I too am patriotic

I too am patriotic. Almost all of us make this claim. And yet I suspect that we have given very little thought to what we actually mean. I am not sure that we would assent wholeheartedly to any of its contradictory meanings. Is it about improving the capacity of America as a whole (society or nation) to achieve at the highest possible level (make America Great Again)? This implies that we should recruit and offer citizenship to the best minds and spirits from all countries in the world (that's how we did it in the past)? Or should we make whatever sacrifices are possible to help people throughout the world that lack resources and opportunities and be "greater" in moral worth than any other people? Or is "America" an abstraction and its people the reality, so that improving the quality of life of ALL its citizens is the ultimate test of patriotism? I.e. reduce inequality. Or should America control and exploit as much of the world's wealth as possible? Conquest equals greatness? It would seem that if it is all these, then it is contradictory and hence meaningless. If it is none of these, then it is without meaning. If it is one of these, then the choice is arbitrary and just one's personal preference. I suggest that for most people it is contradictory, and I am tempted to believe that most of us, and the world, would be better off if we stopped using the term. Furthermore, as we weaponize "patriotism," we cease to be a united society and the answer to the question will finally be "whatever is good for me and mine." For the more we fight over who is or who is not a patriot, the more we will fail to work together toward any common good. There is an alternative, however. A friend commenting on a draft of this column said that possibly "love of country" would suffice as a definition of patriotism. It is a common dictionary definition. This has merit. To love another is to give and sacrifice for the other. It is Kennedy's often quoted part of his first inaugural address, "ask what you can do for your country." It contrasts with identity politics in an important way. Too many take their personal sense of worth or value from their identity as Americans. I am great because America is "great." Better it should make one humble. "From those to whom much has been given, much is expected." It need not be a license to swagger before the rest of the world. This still, though, leaves us with several questions. "How do we serve that which we love?" And how wide should be the "circle" of our love? Love is a way of giving, not taking. But it can be limiting. Many see it as an excuse to be indifferent to those outside the circle. I believe that we do not live on an island, that we are all interdependent with each other. I remember singing as a boy in church, "in Christ there is no East or West … but one great fellowship of love throughout the whole wide earth." This I was taught was one of the greatest lessons of our faith. And then? To serve in what way we can. Love takes the self lightly and the other deeply. Maybe stewardship is another "answer." A humble, regard for this fragile world, its life and all its life-giving potential. John Bing is Emeritus Professor of Political Science at Heidelberg University and writes a by-weekly newsletter at johnb0c.substack.com.