Patriotism is harmful to the human race.

Thanks so much to MTGandP for the challenge and I look forward to a great discussion. ::The Basics:: I stand in negation to the resolution: patriotism is harmful to the human race. Thus, the audience should identify Pro as the winner if patriotism is shown to be an overall detrimental force to the human race and Con as the winner if patriotism is shown to be an overall beneficial or neutral force to the human race. I present no objections to my opponent's definitions and take this opportunity to reiterate them and present one of my own: - Patriotism: love for or devotion to one's country. - Nationalism: loyalty and devotion to a nation ; especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups - Jingoism: extreme chauvinism or nationalism marked especially by a belligerent foreign policy [1] I ask the audience to make note of the distinguishing factors in the above definitions, as they play an important role in my opponent's case and my rebuttals. ::Rebuttals:: C1: "Patriotism is taking pride...and feeling hatred..." My opponent identifies patriotism as undue ownership of the accomplishments of others. However, the above definition of patriotism clearly offers no relationship with such self-aggrandizement. An appreciation for one's country in no way necessitates the belief that one is in some way responsible for the country's accomplishments. What my opponent describes as patriotism in "Bob" is more accurately described as arrogance, a trait with no innate tie to patriotism. My opponent also identifies patriotism as involving feelings of hatred towards those who are different. Once again, a glance at the definition shows that no such connection exists; neither affection nor loyalty to one's country obliges hatred toward others. In the context of this discussion, feelings of international inferiority or hatred can only be drawn from concepts such as nationalism or jingoism. Because my opponent has not demonstrated how patriotism leads necessarily to arrogance or hatred, any negatives associated with them are irrelevant. C2: "Patriotism was a notable cause of both world wars." Pro argues that because nationalism was a major component of the world wars, and patriotism is interchangeable with nationalism, patriotism can be considered a cause of the wars. Thus, if patriotism can be identified as separate from nationalism, my opponent's contention is refuted. Fortunately, Pro provided the definitions necessary to make this distinction clear. My opponent would attribute acts of international aggression and superiority to patriotism, despite the fact that these traits find absolutely no root in the term. Patriotism and nationalism share the common element of national devotion, but while the former ends there, the latter goes on to include feelings of entitlement and prominence. Given that this is a clear distinguishing factor between the terms, they must not be used interchangeably when these additional elements are present. The international hostility and violence demonstrated in the wars fit only the description of nationalism. My opponent's attempt to combine these terms despite their differing meanings is equivalent to equating cultural pride with racism, love with obsession, etc; just because these terms share common elements does not mean the negatives of one can be attributed to the other. Given that Pro has provided no evidence that patriotism and nationalism are identical or that one necessarily leads to the other, my opponent's contention is refuted. C3: "Patriotism is the willingness to kill...for trivial reasons." Pro claims that patriotism leads to irrational deeds, using an unusual example to illustrate his claim. However this example, which involves our friend Bob murdering his children because his country asked him to, is unrelated to patriotism for multiple reasons. First of all, patriotism does not imply that one follows unquestioningly the requests of their country, nor does it imply a belief that one's country is infallible. Once again, my opponent has attributed Bob's actions to patriotism when ignorance, blind servitude, and questionable moral judgment are more fitting reasons. Secondly, my opponent suggests that patriotism inhibits independence and critical thinking skills, depicting the patriotic as mindless, obedient automatons. Of course, this description is not drawn at all from the definition of patriotism and no sort of evidence is presented to support it. Patriotism is understood as a position of appreciation for, not submission to, a country. In fact, a solely patriotic mindset is neither necessary nor sufficient to produce the actions described in Pro's example; blind obedience to the degree mentioned is more likely a result of fear of punishment or ignorance of alternatives than it is a result of national pride. ::The Benefits of Patriotism:: 1. Social Support By providing citizens with a sense of community and common loyalties, patriotism acts as a source of social support, motivation, and inspiration. Moments of national crisis provide common examples of the positives of patriotism, in which feelings of national devotion produce emotional and psychological stability for citizens. International sporting events also demonstrate the benefits of national pride, as athletes and spectators are inspired to represent their countries through outstanding accomplishments and enthusiasm, respectively [2]. 2. National Improvement True patriotism, which is often blamed for the mismanagement of governments, is actually a tool to correct such errors. Patriotism works to battle national and political apathy, opening up a pathway for constructive public discourse. Possessing the common goal of countrywide advancement encourages both governmental advocates and critics to voice their opinions in an open and free atmosphere [3]. Lacking patriotism would result in a developmental void, wherein many efforts to improve one's country, through either support or criticism, would dissolve from a lack of motivation or interest. 3. National Defense By blaming it for the start of two world wars, my opponent misunderstands the innately defensive nature of patriotism. Patriotism proposes no position of authority, advantage, or privilege in relation to other nations, fundamentally excluding it from issues concerning international attacks. Instead, its message of devotion is more suited to a position of defense. To love one's country is to support its preservation, leading to greater interest in national safekeeping [4]. Whereas nationalism may encourage interference or hostility across nations, patriotism encourages only self-defense and internal stability. I apologize for the brevity of my arguments but the character limit looms. I hope to elaborate and extend my arguments in R2. ::Closing:: My opponent's gripes with patriotism are based entirely on incorrectly associating it with separate concepts, such as arrogance, hatred, prejudice, and obedience. In reality, patriotism makes no overt or implied relationship with any of these elements. Furthermore, Pro has offered no logical connection between patriotism and the harms he attributes to it. To love one's country does not presuppose discrimination or irrationality, but instead allows for national support, improvement, and defense. ::References:: 1. http://www.merriam-webster.com... 2. http://www.voanews.com... 3. http://www.lewrockwell.com... 4. http://archives.chicagotribune.com...