David Archard's Three Ways To Be A Good Patriot

945 Words4 Pages
This essay seeks to argue that David Archard’s definition of patriotism is far more beneficial to a nation’s growth when compared to Simon Keller’s definition of patriotism. I will begin by summarizing the definition of patriotism according to Keller. This will inevitably lead into an analysis of his definition of “bad faith”, and how this comes into fruition. I will then explain the contrasting argument presented by David Archard in his essay “Three Ways to be a Good Patriot”, exploring the idea of the patria. I will conclude by stating my personal views on patriotism, expressing which type of patriot I believe contributes the best to the well-being of compatriots and a nation’s future.
In the essay “Patriotism as Bad Faith”, Simon Keller argues that patriotism is a vice and not a virtue. To explain his viewpoint, Keller separates patriotism into
…show more content…
Archard defines patriotism object of affection is labelled the patria (p. 101). Elements of the patria include customs, traditions, lifestyle, compatriots, history, languages and even religion if applicable (p. 101). Rituals and symbols also comprise the patria in the form of celebrations, holidays, national flag or crest. With the object defined as per Archard’s essay stipulates, the next clarification is in regards to the attitude felt towards the object, patriae. The special affection and attitude one has to the patria is based opon a sense of pride within the achievements, identifying a sense of belonging with the patria, a vested interest in the success and future of the patria, and making sacrifices in one’s personal life for the sake of the patria (p. 102). Archard stipulates explicitly in his argument that patriotism is more than just celebrating the achievements or reputation of one’s country. It also involves the shame associated with failures of the patria as
Open Document