Category: Patriotism

Introduction

Virtue is a trait that promotes the moral and common good. However, patriotism is a virtue to the point that is not the extreme and the people of the country never gain at the cost of resources, which are useful to other countries. In addition to that patriotism should not avoid or prevent the flow of talent from other countries to the mother country. In that aspect American society follows Nussbaums broader cosmopolitan view to inviting the talent from all parts of the world. According to George Bernard Shaw, Patriotism is a feeling of one own countrys superiority because he/she was born in it. As ones birth cannot decide ones superiority, the wars may result in extreme patriotic behaviors according to Guy de Maupassant. Hence, in extreme conditions patriotism cannot be considered as a virtue when it leads to wars between countries, which are destructive and harmful for the people of participating countries. Hence, the broader cosmopolitan view of Nussbaum can be viewed superior to that of David Millers view as it inherently contains the common good and moral values for mankind. Patriotism should be compassionate and it may take an extreme turn when the people of a particular country or origin are oppressed by people of another country or origin. In that condition, the oppression faced by the people may take shape of extreme patriotism and may result in the common good of the oppressed. However, after attaining freedom, the previously oppressed people should not dominate other people in the name of patriotism as it does no common good and in that context, the patriotism may lose its virtue.

Compassionate Patriotism

In some cases, patriotism arises from fear, grief, and astonishment and from the feeling that everybody has to defend the country. The September 11, 2001 incident that happened in the US was the incident that is capable of giving rise to that type of patriotism. Even in the wake of Americans sympathy to women and children in Afghanistan, the orientation of intentions and imaginations of American society in the aftermath of 9/11 just resulted in a patriotic fervor that leads to the war on terror. Hence, in the above context, patriotism is the feeling that arises from the concerns of the safety of the people of a nation. However, in that concern, the fate of thousands and lacs of peoples who are suffering from national calamities and civil wars all over the world are neglected as they do not have enough economic clout in the international arena and they are not fierce enough to fight against the problems they face. As a result in the above context, patriotism is the quality that defends a country but not a virtue that does the common good. The above type of patriotism cannot result in compassionate patriotism as the safety concerns of the people of the US and their children resulted in the defeat of other people and safety concerns of their children for at least one generation. Hence, it can be termed that the patriotic fervor that results in a win of pride for one country and loss of pride and livelihood for another country is not compassionate patriotism. Compassionate patriotism arises from the aspect that enables the sharing of values and prosperity with the people of another country. One can observe that there is no conflict with the countries with which we share our prosperity, values and thoughts. The conflict arises by loss of compassion in patriotic feelings and the compassionate patriotism can lead to prevention of conflicts between different countries. Though one can term the safety concerns are emotional as well as the compassion, the compassion results in positive results and safety concerns arise from the lack of compassion.

Martha Nussbaum (2001) quotes Aristotle in her article about compassion that requires three things. The first thing is the rise of compassionate feeling from own self interest and the reality of another persons good or ill. The other kind of compassion is the compassion that arises from emotion and do not consider the vulnerabilities of self and other people. The patriotism seizes to be a virtue when the expansion of moral concern in that stops at the national boundary. Though our philosophies regarding religions and studies say that all human beings are of equal worth, the human emotions involved in patriotism do not believe it and that removes virtue from the patriotism. Nussbaum quotes Aristotle for second time about the citizens of Platos ideal city who are asked to care for all citizens equally and actually care for none. As care is a result of intense attachments in small groups the universal care sometimes seizes to occur if it does not have an organizational buildup to take care.

Comparison between Millers and Nussbaums Views

Miller in his debate We should promote Patriotism emphasizes ones allegiance to national boundaries without justification of their stand. He quotes the moral and political philosophies that are flawed and are only corrected when found that they are inconsistent. Hence, he supports the allegiance and extreme patriotism unless it is proved that the patriotic feelings are not justified and are not for common good. He undermines the role of rationality to support his argument and talks about the allegiances of people towards nationality that build the political philosophy and organization. Hence, he supports the patriotism to its extreme point in order to build organization necessary for the people living under certain boundaries. David Miller talks about the different points of distributive justice that emerge from national and universal point of view are the reason for the national and universal allegiances. The above aspect indicates that the patriotism feelings are a result of political organization and distributive justice for the people living in definite boundaries. In contrary to the argument of Miller, Nussbaum talks about compassionate patriotism and broader cosmopolitan view. She quotes the Ravindranath Tagores views in his story The Home of the World that the worshipping the country is different from serving the country as the former may result in not considering the flaws in patriotic feelings. The cosmopolitan view rises from the sharing of feelings of human beings but not from the pre decided agenda. Hence she expresses that the patriotism should be in a way to serve the people rather than raking up the emotions. She talks about human rights in the context of the global relations, national values and rational education system. All the above aspects decide the way patriotic feelings rise and breed in the minds of the people. The patriotic feeling that makes the students and youth think that US is above the remaining world and propaganda regarding it may result in envy and prejudice in the minds of lesser developed countries and are capable of breeding opposition to US. Does the opposition to US in various countries is inevitable in the era of global economics and relations? If the above idea is true, the broader cosmopolitan view of Nussbaum prevails over the patriotic view of Miller. Nussbaum discusses about the two communities, a human being has to face; one, the community of his birth and the other the community of human argument and aspirations. The community of human argument and aspiration leads to the fact that the growth of community can ensure the growth of neighboring and other communities as well as the countries. The universal citizenship view can develop relations between citizens of different countries as US encourages the talent shift from other countries to America. Hence, the broader cosmopolitan view can keep the patriotic rhetoric under control and can develop relations with other communities thus decreasing the chances of conflict between US and other countries.

