It takes awhile for the pendulum to swing the other direction. First it slows. Slows some more.

Then comes to a stop.

And then, inexorably, it starts slowly going in the opposite way. Faster. And eventually it's speeding along.

Have we even reached full stop yet?

1) We did not "liberate" this continent. We took it. By force. From the people who were already here. In fact, there continent was already quite crowded by their lifestyle. In fact, America's riches were based on plundering the natural resources here - which are nearly used up now.

2) Humans are tribal animals. We want to belong. To feel "right" about our choices. Cliques, organized religion, and patriotism all come under category.

Some quotes on Patriotism:

Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all others because you were born in it. -- George Bernard Shaw

Patriotism ... is a superstition artificially created and maintained through a network of lies and falsehoods; a superstition that robs man of his self-respect and dignity, and increases his arrogance and conceit. -- Emma Goldman

Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel. -- Samuel Johnson

Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it. -- Mark Twain

Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy -- George Bernard Shaw

and finally, most appropriate here:

Patriotism is not short, frenzied outbursts of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. -- Aldai Stevenson

Oh Stilli another thing I just thought of--

Right now this Representative from IL, Shackowski--I am really heartened by these women fighters....

She is on Rachel and is on the Intelligence Committee.

See there is some intelligence on the Intelligence Committee.

A lot of women are upset just like you--only they have some POWER. ha!!!

Thanks for this wake up call - I am one of those who sat on my ass doing nothing to help this country get out of the mistakes W and Cheney got us into. Now I am beginning to see that sitting around and complaining but doing nothing to remedy the situations facing us at this juncture,is both lazy and ignorant. Now I am beginning to get involved by reading more, watching news other than Fox and writing to my congressman and senator - not Specter cuz he still makes me angry. Anyway - thanks for putting it into perspective for me, Stilli.

"America: change it or lose it."

Oy!

Perfect.

we need to make some bumper stickers.....

I have been feeling that way since the Reagan administration. I am used to it so I don't lose any sleep over it.

Granted it got much worse during the Bush years. I don't know what has happened to America. When did we become a country where to show your love of it you have nothing but contempt for every other country on this planet and have no problem killing others to show your love of the good old U S of A? I think it has something to do with religious intolerance as espoused by the more fanatical members of Christianity that we have in our population. They're just really enraged right now because their side is losing the culture war...case and point we elected President Obama. The rotten core of the conservative movement is inhabited by hateful racists who are really pissed that they are now marginalized.

Stilli,
I hate to rain on your parade but much of what you refer has been with us for a very long time. I have watched this eveolve during and since our Vietnam and Nixonian experiences and grow ever since.

There are no real exceptions to this, whether political, financial, social, militarily or otherwise. The indicators suggest an increasing departure from any notion of objective governance into a realm of subjective governance which is wholly without merit and which has decidely produced some very undesirable results.

While the finacial collapse is on the national radar it is necessary to examine the ethical collapse that preceded it and which made the former possible.

We are a nation dependent upon the quality of our national leadership. A real time measurement of that quality is difficult at best. As a practical matter it can only really be measured based upon the result. The process leading to the result is commonly blurred so we can't readily see the direction being taken. This characteristic of nontransparency has without question increased over time. There has been an unmistakable and apparently intentional obscuring of the rationale guiding the national agenda.

The results give us a true picture of the agenda and exposes the contrast between it and the one as stated by our elected officials. That there is a significant differential informs us of the extent to which the nation has been repeatedly lied to.

The metrics the public uses to measure their general state of well being and the ones the government uses aren't rationally unified. Conceptually, that satement has a huge consequence.

It is necessary to establish the correllation between declines in personal wealth of average citizens and the doubling of Wall Street profits as a share of overall businnes profits to put some perspective on this. This doubling occurred over a thirty year period starting in the late seventies. This remarkable change is a clear indicator of a guiding agenda which explicitly sought that goal. You cannot specify this as conincidental.

The prior indicator is one of many transformations that are markers of the undersirable changes that have occurred over the years which have altered our social, political and financial constructs in significant ways. Without exception the alteration of these constructs has been all too apparently intentional. No amount of explanation can accommodate this phenomena except to identify it as intentional.

