Nationalism isnâ€™t just about Us vs. Them, itâ€™s reliant on the marginalized and the â€œdeviant.” They help us define who â€œweâ€ are, and it comes at a high cost: justice. Ten years into 9/11, Joanne Kalogeras explains, from London.
I was at home in San Francisco on 9/11/01. I could go on about what I saw and how I felt after my sister’s phone call roused me from bed and drove me to the television set, but youâ€™ve heard it all before, a thousand times. Shock. Fear. Confusion. Then, later that evening at a Castro Street bar, trying to make sense of it, Earthquake Love (what Californians call the strong social bond many feel towards each other in the face of an emergency or disaster).
The following week, I thought about odd things to be grateful for. My father had passed away six months earlier, and I still donâ€™t like to think of how he wouldâ€™ve taken those events. The person videotaping George Bushâ€™s deer-in-headlights reactions upon hearing the news from his aides. The Onion rising to the occasion magnificently: â€œRest of Country Temporarily Feels Deep Affection for New York”.
Which, by the way, is just how I like my patriotism, if I must have it at all: with humorous affection and a resistance to taking it too seriously. The stomach-churning nationalism the country has descended into since 9/11 is not simply senseless and mean-spirited. It is antithetical to what we say America stands for. Yes, in the past weâ€™ve often been staggeringly hypocritical that way, but 2001 inspired us to a new level. And of course it would, because those two planes hit us where we live: at one of the real and metaphorical centers of our free market/individualism conception of our nationhood.
Today, 9/11 brings two things to my mind: justice and nationalism, and how closely they are related.
Nationalism can be hard to pin down. In Encountering Nationalism, Jyoti Puri describes it as the â€œrelatively recent beliefs and practices aimed at creating unified but unique communities within a sovereign territoryâ€¦ Sameness and difference are the foundations upon which nationalism restsâ€¦â€ Individuals are â€œsimilar and equal,” but as a people, distinct from those of other nations. Puri asserts that itâ€™s also a form of power and an expression of power: it is unifying, and inspiring enough that people give up their lives for it. Itâ€™s used to unite people against a common enemy, and can also be used to persuade people that foreign (and national) actions are just.
Nationalism isnâ€™t just about Us versus Them, where â€œtheyâ€ are outside our borders. Itâ€™s very much reliant on the marginalized and the â€œdeviantâ€ within our borders. They help us define who â€œweâ€ are, in order to face those who are not us. The lines are often murky, and the goalposts are always moving. But the dependence is very real, and it comes at aÂ high cost. That cost is justice.
So far, there are probably no real surprises in Puriâ€™s description. However, she points out that nationalismâ€™s chief characteristic is internal unity, and that it is simply a myth. We seem to recognize and respect the â€œreality of differencesâ€ (her words), especially in the multicultural U.S.â€”we pride ourselves in that. But when nationalism comes into play, we are all about Us versus Them, and internal differences are swept under the rug. One might look upon that as a positive, unifying force despite differences, but in actuality those differences are ignored or serve as markers to exclude. Internally, this is what has happened since 9/11.
The months and years following 9/11 saw our civil liberties curtailed; Guantanamo Bay turned into an offshore detainment and interrogation center outside the jurisdiction of U.S. law; the rise of virulent Islamophobia; the sanctioned use of torture by the U.S. government; and two wars that have not effectively been ended yet, both being motivational sources of our nationalism (and serving as foreign grounds on which we wage our internal moral wars). Seemingly unrelated, we have seen the drastic decline of abortion rights and accessibility, a rise in the profitability of insurance companies that are covering less, the privatization of almost all new prisons and a corresponding growth of incarcerations (Americaâ€™s population is 5% of the worldâ€™s, yet we have 25% of its prisoners), as well as a full-force attack on collective bargaining rights for workers.
What do those two seemingly unrelated groups of changes have in common, and what do they have to do with nationalism? In the attempt to shore up feelings of patriotism, to gather strength for the fight ahead, we want to define who we are, and tell the world weâ€™re proud to be citizens of this nation. But the endeavor to define who â€œweâ€ are, who gets to be included in the nationalist discourse, always involves identifying who isnâ€™t part of that discourse, who gets excluded. Letâ€™s consider a few things.
Immediately after the attacks, anything but blinding loyalty was labeled unpatriotic. If you criticized any part of U.S. policy, you hated the U.S. We saw the return of â€œAmerica, love it or leave it”. Certain kinds of differences aroused illogical and knee-jerk suspicions. You could be a Mayflower WASP who converted to Islam last year, and your loyalty to America was suspect. Got an Arabic-sounding name (or Metallica lead vocalist James Hetfieldâ€™s â€œTaliban-like beard“)? Be prepared for grief. Existing problems such as racism, xenophobia, sexism, and homophobia mean that people got treated differently, regardless of citizenship. Puri calls these the â€œinternal frontiers of nationalism”, because they belie the myth of internal unity.
