ursus arctos wrote:

QUOTE:
Were there piss-ups after the Nuremberg rallies? Riefenstahl never filmed those?

Well, the beer in Franconia's spectacular, so if there weren't, the Nazis were missing an opportunity.

QUOTE:

Of course it's setting the bar high, but I really don't know where you've set it. Is the claim just that there is a political aspect to the tradition? That some participants consider it an important part of nationalist propaganda? Those seem self evident to me.

That's pretty much it, yeah.

As I say, I think that part of the European response is visceral, and reflects the fact that over here, people who go around gazing at flags and singing anthems at the drop of a hat tend to be fascists. And I don't think the idea that it's fascist is sustainable.

But I do think the US expends a lot of collective effort shoring up patriotism, and that this patriotism is bound up with exceptionalism, and that both the patriotism itself, and its exceptionalist streak, have consequences for the rest of the world that aren't uniformly benign.

Baseball was invented over here, of course. Maybe y'all should sing GS the Q.

Wyatt Earp wrote:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:
...I also don't see expressing basic love of country as an inherently a bad thing.

Yeah, well, I do.

Then presumably you think the nation state should be abolished, and/or that no nation state can be worthy of being loved.

BrunoMaggiore wrote:

QUOTE:
Okay, but on the other hand, I'm not effortlessly pivoting from a national anthem at baseball games to the Nuremberg rallies.

Neither am I, if what you mean by "pivoting" is "drawing parallels". I was arguing against the idea that because something's not significant for all the participants, it's not significant. I've said, three fucking times now I think, that I don't think the anthem-singing is fascist. Let me say it a fourth time: I DON'T THINK THE FUCKING ANTHEM-SINGING IS FUCKING FASCIST.

I must admit I thought what I was doing there was totally clear, and that you're trying to muddy the waters, presumably in support of your "knocking down a few pegs" interpretation. If I'm right, it's a waste of fucking time talking to you because you've already decided how to spin everything anyone says.

Thinking that it's completely assinine to love an arbitrary governmental institution like the nation state is not the same as thinking it should be abolished.

QUOTE:
The national anthem is a cypher for unreflectively expressing basic love of country

Well that's precisely the point, isn't it. In much of Europe, unreflectively expressing basic love of country is considered a bit weird, for pretty obvious historical reasons. Unreflectively expressing basic love of country at every possible opportunity (and even more so, the reification of it through lapel pins, fucking enormous flags, and pledging allegiance to a flag rather than the country) is considered quite creepy. What we're not saying is that (most) Americans view these rituals themselves in a way that is creepy.

The Nazis missed lots of opportunities, which is why we aren't writing in German.

I also feel compelled to note that European Communists were also quite fond of "gazing at flags and singing anthems at the drop of a hat".

But, as usual, I think we are essentially in agreement (except on the origins point, baseball certainly evolved from rounders, but it isn't the same thing, to say that it was invented in the UK is as wrong as saying that it was invented by Abner Doubleday in Cooperstown in 1839).

BrunoMaggiore wrote:

QUOTE:
Then presumably you think the nation state should be abolished, and/or that no nation state can be worthy of being loved.

Well, I don't find nation states especially lovable, no, and I don't think they're necessarily the optimum form of political unit, no (though as a reformist, I reckon that a "tear down the nation" agenda would, by creating instability, do more harm than good). But we're not on about whether nation states in general are worthy of being loved. Are we?

I mean, if everyone got the opportunity, before every ballgame, to express "love" for a "nation state" of their choice, I'd still think that was weird, but it would be harmless. But it's a collective, peer-reinforced, expression of love for the "nation state" that just happens to be the one that, ooh look, nearly all the crowd are citizens of.

Wyatt Earp wrote:

QUOTE:
But I do think the US expends a lot of collective effort shoring up patriotism, and that this patriotism is bound up with exceptionalism, and that both the patriotism itself, and its exceptionalist streak, have consequences for the rest of the world that aren't uniformly benign.