This all poses the obvious and crucial question of can this be changed? Again, this comes down to our national leadership. Congress must be willing to do a comprehensive examination of the metrics. I mean each congressperson has to sit down and actually look at all the significant data points and compare the numbers over the last thirty years. If they aren't willing to really do an objective evaluation or if they are unable to digest the meaning (some are hopelessly stupid) then nothing will change.

I happen to think that few if any really have an understanding of what has occurred and a not insignificant number have actively promoted this very outcome. At this very moment you can see a major portion of our elected officials pushing to keep moving in this same wrong direction. It goes without saying that republicans are going this way but blue dog democrats are no less inclined to do the same. For whatever reason their inability to recognize the irrational path we have been on and which they insist we continue will dictate the possibility of undoing the damage that has occurred.

The irrational and constitutionally conflicted system of campaign finance is at the top of the list of things that must be fixed. This is inseparable from the notion of corporations being falsely and illogically recognized as citizens. Those two things are the prerequisites to any meaningful change. If congress can't understand the need to have a complete and rational separation of these things from the legislative process then it identifies congress as both hopelessly stupid and hopelessly corrupt. That is where they are right now and to make them change is a tall order. Polling data absolutely indicates this is what citizens want. Nothing is happening on these issues at all. Which tells us everything we need to know about the state of our republic. It also tells us we have to do something very different if we have any hope of changing. Where this all might be headed is unknown. We do know though the ethical collapse is in strict lockstep with everything else that is crumbling before our eyes.

Isn't it intriguing, those who want less government are the same ones, for the most part, whom turned a blind eye to the atrocities that have landed us here.

Wow! A fine rant indeed, stilli. And very pithy (no I don't lisp) comments, especially from peoplechoose (may I call you pc?). At the risk of getting all philosophicy, it seems to me that you have to weigh the effects that anger and frustration have on you personally versus your ability to remedy the perceived causes of your disharmony. Two quotes come to mind. "In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve." At least that's close to something Jefferson said. "Seek not to change the world, rather change your mind about the world." That's from A Course in Miracles.

Even if you could change all the things about America that enrage you, what about the rest of the world? Are our corrupt politicians, institutions and corporations worse than those in the rest of the world? Corruption, injustice, starvation, disease, war, etc. have always been with us and will always be with us. It is the nature of this world. Of course, this does not mean that you have to behave this way. You always have the choice to live your life guided by higher ideals and goals. But do you really think that you can change the Cheneys or the Exxon/Mobiles of this world? As pc said, it's a huge ethical whack-a-mole game. The goal, I believe, should be your own personal peace of mind. And of course, that is not found out in the world.

I believe the path for each of us is to help one person, whatever that means. Then the two of you can each help one person, and on and on. The journey of a thousand miles...don't you know.
Sharing love and peace and truth with one person will change the world, even though that's not the goal.

And to pc, I am also on the "wrong" side of 60. Does that explain why we choose the default avatar?

I've thought more about this blog, Stilli, and concluded that you were in a unique position to write it.

You ask what defines "patriotism" and talk about expressing yourself and righting wrongs.

However, I wonder what the Stilli of 2009 would say to the Stilli of 1999? I believe both Stillis were thoughtful and passionate.

Nevertheless, both would have been on their respective party lines (as it were). Again, as is so much the theme of what I write, the dogma of people's thoughts prevents them from approaching each situation as new and rethinking it from the start. The fact is that the Dems do not have all the answers, the GOP does not have all the answers, and certainly the "progressives" do not have all the answers.

Political debate has been increasingly polarized simple because people tend to "pick a side" and then look at the facts from that side (assuming that they bother to look at all the facts which often they don't) -- rather than the proper way (e.g. the other way around). This is tantamount to converting a political ideology into religious dogma; one is expected to simply follow along.

That prevents real conclusions.

Think about this: politicians don't care about real, best conclusions, they care about politically expedient ones. The best chance for open debate is when political liabilities aren't in the mix -- as at TPM, for example. Yet, even here, most people tend to align themselves to the "groupthink" of what is expected from a "progressive" or at least a Democrat (though Jason Everett Miller is a hugely notable exception -- and what how *he* can get pounded).

I think a most interesting blog for you to write would be the two Stillis discussing a topic back and forth. The simple device of having to look at both sides of the issue might bring the more difficult issues to light -- without the ideology and dogma. It's what the Buddhists call the "middle way".