Hence, according to above discussion, the Nussbaums view emerges as the suitable one in the backdrop of global economics and politics for a country like US. The patriotism within the broader cosmopolitan view not only can benefit US but also the other countries in the world who are a part of global economy and international society. The essay Patriotism in the book of Emma Goldman (1910) quotes Leo Tolstoys opinion that the Patriotism is a principle to justify the training of murderers. When the training of military does not arise from defensive tactics and if it focuses on attacking others, the patriotic feelings that are enrooted in the minds of people by the government are the ones, which help the administrations attacking tactics using its military and patriotic feelings in the people. Emma Goldman states that the patriotism declares that the world is divided into small spots and each spot belongs to a particular community and supports conflicts between communities that are result of conceit, egotism and arrogance that evolve due to extreme patriotic feelings in the people and in the minds of political leadership.

Conclusion

The above discussion that contains the views of Martha Nussbaum, David Miller and Emma Goldman supports the view of Nussbaums broader cosmopolitan view that give strength to universal citizenship. As universal citizenship is capable of avoiding the conflicts between citizens of different countries by sharing the world in a mutually agreed manner the extremes of patriotism; arrogance, egotism and conceit can be contained. The resultant world that is dominated by the feeling of universal citizenship, which is a follow up of broader cosmopolitan view on patriotism can be expected to be more peaceful than the present world.

Bibliography

George Bernard Shaw, Leo Tolstoy, 2008, Quote Unquote. Web.

Martha Nussbaum, 2001, Can Patriotism can be Compassionate?, The Nation. Web.

David Miller, 1993, We Should Promote Patriotism, In Defense of Nationality in Journal of Applied Philosophy, Volume 10, Number 1.

Martha Nussbaum, 1994, We Should favor a Broader Cosmopolitan View, Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism of Boston Review.

Emma Goldman, 1910, Patriotism in Anarchism and Other Essays, Kennikat Press.

Service to community depends heavily on the individual community members notion of self, which is in turn heavily influenced by his culture. This paper explores the differing notions of community exemplified by two very different main characters: Dr. Rieux in Albert Camus The Plague, and Lieutenant Shinji Takeyama in Yukio Mishimas Patriotism. This paper will show that each characters service to his community, or lack thereof, directly reflects his culturally defined role.

In Camus The Plague, Rieux begins the novel far more absorbed in his personal life than in his professional responsibilities as Orans only physician. His wifes long illness necessitates a visit to a sanatorium out of town, and her leaving triggers tremendous guilt in him, both personal and professional, as seen here: he begged her to forgive him; he felt he should have looked after her better, hed been most remiss (Camus 10). Rieuxs role as husband supersedes that of doctor, initially.

In Patriotism, we see the opposite is true of Takeyama. His role as an officer of the Imperial troops subordinates his role as husband, so much so that Takeyamas honeymoon trip was dispensed with on the grounds that these were times of national emergency (Mishima 1).

The two characters differ wildly in their views toward their roles in the community also. Rieux, though a competent doctor and essentially kind hearted, exhibits a slightly annoyed air during the early days of the plague, and as the disease wears on, this annoyance graduates to full blown resentment.

The whole of the following day was spent, so far as Rieux was concerned, in long drives to every corner of the town, in parleyings with the families of the sick and arguments with the invalids. Never had Rieux known his profession to weigh on him so heavily (Camus 59).

Takeyama, conversely, observes his role as officer, soldier, and defender of the Imperial family with a religious austerity that borders on obsession. On the god shelf below the stairway, alongside the tablet from the Great Ise Shrine, were set photographs of their Imperial Majesties, and regularly every morning, before leaving for duty, the lieutenant would stand with his wife at this hallowed place and together they would bow their heads low (Mishima 2).

Both characters are products of the cultures they live and work in. Rieux, although an important member of the community, remains first and foremost an individual, amongst other individuals. The townspeople of Oran habitually place their own needs first, and identify less as a cohesive community, and more as a collection of individuals with a loose geographic connection.

Being ill is never agreeable, but there are towns that stand by you, so to speak, when you are sick; in which you can, after a fashion, let yourself go. An invalid&likes to have something to rely on,&but at Oran the violent extremes of temperature, the exigencies of business,&and the very nature of its pleasures call for good health. An invalid feels out of it there (Camus 5).

Takeyama, by contrast, utterly identifies with the community represented by the Imperial troops. His connection to his fellow officers and soldiers is deeply emotional and intimately connected to his psychological well being. Upon discovering that the cohesive community he imagined himself a part of is actually riven with discord, infighting, and rebelliousness, the schism between his fantasy community and his real community rends his soul.

Profoundly disturbed by the knowledge that his closest colleagues had been with the mutineers from the beginning, and indignant at the imminent prospect of Imperial troops attacking Imperial troops, he took his officers sword and ceremonially disemboweled himself (Mishima 1).

Lastly, a significant disparity in the experience of time exists between these two characters, which also relates to their respective views of community. A good deal of time elapses between the imposition of the quarantine and the moment when Rieux and the other townspeople take action and begin helping one another:

precisely when things seemed worst, people began to pull themselves together. Tarrou organized a group of volunteers to combat the plague. Rambert, on the eve of his escape, chose to remain and fight;&It was not a question of heroism; people hardly had enough freedom of choice to be heroic.

