In the United States today, anyone raised in the current culture would agree that patriotism is a hugely significant aspect of American culture.
In elementary school, a scripted Pledge of Allegiance is recited every morning, the national anthem and its supporting hymns are memorized by heart, and the United States is always the hero in social studies class. Patriotism is the word blasted from speakers and plastered on signs on national holidays and events. So often, as students leave the school system and enter a much more international environment as adults, a shift is noticed: patriotism has become something very different than what they were taught; something possibly nefarious. But what is the difference, and is it inherently harmful?
Patriotism, in its purest form, is a human quality that seems to be unavoidable, no matter the geological location, timeline, or political environment of the people in question. Pride in one’s national identity is often shown through military service, public service, and a willingness to sacrifice for the common good are all aspects of patriotism, seen throughout history for as long as groups of people have organized themselves under the same flag.
One example of patriotism and military service being linked in society can be seen in Ancient Greece and Rome; military service and the desire to defend their country from intruders was seen as the ultimate display of patriotism. In modern times, military service is seen very similarly, with added social aspects such as supporting national sports teams and celebrating national holidays with gusto sprinkled on top.
The love of one’s country is, in itself, good. It’s good for the person to feel connected to his countrymen and hold the desire to commit acts in the best interest of those countrymen, while also considering those who may have been born under a different national emblem. The key difference begins to rear its head at this point in the conversation of patriotism vs nationalism; nationalism does include the same pride and love in national identity, while protecting the values of a culture and people that patriotism exemplifies. The gap between the two holds several differences, most born from widespread fear and a desire for power.
Nationalism is often a reaction to colonialism and multinational empires, lording over their citizens through mistreatment, much like the way the United States originally reacted to the British Empire and its imperial attitude towards the people who made desperate attempts to achieve their goals diplomatically and peacefully. The Ottoman Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire are more examples of vast groups of countries ruled by a single national entity, often without consideration for the individual or group rights of the colonized countries.
Despite the origins of the US and it’s vehement stance against imperialism, the country holds several countries and areas of land as “territories”. The list includes American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin Islands. Most of the occupied countries that are under US control as territories were acquired either through cession, or another imperial country handing over control as a result of conflict e.g. Texas, 1845; The Phillipine Islands, 1898; Peurto Rico, 1898), through purchase without conflict (The Virgin Islands, 1917), or occupation of an unclaimed area (Midway Islands, 1867). While not all acquisitions of territories were a result of war with another imperial country (Spain, Britain, etc.), none of those where people were already established physically and culturally were acquired without bloodshed.
The jump to nationalism can also be a result of a society or culture experiencing extreme decline in resources, peace, and general prosperity. One of the most significant examples in history of nationalism stemming from social decline, ultimately resulting in full-blown fascism, is the Nazi party in post-World War I Germany. One of the biggest arguments that Adolf Hitler used to justify his expansion into Europe and cultural or militant genocide was Lebensraum, or “living space”. The concept is credited to Karl Ernst Haushofer from the Institute of Geopolitics in Munich and his ultra-nationalist desire to undo the perceived failure of Germany in the First World War and the consequences in the Treaty of Versailles (1919). Expansion through war and genocide was seen by nationalists like Hitler and General Friedrich von Bernhardi (1849–1930) as a “biological necessity” to avoid “inferior or decaying races would easily choke the growth of healthy, budding elements” through war.
In this case, the superiority of the Aryan race was seen as all-important and justified the murder and/or removal of outside races, such as Poles, Russians, Romani people, and, in particular, the Jews. Nationalism’s relationship with racism, eugenics, and a dislike for the mixing of cultures and races through birth, derogatorily known as “miscegenation”. Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and many other nationalist and ultra-nationalist regimes condemn the concept, claiming the “watering down” of a group’s identity damages its quality compared to the rest of the world.
While not all nationalism is as extreme as Hitler and his desire to rid the German world of non-Aryan races, nationalism is closely tied to the prioritization of military action in a nation’s response to international conflict.
After the Cold War with the USSR, the conflict expanded rapidly into sending thousands of military advisors and soldiers to fight on the ground during the Vietnam War, ultimately a civil war backed on both sides by multinational empires. The widespread fear of communism in the 1940’s, aka “Red Scare”, impacted many decisions made by the United States government, from supporting the French imperial rule in the Vietnam War to adding “Under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954 in an attempt to further implement the moral separation between the capitalist US and a “godless”, communist USSR. The Vietnam War saw a death toll of 50,000+ American soldiers, ending with the success of a communist government in Vietnam, but a communist government made up of themselves.
A major argument for nationalism says patriotism is a net positive for the morale of the people in question, which has been undoubtedly proven through centuries of expanding cultures, while the evolution of that patriotism into nationalism speaks to racial and cultural superiority, the exploitation of vulnerable groups, a breakdown of global cooperation and peace, and the bloodshed of millions or more innocent lives. While conflict, as a species, is inevitable, hatred and dismissal of those with varying views and cultures for the benefit of a sole victor is avoidable. All things in moderation not only speaks to the small joys in life, like wine or the occasional fast food order, but also to pride, to the dominion of a single group over others.
To recognize the difference between patriotism and nationalism is to see that those groups are just as inherently deserving of peace as the brethren that stand on distant ground.
Located in Anchorage, Alaska, Vance spends her time working in floristry, taking her border collie mix, Una, on trail adventures, and drinking tea and binge-watching Bob’s Burgers.
As a lifelong writer of creative stories and novellas, she graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in English and Communication with hopes to eventually Master in Communication. She is deeply invested in the art of connecting others through writing and words and shining a light on otherwise shrouded communities such as LGBTQ+, neurodivergent groups, and survivors of domestic abuse.
