iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Robert Reich

GET UPDATES FROM Robert Reich
 

Patriotism July 4, 2012

Posted: 07/04/2012 9:46 am

In the last two weeks, the Supreme Court has allowed police in Arizona to demand proof of citizenship from people they stop on other grounds (while throwing out the rest of Arizona's immigration law), and has allowed the federal government to require everyone buy health insurance -- even younger and healthier people -- or pay a penalty.

What do these decisions -- and the national conversations they've engendered -- have to do with patriotism? A great deal. Because underlying them are two different versions of American patriotism.

The Arizona law is aimed at securing the nation from outsiders. The purpose of the heatlhcare law is to join together to provide affordable health care for all.

The first version of patriotism is protecting America from people beyond our borders who might otherwise overrun us -- whether immigrants coming here illegally or foreign powers threatening us with aggression.

The second version of patriotism is joining together for the common good. That might mean contributing to a bake sale to raise money for a local school or volunteering in a homeless shelter. It also means paying our fair share of taxes so our community or nation has enough resources to meet all our needs, and preserving and protecting our system of government.

This second meaning of patriotism recognizes our responsibilities to one another as citizens of the same society. It requires collaboration, teamwork, tolerance and selflessness.

The Affordable Care Act isn't perfect, but in requiring younger and healthier people to buy insurance that will help pay for the healthcare needs of older and sicker people, it summons the second version of patriotism.

Too often these days we don't recognize and don't practice this second version. We're shouting at each other rather than coming together -- conservative versus liberal, Democrat versus Republican, native-born versus foreign born, non-unionized versus unionized, religious versus secular.

Our politics has grown nastier and meaner. Negative advertising is filling the airwaves this election year. We're learning more about why we shouldn't vote for someone than why we should.

As I've said before, some elected officials have substituted partisanship for patriotism, placing party loyalty above loyalty to America. Just after the 2010 election, the Senate minority leader was asked about his party's highest priority for the next two years. You might have expected him to say it was to get the economy going and reduce unemployment, or control the budget deficit, or achieve peace and stability in the Middle East. But he said the highest priority would be to make sure the president did not get a second term of office.

Our system of government is America's most precious and fragile possession, the means we have of joining together as a nation for the common good. It requires not only our loyalty but ongoing vigilance to keep it working well. Yet some of our elected representatives act as if they don't care what happens to it as long as they achieve their partisan aims.

The filibuster used to be rarely used. But over the last decade the threat of a filibuster has become standard operating procedure, virtually shutting down the Senate for periods of time.

Meanwhile, some members of the House have been willing to shut down the entire government in order to get their way. Last summer they were even willing to risk the full faith and credit of the United States in order to achieve their goals.

In 2010 the Supreme Court opened the floodgates to unlimited money from billionaires and corporations overwhelming our democracy, on the bizarre theory that corporations are people under the First Amendment. Congress won't even pass legislation requiring their names be disclosed.

Some members of Congress have signed a pledge -- not of allegiance to the United States but of allegiance to a man named Grover Norquist, who has never been elected by anyone. Norquist's "no-tax" pledge is interpreted only by Norquist, who says closing a tax loophole is tantamount to raising taxes and therefore violates the pledge.

True patriots don't hate the government of the United States. They're proud of it. Generations of Americans have risked their lives to preserve and protect it. They may not like everything it does, and they justifiably worry when special interests gain too much power over it. But true patriots work to improve the U.S. government, not destroy it.

But these days some Americans loathe the government, and are doing everything they can to paralyze it, starve it and make the public so cynical about it that it's no longer capable of doing much of anything. Norquist says he wants to shrink it down to a size it can be "drowned in a bathtub."

When arguing against paying their fair share of taxes, some wealthy Americans claim "it's my money." They forget it's their nation, too. And unless they pay their fair share of taxes, Americans can't meet the basic needs of our people. True patriotism means paying for America.

So when you hear people talk about patriotism, be warned. They may mean securing the nation's borders, not securing our society. Within those borders, each of us is on our own. These people don't want a government that actively works for all our citizens.

