Peace Is Not Patriotic

I see any number of people who try to straddle the line between their peaceful, humane sentiments and the vicious demands of statism, by decorating their cars with bumper-stickers that read “peace is patriotic.” As I stated in an earlier article, “peace” and “patriotism” are diametrically opposed concepts. Patriotism is a “love or devotion to one’s country.” This makes a self-proclaimed “patriot” an easy mark for political forces that want to set his country (e.g., the U.S.) against other countries (e.g., Iraq, Iran). “If you love your country,” so the song-and-dance goes, “you’ll support the wars, boycotts, etc., directed against these other countries.”

Charles’ blog of today provides an excellent examination of how “patriotism” provides the energy that keeps statism alive. If “war is the health of the state,” “patriotism” is the tonic that keeps the state robust. Lew’s reference to the South Carolina GOP official who wants to keep Ron Paul out of his county is a prime example of this symbiotic relationship. Republicans and Democrats alike implicitly realize that the capacity to inflict massive death and destruction upon innocent, helpless people, is what keeps the state vibrant. If peace was to suddenly break out in the world and infect the United States – such that its war machinery and conflict-manipulations would no longer have meaning – being elected to high office in Washington would have no more meaning than being a county commissioner in Kansas, . . . or South Carolina.

The South Carolina GOP official need not worry about Ron Paul as much as for the future of his own criminal syndicate. As Justin Raimondo pointed out in his Antiwar.com article of July 2nd, the Republican Party has destroyed itself. Ron Paul is not so much the “lunatic” that this GOP leader imgaines, as he is a phoenix rising from the burned-out remains of a party that has no principles other than that of acquiring and exercising as much violent power as it can.

“Peace” is incompatible with all of this. “Patriotism” divides people into warring groups, while “peace” is indivisible. A peaceful disposition cannot be turned on and off at will. Patriotism, on the other hand, is a history of “loving” and “hating” those of other countries as identified by the fleeting interests of those in power. In American history, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, China, Japan, Germany, Italy, Mexico, and Spain, have been identified as our “friends”, while Great Britain, the Soviet Union, China, Japan, Germany, Italy, Mexico, and Spain, have been labeled our “enemies.” Is there a message in all of this? If you remain uncertain, re-read Charles’ blog.

The Best of Butler Shaffer