It hasnâ€™t been a rosy decade. In the 10 years since the 9/11 attacks, we have made some important strides in gay rights, yet extreme homophobes have found audiences in the halls of representative government (see:Â Sally Kern), and in the governments of foreign countries (Uganda).
The middle and working classes have suffered significantly. Are you poor? Unemployed? No matter there are five people who need jobs for every one available, itâ€™s still your own damn fault, because you live in the country of personal responsibility, and youâ€™re lucky you do. Donâ€™t rely on unions to help you get a fair paycheck, though. If youâ€™re not supportive of corporate America, youâ€™re not supportive of America. Corporations are people, too, according to Mitt Romney. You donâ€™t need unions, look at the rest of the worldâ€”in plenty of places, corporations are free to pay as little as they want, in whatever conditions they decide for their workers. If youâ€™re really a good citizen, you can afford health insurance. If you canâ€™t, well, surely your local church can help you out. (You do go to church, donâ€™t you?) Weâ€™re not a welfare state, not a nanny state. Our citizens donâ€™t need social safety nets. The U.S. is all about people helping each other, and not expecting the Government to give you handouts. (After all, if you need them, you donâ€™t deserve them.) If you lead a clean and ethical life, the American Dream will see you through.
Except that it hasnâ€™t. Trying to get health care for the underinsured, and for the 44 million American who have none at all, has been a bloody battle. Union membership corresponds directly with the health of middle class income, yet so many Republican politicians are bent on destroying them. Us/Them has intensified within the nation. Pundits from nearly all sides have fretted over the increasing polarization of the country.
We criticize other â€œless civilizedâ€ countries for human rights violations, but refuse to turn our gaze inward. I reside in the UK at the moment, and I can tell you that people from a host of different countries, many far worse off that the U.S., think weâ€™re absolutely barbaric for not taking care of our own. (Iâ€™d throw in â€œfor not abolishing capital punishment,” but thatâ€™s for a longer discussion.) If I were a cynic, Iâ€™d say that itâ€™s all about kickbacks and campaign money. But I think the problem goes deeper than that.
Nationalism isnâ€™t just about Us versus Them, where â€œtheyâ€ are outside our borders. Itâ€™s very much reliant on the marginalized and the â€œdeviantâ€ within our borders. They help us define who â€œweâ€ are, in order to face those who are not us. The lines are often murky, and the goalposts are always moving. But the dependence is very real, and it comes at a high cost. That cost is justice.
In her December 2001 article in The Nation entitled, â€œCan Patriotism be Compassionate?â€ (subscription) Martha Nussbaum relates an interesting incident. She was at the first White Sox game at Comisky Park played after 9/11. It was against the Yankees, and the opposing team received rousing, heartfelt (and highly unusual) cheers from the home team crowd. But as the game went on, the crowd started chanting â€œU-S-A!â€ in opposition to the Yankees. When the umpire made a bad call against the Sox, the crowd turned on him with the same chant.
It doesnâ€™t seem particularly logical to shout out nationalisms during a sporting event between two American teams, unless one understands that nationalism is all about Us and Them, even within the nation, and about defeating Them. Nussbaum compares nationalismâ€™s need for defeating and humiliating the â€œotherâ€ to parents who cross the line from supporting their own children to defeating and humiliating the children of others. Itâ€™s best for everyone if we refrain from crossing such lines. We don’t put ourselves at any advantage by doing so.
To Nussbaum (who is, to be clear, an often problematic and controversial thinker), our desire to bring the hijackers to justice is understandable and appropriate. The problem arises when Us/Them thinking loses its focus, and descends into â€œa general call for American supremacy, the humiliation of â€˜the otherâ€™.” In her Winter 2001 article â€œCosmopolitan Emotions?â€ at The New Humanist, Nussbaum wrote, â€œCompassion begins with the local. But if our moral natures and our emotional natures are to live in any sort of harmony we must find devices through which to extend our strong emotions to the world of human life as a whole.â€
Itâ€™s about time we stop seeing the world through binaries: the world isnâ€™t black and white. Weâ€™re much too interdependent to cling to Us/Them oppositions. Unless, that is, you subscribe to George Bushâ€™s philosophy: â€œI donâ€™t do nuance.â€ But the world is nuancedâ€”itâ€™s riddled with difference. We can either be friends with it and enjoy its riches, or we can be fearful of our shadows. Living with a respect for difference means acting on what we say our values and beliefs are. That people are created equal, and have the same moral worth. That everyone is deserving of what we think are principles of justice to live by: habeas corpus; trials within the bounds of the U.S. judicial system; an insistence that U.S. corporations adhere to the same working conditions in other countries as we do here. The list goes on. But we donâ€™t have to look very far for the most basic principles:
â€œWe hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.â€
We know the Founding Fathers pretty much meant â€œwhite menâ€ in the Declaration of Independence, when Jefferson wrote â€œmen.” But we have come to believe that those words mean â€œall people.” Itâ€™s time we start acting like it, and treating all people, inside and outside our borders, with similar respect.