Yet true patriotism isn't mainly about excluding outsiders seen as our common adversaries. It's about coming together for the common good.

ROBERT B. REICH, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.

 

Follow Robert Reich on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RBReich

FOLLOW POLITICS
In the last two weeks, the Supreme Court has allowed police in Arizona to demand proof of citizenship from people they stop on other grounds (while throwing out the rest of Arizona's immigration law),...
In the last two weeks, the Supreme Court has allowed police in Arizona to demand proof of citizenship from people they stop on other grounds (while throwing out the rest of Arizona's immigration law),...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,140
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (15 total)
11:01 AM on 07/06/2012
Once again, Reich is on target. When did Americans become so selfish that the common good is unknown to them?
09:24 PM on 07/05/2012
"When arguing against paying their fair share of taxes, some wealthy Americans claim "it's my money." This is something I had never heard before. I guess prior to the new GOP/Tea nobody would have dared expressed such selfishness and lack of Patriotism and love for our Nation.

It's really a shameful statement. It's also not true. It is not "my money". Nobody, not an individual, group of individuals, organization, partnership, corporation makes money on their own.

In order to make money you need people with minimum levels of education. Your employees or contractors were educated by our schools and universities which exist as a result of our educational system which is paid for by all of us. Your products are transported to market via our (even now) excellent transportation system. Business, personal communications necessary for commercial activity are provided as a result of the communications infrastructure developed in our Nation and paid largely from public funds generated from income and other taxes. Same for the legal system and Defense.

Developed countries, have reached this level from the income of our goverment and the economic activity generated from it. Underdeveloped countries cannot get of the ground because they cannot reliably collect the necessary income taxes from individuals, corporations and other economic entities.

Our capitalist system depends on the combined contributions of all the participants in our economic activity. From the combined efforts of of all our citizens and residents. Without it we would be back in the Middle Ages.
01:29 AM on 07/06/2012
Of course it takes other people, but it is only through the free exchange that the system is the least bit efficient. When I buy something from someone, I do so because I value that something more than I value what I gave for it. The person who sold it to me values it less than whatever I give him. Both parties are better off. The same applies to labor. I voluntarily give my labor to my employer because I value what I get in return more than my time and effort. The employer voluntarily gives me something I want for my labor because he values my labor more. Both parties are better off. That's it in a nutshell and anything that interferes with that only makes everyone less rich. Without private ownership of what you have and without being the determiner/benefactor of your own labor, the system stops working. So we DO have the concept of "it's my money." The system cannot work without that concept.
01:29 AM on 07/06/2012
Some things require the pooling of our resources, a common defense, courts to enforce contracts, roads, etc. Taxes are a necessary part of the system. The rich know this; the poor know this. I don't know anyone who wants to not pay a share that is proportional to his or her benefit from this common good. Taxes can be fee based, but that can leave the poor to pay more than what they get out of it. Taxes like this are regressive; I dislike regressive taxes. FICA, medicare, etc. are all regressive. Taxes can be flat (a certain fixed percentage). I think that is better, but I favor a bit of progressiveness (the percentage goes up as income goes up). That is exactly what income taxes are suppose to do. Determining what is fair is a tricky proposition.

What happens is a lot of the taxes collected and the money spent is not going to roads, courts, defense, infrastructure. It is going to individuals. I am fine with a social safety net, but more and more it seems we don't just have safety nets, we have hammocks. The perception of free loaders, right or wrong, is something that very much bothers a large number of people. THAT is what you are seeing.
Benjacomin Bozart
Jefferson-better to eat bacon at home than to rule
04:39 PM on 07/05/2012
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
photo
smalljaws
It can't happen here.
02:30 PM on 07/05/2012
" Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it. "

George Bernard Shaw
05:05 PM on 07/05/2012
Yep, makes just as much logical sense as to think your race is superior to all others because you born to it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
legalclubs
02:27 PM on 07/05/2012
A claim that people should "pay their fair share" of taxes is completely meaningless. Probably 99.99% of Americans agree with the general statement, but nobody can seem to agree on what constitutes somebody's fair share.

