Patriot

Assalam Alaikom,

I meant to let the caged thoughts of my mind on patriotism fly into the Cyberspace today, but then I chanced upon an immensely artful article by such a great writer that I decided to postpone my humble thoughts, or perhaps replace them with his and be content for the rest of my life, to another day and present you with Tolstoy’s opinions on the subject.

Patriotism or Peace

By Leo Tolstoy

            Strange is the egotism of private individuals, but the egotists of private life are not armed, do not consider it right either to prepare or use arms against their adversaries; the egotism of private individuals is under the control of the political power and of public opinion.  A private person who with gun in his hand takes away his neighbor’s cow, or a desyatina of his crop, will immediately be seized by a policeman and put into prison.  Besides, such a man will be condemned by public opinion—he will be called a thief and robber.  It is quite different with the states: they are all armed—there is no power over them, except the comical attempts at catching a bird by pouring some salt on its tail—attempts at establishing international congresses, which, apparently, will never be accepted by the powerful states (who are armed for the very purpose that they many no pay any attention to any one), and, above all, public opinion, which rebukes every act of violence in a private individual, extols, raises to the virtue of patriotism every appropriation of what belongs to others, for the increase of the power of the country.

 

Open the newspapers for any period you may wish, and at any moment you will see the black spot—the cause of every possible war: now it is Korea, now the Pamir, now the lands in Africa, now Abyssinia, now Turkey, now Venezuela, now the Transvaal.  The work of the robbers does not stop for a moment, and here and there a small war, like an exchange of shots in the cordon, is going on all the time, and the real war can and will begin at any moment.

 

If an American wishes the preferential grandeur and well-being of America above all other nations, and the same is desired for his state by an Englishman, and a Russian, and a Turk, and a Dutchman, and an Abyssinian, and a citizen of Venezuela and of the Transvaal, and an Armenian, and a Pole, and a Bohemian, and all of them are convinced that these desires need not only not be concealed or repressed, but should be a matter of pride and be developed in themselves and in others; and if the greatness and well-being of one country or nation cannot be obtained except to the detriment of another nation, frequently of many countries and nations—how can war be avoided?

 

And so, not to have any war, it is not necessary to preach and pray to God about peace, to persuade the English-speaking nations that they ought to be friendly toward one another, in order to be able to rule over other nations; to form double and triple alliances against one another; to marry princes to princesses of other nations—but to destroy what produces war.  But what produces war is the desire for an exclusive good for one’s own nation—what is called patriotism.  And so to abolish war, it is necessary to abolish patriotism, and to abolish patriotism, it is necessary first to become convinced that it is an evil, and that it is hard to do.  Tell people that war is bad, and they will laugh at you: who does not know that?  Tell them that patriotism is bad, and the majority of people will agree with you, but with a small proviso.  “Yes, bad patriotism is bad, but there is also another patriotism, the one we adhere to.”  But wherein this good patriotism consists in not being acquisitive, as many say, it is nonetheless retentive; that is, men want to retain what was formerly acquired, since there is no country which was not based on conquest, and it is impossible to retain what is conquered by any other means than those by which it was acquired, that is, by violence and murder.  But even if patriotism is not retentive, it is restorative—the patriotism of the vanquished and oppressed nations, the Armenians, Poles, Bohemians, Irish, and so forth.  This patriotism is almost the very worst, because it is the most enraged and demands the greatest degree of violence.

 

Patriotism cannot be good.  Why do not people say that egotism can be good, though this may be asserted more easily, because egotism is a natural sentiment, with which a man is born, while patriotism is an unnatural sentiment, which is artificially inoculated in him?

 

It will be said: “Patriotism has united men in states and keeps up the unity of the states.”  But the men are already united in states—the work is all done: why should men now maintain an exclusive loyalty for their state, when this loyalty produces calamities for all states and nations?  The same patriotism which produced the unification of men into states is now destroying those states.  If there were but one patriotism—the patriotism of none but the English—it might be regarded as unificatory or beneficent, but when, as now, there are American, English, German, French, Russian patriotisms, all of them opposed to one another, patriotism no longer unites, but disunites.  To say that, if patriotism was beneficent, by uniting men into states, as was the case during its highest development in Greece and Rome, patriotism even now, after 1,800 years of Christian life, is just as beneficent, it is the same as saying that, since the ploughing was useful and beneficent for the field before the sowing, it will be as useful now, after the crop has grown up.

 

It would be very well to retain patriotism in memory of the use which it once had, as people preserve and retain the ancient monuments of temples, as mausoleums stand, without causing any harm to men, while patriotism produces without cessation innumerable calamities.

 

 

C’est a prendre ou a laisser, as the French say.  If patriotism is good, then Christianity, which gives peace, is an idle dream, and the sooner this teaching is eradicated, the better.  But if Christianity really gives peace, and we really want peace, patriotism is a survival from barbarous times, which must not only not be evoked and educated, as we now do, but which must be eradicated by all means, by preaching, persuasion, contempt, and ridicule.  If Christianity is the truth, and we wish to live in peace, we must but only have no sympathy for the power of our country, but must even rejoice in its weakening, and contribute to it.  A Russian must rejoice when Poland, the Baltic provinces, Finland, Armenia, are separated from Russia and made free; and an Englishman must similarly rejoice in relation to Ireland, Australia, India, and the other colonies, and cooperate in it, because the greater the country, the more evil and cruel is its patriotism, and the greater is the amount of the suffering on which its power is based.  And so, if we actually want to be what we profess, we must not, as we do now, wish for the increase of our country, but wish for its diminution and weakening, and contribute to it with all our means.  And thus must we educate the younger generations: we must bring up the younger generations in such a way that, as it is now disgraceful for a young man to manifest his coarse egotism, for example, by eating everything up, without leaving anything for others, to push a weaker person down from the road, in order to pass by himself, to take away by force what another needs, it should be just as disgraceful to wish for the increase of his country’s power; and, as it now is considered stupid and ridiculous for a person to praise himself, it should be considered stupid to extol one’s nations, as is now done in various lying patriotic histories, pictures, monuments, textbooks, articles, sermons, and stupid national hymns.  But it must be understood that so long as we are going to extol patriotism and educate the younger generations in it, we shall have armaments, which ruin the physical and spiritual life of the nations, and wars, terrible, horrible wars, like those for which we are preparing ourselves, and into the circle of which we are introducing, corrupting them with our patriotism, the new, terrible fighters of the distant East.

 

In reply to a prince’s question how to increase his army, in order to conquer a southern tribe which did not submit to him, Confucius replied: “Destroy all thy army, and use the money, which thou art wasting now on the army, on the enlightenment of thy people and on the improvement of agriculture, and the southern tribe will drive away its prince and will submit to thy rule without war.”

[Me] This was part one, we shall meet once more soon.

Advertisements

A great man once said...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s