They simply decided to do what they could, even if their resistance was absurd. And perhaps, suggests Camus, to continue upholding ones human obligations when there seems the least possibility of fulfilling them is, if not heroism, the best men can do (Community of Death 98).

For Takeyama, on the other hand, he takes action the instant he learns of the mutiny, and his action is to flee, via death. Well, then . The lieutenants eyes opened wide. Despite this exhaustion they were strong and clear, and now for the first time they looked straight into the eyes of his wife. Tonight I shall cut my stomach.

(Mishima 3). His culturally defined role as soldier leaves no room for any other action, in his mind.

In Camus The Plague and Mishimas Patriotism, each characters culturally defined role ostensibly dictates the actions he takes to serve his community in a time of great strife. Ironically enough, Takeyama, the character who displays the most obvious adherence to the idea of community, is the first to leave his. Rather than stay and help his community during a civil war, he immediately kills himself and abandons it. It is Rieux, the reluctant community member, who remains to minister to the needs of his afflicted neighbors.

Works Cited

Camus, Albert. The Plague. Trans. Stuart Gilbert. New York: Vintage Books-Random House, 1991. Print.

Community of Death. Time 16 August 1948: 98. Web.

Mishima, Yukio. Patriotism. Trans. G.W. Sargent. Mutantfrog Travelogue. WordPress, 19 October 2010. Web.

Introduction

Written by Yukio Mishima, Patriotism is an allegorical short story describing the circumstances leading to the death of a young man and his newly wed wife. The author employs different elements of literature to underscore different themes. However, use of symbolism/imagery to explore the theme of loyalty stands out conspicuously as developed next.

In Patriotism Mishima develops the theme of loyalty through the use of symbolism. One of the lieutenants general, Ozeki ensures there is proper housing for his soldiers. For instance, Shinji gets an apartment immediately after his wedding. However, the apartments are of poor standards. The houses are old with three bedrooms and a tiny garden on the side.

The rooms are made of patches of mats hence the sun penetrates through into the houses. Moreover, the rooms are not enough hence some rooms double as guest rooms and bedrooms. Interestingly, none of the soldiers complains about the poor housing system. The houses lack any form of security incase the soldiers are on duty.

The soldiers silence towards the deplorable living conditions symbolizes their loyalty to the government and authority. The pathetic shacks going for soldiers houses is an image of how living conditions here are wanting; nevertheless, this image brings out loyalty because at the end of the day, no one complains despite the fact that anyone has every reason to complain.

As aforementioned, silence and compliance are symbols of loyalty. For instance, one day the lieutenant general orders other junior officers to prepare for a coup that would automatically rebel against the government. Homma, Yamaguchi, and Kano respect these orders at the expense of their lives.

This highlights the theme of loyalty, as the soldiers are ready to obey orders well aware of the dangers involved. Although one of the lieutenants, Shinji is against the coup, he does not resist the orders before the general. However, before he commits suicide he writes a note stating, Long live the imperial forces (Mishima 95). This form of blind compliance regardless of the risks involved underscores the theme of loyalty in the story.

The author continues to explore the symbol of compliance and selflessness by explicating how soldiers brave hostile conditions to execute the coup. On the dawn of 26 February, violence erupts in the country. Soldiers forego their sleep, overlook the snowy weather, and assemble in order to plan for a coup. Although there is violence and poor weather, soldiers obey orders and stay in cold for about two days to plan for a coup.

As the story closes, the reader might wonder why soldiers seem to follow orders blindly even in cases where common sense would demand otherwise. For instance, a coup underlines rebellion against a government that the soldiers ought to serve dutifully (Nathan 59); therefore, one would expect the soldiers to reject such a move with absoluteness. Nevertheless, the author uses this symbolism to bring out the theme of loyalty, if anything loyalty demands ones support at all times be it in good or bad times.

Conclusion

The theme of loyalty comes out clearly, as Mishima develops Patriotism, an all time masterpiece. Soldiers blind compliance and silence symbolize their unrelenting resolve to remain loyal to the immediate authority.

Against all the expectations, the soldiers comply with the lieutenants orders to stage a coup. Moreover, they remain silent despite the fact that they live under deplorable conditions. Mishima deliberately paints the soldiers as such to bring out the theme of loyalty by using silence and compliance as the core elements that define loyalty.

Works Cited

Mishima, Yukio. Death in Midsummer and Other Stories. New York: New Directions

Publishing Corporation, 1966 Nathan, John. Mishima: A Biography. New York: Little, Brown, and Company, 1974.

Introduction

Written by Yukio Mishima, Patriotism is an allegorical short story describing the circumstances leading to the death of a young man and his newly wed wife. The author employs different elements of literature to underscore different themes. However, use of symbolism/imagery to explore the theme of loyalty stands out conspicuously as developed next.

In Patriotism Mishima develops the theme of loyalty through the use of symbolism. One of the lieutenants general, Ozeki ensures there is proper housing for his soldiers. For instance, Shinji gets an apartment immediately after his wedding. However, the apartments are of poor standards. The houses are old with three bedrooms and a tiny garden on the side.

The rooms are made of patches of mats hence the sun penetrates through into the houses. Moreover, the rooms are not enough hence some rooms double as guest rooms and bedrooms. Interestingly, none of the soldiers complains about the poor housing system. The houses lack any form of security incase the soldiers are on duty.

