Why are Americans so Patriotic?

Recommended Videos

Baneat

New member
Jul 18, 2008
2,757
0
0
Isn't/wasn't instilling patriotism part of government policy fairly recently? Only buy american, that kind of shit.
 

Blow_Pop

Supreme Evil Overlord
Jan 21, 2009
4,861
0
0
A good portion of us just don't care. However it is our very vocal minority that gets shown and because of them we all get labelled as exceedingly patriotic. Personally I can't wait to get the fuck out of America....
 

NapoleonWilson

New member
May 27, 2010
15
0
0
It's because Americans are allowed to be patriotic. It's not compulsory like it is in certain, "Eastern" countries. And as for other western countries, after watching Greece, Italy, Spain, France in recent weeks and months, they don't seem to have much too feel patriotic about. Although admittedly, with the OWS crowd, I have never felt more disgust in America than I do now. Americans acting like a bunch of entitled, ignorant children who if they put as much effort into their belly-aching about fairness as working they would have everything they want.
 

EvilPicnic

New member
Sep 9, 2009
540
0
0
Volf99 said:
To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.
Not disputing your argument (which I mostly agree with), but what exactly did England do to Argentina?

Be among the first to recognise their sovereignty as a nation? Invest heavily in their economy when they most needed it? Lose to their football team due to an illegal handball (and constantly thereafter)? Or defend themselves in the Falkland Islands when the Argentines invaded?

The British Empire did not have a great Human Rights record, but I don't think Argentina is generally included on the list of abuses...
 

Helmholtz Watson

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,497
0
0
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
AndyFromMonday said:
Patriotism only serves to breed distrust between different cultures. We should attempt to unite under one banner and relinquish our imaginary differences rather than enforce and encourage them. Patriotism is dangerous, plain and simple.
hhmmm...no. I rather not because that sounds like a gateway to have a single monolith government/country that spans the globe and I don't want that.
Why not?

Seriously, what are the downsides?
To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.
Hmm... yes, I can definitely see that downside. This is why we must get to work on benevolent (and we'd better make really motherfucking sure they are completely benevolent) computers to govern this theoretical all-encompassing country as quickly as possible. I imagine they'd work better than all the other forms of governance that have been tried...
I don't know the name, but there was some book in the 1980's about two super computers, one in Russia and one in America. They were to protect their countries and ended up enslaving the population to do so. So...... I rather have people run governments, because at least their rule isn't forever, which I can't say the same about computers. Also I have some irrational fear that the computer might turn into the computer from the story, I have no mouth and I must scream.
 

Emperor Nat

New member
Jun 15, 2011
167
0
0
Generally most people like the country they live in and to some extent prefer it to the alternatives (otherwise why do they still live there?).

American culture tends to be relatively vocal about its opinions and emphasises having ones opinion heard.

2+2=4
 

Helmholtz Watson

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,497
0
0
EvilPicnic said:
Volf99 said:
To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.
Not disputing your argument (which I mostly agree with), but what exactly did England do to Argentina?

Be among the first to recognise their sovereignty as a nation? Invest heavily in their economy when they most needed it? Lose to their football team due to an illegal handball (and constantly thereafter)? Or defend themselves in the Falkland Islands when the Argentines invaded?

The British Empire did not have a great Human Rights record, but I don't think Argentina is generally included on the list of abuses...
The issue with the Falkland Islands, England has no right being there anymore than they did being in Hong Kong.
 

Fbuh

New member
Feb 3, 2009
1,233
0
0
From my point of view, and as an American, I believe that it is because that we are such a young country. As a people, we are still full of ideals about how we're not going to take shit from anybody anymore. Essentially, we are the equivalent of the twelve year old who likes to bash people on X-Box Live because he thinks it makes him cool. We'll grow out of it in time.
 

repeating integers

New member
Mar 17, 2010
3,314
0
0
Volf99 said:
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
AndyFromMonday said:
Patriotism only serves to breed distrust between different cultures. We should attempt to unite under one banner and relinquish our imaginary differences rather than enforce and encourage them. Patriotism is dangerous, plain and simple.
hhmmm...no. I rather not because that sounds like a gateway to have a single monolith government/country that spans the globe and I don't want that.
Why not?

