About time.

Samuel Johnson’s utterance is “famous” only because people who seem to have trouble with patriotism have done it to death. On their own, Johnson’s words are meaningless, as is referring them to them without explanation. What did Johnson mean?

Coady seems to favour the idea that it is the first refuge of a scoundrel as deemed by a person less know (if known at all by most people reading Coady’s article) than Johnson. Bierce, it seems, was a done-a-bit-of-everything American with no particular qualifications who did a bit of writing.

As with all people who preach the “evils” of patriotism, Coady is using the extremes of the sentiment to attack Australia. He is a typical academic white ant who seeks to undermine his own country instead of arousing awareness of the forces within -well, he couldn’t very well do that, could he, with his attitude? - and without that have ability to do real harm to Australia: much more harm than the odd over-the-top patriot can do.

Of course no country, including our own, is always right or wrong. But a few cases of extreme, if sometimes embarrassing, patriotic fervour are preferable to the wet left philosophy proposed by Coady and his mates in universities

Has anyone ever noticed how people on the right wing of the culture wars quite often use emotionally manipulative slur words and/or name calling instead of really addressing the topic or theme. And that they invariably use the language of binary exclusions. No shades of grey or complexity or multiple contexts and interpretations allowed.

Leigh, what would you regard as an 'extreme' form of patriotism vs. the regular garden benign variety?
How about singing the national anthem - a fairly innocuous practice, yes?
What about that inspirational little ditty La Marseillaise? The last lines translate approximately to "In death your enemies/See your triumph and our glory". Is that a fitting and responsible piece of civics education for little French boys and girls to be raised singing? It's a sentiment that sounds more at home at a training camp for suicide bombers to me. In fact, if a certain local Sheik got on air and said words to that effect, everyone would go into conniptions, but apparently it's just a harmless bit of patriotism if 6-year olds to sing it. Well, at least it tells the rest of the world the price of being an enemy of La France.
C'est la vie, non?

Its just as well Coady managed to pass this lot.
He would probably have died of constipation, if he hadn't.

There certainly is a lot of codswallop associated with public declaration of patriotism.
And it does seem to mean different things to different people. Before jumping onto any bandwagon, it would seem advisable to define what your concepts are for that particular burst of enthusiasm.
William Lines in his latest book, "Patriots", takes the interesting line that it might mean standing up in opposition to a Government and its laws when those laws are shown to be an ass and against the national interest.

Tolstoy also has something say on patriotism he said... Patriotism is slavery elsewhere he defined patriotism as .....

"the principle that will justify the training of wholesale murderers; a trade that requires better equipment for the exercise of man-killing than the making of such necessities of life as shoes, clothing, and houses"

And another Marxist E Belford bax ( yes he was a leftie and sported a fine moustache to boot)he was also a barrister said.

"The time is fast approaching when to call a man a patriot will be the deepest insult You can offer him. Patriotism now means advocating plunder in the interests of the privileged classes of the particular State system into which we have happened to be born.

I think the time Belford was referring to has well and truly come - we are less bold about beating up patriotism than some but our leaders are out there banging on 'bout values - stressing at every corner the differences between us and them - and I dont need to tell you who the them is - in order to keep the enthusiam for murder and mayhem alive in our hearts - becuase if we do not do these things a worse fate may befall us -

Patriots go to war and or urge others to go to war or stay on a war footing - and that is our national focus.

And we can see the effects on unbridled patriotism in Iraq - on both side actually - a few elites round up as many young men and women as they can and order them to kill each other - stupid really.

And in reference to the priviliged clases bit - the Sooppreeeem Commander of our Standing Army recently and quite correctly queried the notable under representation in the services of the children of politicians -

Patriotism is a crock - of course failure to be a patriot will be aligned with not loving ones country - and allegations of white anting our great nation will follow.

So Coady's essay is well overdue

PATRIOTISM FOR WEDGE POLITICS

From the comments above the "p" word sure looks divisive.

Funnily enough the Howard Government is aware of patriotism's divisive nature and uses it against the Labor Party and its supporters.

I reckon patriotism is yet another of Howard’s WEDGE POLITICAL tools. He knows that key ethnic groups in Melbourne and Sydney (eg Muslims) reputedly prefer Labor. Many other Labor supporters Australians are strongly patriotic "true blue" Aussies.