What about the 50% of the population who pay no federal income tax. Are they paying their "fair share" of the costs of the federal government? Keep in mind, that prior to Clinton and Bush, these people actually did pay something, whereas after Clinton and expanded by Bush, many of these people are get a refund from the federal government for tax they never even paid (i.e. the earned income tax credit)? How is getting something for nothing, paying your fair share?

Then take the middle class. Neither party is saying taxes should be raised on this group.

Then take the rich. The top 20% pays more than 85% of all federal income taxes in the United States. When the tax breaks expire at the end of this year, the top marginal rate will equal nearly 40%, plus additional surcharge taxes for Obamacare, plus phaseout of deductions, bringing the top tax bracket close to 50%. Does someone paying almost half of all their earning to the federal government not enough? This doesn't even include another 10% in income taxes for states like California and New York, not to mention gas taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, and the thousand of other taxes. How much is enough? 60%? 70%? 100%?
05:07 PM on 07/05/2012
I think you might be conflating effective tax rate and marginal tax rate. A top marginal tax rate of 40% does not mean you are paying 40% of your income in taxes. I definitely agree that the argument is not whether or not everyone should pay their fair share, but what "fair share" means.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
legalclubs
09:49 PM on 07/06/2012
When referring to taxes I said it was "bringing the top tax bracket close to 50%" By top bracket I was of course referring to the marginal rate.
10:30 PM on 07/05/2012
legalclubs

Yours is a bogus issue. First of all, it's not true that 50% of the population does not pay income taxes. Second the earned tax credit is a very small portion of our economic activity. Also the Bush tax cuts were excessive and not needed, specially when we had to pay for two wars, one of which was completely unnecesary. Third, this idea of trying to balance the budget by cutting social programs is not only unfair but even if completely eliminated would not make a dent in the deficit. You cannot grow an economy by cutting services for your population. You grow an economy by generating more economic activity which will generate more income taxes. Fourth,
you can eliminate all loopholes on the oil companies.
01:38 AM on 07/06/2012
"First of all, it's not true that 50% of the population does not pay income taxes."

Not quite, but darn close: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/who-doesnt-pay-federal-income-taxes-legally/

"Second the earned tax credit is a very small portion of our economic activity."

Doesn't seem insignificant to me.
http://www.results.org/issues/us_poverty_campaigns/economic_opportunity_for_all/earned_income_tax_credit/
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alphakat333
May you be touched by his noodly appendage
01:59 PM on 07/05/2012
Well said, Professor!

We're either in this together or its Lord of the Flies.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Black Rhino
01:51 PM on 07/05/2012
Reich is a one trick pony. Take money from the successful and cautious, and hand it over to deadbeats and underwater families. That is 'patriotism'.

No thanks. I think the Facebook founder had it right...take your hard earned money, and flee to singapore.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:56 PM on 07/05/2012
You've just defined socio-pathology and crass selfishness. The more prevalent such behavior, the more dysfunctional society becomes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Black Rhino
03:30 PM on 07/05/2012
It's not selfish. "Selfish" is having a kid when you have no savings or skills, and expecting others to pay for it.

"Selfish" is signing documents you have no concept of, or didn't bother reading and understanding.

"Selfish" is spending more money on your hair-do, than your kid's education.

"Selfish" is eating until you're obese, and then expecting "society" to pick up the medical tab.

There's a lot of selfish going on...I don't want my money paying for it. End the wars, stop the crazy welfare/handouts, and cut taxes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Black Rhino
03:32 PM on 07/05/2012
And, there may be no "society". "Society" is a myth. People generally only care about their immediate surroundings (do you need me to suggest some benedict anderson for you?).

Society is disintegrating because most people care about those outside of their "society" as much as those supposedly in it. Hence, outsourcing doesn't really bother us, even though it may decimate the middle class.