The soldiers silence towards the deplorable living conditions symbolizes their loyalty to the government and authority. The pathetic shacks going for soldiers houses is an image of how living conditions here are wanting; nevertheless, this image brings out loyalty because at the end of the day, no one complains despite the fact that anyone has every reason to complain.

As aforementioned, silence and compliance are symbols of loyalty. For instance, one day the lieutenant general orders other junior officers to prepare for a coup that would automatically rebel against the government. Homma, Yamaguchi, and Kano respect these orders at the expense of their lives.

This highlights the theme of loyalty, as the soldiers are ready to obey orders well aware of the dangers involved. Although one of the lieutenants, Shinji is against the coup, he does not resist the orders before the general. However, before he commits suicide he writes a note stating, Long live the imperial forces (Mishima 95). This form of blind compliance regardless of the risks involved underscores the theme of loyalty in the story.

The author continues to explore the symbol of compliance and selflessness by explicating how soldiers brave hostile conditions to execute the coup. On the dawn of 26 February, violence erupts in the country. Soldiers forego their sleep, overlook the snowy weather, and assemble in order to plan for a coup. Although there is violence and poor weather, soldiers obey orders and stay in cold for about two days to plan for a coup.

As the story closes, the reader might wonder why soldiers seem to follow orders blindly even in cases where common sense would demand otherwise. For instance, a coup underlines rebellion against a government that the soldiers ought to serve dutifully (Nathan 59); therefore, one would expect the soldiers to reject such a move with absoluteness. Nevertheless, the author uses this symbolism to bring out the theme of loyalty, if anything loyalty demands ones support at all times be it in good or bad times.

Conclusion

The theme of loyalty comes out clearly, as Mishima develops Patriotism, an all time masterpiece. Soldiers blind compliance and silence symbolize their unrelenting resolve to remain loyal to the immediate authority.

Against all the expectations, the soldiers comply with the lieutenants orders to stage a coup. Moreover, they remain silent despite the fact that they live under deplorable conditions. Mishima deliberately paints the soldiers as such to bring out the theme of loyalty by using silence and compliance as the core elements that define loyalty.

Works Cited

Mishima, Yukio. Death in Midsummer and Other Stories. New York: New Directions

Publishing Corporation, 1966 Nathan, John. Mishima: A Biography. New York: Little, Brown, and Company, 1974.

The article by Michelene E. Pesantubbee Nancy Ward: American Patriot or Cherokee Nationalist features the life story of Cherokees beloved woman peacemaker Nanyehi, also known as Nancy Ward. As Nancy dedicated her life to being a peacemaker, nowadays, there are various opinions on whether she is an American Patriot or Cherokee Nationalist. The author of the article explores various aspects of Nancy Wards life which correspond to both statements. The article states that Nancy Wards actions come from her understanding of changes that Cherokee had to face, and her will to adapt to the changes rather than commit to American Patriotism or Cherokee nationalism.

The author starts the article with an introduction of Nancy Ward and her impact on the American-Cherokee relationships. The article notes multiple opinions on peoples perception of Nancy Ward, emphasizing the statement that Ward desired to be more like white people (Pesantubbee 177). The author states that Nancy Wards actions were not due to this desire, her marriage to a white man, or because she felt that American society was superior.

According to the author, Nancy Ward carried her functions as a beloved woman and sought new ways for Cherokee to thrive in a changing world (Pesantubbee 177). The article lists arguments regarding different aspects of Nancy Wards personality to prove that her actions were majorly impacted by her inner nature rather than as a commitment to American patriotism and Cherokee nationalism.

The arguments proposed by the author starts from Nancy Wards origins or her relations to the Cherokee Wolf Clan. In the authors opinion, Nancy Wards actions were connected to her affiliation to the Wolf Clan, one of the most important clans of Cherokee that was responsible for helping captives during the war (Pesantubbee, 181). The text of the article implies that the help that Nancy Wards provided to American soldiers was a part of her Clans traditions.

The author entails that Nancy Wards responsibilities as a beloved woman defined her commitment to peacemaking. Wards duties and power were broadened by her additional title of war woman that she earned in the battle in Muscogee Creek. The author states that due to her responsibilities as a beloved woman and a war woman, Ward was the one to decide Lydia Beans fate, and due to these circumstances, she chose to protect Beans life.

Wards sense of patriotism is emphasized in a designated part of the article where the author addresses the issue that Ward is frequently perceived in American history as the only beloved woman. The article notes that war was a part of beloved people, both men, and women that dedicated their lives to the white path. According to the author, Cherokee people were able to balance white and red, where white symbolized peace brought by peace leaders and red symbolized warriors (Pesantubbee 189).

As an example, the author describes that Wards initial concern when she sent warnings about the Cherokee assault was to protect the warriors who engaged in the combat. Therefore, despite the action being perceived in American culture as Ward being a traitor to the Cherokee people, it had another motivation (Pesantubbee 178). Wards relationship with her father, Attakullakulla, another famous Cherokee peacemaker, is also listed by the author as an argument that Wards personality is the reason for her actions.

The article lists valuable arguments supporting the statement that Nancy Wards actions were influenced majorly by her perception of the piece and her responsibilities as a beloved woman. The author provides a perspective that was not previously explored in a concise and organized way. With the article, the author achieved the stated purpose of determining whether Nancy Ward was an American Patriot or a Cherokee Nationalist and made a significant contribution to an existing body of knowledge.

Work Cited

Michelene E. Pesantubbee. Nancy Ward: American Patriot or Cherokee Nationalist? American Indian Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 2, 2014, pp. 177206. JSTOR. Web.