I think that patriotism in the U.S. is still a fairly spontaneous sentiment that doesn't require constant "shoring up." Our modern sense of exceptionalism, of course, largely stems from having shored up Europe on two occasions when they were doing their utmost to bring human civilization to an end. So if there's one thing guaranteed to leave a country with a stubborn residue of exceptionalism, it's probably that. And of course there are negative ramifications, though they haven't proved to be anywhere near as negative as the forces which may be said to have enabled this exceptionalism in the first place. America was literally founded as an exception to the European status quo, after all, and it was Europe, by and large, who eventually came around. But all good things must run their course, to be sure.

ursus arctos wrote:

QUOTE:
I also feel compelled to note that European Communists were also quite fond of "gazing at flags and singing anthems at the drop of a hat".

Exactly. Cunts.

QUOTE:
Our modern sense of exceptionalism, of course, largely stems from having shored up Europe on two occasions when they were doing their utmost to bring human civilization to an end.

Oh, Jesus fucking Christ on a bike, not that one.

Are you being Comedy Online American?

La Lanterne Rouge wrote:

QUOTE:
Thinking that it's completely assinine to love an arbitrary governmental institution like the nation state is not the same as thinking it should be abolished.

But a nation state is more than just an arbitrary governmental institution, surely. Many of them are based on ideas and ideals.

QUOTE:
It was not very wonderful that Catherine, who had by nature nothing heroic about her, should prefer cricket, baseball, riding on horseback, and running about the country at the age of fourteen, to books...

Jane Austen, Northanger Abbey, 1803.

Gawd bless King George.

Wyatt Earp wrote:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:
Our modern sense of exceptionalism, of course, largely stems from having shored up Europe on two occasions when they were doing their utmost to bring human civilization to an end.

Oh, Jesus fucking Christ on a bike, not that one.

Are you being Comedy Online American?

Well, ha ha, but people talk of American exceptionalism like it just bubbled up to the surface all by itself, because Americans are a bunch of egotists. It was an inevitable byproduct of certain historical forces. And it's probably run its course.

BrunoMaggiore wrote:

QUOTE:
La Lanterne Rouge wrote:

QUOTE:
Thinking that it's completely assinine to love an arbitrary governmental institution like the nation state is not the same as thinking it should be abolished.

But a nation state is more than just an arbitrary governmental institution, surely. Many of them are based on ideas and ideals.

I can't agree with that at all. The nation state is defined by its (relatively arbitrary) geography (and, to an extent, the cultural make-up of people who happen to be within those borders).

I can't really think of a nation that's defined by its ideas or ideals.

And even if there was, I still can't see the faintest reason for loving it. Qualified admiration and support if, at a particular time, it was living up to the ideals. But love? Seriously?

C'mon Wyatt, you know that Austen was talking about a completely different game.

Ginger Yellow wrote:

QUOTE:
Well that's precisely the point, isn't it. In much of Europe, unreflectively expressing basic love of country is considered a bit weird, for pretty obvious historical reasons.

Look, Americans are more than capable of reflecting on why they 'basically' love their country, they just probably aren't doing so during the national anthem (though maybe many are).

QUOTE:
Unreflectively expressing basic love of country at every possible opportunity (and even more so, the reification of it through lapel pins, fucking enormous flags, and pledging allegiance to a flag rather than the country) is considered quite creepy. What we're not saying is that (most) Americans view these rituals themselves in a way that is creepy.

"Every possible opportunity" is just caricature. Fucking enormous flags are mainly the provenance of car dealerships, for whatever reason. Lapel pins are worn by politicians because of the Rovian trap of being caught not wearing one, and say nothing substantial about the general public's attitudes on patriotism. Most people could give a fuck about that. There's nothing ritualistic about big flags, or about lapel pins except among national politicians and the self-obsessed media.

Pledging allegiance to the flag is another thing, and has a definite creep element, and is also a distinctly un-American ritual.