Seriously, what are the downsides?
To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.
Hmm... yes, I can definitely see that downside. This is why we must get to work on benevolent (and we'd better make really motherfucking sure they are completely benevolent) computers to govern this theoretical all-encompassing country as quickly as possible. I imagine they'd work better than all the other forms of governance that have been tried...
I don't know the name, but there was some book in the 1980's about two super computers, one in Russia and one in America. They were to protect their countries and ended up enslaving the population to do so. So...... I rather have people run governments, because at least their rule isn't forever, which I can't say the same about computers. Also I have some irrational fear that the computer might turn into the computer from the story, I have no mouth and I must scream.
Yeah, so I imagine we'd have to be veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful when coding said computers. I'm still convinced it would work better than the current best (Democracy).
 
Dec 14, 2009
15,525
0
0
Volf99 said:
EvilPicnic said:
Volf99 said:
To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.
Not disputing your argument (which I mostly agree with), but what exactly did England do to Argentina?

Be among the first to recognise their sovereignty as a nation? Invest heavily in their economy when they most needed it? Lose to their football team due to an illegal handball (and constantly thereafter)? Or defend themselves in the Falkland Islands when the Argentines invaded?

The British Empire did not have a great Human Rights record, but I don't think Argentina is generally included on the list of abuses...
The issue with the Falkland Islands, England has no right being there anymore than they did being in Hong Kong.
Ask that to the people who live there.

The islands were uninhabited when they were discovered, so it was fair game.

When soverignty came into dispute, they even let the islanders vote on who they wanted to be part of.

The British did many terrible things in their colonial days, but the Falklands was not one of them.
 

Helmholtz Watson

New member
Nov 7, 2011
2,497
0
0
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
AndyFromMonday said:
Patriotism only serves to breed distrust between different cultures. We should attempt to unite under one banner and relinquish our imaginary differences rather than enforce and encourage them. Patriotism is dangerous, plain and simple.
hhmmm...no. I rather not because that sounds like a gateway to have a single monolith government/country that spans the globe and I don't want that.
Why not?

Seriously, what are the downsides?
To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.
Hmm... yes, I can definitely see that downside. This is why we must get to work on benevolent (and we'd better make really motherfucking sure they are completely benevolent) computers to govern this theoretical all-encompassing country as quickly as possible. I imagine they'd work better than all the other forms of governance that have been tried...
I don't know the name, but there was some book in the 1980's about two super computers, one in Russia and one in America. They were to protect their countries and ended up enslaving the population to do so. So...... I rather have people run governments, because at least their rule isn't forever, which I can't say the same about computers. Also I have some irrational fear that the computer might turn into the computer from the story, I have no mouth and I must scream.
Yeah, so I imagine we'd have to be veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful when coding said computers. I'm still convinced it would work better than the current best (Democracy).
lol, yes we would have to be "veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful" when build and coding the computer. Also it would be good if it didn't have absolute power and if we had a self destruct switch built in as well.
 

gphjr14

New member
Aug 20, 2010
868
0
0
Fagotto said:
Kopikatsu said:
Fagotto said:
Kopikatsu said:
Never use wikipedia as a source. Never.
That's just a silly thing to say. Wikipedia works as a source.
Try telling that to a college professor.
Try considering the reasons instead of just mimicking them. Life is not an academic paper where people should be using more direct sources.
But at the same time just about anyone can put anything on wikipedia so its authenticity is under constant scrutiny. That and the fact most people (employers) expect you to do your own work not take short cuts which is often what people are doing when using wikipedia. Also the college I graduated from considered it an ethics violation. Sources cited for wikipedia articles can work but not the condensed and sometimes flat out wrong interpretation people often see in wiki articles.
 

repeating integers

New member
Mar 17, 2010
3,314
0
0
Volf99 said:
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
OhJohnNo said:
Volf99 said:
AndyFromMonday said:
Patriotism only serves to breed distrust between different cultures. We should attempt to unite under one banner and relinquish our imaginary differences rather than enforce and encourage them. Patriotism is dangerous, plain and simple.
hhmmm...no. I rather not because that sounds like a gateway to have a single monolith government/country that spans the globe and I don't want that.
Why not?

