The broader case for the importance of patriotism in liberal regimes takes off from themes in Tocqueville involving the wide degree of personal freedom that such regimes ensure and the corresponding need for high levels of civic virtues among citizens. Before that day, I never really thought about being a friend to myself, and at the time, I didn't really know what it meant. For the most offended among Washington’s elites, the inauguration of America’s 45th president should bring forth a feeling of empathy. Patriotism has its purposes. If some such argument succeeds in showing that robust patriotism contributes substantially to the health of liberal polities , one might think it follows directly that liberal states should take a range of actions to promote it, by doing things like funding national celebrations, sanctioning recognized holidays, and, most importantly, requiring some program of civic education designed to promote patriotic feelings. The argument that liberal regimes depend on their citizens having some substantial degree of patriotism has been pressed from narrower and broader perspectives. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 259–282, Walzer M (1974) Civility and civic virtue in contemporary America.
Abby Margaret, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Sign in to comment to your favorite stories, participate in your community and interact with your friends. A time where you're nice to yourself and put your own self-care before anything else. As those principles get concretized in ways that seem more likely to meet the particularity requirement, they are more likely to become contested among a plural citizenry and so less likely to be the common foundation on which strong patriotism can arise. And if there is nothing wrong with an ordinary citizen’s invoking robust patriotism in this way, then robust patriotism is a morally acceptable position for such citizens to invoke as they approach political matters. Trapped by Commitment Preventing South Vietnam from being overcome by North Vietnam pushed the U.S. government into a trap by commitment. There were differences but few big surprises.
They serve their country, whatever government is in power. I will not here try to establish that the institution of the state, populated by political agents operating on its behalf, meets the conditions Luban specifies.
Consider Saudi Arabia, whose diplomats sometimes live extremely liberal lives outside the Kingdom (and even within it) while defending a starkly orthodox social order to the rest of the world. Following Joseph Raz, Luban calls this an exclusionary reason. Agents who did not so act would unfairly disadvantage the interests of the citizens they represent vis-à-vis those of outsiders. In: Schaar J (ed) Legitimacy in the modern state. Still, it is possible to say a good deal more in defense of something like moral alchemy. 63.228.175.170, Canovan M (2000) Patriotism is not enough. Even if a properly designed world government would do a better job protecting the basic interests of persons around the world (a claim, I should say, that strikes me as highly dubious), it’s important to see that the mere logical possibility of some better alternative hardly disproves the claim that states as they are provide important goods. If you've ever listened to Lin-Manuel Miranda's 'Hamilton' then you know American wasn't even perfect at the start.