… maybe more than that… but I like the word, so I’ll use it to describe the previously unknown to me blog Done With Mirrors. Its author Callimachus has an engaging essay on “Progressive Patriotism.” I’ll be back. (hat tip: Yehudit)
PJ Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that PJ Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. Please note that comments are reviewed by the editorial staff and may not be posted immediately. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pjmedia.com.
That’s a good blog that deserves more notice than he gets.
Agreed.
Like a lot of words, shufti(Arabic) was picked up by the military working overseas,in this case the Middle East.Some of us old codgers still use it in the context of “take a quick shufti”.
Shufti’s a good word, of Indian origin, I think. Another word, used in the declining British film industry, is “butcher’s.” One asks the camera operator if one can have a “butcher’s” at the scene he’s shooting. From rhyming slang butcher’s hook = look.
– Woccam.
Shufti is Arabic via Hindustani (from which a ton of British soldierly slang comes).
Solomon: That’s a good blog that deserves more notice than he gets.
Yep. And I just gave him some.
MJT,
From your blog:
Patriotism and intelligence will have to come together again. Can they?
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000665.html
Some might point out that here in contemporary America these two virtues have never parted company. A deficiency in the former virtue is usually CAUSED by a deficiency in the latter. Only Europhile tranzi sophists afflicted with the vices of ignorance and arrogance think patriotism and intelligence are mutually exclusive. Some of us know better.
BTW, since when did YOU get into the habit of questioning people’s patriotism? Is it only acceptable to do so when using Orwell as your proxy? If only I had thought of that myself then perhaps I could have posted this comment on YOUR blog instead of Roger’s. I suspect that is no loss in your view.
Why is there even a need to dream up a phrase like “progressive patriotism?” What is wrong with plain old patriotism? Does patriotism need to be qualified in some way? Would it cause Europeans to sneer?
If re-branding patriotism as “progressive patriotism” is what it takes get leftists to conduct themselves in accordance with their duties as citizens, then I’m all for it. But the need to come up with such a phrase is just further indictment of the left. I think leftists could find a way to rationalize heart disease – as long as it is “progresive.”
You know, “progressive patriot” has a certain Newspeak quality to it. Someone who insists he is a “progressive patriot” is probably neither.
HA said: “Only Europhile tranzi sophists afflicted with the vices of ignorance and arrogance think patriotism and intelligence are mutually exclusive.”
Well frankly I think that whether the 2 are mutually exclusive or not depends on the relative merits of the country one lives in. Would it be intelligent to be patriotic while living in Saddam’s Iraq for instance?
See I don’t consider myself to be exactly “patriotic” – in the sense of love of my country good or bad. I simply recognize that my country is objectively “good”, comparatively speaking, and hence I am not going to do or say foolish things to weaken it because I actually care about the consequences of weakening it (as Orwell pointed out in the original article).
Should have pointed out that the Orwell is over at MJT. There’s a 3-way conversation going here…
ìI think the suspicion that the left has learned to be reflexively anti-American is one of the reasons Kerry lost the election. And I think the perception bodes danger for the U.S. political system, if it continues to grow.î
I have been saying this since November 2, 2004—the day when the national Democratic Party died. This party is now only viable in local and statewide elections. There is little chance that those who possess the veto over the Democratic presidential candidate can be removed from power. They are safely ensconced, and going nowhere. And it most certainly does not bode well for our political system. While I am a convinced Republican, I still donít feel comfortable with the harsh fact that no real competition presently exists.
If I had to say one positive trait of the American Republic that expresses my adoration of this great nation it is this: “We have an unprecedented capacity for self-improvement.” Whatever our failings have been, and they have obviously been many, we have managed to eliminate the overwhelming majority while retaining our freedoms and liberties as well as our enormous economic strength that enables us to live in a style that kings could only have dreamed about.
Wanted to add to my earlier comment – that I think most leftists (or say the intelligensia in general) do eschew a definition of patriotism as “love of my country good or bad”. They are very much focused on the “bad”, claiming they are trying to make the country even better, and that this is in fact the very hallmark of true patriotism. And this is all very well and good, provided there are no external threats to the country’s security, as there were not during most of the baby boomers’ lifetimes. Now post 9/11, relentless focus on the bad has real world consequences (again – returning to the Orwell article at Michael Totten). What they honestly need to ask themselves is whether they would in fact welcome those consequences. If not, and they persist in their over-the-line criticism (Michael Moore or Chomsky being obvious examples), then they are the ones lacking in intelligence. If they actually invite those consequences then they are obviously not patriots by any definition of the term.
In another post, on Juan Cole, Done With Mirrors links to this article. Just read it.
Yehudit – I read the link and at the end, Pilger’s quote: “we have no choice now but to support the resistance, for if the resistance fails, the ‘Bush gang’ will attack another country. If they succeed, a grievous blow will be suffered by the Bush gang.”
“a grievous blow will be suffered by the Bush gang.” I am trying very hard to understand the logic here, assuming that it might be shared by many on the left. Is he implying that he is trying to prevent blowback? Is he implying that his support of the resistance is in some sense therefore “patriotic”? (not trying to be dense here but he didn’t say… will be suffered by “Americans” or “Brits” but by the “Bush gang” so his meaning is not entirely clear to me).
Caroline:
There is nothing more despicable than wishing misery on others in the hopes that you can say I told you so. That is what Pilger and others are doing. The truth is often as not they did not tell us so, they have just convinced themselves they did. Revisionism run amuck.
Oh,Pilger is just reliving his imagined triumph in Vietnam,there is nothing sadder than a faded sixties celebrity hippy rehashing his old material.
Caroline,
Would it be intelligent to be patriotic while living in Saddam’s Iraq for instance?
I don’t live in Saddam’s Iraq. I live in yours, mine, Roger’s and George Bush’s America. American patriotism is unique in that it originates from belief in a creed that rather than membership in a racial, ethnic or religous group. The left’s indiscriminate hostility to patriotism is derived from their desire to prescribe the European medicine for a European disease to America (and Israel for that matter).
The American creed has proven itself against European imperialism, slavery, Jim Crowe, Fascism and Communism. It is currrently being tested by transnational socialism/progressivism and Islamic fundamentalism. We don’t have Europe’s disease, and we don’t need their medicine. For that matter, their medicine isn’t doing much good for them either.
Leftists want the American creed to be replaced by the tranzi creed. They are willing to ally themselves with Islamists to defeat the American creed under the assumption that their ideology will fill the vacuum rather that of the Islamists. They want to subordinate American sovereignty and security to international organizations and protocols. This is a failure not only of patriotism and intellect, but also of morality.
See I don’t consider myself to be exactly “patriotic” – in the sense of love of my country good or bad.
My country is good and I love it unconditionally. That doesn’t mean that we aren’t wrong at times. But dissenters can be wrong too. And just as some folks use the cloak of anti-Zionism to disguise their anti-Semitism, some use the concept of dissent to cloak their sedition. For this reason, the motivation and allegience of the dissenter MUST BE OPEN TO QUESTION.
Dissent works both ways and a legitimate dissenter should have no trouble acknowledging this. A dissenter who would put his own beliefs and motivations beyond question is merely auditioning for the role of New Boss. The real dissenters need to purge the seditionists from their midst.
Should have pointed out that the Orwell is over at MJT.
I would have posted my comment at Totten’s but he banned me for questioning the loyalty of some who express tranzi ideas, and denouncing the systemic moral and intellectual corruption of the Democratic party. I find an abundance of irony in seeing him use Orwell as a vehicle to do in part essentially the same thing he banned me for.