According to Jeannette Krebs, patriotism has lost most of its original meaning and use. In fact, it has been misused by the people leading to loss of its initial meaning. The author presents the topic as internal feelings which are personal and strong binding a person to his/her country. This makes the name to express the overall love for a country and being ready to do virtually anything for the country (Jeanette, 2010).
The author presents patriotism as something internal and ever present in the citizens of a country not only during special occasions. This is presented by her examples of the feelings that American citizens had after September 11th tragedy. The whole nation was in doom and all the citizens dull through not all areas of America were affected (Jeanette, 2010).
The first article presents some bias by trying to associate patriotism with education and politics more than any other policy of the government. She tries to associate patriotism with total adherence to the law and policies which might be interpreted as blind adherence even to the disadvantageous policies. The second article comes in to reduce this bias by evaluating that blind adherence to policies in not patriotism (Jeanette, 2010). However, this second article presents yet another bias by encouraging mass action which might result in damage which is an act contrary to acts of patriotism (Sparks, 2010).
Both articles contain ambiguous information in ways of practicing patriotism. Both articles indirectly call for mass action as an expression of patriotism when the government policies are oppressive to the people. I can agree to this information but the authors overlook the consequences of the actions. The actions might provoke a series of bitter retaliation government actions which might be oppressive to the citizens or even cause death of some citizens.
Both of the sources presented in this paper contain credible information for this topic. Assessing the credibility of the sources, Jeanette’s article defines patriotism from the best perspective and especially from an American viewpoint. The article also presents several examples on patriotism and how to separate patriotic adherence to government policies from arrogant adherence. The second article is also important since it helps draw the bigger picture of patriotism from opposition side. The article presents information on how to separate fear from patriotism and expresses the topic as an act of courage and boldness not fear and arrogance.
Looking at fallacies employed in the articles, both articles use appeal to power or mass action which calls for demonstration to express the citizens’ feelings. This appeal makes use of indirect force and pressure on the government which might translate into quick fix policies to calm the citizens down without looking at the overall long term aftermath of the policies’ implementation.
Both articles can be claimed to have several similar arguments but the main argument presented by both articles is patriotism is more than just love for one’s country. The articles use different structures to express this point. Jeanette’s article associates patriotism with personal feelings while Sparks’ article associates patriotism with loving one’s country to a point of even correcting the government when it makes inappropriate policies. These articles present several illustrations supporting this argument and conclude on patriotism being an act from within and a personalized feeling making a person feel accountable for his/her government and country.
Looking at validity of this argument, it is valid in the contemporary society which needs much enlightenment on this topic. This is mainly because most of the contemporary societies in the world result in blind adherence to government policies in the name of patriotism.
References
Krebs, Jeanette, (2010). Patriot-News: American Patriotism Is Alive and Well. Detroit: Green haven Press.
Sparks, Ron. (2010). Blind Patriotism Is Rampant: Patriotism Is Love of Country, Not of Government or Its Policies. Detroit: Green haven Press.
