The question is this: how can one be proud or glad of one's identity without implying the judgement that 'your' people - Irish, Jews, Italians, whoever - are better than other people? Suppose you thought that the group you belonged to was worse than everyone else. How could you be glad to belong there? And if they were neither worse nor better but just different, what would be the source of your comparative feeling that belonging to this group was especially good? There's a possible parallel here with the feelings of an individual. Would I rather be someone else? (By this I don't mean: are there advantages someone else enjoys that I don't enjoy and would like to, while remaining myself? I mean: would I like to be that person?) For all those who would answer no, for they are happy, indeed prefer, to be who they are, must this entail that they disparage all other individuals as being less good people to be than they are themselves?He makes a good point. The answer, as Geras goes on to say, is no. But that doesn't mean that the afore-mentioned implications are entirely invalid. I've always resented the quality of being overly-proud of one's country; a striking level of patriotism is something I come to dislike in a number of people. Sure, it's acceptable to be proud of the country, ideology, religion, or ethnic group to which you belong, but we don't need to hear about it all the time. (via TDD)
A compendium of perspicacious reportage and a weblog about all things pertaining to politics, news and intergalactic agriculture; weblog of Alistair Murray.
The nature of pride; what does it mean to be proud of one's country?
THE NATURE OF PRIDE: Norman Geras questions the implications of being proud of one's identity.