Should Patriotism Allow Questioning? (politicians, rating, parties, examples)

[dkmisol]

Patriotism is questioning everything... just questioning and investigating something you might have doubts about doesn't necessarily make it untrue.

Originally Posted by SeanMc

I'm really interested in knowing how people feel about this. I notice many fellow Americans seem to have taken on a somewhat radical stance as to what constitutes a true patriot today.

Since the concept of patriotism is quite subjective I'll narrow the question by breaking the ideals of patriotism down into two basic camps which I'll call; 'Hard' and 'Soft'.
Warning: These two group names may not coincide with your own personal understanding of what constitutes hard or soft so in this context I'll ask you to bear with me by accepting my definition of both groups for the purposes of this voting as follows.

-As an example of the Hard group I'd offer those Americans who believe that true patriotism is unwavering and unquestioning. That we must place absolute trust in the courage and integrity of the leadership at all times and never second-guess their actions or motives. That the government may exceed the rights contained in our Constitution or expand on them if justifiable according to the times we are living. This interpretation allows little or no room for dissent or criticism. In fact dissent & criticism could be construed as almost traitorous.

-The Soft group on the other hand believes that true patriotism consists of almost constantly questioning the courage and integrity of its leadership by maintaining constant oversight of all their actions and motives. They would argue that it is in fact a patriotic duty for citizens to question, doubt and even criticize the actions of their government if justifiable according to our Constitution. As to our Constitution, they would uphold it's compliance to the letter of the law only and accept no deviance. This interpretation allows considerable room for debate or dissent of its citizens without affecting one's legitimate standing as a patriot.

[Fat Freddy]

I am a Patriot.
I love America and it's people.

But that has nothing to do with what I think of the Government, it's policies, or the degree to which I support or oppose them.

[GregW]

Parent, preacher, politician. People are taught to trust in authority. Trusting any of these is foolish. They all have their own agenda and only want you to do something for their benefit while telling you it is for yours. Deceivers all.

Be aware, observe, get the facts not the propaganda and trust your own judgment. Remember there are many enemies and few friends in this world.

[madicarus2000]

When someone is taking action on your behalf, you have the authority and the right to question their actions. We have a representative democracy and those in power are acting on our behalf using our power and consent to be governed. Therefore we DO have the right to question any governmental action.

[Rggr]

Originally Posted by saganista

Hard...soft...I think it's all just a part of right-wing attempts to hijack stuff. God, flag, country...they like to wrap themselves up in some distorted version of such things, then claim that only those who think the way they do are the 'true' Christians or the 'true' patriots or the 'true' Americans. They still remind me mostly of cheerleaders at a high school football game...

Not really. The right certainly questioned things under Clinton.

[Rggr]

I think it's our duty to question. That questioning is built into the electoral process.

This seems like an attempt to label the arguments of the far right and the far left in relation to the war in Iraq. You can't generalize people's view from their response on one issue at one time. People say that the right demands unquestioning loyalty. I have not seen that on a large scale. Even those in favor of the action in Iraq usually have some questions about elements of it or about some other policies made by the government. I also think that if you look over time you will see that the people on the far right have questioned a lot of decisions made by the US government.

[buildings_and_bridges]

Originally Posted by Rggr

Not really. The right certainly questioned things under Clinton.

The wrong things, I'd say. He certainly did some things I had a problem with, but I couldn't have cared less about him cheating on his wife. He made political decisions that bothered me and the bad personal decisions were of little consequence, IMO. But people had to make an issue of the whole thing. Most of the questioning I saw wasn't what the OP was referring to, I think.

[Rggr]

I think that it you look at history, the people on the right disagreed with lot that Clinton did. The question was never about what you should question, it's about questioning anything that you disagree with.

[buildings_and_bridges]

Originally Posted by Rggr

I think that it you look at history, the people on the right disagreed with lot that Clinton did.

Maybe so. Why is it that I only remember people complaining about the Lewinsky scandal? Because I was young? I don't know.

And are some of the people who deride liberals (and some conservatives also) for criticizing Bush because we are not to question the person in office the same ones who criticized Clinton's politics a few years before?

The question was never about what you should question, it's about questioning anything that you disagree with.

The original post talks about 'criticizing the actions of our government if justifiable according to our Constitution.' Clinton was guilty of perjury, but I don't see how his other actions during the Lewinsky scandal were unconstitutional.

[Rggr]

Originally Posted by buildings_and_bridges

Maybe so. Why is it that I only remember people complaining about the Lewinsky scandal? Because I was young? I don't know.

It left the lasting impression.

Originally Posted by buildings_and_bridges

And are some of the people who deride liberals (and some conservatives also) for criticizing Bush because we are not to question the person in office the same ones who criticized Clinton's politics a few years before?.

I'm sure. I think the concern for those people is not about criticizing the person in office though; many of those would be very critical of the current spending for example. It has more to do with how/when/where and about what etc. they think it's appropriate to raise questions regarding war and soldiers.

Originally Posted by buildings_and_bridges

The original post talks about 'criticizing the actions of our government if justifiable according to our Constitution.' Clinton was guilty of perjury, but I don't see how his other actions during the Lewinsky scandal were unconstitutional.

I think it's always justifiable, but I think the OP is a staw man argument so they can justify saying anything they want about troops and the government and claim to be patriotic.