Country or Humanity - Has it Really Come to This?

Patriotism.

A word that has been abused time and again, so much so that it ranks at the very top today when it comes to misleading people.

It does not stop at misleading. Anyone who does not subscribe to and abide by the popular definition of patriotism is vilified. You have seen this around you.

Academics, politicians, activists, even students are so easily labelled as anti-patriotic if they say or do something that goes atop the narrow boundary we have drawn for what should be said or done, for what is deemed as “insensitive”.

Should it be this way? When did we suddenly get so touchy about this subject? And do we even understand what patriotism means in the first place?

A Closer Look At Patriotism

A country is a hodgepodge of entities including the government, citizens, immigrants, corporations, military and so on, all of which play their own roles to represent and serve it. None of these solely represent it, and any of them can tread in the wrong direction — intentionally or otherwise.

If you point out a wrong, you are not anti-patriotic. Quite the opposite in fact. You love your country and care enough to have the wrong corrected.

“My country, right or wrong,” is a thing that no true patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying, “My mother, drunk or sober.” — a wise bloke.

Patriotism should not be desecrated to a blind acceptance of what your country is, it should be an aspiration of what you want your country to be.

However, a worrying trend has been emerging recently. A growing faction of society is putting their narrow view of patriotism above something that should ideally be above all — Humanity.

The Infringement Upon Humanity

Rohingya. Xinjiang. Kashmir. Darfur. The detention centers at the southern borders of the US.

You may know that the commonality here is ongoing persecution, be it along the lines of religion, ethnicity, nationality or political views (if you think that xenophobia does not at least play a role in the operation of these US detention centers, you are just adorable!).

While this remains unjustifiable, what concerns me more is the increasing number of “online patriots” who staunchly defend these atrocious acts against what they perceive as a global criticism of their country.

When the spotlight was on each of these cases, the twitter mob came out lashing against the criticism, blaming anything and everything from media, rival nations, external forces, even a global conspiracy. It was binary to them — you either defend your country or you join the anti-patriotic brigade. An ‘Us vs Them’ mentality at its best.

When Aung Suu Kyi was questioned by the International Court of Justice, she presented a nuanced depiction of the complexities in the Rakhine state and why the term ‘genocide’ might be dangerously misleading. Her defence was understandable to an extent considering she could not afford to antagonise both the military and the pro-military opposition. Many citizens of Myanmar however, especially the ones fortunate to receive higher education and capable of drawing a distinction between state-sponsored misinformation and reality, were simply swayed by her popularity and joined the denial bandwagon. Activists like Ei Thinzar Maung were scorned at for supporting the application that The Gambia filed against Myanmar.

What this specific group of people fail to realise is that the they are not really defending their country, only its representatives that are currently turning a blind eye to inhumane acts in the name of national security, just as the criticism that is made in the first place is also not against the country. No country’s founding values glorify persecution.

Reassessment Of Priorities

We seem to care so much more about defending our countries’ image than accepting that, once in a while, we are in the wrong.

Do we think fondly of the German citizens who stood by silently during the Holocaust because they were afraid to speak out or did not want to tarnish their country’s reputation? We need to reassess our priorities.

Going Beyond Polarisation

It is not a secret that we live in a polarised world. We seem to have extreme differences when it comes to anything and everything, be it politics, economics, the environment or religion.

A while ago, I jotted down my thoughts on whether it is possible today to have a reasonable conversation on ideological differences and find consensus. This article explores one of the polarising topics that riles many up.

The Tipping Point

Regardless, we have to draw a line somewhere and come together when there are exceptional circumstances at play. These has to be a tipping point for each of us wherein political affiliations, ideological differences, religious biases and even patriotism take a back seat and our basic humanity comes to the forefront.

I believe that ultimately we share this common bond — our innate humaneness — no matter how different our views may be. We are not really wired to relish victimisation or persecution. At some level, it will affect us.

We need to realise this and stop this worrying habit of denying what we don’t like and trolling those who voice out what we don’t like, all just in the name of patriotism. If we don’t, then truly humanity has been pushed to the side.