Nationalism, like this notion of 'society' you cling to, is an artifact of the past 2 centuries. We've evolved past them (or devolved). We simply don't care for one another too much, any more.
03:16 PM on 07/05/2012
Please do.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bdunlap52
01:49 PM on 07/05/2012
Forcing people to buy something to take care of other people is not what American Values are. Allowing them to be charitable is the value you're missing out on.
03:22 PM on 07/05/2012
Government subsidies and tax breaks to corporations outpace all the federal money spent on programs for the poor, including welfare, food stamps, housing subsides, and student aid.

"Take the Rich Off Welfare", Zepezauer and Naiman

"cut 26 percent of the welfare now given to the rich you have instantly balanced the budget."

"If you cut out wealthfare, you could pay off the national debt in 11 years."
05:17 PM on 07/05/2012
I'm not for giving subsidies. I would end them all today.

A tax break is not a giving. It is a reduction of a taking.

I very much doubt you could balance the budget by ending welfare for the rich. Not saying we shouldn't do it, just saying that's not where the big money in the budget is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Justice Seek3r
Liberty, In God We Trust, E Pluribus Unum
01:26 PM on 07/05/2012
"joining together for the common good..."

Hah! As long as it's conservatives supporting liberal policies, not the other way around!

Your implied assumption that conservatives are motivated by selfishness, xenophobia, racism, etc. simply proves how ignorant you are of conservatives and their values.

It's just not possible for conservatives to have a genuine interest in improving this country, for ALL its citizens, right?
photo
ksuetorres
Truth, Fairness, Civility
02:45 PM on 07/05/2012
With all due respect, I find small evidence that conservatives have a genuine interest in improving the country, and it's completely inexplicable. Don't we all live here? Why would conservatives so eagerly throw the poor, elderly and otherwise vulnerable under the juggernaut? And yet that's precisely what the Ryan budget does, with the rank and file bobbleheads dutifully nodding. Why would conservatives cheer at the idea of someone without insurance being allowed to die because they can't afford medical care? And yet, that's precisely what they did during the debates. Aren't there any poor, elderly, uninsured conservatives? Why are you upholding positions that blatantly harm you?
05:24 PM on 07/05/2012
The fact that you find it inexplicable does not mean it is inexplicable. It can be explained:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Righteous-Mind-Politics-Religion/dp/0307377903/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0
photo
smalljaws
It can't happen here.
02:54 PM on 07/05/2012
Altmeyer's empirical data suggests that right wing followers are : submissive to authority, aggressive on behalf of authority, conventional, highly religious, trusting of untrustworthy authorities, prejudiced, intolerant, zealous, dogmatic, uncritical toward chosen authority, inconsistent and contradictory, self-righteous, and moralistic with a lack of self awareness.
05:31 PM on 07/05/2012
Do you mean Robert Altemeyer?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jwashmon
Usually, everyone is right to a certain degree....
01:20 PM on 07/05/2012
It all seems so obvious if you have a functioning brain/mind.
Robert Reich is so clear, because what he says is so real and he understands it.
America's problem is that most of the general population is not looking for wisdom, but Dancing with the Stars and listening to FOX "news."
It is my opinion that Religion is the primary factor in the lack of ability to see reality.
When you say "I know" or "My Religion says" or "I believe," you are no longer open to reality, learning, or the truth.
Religious leaders are some of the most evil people on Earth, because they know what they are doing. They get parents to bring in their children and break their minds so that they will grow up and give them money and in turn bring in their children. For what they do to children I call them evil. To the religious leaders who are not actually evil I say they are just not very smart.
05:42 PM on 07/05/2012
I keep looking for a scientific study that proves that the members of one political party are more or less intelligent than another. I can't seem to find one. Funny thing is many Republicans claim Democrats are stupid and many Democrats claim Republicans are stupid, but neither ever provide more than their subjective opinion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jwashmon
Usually, everyone is right to a certain degree....
10:29 PM on 07/05/2012
Who watches FOX News and who listens to Rush Limbaugh?
Try to find a similar situation that is as big as this on the Democratic side!
Fanned, you are for being so straightforward!
01:19 PM on 07/05/2012
Too bad US corporations were not more patriotic. Send millions of jobs to India and China and then expect the sons and daughters of the outsourced US worker to serve in the Military and protect your Freedoms from a country like China one day.
01:42 PM on 07/05/2012
Yeah, if they were patriotic, they'd be bankrupt. I guess that's falling on your sword.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
MacTheCat
Those Clouds You See Aren't really clouds at all
01:18 PM on 07/05/2012
I want someone to show me in the Constitution the part that allows for indefinite detention, or extra judicial terminations by a president.