Note: These are just a few thoughts on a very complex subject. I hadnâ€™t expected to write a post on nationalism in this context–my original thought was to write about homonationalism, a common LGBT desire to be recognized for being as patriotic as heteronormative people. Itâ€™s a difficult subject, because while I staunchly support gays in the military and gay marriage, they are two of the most nationalistic, heteronormativity-perpetuating institutions we have. For the time being, I live with the contradiction. More thoughts to come on homonationalism.
About the image, via Wikipedia:
This political cartoon (attributed to Benjamin Franklin) originally appeared during the French and Indian War, but was recycled to encourage the American colonies to unite against British rule. From The Pennsylvania gazette, 9 May 1754. Abbreviations used: South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and New England. This is a somewhat odd division: New England was four colonies, and Delaware and Georgia are missing.
Joanne Kalogeras grew up outside of Chicago. She studied political philosophy at the University of Chicago before engaging in various and sundry other occupations, including a long stint in software development. San Francisco is her home, but she is currently residing in London where she is finishing her doctoral thesis on cosmopolitan theory at the London School of Economicsâ€™ Gender Institute.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
‘I’m Broke’: One Day Before Shutdown and With No Plan McCarthy Says He Has ‘Nothing’ in His ‘Back Pocket’
Just 30 hours before his own Republican conference likely will have succeeded in shutting down the federal government of the United States, Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy candidly admitted to reporters he’s run out of ideas.
Earlier Friday in an “embarrassing failure,” 21 House Republicans killed legislation from their own party, a short-term continuing resolution, that would have kept the federal government open.
Later on Friday afternoon, swarmed by reporters, McCarthy was asked if he was going to tell them what his plans are. He sarcastically replied, “No, I’m going to keep it all a secret.”
When pressed, he said he would “keep working, and make sure we solve this problem.”
“What’s in your back pocket, Speaker?” another reporter asked, pressing him for an answer.
“Nothing right now. I’m broke,” he admitted, apparently referring to options and ideas to avoid a shutdown.
But another reporter asked Speaker McCarthy the main question: Would he partner with House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to put the Senate’s bill before the House.
He refused to answer.
After Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) failed House vote to keep the federal government open…
Reporter: “What’s in your back pocket, Speaker?”
McCarthy: “Nothing right now. I’m broke.” pic.twitter.com/pB2SWhOSVr
— The Recount (@therecount) September 29, 2023
Just before 5 PM CNN’s Manu Raju reported on the ongoing House Republicans’ closed-door meeting with the Speaker, a meeting where the 21 Republicans who will likely be effectively responsible for the shutdown reportedly did not attend.
“McCarthy is telling [Republicans] now there aren’t many options to avoid a shutdown, according to sources in room. He says they can approve GOP’s stop-gap plan that failed, accept Senate plan, put a ‘clean’ stop-gap on floor to dare Democrats to block it — or shut down the government.”
He adds, U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) largely responsible for the impending likely shutdown and the impending possible ouster of McCarthy said: “We will not pass a continuing resolution on terms that continue America’s decline.”
At midnight Saturday Republicans will likely have succeeded in furloughing 3.5 million million federal workers – two million of them service members in the U.S. Armed Forces – and countless contractors, while financially harming untold thousands of businesses that rely on income from all those workers to keep running – unless Speaker McCarthy puts a bipartisan continuing resolution approved by at least 75 U.S. Senators on the floor, legislation every House Democrat is likely to vote for.
Should he do so, many believe he will have also signed his own pink slip.
But whether or not the government shuts down, and whether or not McCarthy puts the Senate’s CR on the floor, according to The Washington Post the far right extremists in his party are already moving to oust him “as early as next week.”
The Biden campaign is making certain Americans realize the blame for the impending shutdown sits at McCarthy’s feet.
Here is Kevin McCarthy a few months ago praising the deal he made with President Biden to avert a government shutdown, which he is now reneging on pic.twitter.com/B4rVNzNXkZ
— Biden-Harris HQ (@BidenHQ) September 29, 2023
At 6:23 PM Friday evening, Punchbowl News’ Jake Sherman wrote on social media: “HOUSE REPUBLICANS HAVE NO PLAN TO KEEP GOVERNMENT OPEN.”
