The idea that loyalty to your country supersedes all other loyalties is inculcated from an early age, and has a strong hold on citizens' minds. It's a confused idea of what your country is, and whether it is defined by what the country's authorities say and do - rather than what your country should say and do. As discussed in the previous comment, the rules that men are taught to live by are often contradictory: in wartime it's permissible to dispense with decency, in fact, indecent actions are often prescribed and considered laudable. My Lai, it turned out, was no exception. Most wars are in themselves indecent, criminal, inhuman. It is amazing in a ridiculous way that the same species that supports art, music, philosophy, creativity, religion - and "family values, " and can joke and laugh and have a good time can also do the most outrageously inhuman things. It is cognitive dissonance by order and habit: we are trained not to see what the authorities, in some contexts, don't want us to see.
It's remarkable how the propaganda for "loyalty to your country" is pounded into you for all state sponsored wars or sanctions, but when it comes to "loyalty to your country" in regards to affordable education, making sure everyone can see a doctor, or having a thriving economic middle class - suddenly the only loyalty one can find is for one's corporate overlords in the name of profit for me, and poverty and wage slavery for thou.
Yes, that is so much the case, and in spite the the obvious fact that a well-fed, healthy and educated population is more productive, creative and cooperative. It is n example of how a tiny minority can direct a country against its own best interests: money for war against fictitious enemies is unquestioned, while money spent to improve and maintain quality of life is considered a "waste" and incursion into what should be left to the private sector.
The idea that loyalty to your country supersedes all other loyalties is inculcated from an early age, and has a strong hold on citizens' minds. It's a confused idea of what your country is, and whether it is defined by what the country's authorities say and do - rather than what your country should say and do. As discussed in the previous comment, the rules that men are taught to live by are often contradictory: in wartime it's permissible to dispense with decency, in fact, indecent actions are often prescribed and considered laudable. My Lai, it turned out, was no exception. Most wars are in themselves indecent, criminal, inhuman. It is amazing in a ridiculous way that the same species that supports art, music, philosophy, creativity, religion - and "family values, " and can joke and laugh and have a good time can also do the most outrageously inhuman things. It is cognitive dissonance by order and habit: we are trained not to see what the authorities, in some contexts, don't want us to see.
It's remarkable how the propaganda for "loyalty to your country" is pounded into you for all state sponsored wars or sanctions, but when it comes to "loyalty to your country" in regards to affordable education, making sure everyone can see a doctor, or having a thriving economic middle class - suddenly the only loyalty one can find is for one's corporate overlords in the name of profit for me, and poverty and wage slavery for thou.
Yes, that is so much the case, and in spite the the obvious fact that a well-fed, healthy and educated population is more productive, creative and cooperative. It is n example of how a tiny minority can direct a country against its own best interests: money for war against fictitious enemies is unquestioned, while money spent to improve and maintain quality of life is considered a "waste" and incursion into what should be left to the private sector.
A country--whatever that is--should have to earn your loyalty on a day-by-day (hour-by-hour, minute-by-minute) basis.
(I pledge no allegiance to any country.)