By bringing up patriotism Howard forces Beazley and local Labor MP to choose a line to prove that Labor is patriotic or at least addressing the multicultural issue. Whatever line Beazley uses he alienates certain groups of Labor politicians and potential oters.

To some extent Howard and Costello also outdo themselves in kicking the patriotism can as part of the succession struggle.

Patriotism has little to do with country where politics is concerned.

Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com

Ho Hum
You're quite right that the political right uses prejudicial language and oblique attacks, but it seems to me that the this is something the left is equally guilty of. I suspect most of us find bias a lot easier to identify in the words of people we disagree with than those we agree with.

This article is not above a bit of prejudicial language – “indulgence in flag-worship” and “the crocodile man was better known and more loved in America than Australia, which may explain some of the prime minister's infatuation with his image” both qualify as "emotionally manipulative slur words", in my book (even though I have some sympathy with the opinions they're intended to convey).

The author is correct when he refers to that famous quote…..’patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel’. Some people do abuse it and some people use patriotism for purely selfish reasons. Recently an estimated 20,000 very patriotic Australians were found living in the south of Lebanon. Their paroxysms of flag-worship were greeted with astonishment and scorn.

The most overt displays of patriotism can be found in the USA. How do we explain that the USA is still a magnet for millions of people? An estimated 7 million illegals want to be classified as USA citizens. They want to be American, proud, patriotic and the all the other jingoistic tosh that the yanks go on with. How so?

A person would have to be deaf, dumb and blind not to have noticed America’s dirty washing on display for all the world to see yet 7 million people seem to still want to commit to what they view as worthwhile ideals.

Maybe patriotism ain’t all that bad

Those who argue for a "gray" reality may well get it. Or at least some semblance of gray, induced by a stiff knee in the back as they find themselves bent to the will of oppression as the very rights they claim as "theirs" are chocked from them.
Of course they will also demand that they be protected by those very same patriots that they have vilified.
That's the beauty of gray. Your always right(or more right)because you advocate no thing.

The dictionary says that a patriot is a lover or defender of his country. Do some of the people in these posts object to being a patriot to this country because in time of war their allegiance is to their old tribe in their old country. It makes a lie of the vows they swore when they were granted citizenship and swore loyalty and allegiance to this country doesn’t it.

As for professor Coady. I say what kind of person doesn’t love their country or want to defend it. Whos going to be standing on your side of the line Professor Coady if war breaks out and the line is drawn in the sand. You’ll want your fellow countrymen to protect you then wont you. The fact that some of the people in these posts don’t feel patriotic to their sworn Australian citizenship highlights the point I always make. That mankind is tribal and incapable of multiculturalism unless intermarriage takes place because their first allegiance will always be to their tribe if a world war breaks out

I dont know that Mr Coady does not love his country - he just think the way patriotism is being pumped up is bad - so do I

Now! How many "posters" took the "BAIT".

whats the bait sueb etc ... - ?thiss isust too hard suntimes u guys go on with so much crap

Patriotism: Mmmmm, just another one of these vague multifaceted terms, that means different things to different people, and which is easily manipulated by politicians.

Most people would consider those who buck the system and make lots of complaints to be non patriots.

Well, I think that in many cases they are the greatest patriots of all, because they are the thinking individuals who are willing to stand up and be counted. They are the ones most concerned about the ills of society and nation and wish to see them set right….. where as those that blithely roll with the flow are not necessarily being patriotic at all.

Surely patriotism in a democracy must include the right to freely express opinions contrary to the dominant paradigm or doctrine. But this is where patriotism is often seen to be violated.

So it’s a complex issue, and not one we should dwell on for too long.

Let’s just encourage everyone to support the notion of a united nation, and in so doing, exercise their freedom of speech openly, even if it means being highly critical of some of the fundamental policies of governance….and leave it at that.

Patriotism, not for those who represent wealth and power, but for the people, which unlike sheep don’t even need to be driven, but will gladly follow.

But surely the above must be a perfect society, like one to dream about.

How is it attained? Needs a bit of luck, with a leader conscious of what the average person wants, and playing the part, even if he or she can be a little racist.

Back to the luck which means happy consumers with cheap imported clothing as well as cheap imported small tools, as well as even cheap imported machine assemblies. Plus even more important, strong demand from formerly backward countries for underground compounds to structuralise and modernise even better eventually than the supplier

But wait a minute, for the lucky public, is this encouraging patriotism or just like over-feeding those sheep when there’s still feed in the paddock but not as nice as that back in the trough?