Watch the videos above or at this link.
‘Bad News’ for Sidney Powell as First Trump Co-Defendant in Georgia RICO Case Takes Plea Deal: Legal Expert
“Under the terms of an agreement with Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s office, Hall pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy to commit election fraud, conspiracy to commit computer theft, conspiracy to commit computer trespass, conspiracy to commit computer invasion of privacy, and conspiracy to defraud the state,” NBC News reports. “Under the terms of the deal, he’s being sentenced to five years probation.”
CNN previously reported “Hall, a bail bondsman and pro-Trump poll-watcher in Atlanta, spent hours inside a restricted area of the Coffee County elections office when voting systems were breached in January 2021. The breach was connected to efforts by pro-Trump conspiracy theorists to find voter fraud. Hall was captured on surveillance video at the office, on the day of the breach. He testified before the grand jury in Fulton County case and acknowledged that he gained access to a voting machine.”
Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, a professor of law and frequent MSNBC contributor, says Hall “was in the thick of things with Sidney Powell on Jan 7 for the Coffee County scheme involving voting machines. If he’s cooperating, it’s a bad sign for her.”
Hall’s plea deal “spells bad news for, among others, Sidney Powell,” says former Dept. of Defense Special Counsel Ryan Goodman, an NYU Law professor of law. Goodman posted a graphic showing the overlap in charges against Hall and Powell, which he called “alleged joint actions.”
With breakthrough for Georgia DA (@TamarHallerman reporting: “SCOTT HALL has become the first co-defendant in the Fulton election interference case to take a plea deal with prosecutors.”)
That spells bad news for, among others, Sidney Powell.
Example of alleged joint actions.👇 pic.twitter.com/odMM5C7JtX
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) September 29, 2023
See the graphic above or at this link.
Far-Right Republicans Kill GOP Bill to Keep Government Running in ‘Embarrassing Failure’ for McCarthy: Report
With a shutdown less than 36 hours away, far-right Republicans in the House of Representatives Friday afternoon voted against their party’s own legislation to kept the federal government running. Democrats opposed the content of the bill and voted against it. Just 21 far-right members of the GOP conference were able to effectively force what appears to be an all but inevitable shutdown at midnight on Saturday.
“HARDLINE HOUSE RS take down stopgap funding bill. 21 GOP no votes. 232-198,” reported Punchbowl News’ Jake Sherman just before 2 PM Friday.
NBC News reported that a “band of conservative rebels on Friday revolted and blocked House Republicans’ short-term funding bill to keep the government open, delivering a political blow to Speaker Kevin McCarthy and likely cementing the chances of a painful government shutdown that is less than 48 hours away.”
“Twenty-one rebels, led by Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., a conservative bomb-thrower and a top Donald Trump ally, voted Friday afternoon to scuttle the 30-day funding bill, known as a continuing resolution or CR, leaving Republicans without a game plan to avert a shutdown. The vote failed,” NBC added. “The embarrassing failure of the GOP measure once again highlights the dilemma for McCarthy as his hard-liners strongly oppose a short-term bill even if it includes conservative priorities. It leaves Congress on a path to a shutdown, with no apparent offramp to avoiding it — or to quickly reopen the government.”
A bipartisan group of at least 75 U.S. Senators has passed two bills this week that would keep the government running. Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy has refused to allow it to come to the floor for a vote.
- News2 days ago
McCarthy Blocks Bipartisan Bill Approved by 77 Senators to Avoid Shutdown as He Moves to Pin the Blame on Democrats
- News2 days ago
‘Jaw Dropping’: Democratic Senator Slams Tuberville’s ‘Open’ Talk About ‘White Supremacy’
- News3 days ago
Trump Goes on Wild Rant Targeting Judge and Attorney General After Being Found Liable for Fraud
- News2 days ago
‘Apparently You’ll Never Believe Us’: House Republican Melts Down After Reporter Questions His ‘Evidence’ Against Biden
- News1 day ago
‘Flying Monkeys on a Mission for the Wicked Witch’: Raskin Rips Republicans Over Impeachment ‘Inquiry’
- News2 days ago
‘Fire Sale Prices’: Biographer Predicts Trump ‘May Soon Be Personally Bankrupt’ and Could See His Assets ‘Liquidated’
- News1 day ago
‘All Those Biden Towers’ Where ‘Influence Was Used’: Democrat Turns Tables and Mocks Republicans in Sarcastic Q&A
- News2 days ago
‘I Feel a Little Bit Dumber for What You Say’: The Nine Worst Moments of the GOP Presidential Debate