Overflowing with patriotism and idealism, the sonnet, written soon after World War I, exemplifies the glory of self-sacrifice. Rupert Brooke details the optimistic perspective of a British soldier through the themes of courage, nationalism, and self-sacrifice. By doing so, the poet conveys the beauty of defending and dying for one’s country, concealing the doleful aspects of war.

A sonnet written in the first-person speaker, the Soldier reveals the passion and courage of those that fought in the war. The poem begins with an apprehensive tone, stating, “If I should die, think only this of me”. By recognizing the possibility of death through the equivocation in the term ‘if’ in the first-person perspective, the speaker becomes much more personal. As a result, the audience is instilled with pathos due to the menacing situation (war) in which the soldier is in. However, the clear assertion ‘think’ directed towards the reader establishes the poet’s sense of excited urgency to convey his fond sentiment for death. Furthermore, the pathos rapidly diminishes due to the lack of terms with fearful and distressing connotations. Rupert, instead, replaces the usual despondent tone of war-writing with sanguine language. For example, the references are to life in the phrases “a pulse in the eternal mind” and “dreams happy as her day; and laughter, learnt of friends”, encouraging the reader to not grieve. Terms such as ‘dreams happy’, ‘laughter’, and ‘friends’ emphasize happiness through their jovial connotations, and create a much more idealistic attitude towards war. This is quite ironic, especially due to the tenor of the poem. Additionally, the colon at the end of the phrase suggests that a list of expectations, in compensation for his likely death, will follow. This style is similar to a letter, and thus interlinks with the idea of departure, both for war and the afterlife.

Moreover, the theme of nationalism is explored through the use of figurative language. As represented in the phrase, “that there’s some corner of a foreign field that is forever England”, the poet implies that nationhood is an embodiment of identity. The term ‘some’ in the phrase “some corner” suggests ‘anywhere by even a minuscule amount’, and ‘corner’ expresses the ‘ends/borders of’. Consequently, Rupert implies his aspirations for the presence of England anywhere, as long as it is in existence. This message is further intensified through the use of enjambment from line two to three to symbolize the soldier’s stretched distance away from home. The continuation of the sentence “That there’s some corner of a foreign field/That is for ever England” in separate lines also isolates “That is for ever England” to provide emphasis. As a result, the significance and potency of the poet’s nation is further embedded within the reader. Not only so, but the phrase “foreign field” employs alliteration with the consonant ‘f’, that provides a flow for an elongated acoustic effect. Consequently, Rupert Brooke stresses the sense of unfamiliarity and distance, implying the limitless possibilities of the occupation of England. Thus, Rupert figuratively transforms this ‘foreign field’ into a part of England, and implies that his demise would be a victory for England.

Furthermore, regardless of the place, “a richer dust will be concealed” due to his nationality: reinforcing the idea of patriotism. The metaphor of ‘dust’ compares the poet’s own body to land, and alludes to both the idea of ashes and the ‘dust’ of battlefields. By directly making this comparison, the poet has already envisioned himself as deceased. However, his continuous focus centered on the value of his “Englishness” as being the reason of the “rich earth” indicates his allegiance. Additionally, the term ‘rich’ implies eminence, as his corpse would be a mark of his nobility. As a result, the poet places the significance of his nationhood superior to his own survival. In addition, the space in between ‘for’ and ‘ever’ elongates the time frame of the term “forever” to accentuate the extensive time. The poet does so to presage the eternal presence of England. This effect is further amplified through a caesura in “That is for ever England”, which individualizes and empowers the statement. By doing so, Rupert Brooke intensifies the cruciality of nationalism and ‘England’.

Additional to the nationalism motif, Rupert Brooke expands on England’s prestige. Reiterating the ‘dust’ metaphor in the succeeding line, “a dust whom England bore, shaped, made aware”, the poet personifies England into a motherly, nurturing figure. Through maternal terms, such as “bore, shaped, made aware”, the growth from birth to adulthood in England is implied. As a result, the soldier’s duty of self-sacrifice is presented as a son’s deed for his mother (England). Thus, the poet indicates his loyalty and devotion to England as his motive for participating in the war. In addition, the maternal language adds an interpersonal connection between the nation and Rupert Brooke. As a result, the stanza becomes much more sensitive and sentimental.

Additionally, the second stanza is embellished with tranquil imagery to romanticize England’s scenery. These descriptions of the British landscape transfigure nationhood from something humane, “body”, to natural, “air”. Set in the countryside of England, the readers depict the “English sights and sounds” filled with “laughter”, “friends”, “suns”, and “rivers”. By presenting England in such a flawless way, the religious allusion to the Garden of Eden is implied. The poet’s presentation of the details of his home as impeccable provides a contextual understanding of his dedication and passion. This is further justified through the metaphor ‘English heaven’ and ‘all evil shed away’, which heighten the glory and purity of Rupert Brooke’s nation. In addition, the metaphor implies his hopes of heaven being just as perfect as England.

Overall, Rupert Brooke presents the honor and prestige of both England and British. Overpowering with a strong sense of patriotism, the poet justifies the nobility of self-sacrifice. As a result, the menacing aspect of a soldier’s fate in war is debilitated.

True patriotism is an act of courage and velour towards your country. It means keeping the interest of the country before one’s own personal needs. It makes the nation stronger. We refer to our nation as our Motherland and we must endeavor to make it a better place for all. True patriotism helps in building a country with a better future so that people live in harmony. Passion and sacrifice must be adhered to instead of being violent showcasing our love and interest for it.

