothing will ever sink in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Debs said:

What you say is true of course. I did exactly that when a rightwinger made a gratuitous and flippant remark about lefy socialism on the no holds barred side.  I do like to make this point however and it seemed a relevant place considering it was a moderate liberal talking about why dont we lefties act the way he wishes we did which I take to be accept our place as punching bags and do what the rightr WANTS for the most part and dont get too lefty for his comfort

Noted, I did assume that, talking to a person on the left at least gives me the possibility to hear the truth ,the amazing part is what goofy crap that the right builds its case with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Toldya said:

 

This describes state capitalism, not socialism and DEFINITELY not communism.

I don't know how anyone could ever hope to explain the difference to a typical ignorant RWNJ... they hear the word 'capitalism' and think 'FREEDOM'.

 

They're not even worth debating 98% of the time, because nothing will ever sink in.

You simply have to keep on telling them,  by holding their feet to the fire. The only way they will stop is if they are seen as stupid for believing what they believe. It then becomes hard for them to try to sell that crap here. Logic will get you very little with the brain dead. Never let facts get in the way of a opinion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×