Patriotism is harmful to the human race.

Thanks to MTGandP for this great debate. I really enjoyed it =D ::Rebuttals:: C1: Conceded My opponent has abandoned his contention that patriotism leads to hate and arrogance. It was based entirely on a false definition of patriotism and was irrelevant. C2: "I am most devoted to my own country, then my country must be the most worthy of devotion." Patriotism cannot, by definition, stem from a belief of national superiority. What my opponent is describing is called nationalism and is fundamentally different. My opponent has failed to show any causal relationship between these concepts, despite having three separate rounds to do so. Once again, love or devotion to an entity does not imply that entity is superior. If that were the case, parents would only love their "best" child, the entire nation would only support a single sports team, automakers would produce only their best model of car, and so forth. The same analysis can be applied to patriotism; love or devotion to a country does not imply one finds it superior. Familiarity with or appreciation for particular aspects of a country is sufficient to produce patriotism, and relates nothing with other nations. My opponent has continued to ignore the actual definitions of patriotism and nationalism and simply perpetuates his own flawed comparison. As always, this contention is refuted. C3: "Patriotism, while not *completely* necessary for a military, is a very important element." My opponent has altered his argument for a second time, this time shifting patriotism from a necessary element of militaries to just an important element. However, this change has little to do with the actual contention and still fails to address any of my previous rebuttals. I have already clarified (and Pro has not disagreed) that patriotism does not inhibit rational thought, and thus does not produce "mindless" military obedience. Also, aggressive military acts are unrelated to patriotism, falling instead within the scope of nationalism or jingoism. Lastly, the prominence of national symbols in military advertisements does not negate non-patriotic reasons for joining the armed forces, including money, a family history, and personal growth. The difference is that patriotism is the only reason that encourages a position of military defensiveness rather than aggressiveness. Pro's contention remains misguided and extraneous. ::The Benefits of Patriotism:: 1. Social Support "Devotion to a country and devotion to the human race are frequently mutually exclusive…If there was a pie contest, you would be forced to choose between mom's apple pie and that really good blueberry pie." Please note that my opponent's response does nothing to refute patriotism as a source of social support. The stability, motivation, and encouragement it provides citizens are evident and Pro says nothing to deny this. At this point, his only claim is that such support would force citizens to choose their country above the interests of mankind in general. Fortunately, patriotism has nothing to do with matters concerning other countries and assuming it does stems from a misunderstanding of the term. For the last time (I promise), patriotism does not imply, demand, suggest, or even ask one to consider their country superior or inferior to another. It is an isolated relationship of love or devotion between a citizen and their country. Individuals can retain their sense of patriotism during times of conflict, but any feelings of superiority related to other nations stem from a separate entity: nationalism. My opponent has failed in 3 rounds to connect these terms, so they remain separate and his rebuttal stands as irrelevant. 2. National Improvement My opponent has abandoned his rebuttal against patriotism as a source of national improvement. In the previous round, he went so far as to concede that patriotism motivates citizens to act as an agent of improvement within their country. It serves to combat national apathy and works toward the greater good of all citizens. It also provides a common goal for seemingly opposing parties, encouraging dialogue and overarching national development. 3. National Defense "Patriotism, while not synonymous with nationalism and jingoism, is a necessary element of both." Again, my opponent's rebuttal does nothing to refute patriotism as a source of national defense. A love or devotion for one's country encourages efforts to ensure its preservation, thus increasing interest in national protection and security. My opponent has ignored this issue and once again tries to blame patriotism for the negatives of nationalism. As anyone who has read this debate thus far already knows, those elements that make nationalism so dangerous (i.e. feelings of superiority and aggression) exist independently of patriotism and would continue to exist in its absence. Attacking patriotism in an attempt to end nationalism is akin to attacking cultural pride to end racism; the common elements of these concepts do not render them interchangeable, and eliminating that which is positive does not eliminate the negative. ::Conclusion:: Pro has not offered a single relevant source, example, or line of reasoning to demonstrate any harm caused by patriotism. Instead, he has spent his time arguing against nationalism and other separate concepts. By failing to show any relevant link between these concepts and patriotism, his entire case falls flat. On the other hand, I have presented three unblemished benefits provided by patriotism: its production of national support, improvement, and defense. While Pro would describe patriotism as some harmful entity, he has conceded each of these benefits. The only arguments actually pertaining to patriotism in this debate are those that show the positive impact it has on citizens. For these reasons, I strongly urge a Con vote. Thank you to MTGandP and all the readers!