The Immorality of Patriotism

In this article, I hope to reveal the inherent immorality of patriotism and its connection to ethical egoism. Upon close examination, patriotism morally fails on multiple levels and proves itself incompatible with the universal morality. At best, patriotism is yet another failing incarnation of ethical egoism.

It is important to first define what is meant by egoism. Egoistic theory exists in three forms: psychological, rational, and ethical. Psychological egoism is the theory that all human beings involuntarily act in their own self-interest. Rational egoism states that the only rational action one can take is to act in her own self-interest. Ethical egoism is the theory that finds acting in one's own self-interest to be the only morally acceptable form of action, and it strongly differs from psychological egoism in that it assumes people often do not act in their own self-interest.

Patriotism in its most common form bears a strong resemblance to ethical egoism. If one expresses a non-patriotic perspective in the USA, that person will likely be shunned for their supposedly immoral behavior. Americans are conditioned to believe that patriotism is a duty and that it is honorable to act in one's country's best interest. This nationalism is a form of masked self-interest, as the individual elevates his own country above those of all others, much in the way an ethical egoist would elevate his own interests above those of all others.

Leo Tolstoy writes, "Public opinion, which rebukes every act of violence in a private individual, extols, raises to the virtue of patriotism every appropriation of what belongs to others, for the increase of power of the country" (Tolstoy, paragraph 1). While personal egoism is roundly rejected in public circles, patriotism runs rampant. The first, and obvious, reason for patriotism's inherent immorality is that it is entirely arbitrary, just as ethical egoism is arbitrary. While a patriot may be able to give reasons regarding a preference for their own country in a governmental sense, ask what makes the population more or less worthy of consideration, and the response will probably be a blank stare. The idea that one large group of human individuals is inherently more worthy of consideration than another simply because of geographical location is preposterously irrational.

Continuing with this stream of thought, patriotism would still morally fail even if it were not arbitrary. Just as ethical egoism assumes the elevated self-worth of each individual, patriotism assumes the elevated worth of one's own nation. This style of thought leads to an illogical form of arrogance. For example, America invaded Iraq for the supposed reason of spreading peace and democracy to a people who were not free. While this reason is almost definitely untrue, I will make the assumption that this reason is true for the purposes of this argument. After invading Iraq, the Iraqi people were left in a devastated state. While the intentions of America were just, their arrogant action was most certainly not. Patriotism allotted social democracy as the only worthy form of government for no apparent reason except that America had it, taking little to no considerations of the social impact such an overthrow would have on the people of Iraq.

Before describing the moral failures of patriotism not rooted in irrational and illogical thought, it is necessary to address what has been termed "moderate patriotism." Philosophers such as Stephen Nathanson would counter the previous arguments against patriotism by stating that we have misread patriotism by only analyzing an extreme version of it. They say that a milder form of patriotism ("moderate patriotism") is in fact morally acceptable and possibly desirable. Rather than an elevation of one's country to the detriment of another, Nathanson instead describes what he terms a "special affection" for one's own country, still with negative and possible positive, duties to other people groups (Nathanson 382-384).

This may appear to be a sound form of patriotism that answers the moral critics. However, moderate patriotism fails when more closely examined. Its failure is less of a moral one than a practical and rational one. If an individual has a special preference for her own country, but is faced with a positive duty to act in the interest of another, this duty overrules the preference, overruling patriotism. In fact, "moderate patriotism" appears to be little more than practical universalism. If one has no greater duty to one's own people than any other, she could hardly be considered a patriot, rather quite the opposite. What Nathanson describes becomes a division of labor rooted in moral universalism. While this division of labor is both effective and morally sound, it is not at all patriotism, as even the actions performed in the service of one's own country are for the benefit of all people, without any real preference for one's own people, at least in a moral sense. As it stands, patriotism and universal morality are simply incompatible (Gomberg, 144).

Striking "moderate patriotism" from the equation, we are left with the original, brutish form described earlier. The previous arguments have been rooted in the irrationality and arrogance of patriotism, but there exists more serious moral offenses in the realm of patriotism. Beyond its arbitrary nature, patriotism is dangerous because of its inherent racism. Patriotism does not only promote the interests of one's own country. The darker side of the coin renders patriotism a socially acceptable form of bigotry (Gomberg, 147-148).

In blatantly elevating the worth of one's own country, it follows that the worth of others is reduced or demolished altogether. One has only to think of very recent history to see this. Patriotism does not only serve to unite a single people, but rather divides the entire world into countries in which each group of people is bonded in the collective psyche to the eradication of individuality in the minds of the people. In our current situation, this can be seen in the horrendous attitudes of many Americans toward Muslim people. After the World Trade Centers were attacked by a group of Muslim extremists from the Middle East, the collective American psyche, in its patriotic way, viewed the senseless attack as an action of one nation against another. All people identified as Muslim, or "Middle Eastern," by the American people were, and still are, largely deprived of their dignity and right to the pursuit of happiness.

Patriotism also diminishes the worth of individuals within an identified nation. This occurs because of the previously referenced inherent arrogance of the arbitrary patriotic system. Patriotism gives all individuals license to denigrate others, even of their own country, on the grounds that the others' actions are not "patriotic," without any further moral consideration. Consider the influx of highly publicized incidents in which public school students refused to say the pledge of allegiance for any possible number of reasons. Many were calling for these students to be expelled or failed on the grounds that they would not recite a pledge, a string of words with no real practical significance or reality at all.

Some will argue that these situations only apply to extreme cases, and that the individuals who behave in such a repulsive way are morally wrong and not "good patriots." This is nothing short of denial, as there is no logical reason that true patriotism would not lead to such actions. After all, patriotism begins as an arbitrary practice, so it only follows that the decisions made in its wake would be just as arbitrary.

For the reasons described, it is a moral necessity that all people work to eliminate the immorality of patriotism. Patriotism is a learned trait that has left nothing but violence, bigotry, and ignorance in its wake. It is our universal duty to ensure that future generations do not have to grapple with this egoistic chauvinism.

Works Cited

"Patriotism." Nathanson, Stephen.

An Encyclopedia of War and Ethics. Edited by Donald Wells.

Greenwood Press. 1996.

"Patriotism or Peace." Leo Tolstoy.

"Patriotism Is Like Racism." Gomberg, Paul.

Ethics 101. The University of Chicago.

October, 1990.