Skip to main content

View Diary: The Party of Patriotism and Secession? (60 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Patriarchy/Patriotism (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lotlizard, hannah

    You are surely correct that the appeal to authority in the notion of patriotism is the same as the authoritarianism of patriarchy.  And I think it's true but not obvious that the challenges posed by feminism to traditional patriarchy are especially grating to those who make nationalistic appeals.  Nationalism is, at its heart, authoritarianism, and authoritarianism is, at least in our culture, largely patriarchal.  

    My one question about your thesis is the tie to real estate.  Patriarchies get their power (like any government) from holding a monopoly on force.  The police and the courts and the armies are the only ones allowed to kill people or imprison them or confiscate their property.  And the confiscatory power of government leads to real benefits for rulers.  To the extent that rulers tend to be male, patriarchy is in play here.  

    However, nomadic tribes can also be patriarchal, with the famous example of Abraham himself.  Pashtun warlords in Afghanistan are extreme examples of patriarchs.  In my opinion, it is not the tie to land that makes a patriarchy; it is the monopoly on force held by male rulers.  Nomadic patriarchs can hold significant property, but not land (although they can be territorial).  

    I would suggest that nationalism is tribal, not based on location.  When international boundaries move, it is ethnic groups that exhibit nationalism.  In the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, for example, settlers claim a tie to the land, but they do not align with their neighbors in their nationalistic fervor.  They align with people across existing international boundaries with whom they have cultural ties.  American frontiersmen were drawn across the frontier in the Western Expansion but did not become aligned with the indigenous cultures in the western territories.  Instead, they maintained their national ties where they had a cultural connection.

    •  Much to think about. Thanks for adding. (0+ / 0-)

      I thin that in the U.S. there has been much emphasis on real property and ownership because, while, in theory, our political system was focused on securing individual human rights, in practice that focus had to give way to an emphasis on property rights, sort of as a sop, to justify the ownership of some persons and the total domination of others. Personal liberty was always an aspiration, which has yet to be achieved. But we are moving forward.

      We organize governments to provide benefits and prevent abuse.

      by hannah on Sat Nov 17, 2012 at 02:31:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site