Love for one country is basically inherited, however, it increases with time when you spend a time of life in it. Your love prospers with time as you get to know the importance of a true homeland that serves as your identity, as in many places and circumstances in your life you are known and recognized by your country’s name instead of your individual self.

Our country Pakistan was not just handed over to us as a peace meal, instead, it was a result of the continuous and true efforts of our supreme leader and the founder of the nation – Mr. Jinnah. He did what best he could in his time, now it is our responsibility to maintain it and keep its flag high in the emerging world. All the nations in the world have seen Pakistan coming up and making its way while going through various hardships ever since 1947.

We, the youth of Pakistan, have been bestowed upon a prime responsibility of keeping it safe from the dangerous eyes and nefarious designs of our competitors and we must leave a single stone unturned to continue with the dream of our great leader. We have the courage, capability, and all the very platforms to raise our standards and efforts in front of the whole world to prove and to make them accept that Islam is not an extremist faction and Pakistan is as good and deserving as any other state in the world to get all the desired privileges.

I believe that true patriotism with its love for the Motherland exists in every citizen’s heart, as we can see in the way our nation celebrates Independence Day and other national days. This display of love and affection could not be let down by the temporary false flagged agendas of harmful nations. However, in maintaining the affection we, the youth, must strive to achieve a more practical approach to strengthening our nation by excelling in all the fields, may it be business, agriculture, infrastructure development, sports, tourism, or any other specific area. It is we who will decide the future of our country by standing tall and one as a nation.

In the essay ‘Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism’, written by Martha Nussbaum, she declares that our nation is shockingly ignorant to the remaining of the society. In societies, patriotism is “the devotion to and vigorous support for one’s country”. In society, cosmopolitanism is “the ideology that all human beings belong to a single community based on a shared morality”. Martha’s definition of cosmopolitanism is a human whose allegiance is to the community of human beings in the entire universe. Nussbaum begins by inquiring about schooling and how scholars should learn that the lack of food in different countries are world-wide problems and not the nations. The principle of this paper will be about patriotism and cosmopolitanism taught in schools and how I believe that this idea is not efficient. Martha strongly believes that an education that teaches children that they are citizens of the economy and that every human being is equal and have inalienable rights is adequate. In my opinion, I think this idea will be difficult to merge in school systems. Martha’s belief of a cosmopolitanism education is not adequate to society and hunger education systems. If this education were incorporated in schools, it would have the same difficulties as nationalistic and patriotic schools and it will not be able to be changed. This paper will argue against Nussbaum’s ideas on incorporating patriotism and cosmopolitanism in schools.

In ‘Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism’, Nussbaum believes that scholars should have knowledge about different cultures and histories. If this were to occur, I believe that the curriculum that is offered will have to change to aid with the new topics that are being taught. In school, some educators use textbooks to teach the material to students. A textbook is a book used as a standard work for the study of a particular subject. Textbooks are something else that will have to change because the books will have to correspond to the curriculum and the topics. Martha believes that it will be beneficial for educators to teach students about nationwide hunger so that they will have a better understanding of what is going on among their community and so that they will be able to comprehend it. She believes that by looking at the world beyond measures, students will gain a better understanding of their community concerns. Nussbaum remarks, “If we want to understand our own history and our choices where the structure of the family and of childrearing is involved, we are immeasurably assisted by looking around the world to see in what configurations families exist, and through what strategies children are in fact being cared for. Such a study can show us such as that two parent nuclear family, where the mother is the primary homemaker and the father is the primary breadwinner, is by no means a pervasive style of child rearing in today’s world”.

There is an abundant amount of perks that involve this cosmopolitan education, this will not work efficiently because the world is an extensive place and it keeps growing. The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law about an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”. Humans are allowed to have different backgrounds, cultures, and believes it is their right. In school, there are many subjects that a teacher has to educate. For example, students have to learn about Mathematics, English, History, and Science. It is not possible for a teacher or professor to focus on these topics and still instruct their scholars on the basic subjects, like Mathematics and English. That is just too much for a scholar or teacher to focus on. If a student wants to learn about multicultural studies at a university, then this will not be a troublesome idea because this will be their major, and they can focus all of their attention on this certain topic. This is something that a scholar will specialize in. If this idea were to be taught in history class in middle school or high school, the teacher might not spend a great deal of time on cultures that make up society. If teachers were able to split the time into each region equivalently different aspects will get neglected. These aspects can include, supreme events that occurred and the advancement of culture. If an instructor extremely allocates their time specifically to cosmopolitanism, they will emphasize the significance that no nation is above another, and they will have the ability to go into depth. An instructor who committed themselves, but is brief on time will be compelled to rank which specific culture to teach the students if they required them to learn a fundamental understanding of history. An option can be to rearrange elementary school classes similar to college-level classes, but I believe that this funding will be expensive because more educators will have to get hired and there will be a need for more books for the classes that are being added, this all will cost money.

In the world today, many public schools have inadequate resources. The only schools that will have the ability to afford and have a cosmopolitan education system will be private and working-class schools. Public schools will have to result in restructuring the way their schools get funding because this result will be increasing funds. Martha did not mention the complications in public school education to make it idealistic.

