Majestyk

This may be a consequence of the invasion but, it is not the impetus.

Of who do you speak?

Mark

I mean the people who accuse dissenters of being un-american etc. if they disagree with the war.

Majestyk

So, people, who are expressing their opinion about people who are expressing their opinion, are undermining democracy by, expressing their opinion.

Pomp

If the intent of their expression is to stifle public debate then, yes, they are undermining democracy. It is possible to use one's participation in a democratic process to counteract democracy. See, for example, the democratic elections that led to the Nazi Party's rise to power.

Majestyk

If, the espousers of such expression were attempting to have them incorporated into the law then, yes I would agree. However I have not seen anyone on this board take such a position. Furthermore, I would oppose any attempt to enforce patriotism under the penalty of law.

Mark

Majestyk, what I mean is I'm all for debate with people who are in favour of the war. I respect difference of opinion. But there are people (on both sides) who demand the other side shut up and do what you're told. That kind of attitude is not healthy for democracy.

Majestyk

Agreed.

Fr.Andrew

(Majestyk): You're right. Criticism is not the same as "Aide and comfort to the enemy". Aid and comfort to the enemy qualifies as treason. Being unpatriotic is not the same as being treasonous.

(Fr Andrew): Criticizing your government is not the same as being unpatriotic.

Yggdrasill

Patriotism is loving your country and wanting good things to happen to it. A country is it's people, if you love the people, but don't think that the government is pursuing a course of action that is in the best interest of the people, you are a patriot. You can be a communist and still be a patriot. You can be a revolutionist and still be a patriot. It all depends on what you think is in the best interest of the people.

That is my view anyway.

Majestyk

If, you include all forms of criticism during time of war, this is where our opinions will differ.

Correspondence to government representitives and private conversations expressing your concerns are never things that should be discouraged.

Public criticism affects the morale of everyone who hears it. Derisive comments create tension and anxiety amongst the populace and those actually on the field of battle. And troops must believe that they have the support of their countrymen in order to be effective. That effectivness is not only to achieve their objectives but, to also defend themselves.

If, you are a citizen then that should be your concern because, you along with every other citizen of the republic are responsible for them being there.

If, on the other hand, you believe that the representatives, that you helped to select, are in breach of the trust that was placed in them, you also have a duty to act.

That action however, must be more than making critical comments or derisive comments about the competence or motivations of the representatives in question. If, you believe that your neighbors, who chose to serve in the defense of the republic, are in imminent peril under such circumstances then, it is your patriotic duty to act. Your actions should cost you something, be it money, time, liberty, or even life. If you are not willing to sacrifice then, your convictions must not run very deep.

So, I don't claim that patriotism is just blind allegiance to the will of our representitives in government. I do claim that as individuals of character, while our fellows are engaged in a life and death struggle, our words and deeds acknowledge the gravity of their situation.

In other words when someone is putting their ass on the line for you, the least you can do is lead, follow, or get out of the way. Don't stand around bitching and moaning.

*edit* Forgot to add that this of course is just my opinion.