Seriously, what are the downsides?
To quote John Dalberg-Acton, "Power corrupts, and absoulte power corrupts absolutely". Think about if this government gave to ok to do something like what (PRC)China is doing to Tibet, America is doing at Guantanamo Bay, what England did to Ireland/India/China/Africa/Argentina. Who could oppose them? They would be the most powerful organized body in the entire world. It would be to risky to have.
Hmm... yes, I can definitely see that downside. This is why we must get to work on benevolent (and we'd better make really motherfucking sure they are completely benevolent) computers to govern this theoretical all-encompassing country as quickly as possible. I imagine they'd work better than all the other forms of governance that have been tried...
I don't know the name, but there was some book in the 1980's about two super computers, one in Russia and one in America. They were to protect their countries and ended up enslaving the population to do so. So...... I rather have people run governments, because at least their rule isn't forever, which I can't say the same about computers. Also I have some irrational fear that the computer might turn into the computer from the story, I have no mouth and I must scream.
Yeah, so I imagine we'd have to be veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful when coding said computers. I'm still convinced it would work better than the current best (Democracy).
lol, yes we would have to be "veeeeeeeeeery specific and veeeeeeeeery careful" when build and coding the computer. Also it would be good if it didn't have absolute power and if we had a self destruct switch built in as well.
Well yes... but if you include a self-destruct button, the laws of fiction dictate that the computer will render it useless and take over the world out of spite and disrespect for humans.

True story.
 

Riff Moonraker

New member
Mar 18, 2010
944
0
0
The Human Torch said:
It's just the vocal minority. Which unfortunately (as always) are far more in the spotlight than most Americans, who plainly don't give a crap.
Sorry, but its NOT the vocal minority. The vocal minority are actually the ones who are NOT patriotic.
 

C2Ultima

Future sovereign of Oz
Nov 6, 2010
506
0
0
Why do all non-americans question Amaerica's patriotism?

See what I did there? That's a generalization, which is exactly what you did in the title of this thread
 

Vault Citizen

New member
May 8, 2008
1,702
0
0
castlewise said:
Unfair stereotype. And contradictory to the stereotype that all Americans pretend to be Canadians when they are abroad.
Do any Americans still do that? I heard that was something that happened during the Vietnam war but I don't know if it was something that was continued.

C2Ultima said:
Why do all non-americans question Amaerica's patriotism?

See what I did there? That's a generalization, which is exactly what you did in the title of this thread
Damn you are crafty.
 

boyvirgo666

New member
May 12, 2009
371
0
0
The Human Torch said:
It's just the vocal minority. Which unfortunately (as always) are far more in the spotlight than most Americans, who plainly don't give a crap.
Pretty much this. As an American i dont really like America, I feel the country is going in the wrong direction very quickly for numerous reasons. The freedoms we get are all well and good but they are rapidly vanishing with idiotic laws that just take away more and more of what made this a fairly decent country.
 

Yoshemo

New member
Jun 23, 2009
1,156
0
0
We're taught at an early age that if we're not super patriotic and support everything our country does 100%, then we're communist, socialist, fascist, nazi, anarchist, hippie, liberal, evil, terrorists.
 

Kopikatsu

New member
May 27, 2010
4,924
0
0
Fagotto said:
Kopikatsu said:
Fagotto said:
Kopikatsu said:
Never use wikipedia as a source. Never.
That's just a silly thing to say. Wikipedia works as a source.
Try telling that to a college professor.
Try considering the reasons instead of just mimicking them. Life is not an academic paper where people should be using more direct sources.
The reason is that anyone can edit Wikipedia. Giving people the freedom to do whatever rarely ends well.