A disadvantage that this concept is the social character of the school. Nussbaum exclaims, “Accustom yourself not to be inattentive to what another person says and as far as possible that person’s mind. One must first learn many things before one judge another’s action with understanding”. Martha is arguing that this will acquire a setting that allows scholars to befriend one another out of respect. Nussbaum also exclaims “to deny the fundamental importance of separateness of people and of fundamental personal liberties”. In society, if a child were to pick patriotism instead of cosmopolitanism they might not be accepted by that particular group, everyone is equal in terms. People in the universe today are very judgmental. Martha emphasizes that scholars should understand that they belong to the world as a whole and not just one specific nationality. “A reader can sometimes sense boundless loneliness as if the removal of the props of habit and local boundaries had left life bereft of any warmth or security.” This loneliness occurs because people in society want to blend in with one another because this gives a confirmation of belonging. Adolescents usually crave the desire to blend in. In school, teenagers form groups that they associate themselves with. They have the feeling of their individual identification apart from the universe.

Furthermore, Martha strongly believes that an education that teaches children that they are citizens of the economy and that every human being is equal and have inalienable rights is adequate. Nussbaum thinks that scholars should have knowledge of different cultures and histories. Martha strongly believes that it will be beneficial for educators to teach students about nationwide starvation so that they will have a greater understanding of what is going on among their community and so that they will be able to comprehend it efficiently. It will be challenging for scholars to reevaluate their values and beliefs. This idea is defective and it does not have logical thinking and justification that will give to society and humanity’s ways.

In his essay “Dare Call It Treason,” Eric Foner criticizes the “American tradition” of suppressing the right to “free expression” when the country is engaged in war and crises. Foner argues that although the “freedom of speech and the right to dissent” are truly American traditions, these rights are suspended and those who engage in such acts are disgraced as traitorous. On the contrary, individuals who remain silent and do not discuss or oppose the faults of their country must be termed as traitors. Countries that accept freedom of speech to be a fundamental right, should allow the citizens to express their opinions on sensitive issues and if these opinions are worthy, they should be considered seriously and accepted by the general public.

Besides being an important fundamental human right that grants the “absolute right to express one’s views”, free speech serves the purpose of safeguarding “the rational mind and its literary, intellectual and scientific products” (Garmong, 2004). If a citizen of any country speaks against the policies or actions of the country, especially when the nation is engaged in war, it appears to others as treason because it is assumed that the person is favoring the enemy country. When America is engaged in war, it does not speak against war. While both the countries, Japan and Korea, lay great emphasis on freedom being the primary right of citizens, free speech concerning a sensitive issue is criticized heavily and termed as treason.

If a Korean speaks well of Japan, the act is termed treason. In order to understand the reason for this mindset, it is first necessary to explore the historical background of two nations, for instance, the historical era of Japan’s colonial rule in Korea. The Japanese have been very cruel to the Koreans, similar to the Nazis. They have engaged in horrific atrocities on the people of Korea and have conducted inhuman experiments on them. One of the very famous experiments which the Koreans were forced into by the Japanese is the “Maruta”, in which people were made to stand in the open, in severe winters, without any clothing, with mercury levels dipping as low as negative forty degrees.

These experiments were conducted to gauge and record the plight of humans under extreme conditions of weather. It is due to the appalling memories of these and other such barbaric atrocities during the colonial rule, that the Koreans have an antipathy towards Japan, even after gaining independence. As a result, even after fifty years of independence from the Japanese rule, it is a common trend among Koreans to consider anyone speaking for Japan, a traitor. Additionally, there is an ongoing dispute between Korea and Japan for the possession of the ‘Dokdo’ Island for the past fifty-four years. This island falls under the administration of Korea and it annoys Koreans when the Japanese insist that the island is a part of the Japanese nation. As such, the Koreans do not like any person to speak in favor of Japan, terming the person as a traitor.

This brings us to investigate the actual meaning of the word ‘traitor’. The term ‘traitor’ is the opposite in meaning to the term ‘patriot’. In “Dare Call It Treason”, Foner describes the “self-proclaimed patriots” as people who “not only seek to determine the boundaries of acceptable speech about the present but rewrite history to create a more politically useful past.” (Foner 595) According to Foner, a patriot is someone who pretends to agree with the government in order to evade the truth. But does such an attribute actually mean that such a person is a true patriot?

A true real patriot of any nation should have the courage and intelligence to speak about the activities of the government and inform the public whether these activities would prove productive or counterproductive for the country. Free speech policies actually function to enhance and improve a country so that when speaking the truth people do not “fear the fate of Galileo” or “that of Socrates” both of whom were “persecuted for daring to assert scientific truths” and “for offending the state” respectively (Garmong, 2004). Free speech policies function to gain diverse opinions on different issues so that the best opinion and decision prevail.

Thus, people who do not have the courage to speak the truth regarding sensitive issues cannot be called true patriots; rather they are traitors who are allowing the country to progress in the wrong direction, towards destruction. If the involvement of a country in war is harmful to the country, it is the duty of sensible patriotic citizens to stand up and voice their opinion and assert that “war is not the way out!” People who are sincerely concerned about the country will have the courage and will to raise their voices against what will harm the nation.

In the same vein, Americans who oppose the government and criticize it for certain actions are also true patriots of the country. They stand by what they to be correct and express themselves by virtue of their freedom of speech. Similarly, in Korea too, the younger generation of Koreans believes that they should now get over the tragic history and must make a fresh beginning by acknowledging the merits of the Japanese society, rather than focusing on past events. Japan has a unique culture and tradition and has gained fame in various domains including music, fashion, movies, food, etc. Even in the field of education, the Japanese enjoy fame, with some of their universities ranked among the hundred best universities in the world. Koreans can concentrate on these attributes of the Japanese and can gain immense knowledge from them which will enable them to develop such special attributes like the Japanese.

