Time Magazine used to be pretty good. Now it features articles by Joe Klein filled with partisan bombast (Bush “clearly unfit to lead”) or humorous, clueless contradictions.
In the latter category, last week Klein proclaimed that liberals are more patriotic than conservatives. A failure to appear patriotic, Klein wrote, has been
a chronic disease among Democrats, who tend to talk more about what’s wrong with America than what’s right. When Ronald Reagan touted “Morning in America” in the 1980s, Dick Gephardt famously countered that it was near midnight “and getting darker all the time.” This is ironic and weirdly self-defeating, since the liberal message of national improvement is profoundly more optimistic, and patriotic, than the innate conservative pessimism about the perfectibility of human nature…. [Emphasis added]
Stung by critics such as Peter Wehner who “[took] me to task for claiming that liberalism is more optimistic and therefore inherently more patriotic than conservatism,” this week he repeated the accusation even as he denied ever making it:
But I didn’t do that at all. I didn’t question the patriotism of conservatives: I simply argued that it is more patriotic to be optimistic about the chance that our collective will—that is, the best work of government—will succeed, rather than that it will fail or impinge on freedom.
In others words, it is more patriotic to be in favor of civil rights legislation than to oppose it…to be in favor of social security and medicare than to oppose them…and to hope that the better angels of our legislators–acting in concert, in compromise–will produce a universal health insurance system and an alternative energy plan that we can all be proud of.
He repeats, that is, what he said last week (and what critics said he said last week): that liberals are optimistic about government, human perfectibility, etc., that conservatives are pessimistic about government and human perfectibility, and that since it is more patriotic to be optimistic than pessimistic liberals are inherently more patriotic than conservatives.
Oh well, another liberal disregards the sandblower principle — When you’re standing in a hole, stop digging — at his peril. (For other recent examples, see here and here.)
Now, some will argue that Klein confuses patriotism — being “optimistic … that … the best work of government will succeed, rather than that it will fail or impinge on freedom” — with Democratic campaign speeches or naiveté (is there a difference?), but I don’t want to go there. What I propose instead is a test to determine whether or not Klein believes what he preaches.
As we have seen, he asserts that “it is more patriotic to be in favor of civil rights legislation than to oppose it.” Next November citizens in a number of states may have the opportunity to vote on civil rights initiatives that would prohibit their state governments from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to, any individual or group based on race, ethnicity, sex, or national origin.
So, Joe, do you believe it is more patriotic to support these civil rights initiatives than to oppose them? If so, will you write a column informing your Democratic colleagues, since they seem to be confused on this issue.
Since the definition of patriotism is a love of and loyalty to one’s country, I’m trying to figure out whether Joe Klein is just being disingenuous or whether he is too stupid to know the meaning of the word patriotism.
“It is more patriotic to be optimistic about the chance that our collective will—that is, the best work of government—will succeed, rather than that it will fail or impinge on freedom.”
It is also a non sequitur. Being optimistic has nothing to do with patriotism. What the Left fails to see is that love of country should not depend on whether you favor or oppose a particular government program. He really should be embarrassed for making such a sophomoric argument.
Liberalism = optimistic? LMAO.
Klein’s problem is that he is defining patriotism as loyalty to HIS VIEW of how America ought to be, rather than America as it is. You can be loyal to a country and realize that it has flaws (always will have) (there’s my conservative pessimism/realism) and work to fix them. I don’t share Klein’s, or Hillary’s, view of the government’s rightful place in helping Americans live their lives. That makes me not a patriot?
It’s amazing how few new ideas exist in politics.
This is a repetition of the fabled “good intentions” mythology of the left.
In this mythology, results don’t matter. The genocide, self-inflicted poverty and slavery imposed by communism can’t really be all that bad because, of course, the intentions of the communists were good. They wanted to create heaven on earth.
Klein’s kind of dumb. The 20th century was a brutal lesson in the necessity of distrusting the good intentions of government. No, I’m not optimistic about the motives of people or the potential of government. People are blinded by self-interest. Governmental intervention, even with those good intentions, more often than not makes things worse. Less government is always better government.
“It is also a non sequitur. Being optimistic has nothing to do with patriotism.”
True, but this is standard leftist tactic. When losing an argument, re-define the terms. They’ve done the same with civil rights, affirmative actions, freedom, and liberalism. Why not patriotism too?
I think it’s funny that questioning someone’s patriotism was supposed to be beyond the pale in public life (even though liberal patriotism was almost never actually being questioned). Where is the outraged media charge now that conservatives petriotism is being questioned in a far more direct (and wrong) manner?
Patriotism.
Hmmm…Start with the Constitution, with the Federalist papers on top.
The farther one gets from following the original recipe for pound cake, with modified
food shortening, artificial sweeteners, artificial preservatives, and an alluring representative image on the box, the more I’m likely to simply call it a Twinkie. Despite appearances from a respectable distance Mr. Franklin saw the need for developing bi-focal lenses.
No thank you Mr. Klein. Go home from us in peace. We seek not your consul, nor your Twinkies.(Lifted from S. Adams)
Good comments, all!
it is dishonest of klein to speak of patriotism as if he is in favor of it, because he does not believe that. such talk is a sop thrown to supposedly stupid people who do believe in patriotism. patriotism does not depend on what the country does for the most part. it is a matter of loyalty to one’s fellow citizens. it has to do with pride, the pride that humans cannot live without. for any country to be worth anything at all, the pride must be there first. liberals seem to think first the nation gives people everything, it makes everyone happy, and then pride follows. as usual, they don’t understand that first the values exist and then the results of the values. it is the same with propserity in a nation, first you get the bourgeious values and that leads to industry and money. it is not that first someone bestows wealth upon you and then you get the values of hard work, that it is honorable in itself, etc. there are disadvantages to unconditional love of country, but the disadvantages of not having it are worse. until this country does x, y, and z for me, I don’t like it is a recipe for disaster. it will result in people being loyal to their own kind (however defined) rather than to the nation, because people must have group loyalties. It will not make any nation better, as liberals seem to think.
JFK said ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do it. obama says ask what your country can do for you. that is a question that can never be answered satisfactorily. it just sets up permanent misery and anger. the more people expect to get for nothing the more unhappy they will be.