Hacker News Reader

Comment by charlesray | Hacker News Reader

Sure. But, I mean, look at some of the points they try to make. The situation in Syria is supposedly evidence of the decline of US power. No, Syria is evidence of the US public's unwillingness to contribute more American blood to a foreign war. We spent the last century dying in various jungles and deserts without much to show for it. It simply illustrates that foreign military power, in many conflicts, accomplishes very little. We could be MORE powerful, that fact still wouldn't change.

The stupidest part of the article, though, was part about young Americans not thinking the US is great. Uh, newsflash: the suggestion that the US is objectively the greatest country in every way has always been absurd. The fact that young Americans now realize this isn't indicative of anything. Again, we could be getting MORE powerful and MORE influential, it still wouldn't affect the absurdity of that statement.

View on HN

> The fact that young Americans now realize this isn't indicative of anything

I seriously disagree with that. It's a big shift to go from a highly patriotic new generation to one almost disenfranchised with the whole idea.

You've literally just reworded the statement of the article.

Neither you nor the author explain how patriotism is linked to power. I (and your parent) think that's an absurd position. If anything, a realistic rather than jingoistic view of the nation's stance in the world enables a sort of realism that prevents stupid mistakes of hubris -- mistakes that can sap a country's ability to project both military and diplomatic power.

> Neither you nor the author explain how patriotism is linked to power

It's linked to the people in power, no? A population that's highly patriotic and supportive of the country they live in are more likely to go along with whatever the leaders of the country do. Like root out people with communist ideas or supposed Japanese spies (and put them in big old camps). Hitler was an expert at stoking the patriotic fires and this helped in immeasurably at the start.

A disenfranchised populous is unlikely to follow their leaders to war and be far more critical (and vocal) about their policies.

Japanese internment camps, wasted energy on McCarthyist witch hunts, Nazi concentration camps, and futile wars are all excellent examples of how patriotism can undermine national power.

Patriotism is an emotion. Emotional decision making can help avoid debates that lead to inaction, but it can also enable horrendously stupid decisions.

It's not clear to me that overbearing patriotism in the general population is a net benefit to a democratic superpower.

It's exclusively a shift in perception.

It's definitely a huge shift, but I think most would agree that the waning of the idea of American exceptionalism comes down to life in the rest of the world getting better, not life in the US getting worse.

The rest of the modern world spent half the past century coming back from the brink after two world wars that left American lands almost entirely untouched. The US had a head start with modern innovation and prosperity but the rest of the world has caught up. Who cares about which arbitrarily defined nation state is "best"? It'sbecoming a great time to be alive in places all over the world, and that's a good thing.

I don't think America is the greatest country in the world, but I don't think any other country truly deserves that title either. It's kind of an antiquated concept really, given how interconnected and global everything has become.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com