Japan is in close proximity to Korea with regard to geographical distance but is distanced with regard to compatibility and companionship. Young, dynamic, and open-minded Koreans have realized that it is now time to move on towards a better future and accept the fact that Japan is way ahead of the Koreans in terms of development and growth and therefore it is important to learn some crucial lessons from them. But sadly, this young and dynamic lot of Koreans is severely criticized by some members of the Korean society instead of being regarded as patriots who speak for the wellbeing and enhancement of the Korean society, by initiating a positive change.

Patriotism is defined by Merriam Webster online as love or devotion to one’s country. It is the special affinity one has towards their homeland. This means being ready and willing to sacrifice for the country due to the loved one’s feels for their country. Patriotic people are seen as more devoted to their countries as opposed to devotion to one’s interests. Patriotism is a complicated phenomenon and scholars have divided it into various categories.

Though there exists a disagreement on the labels. The first group is known as devout patriotism that signifies unconditional loyalty to one’s state. Devout patriotism is also referred to as blind patriotism. The second type of patriotism is symbolic patriotism. This kind of patriotism is associated with symbols and rituals which can be informed of loyalty songs and national flags. The other category is constructive or critical patriotism which is the belief that the best way to love one’s country is with constructive criticism of the government (Primoratz and pavkovic 35-76)

The constructive or critical patriotism leads me to the question. Is being critical of the government patriotic? Some will argue that a patriotic person is the one who is not scared to ask a question to the government. (Littman, 2005) states that she does not criticize what the government is doing because she hates this country. The reason behind her deeds is her passionate love and pride in her American country.

Criticizing the government is very patriotic because we are able to voice our concerns on the issues we feel are not going right. In the case of the Iraq war, how would it be unpatriotic to take to task a government that puts the precious lives of its sons and daughters at risk based on politically influenced intelligence? (Littman, 2005). Being critical of the government is patriotic. Thomas Jefferson observed that the will of struggle to an administration is important on some occasions and should be maintained. Most of the time it is exercised in the wrong manner but is better than not observing it at all. A government that is never criticized would lead us to a scenario like the one in Zimbabwe.

Many would urge that criticizing the government has detrimental effects to that the government such as putting off investors and visitors; which would, in turn, affect the economy of the country. We may embarrass our leaders but this is short-term. In the long term, we rectify the mistakes and things go back to normal..

Some use patriotism to advance their political agenda. In this case, patriotism becomes a threat to democracy. The patriotic allegiance should not limit informed dialogue that involves a varied range of opinions

Where we have blind patriotism it becomes unpatriotic to criticize one’s own country thus leading to intolerance of criticisms thus lack of informed debate and discussion (Primoratz and Pavkovic 89-150). They further their political agenda because they use patriotism to advance their political agenda as the people they lead never question what they do. Like in the case of George W Bush on the war in Iraq he said to those who were opposed to the war were either with them or the terrorist. And in this, he silenced those opposed to the invasion of Iraq us they did not want to be seen as unpatriotic. The people in power embezzle funds make bad decisions for the country as no one takes them to task as they do not want to appear unpatriotic. In my opinion, people in power can use patriotism to advance their political agenda.

The radicals and the liberals can close the gap between America as the apotheosis of democratic strivings and the sordid realities of greed and arrogance that often betray it. This is because they have moved from normal thinking and are ready to embrace change as evidenced in the election of Barrack Obama to the presidency. Yet he was considered an outsider by the conservatives. With their new approach and even trying to bring democracy to the East, they are setting America as a role model for other democracies in the world.

They will help to clean up the mess that has been in the democracy because they are vocal and ready in that they seem ready for a comeback. With the current financial crisis placing the dangers of capitalism at the forefront, they can present better ways of dealing with this problem as they are opposed to a few controlling the economy.

The left side of the political spectrum is more inclined to hold America up to higher standards of democracy and can hold up America. The left-wing issues are equality, social justice, labour rights and trade unionism, concern for the poor, working-class solidarity and internationalism (Berman). And because the left-wing is against hierarchy and authority, strict adherence to tradition, monoculturalism, a privilege for the wealthy. Due to the issues, they can bring a change in the way democracy is perceived in the USA. And because the left-side politics encourages internationalism they are in a position to dialogue with those countries, considered an enemy of the USA for a long time. Already there is a change experienced with the left politicians lifting the travel embargo for Cubans.

On the other hand, it will be very difficult for the left-side to hold the standards of democracy because they are perceived as socialists who seem to promote communism. They need to work very hard on the issues that are considered controversial by the conservatives for instance abortion issues, contraceptives. They may need to maintain the status quo.

Finally, patriotism is a powerful political tool and many nations have become powerful because of it. Some did it through propaganda that created patriots who would do anything for their countries including killing those who were perceived as enemies or outsiders (Primoratz and Pavkovic 180-200). This helps their leaders fulfill their political dreams. Patriotism is good and it should never be used to isolate people of the world into blocks rather it should unite all humanity by everyone becoming a patriot of humanity.

References

Igor Primoratz and Pavkovic Aleksandar (2008) Patriotism: Philosophical and Political Perspectives Alder shot: Ashgate.

“Patriotism.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2009.

Merriam-Webster Online. 2009. Web.

Sarah darer Littman 2006 fourth and Nature of Patriotism. Web.

Sheri Berman (2006) The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe’s Twentieth Century London: Cambridge University Press.