Violence at international football matches is now commonplace in Europe and other parts of the world. The scenario is sickeningly familiar: Supporters of the visiting team have made the long journey because they are patriotic and want to cheer their team to victory.
However, if their team loses, the supporters then pour out of the stadium and go on a rampage; injuring people, damaging property and heaping racial abuse on the terrified local inhabitants. If patriotic fervour can transform so quickly into racist violence (and of course not only after football matches), it is plausible to suppose patriotism has many things common with racism.
It is quite easy for children to become convinced that they are living in the best country on earth. Most children have no first-hand knowledge of other countries. Their access to relevant information is through the distorting channels of the media and possibly through history books. But even history books do not, in general, provide an undistorted account of events. If two countries, A and B, were once engaged in protracted conflict, the record of events in A’s school history texts will usually look quite different from the record of events in B’s. A’s books will say that A was fighting for the good, and will emphasise A’s victorious battles while belittling B’s, and B’s history books will be biased in the opposite direction. The patriotism of a child is founded on reasons, but those reasons themselves may well be founded on prejudice and half-truths, while a child or an unreflecting adult may not realise this. And prejudice is a central characteristic of racism.
The dictionary provides further evidence for the closeness of the concepts of racism and patriotism.
In Roget’s Thesaurus, under the heading “hatred,” are listed the words “racialism,” “racism” and “prejudice.”
Among the words listed under “prejudiced” (biased), we find “nationalistic” and “chauvinistic,” and under the general heading “philanthropy,” sub-heading “patriotism,” are listed “nationalism” and “chauvinism.”
Governments that refuse to grant nationalities to refugees typically offer all manners of rationalisation for the decision. But it is hard to escape the conclusion that, in most cases, the real reasons are racist one.
Political leaders who overtly deplore racism frequently extol patriotism. One reason is expediency. Unpopular measures can be made more palatable if people can be persuaded that by complying with them, they are acting patriotically. One may be willing to work for very low wages or to go and fight against another nation if one is assured that this for the good of the country. One will fight for one’s country even if one thinks the case for war is morally indefensible because patriotism means “my country, right or wrong” (Roget, again). Politicians, then, can exploit patriotism, but they can do this because the people are either already patriotic or can easily be moved to patriotism.
We have already seen how individuals can become convinced of their own country’s greatness, but it is not a necessary consequence of this that they will love their country.
A psychological explanation is required.
It is plausible to suppose patriotism has many things common with racism
One tentative explanation might run as follows: Each of us is just an isolated individual, one of the millions of creatures crawling on the face of this earth. We are insignificant; the death of anyone would have a negligible effect on the course of human history.
To many people, this is a terrifying and depressing thought. We should like to be superior beings, esteemed by our fellows. But most of us are not great athletes, nor will we make any staggering contribution to science. We will not write prose or poetry that will be admired for centuries to come. By all measurable criteria, we are decidedly ordinary, yet we need to feel somehow special. There is also a deep human need to “belong,” since, for most people, to be alone, friendless, with nobody to depend, is a frightening prospect. So we form groups and join clubs to be part of a community. Patriotism satisfies both of these cravings.
Now, it is not in the least shameful to love one’s country, and it may be right to defend one’s country against those who seek to destroy it. But there is all the difference in the world between defending one’s countrymen, one’s values and one’s way of life and trying to impose those values on others or even just thinking one’s values are superior because they are the values shared by one’s group.
Patriots see themselves united with their fellow countrymen in a common cause, and although, as individuals, they may have no particular talents, they can claim to be special by virtue being a privileged member of the greatest country in the world. Needless to say, the criteria for greatness are nebulous immeasurables, such as being more civilised, more cultured, or possessing superior moral values. But the accident of having been born at a particular geographical location cannot be responsible for a person’s possession of all the grant-making attributes. So either people acquire such desirable qualities as a result of how they were brought up, or they were genetically endowed with them. The latter view is very popular, especially among racists, and historically led to sustained attempts to destroy those races deemed genetically inferior (genocide).
Few people are such extreme racists that they would advocate genocide. But less extreme versions of racism are quite prevalent. These include intensely disliking people from other races and claiming to be racially unprejudiced while still treating those not of one’s race with condescension. Even if there were scientific evidence for the superior intelligence of one’s race, would that justify any of these attitudes?
Patriotism also comes in different shades, so, in contrast to the received opinion that patriotism and racism are quite distinct, the former good, the latter bad, it can be argued that the terms ‘patriotism’ and ‘racism’ cover large and overlapping areas. However, we cannot regard these arguments as conclusive. We have a suspicion, but only a suspicion, that if many people who regard themselves as patriotic carefully reviewed their position and its consequences, they would find themselves committed to racist attitudes of which they might be quite ashamed. Perhaps if people conducted such self-assessment tests, they would discover a mass of conflicting moral attitudes.
The writer is a freelancer