So patriotism must need a test, like someone going to attack one’s country. Surely today’s terrorism should be just fitting the bill.

But there can be a type of terrorism caused by us superior ones wanting and grabbing commodities and even running countries that belong to poorer peoples who being trodden on, have no means much to fight back but to give their lives like the terrorists.

So we are now given the real test. Could be like healthy sheep and cattle breaking out and grabbing feed that does not belong to them, but having the go-ahead to do what they are doing.

But with all our superior learning these days, and in a so-called globalised society, should we need such an outmoded thing as patriotism?

Just plain decency and common sense with everybody, would probably be better.

Thanks Tony - great article, which says much that needs to be said.

I've been concerned for some time about the resurgence of jingoistic ideas in some influential sectors of our society, and also by their ready adoption by a significant proportion of the hoi polloi.

Currently, I think that Bierce's correction of Johnson's observation aptly describes much of our mainstream commentary, much to our collective loss. Those who don't understand Johnson, or who have no knowledge of Bierce, are sadly disabled by their poor exposure to literature. Unfortunately, it seems that the 'new philistinism' is the flavour of the month.

Maybe that's why we get so much of it in this forum.

"Jingoistic (mindless)Patriotism"

yes.. that kind of thing is a grasshoppers privates away from grabbing the torches and the rope against the 'non' patriot.

So perhaps this is the place and the time... for we who are sensing the danger, to sieze the opportunity and transform cheap political patriotism into a much more worthy exercise of educated national solidarity based in real threats and realistic assessment of our own blotchy history.

Black marks on our history do not lessen our need or right to survive.
We may be comforted that our accusers one and all ... to the last man, have similar blotches and marks. Self flagellation will do us no good at all.
-Admit.
-Repent.
-Move on.

There has never been a time more crucial for us to build national cultural and social solidarity. I mean never.. as in N-E-V-E-R.

The threat from radical Islam is more grave even than that ideoligy which drove the Nazis. Homicide bombers are not doing it for the Fhuerer. they are doing it because no less than Almight Allah tells them to. (Via their sheiks and Imams). 3 and a 1/2 yr old children are taught to say "I hate Jews, who were born from apes and pigs" (Palestinian Tv... 'Threat of Radical Islam' FoxNews ..find the links)

Anjem Choudary, leading british radical when interviewed about 911 said "Such things/attacks are not legitimate expressions of Jihad" (words_to_that_effect). He was secretly recorded later at a meeting where he said "Now, we look at the glorious 19 martyrs who downed the Trade Centre" (WTTE)

Our political correctness and tolerance is allowing Imam's in America to call on muslims en-masse to march on (storm ?) the White House and make it Islamic. Radicals in the streets of America yelling "Death 2 America".
UK Muslims yelling "This (Islamic) flag will rise over Parliament"

If only 10% of worlds Muslims were 'radical' that would equal 120 million people.

It puts the saying "Most_Muslims_are_moderate" into striking perspective.

911
Madrid
Bali
Kenya
Beruit
London1 (Buses/trains)
London2(thwarted)
London3 plane bombing(thwared)
Beslan
Bali2
Melbourne ? (13 on trial)
Sydney ? (11 on trial)

...continued....

For those among us who feel voicing the threat of radical Islam is just

"Oh.. first it was the chinks, then the wogs daigos,wops and slopes and then the boat people from Vietnam and aah.. now its the 'Muslims' turn, but it will all fade.. just like the others and we will all live and love happily ever after in our multi-cultural utopia".....

I cannot for the life of me find any unifiying force or ideology or global anti western bombing campaign as having arisen from any of the non Muslim groups.

and for the politicallly cynical... the fact that Fox news currently has "Obsession: the Threat of Radical Islam" on its features for the month...

YES....I'm sure the timing DOES have plenty to do with the US election.
NO.....It does not change the reality of the threat one scrap.

The particular version of patriotism being sold to us now is infuriating not because it demands that we love our country, but because it demands we love our country in a particular way.

The idea that there is only one true way to love your country is absurd. Do we necessarily have to get frenzied about Anzacs or is it ok just to appreciate a good ghost gum? Does patriotism always have to be about war or can it be about Vegemite and Hills Hoists?

Give me Uluru, the Top End, wattle, the kangaroo and the platypus, the Harbour Bridge and the Opera House any day. They may be hopelessly romantic and corny but they don't ask me to hate anybody.