What’s Wrong with Patriotism? A Feminist Critique

Abstract

If patriotism is anything, it is the expression of the ideal citizen’s commitment and service to their political community. Two models of citizenship tend to dominate Western political thought: the ancient model of citizen-warrior and, in the modern period, the liberal citizen qua property owner and producer. Both are traditionally male social roles as are the virtues attached to them – reflecting the role of patros (father) or male household head – and for this reason alone they remain one-sided and inadequate models for the modern democratic citizen, 50% of whom are now women. Aristotle provided a third citizen ideal as praxis or public service – activities that realize a civic friendship between citizens – but this ideal is generally considered unrealistic for our large industrial nations. In his seminal 1984 article, MacIntrye attempts to resurrect the notion of patriotism as “service” but in the end reverts back to the older warrior model, whereas we make two suggestions for a third alternative. First, focusing on the traditional activities of women reveals a host of practices that “serve others” whether in the family, neighborhood or state: feeding and caring for them, tending the wounded, furthering their autonomy and abilities, etc. Once this alternative model is developed – and its practices educated to modern principles of universal right and respect for personhood – a new notion of “civic friend” emerges with numerous advantages over the older “patriot”; a civic friend is neither fundamentally male, nor paternalistic, nor warlike, but conceives the citizen as an equal in realizing and maintaining the democratic project. Second, this alternative ideal is not pie-in-the-sky; not only does the mass movement of women into public spheres tend in this direction but the model dovetails nicely with another tradition already on hand: that of nonviolent civic disobedience.