Here's a lotty subject that's likely to turn heads so I'll try and refrain from character bashing as much as I can.
What is a nation?
Is it a place? A definable boarder separating my land from theirs? Is it the palaces of government? The halls of the Senate? Does it lie in the heart of our national monuments? Is it the people who live there? Is it the businesses that keep it running?
Let me pose a theory.
No.
Every nation has landmarks, territories, monuments, and while these may endeavor to represent the heart and soul of a nation (or the memory of it's heroes.) While these could not be done without some nation to represent, saying that a nation is in it's monuments is akin to seeing the forest for the trees.
I would also argue that the government, while close, isn't the nation either. if the government isn't the nation, then, by extension, neither are the people. People are fickle, fragile beings, locked in their own mind. No one (besides Stephen Colbert, or perhaps 'papa bear' Bill O'Reilly) could claim to be their nation personified, not the nations founders. Though this may have been the case back when we believed in "God-Kings" or "Divine Emperors" in our modern world, those ideas seem out of place.
So, where is it? I would argue a very simple idea, one most of us have proboly thought before:
A nation IS the ideals it holds most dear.
We are not united by monuments or fanfares, but rather we, in tribute to our nation, construct/perform them. We are not brought together solely based on where we were born (re: imagration). Our laws serve to protect our ideals and beliefs, but they are the guardiens, not the beliefs themselves.
Good, bad, right, wrong, these words can be bandied about to judge what a nation is but that judgement is a perspective, not the thing itself. Whether we are good or bad depends solely on what ideals we hold to.
The true test of what we are comes in times of crisis. Ideals we are willing to give up in times of crisis arent ideals, they're hobbies (another Boston Legal-ism, a favorite of mine), and are, therefore, not what we actually are or hold most dear. I'm not going to say that sacrificing freedoms and rights for the sake of safety and security to object is right or wrong, but it does say that safety means more to us than freedom. You're call as to which we should be defigned by.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I'd be mostly inclined to agree. The nation is indeed its set of ideals, and how those are acted upon. In that sense, I think the nation is also a combination of the people and the government, and how they interact - hence how they act upon said ideals.
I liked your blog. I think that ideals are a big part of what we hold on to in this country and at the same time I think that what we have done in our past (as countries and people) does not define us, what we do today is what is representative. Security is important but sometimes, too much security can be stifling and therefore limit change and growth, the development of what will be. That is a tricky relationship at best.
Post a Comment