Then I can celebrate those uniquely American pursuits along with my right to habeus corpus--if someone can show me where that went, too...
12:22 PM on 07/05/2012
The only bad thing about government is corrupt politicians. There is no reason we cannot excel at the bureaucratic arts. In this day and age, computerization allows levels of instantaneous oversight and control that could only be imagined twenty years ago. We may consider for example health care. There are no great advantages of private companies managing the risks of healthcare but there are disadvantages to our society in that they bleed off profits and corrupt our politicians. Some things are done better by government.
01:11 PM on 07/05/2012
Politicians are corrupt because we are corrupt. And yes, many things are better done by government. Just because someone wants smaller government, doesn't mean they want anarchy.
05:48 PM on 07/05/2012
Central planning? Really? It is not like that's ever been tried before and failed miserably. Wait, it has...every time.
10:18 PM on 07/05/2012
That is a ghost you have to deal with.
09:44 AM on 07/06/2012
You are confusing government regulation and government services with central planning. Please read the history of the twentieth century again.
photo
Sansculotte
I never did like Tea
11:51 AM on 07/05/2012
The best part of this article is his exposing all the self-proclaimed "Patriots" as actually hating the government.
True Patriots defend and work to improve our government. True Patriots want to help their neighbors - and fellow Americans.
This selfish, mean-spirited bunch who say "you're on your own buddy" are the enemies of progress and the exact opposite of a Patriot. The Founding Fathers they profess to respect, would denounce them without hesitation.
01:11 PM on 07/05/2012
"Giving" to the government doesn't equate to charity
01:43 PM on 07/05/2012
It will be improved by being made smaller and more efficient and limited.
photo
Sansculotte
I never did like Tea
02:08 PM on 07/05/2012
Ignorant blather.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bill Denaro
10:58 AM on 07/05/2012
Excellent article Mr Reich, The " I got mine, too bad you ain't got yours" mantra is not working, and never will... The rich continually tell us they earned their money, and should be able to spend it anyway they want. Those same folks sleep under the blanket of security, and prosperity that is provided by all Americans... that is something they leave out of the equation... The one thing I would point out, that came to mind, in reading you article; I find it kind of interesting that the Right Wing promotes all this protect our borders from free loaders, but says nothing about the super rich foreigners that are now spending tons of millions of dollars to influence our borders.. Remember the Trojan Horse story, we are being directed to look at our physical borders, when the real threat is coming over right in front of our noses
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bill Denaro
11:27 AM on 07/05/2012
Meant to say
Influence our elections --- "now spending tons of millions of dollars to influence our borders"
12:21 PM on 07/05/2012
" I got mine, too bad you ain't got yours" mantra is not working

Right, but the ever popular "you got yours, give it to me or I'll take it" always "works".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bill Denaro
02:09 PM on 07/05/2012
Well I wouldn't agree with that, I mean it doesn't seem to me that right wing approach is working to well for you either.. Now, I know how you right wingers seem to keep getting things mixed up between your brain and your mouths, sort of like " it's a tax, no it ain't, yes it is".. so I assume you were trying to espouse the Left WIng Mantra "You got yours, but you didn't do it alone, so if you pay your fair share then we can all benefit. I don't want what you got, I want the opportunity to get what I need" ...