Nationalism and Nationalists

From the first day that children enter a school system, they are taught how to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and how to honor and respect their country. Good citizenship should be an integral part of our lives so that we can live harmoniously in our society. This is what patriotism should symbolize in our country. However, in the article "Understanding Black Patriotism", Michael Eric Dyson reminds us that sometimes people can take patriotism too far and we can become very critical of people in America. He suggests that black people have been misunderstood and misjudged throughout history.

They gave good reasons to support their ideas. All of the reasons were reasons that the U.S. needed for our own benefit such as the Turner thesis and a strong navy to protect our trade. Some reasons even appealed to helping others. Fiske and Spencer thought that we would be doing the countries we took over because then they would be moved to the top of the country ladder and we would be teaching them better ways to

Then there was Manin who believed that you couldn’t unify Italy because you can’t force people with different cultures, customs, and traditions to come together. He believed that it simply wouldn’t work because people don’t want to unify with people they aren’t similar

Nationalism was further highlighted by the Tariff of 1816 - the first tariff in American history, which was instituted primarily for protection, not revenue (Borneman 261). The expansion of industrialization as a result of this enlarged middle class demonstrated America’s need to expand their self-sufficiency; because before the war, America greatly relied on foreign countries. The War of 1812 revealed the necessity for a better transportation system, economic independence, and independent markets, all of which came to fruition as a result of the

These conflicts caused by that pride

They felt that the Constitution only favored the wealthy men and their power. The anti federalists were afraid of a strong central government when it came to the government taking over their property and using them. For example, the 3rd amendment states that homeowners should not be obligated to open their homes to soldiers and the soldiers should not be allowed to take over one 's home. This proves that they had to address this issue for something to be done to stop this, they must have been feeling like their lives were

Patriotic nationalism, on the other hand, means that societies must have a yearning to protect their land, patriotic nationalism. If not, other enemy lands that do have a sense of nationalism will conquer. When citizens of a country have a love for what their nation stands for and its people, their homeland thrives. People work harder and more efficiently when they feel pride towards a common goal. This is exactly something positive that Orwell doesn’t touch up on in his

They must live in fear and refrain from angering their malicious prince. A ruler should not be concerned with his own prosperity, instead, he should seek to benefit his people. I believe Machiavelli’s opinion on how a prince should rule is evil, and I find no justification in his

Even the negative side effects of their actions led to long term benefits for many. The creation of monopolies led to government intervention in business on behalf of fair competition. The exploitation of workers led to regulations guaranteeing safety codes, minimum wage, abolition of child labor, and the rise of unions. While they did not intend for these things to occur, they are still byproducts of their efforts to build American industry. They set up the country to become, financially speaking, the largest beneficiary of World War I as the U.S. supplied much of the material used to fight the conflict.

Thomas Paine feel like that there is no reason to not start a revolution as Britain does not has the right to control America and their continent as it would be too much to tolerate and would be out of the circle of convenience. He shows that eventually the US would eventually get tired of being govern by someone who is far across the world and who are also ignorant in the American issues. He states “if they cannot conquer us, they cannot govern us.” Also, he treats freedom as a fugitive who needs a place to live, but no one is willing to take it in their asylums of government. Only people take in governments of monarchy and dictatorship.

Beveridge believe that we should just be able to do what other country can do, while Obama focuses on what would be best for the country; basically staying out of wars when they can be avoidable. Beveridge’s response to why we should imperialize other countries is not necessarily how it’s beneficial to our country, but more of its “fair” and we’d be more “equal” to other countries since their governing foreign countries as well. He believes that since we can do it, we should just expand our territory. He thinks that Americans should continue with the march toward commercial supremacy of the World, not even considering any of the outcomes. His strong nationalism is only focusing about the power America can get by doing what every other country may be doing, imperializing.

So why should I give up these rights that have been long fought for. We come from a diverse nation and we should be able to find other ways to fight terrorism other than sacrificing our liberties. Our civil liberties take precedence. The rights of the people in America should not be invaded upon because these rights are warranted. If our rights are invaded it not only oversteps the

The Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States clearly states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Obama’s effort to enforce this amendment may leave America in a frantic position. Stricter gun laws would not benefit America because they would restrict the rights of citizens, restrict the reliability and freedom citizens deserve, and would do nothing to prevent killings from occurring. Recently, laws have been established within states that mistreat

Therefore it is because of that that I support the colonies decision to be independent. Some people may be against the colonies independence because in order to be independent a war has to occur which means lives would be lost. Yet, I believe that either way lives are in danger of being lost whether the colonies seek independence or not because the colonies lack of protection will lead to lives lost. Therefore it is important for the colonies to seek independence.

People who opposed the annexation of the Philippines were often anti-imperialists who believed conquering foreign lands went against the concepts of republicanism. In “Platform of the American Anti-Imperialist League” (Document A), we are presented with the common beliefs such as the fact that the U.S. did not have the authority to rule another country or colony without its permission. The document expresses that taking control of a land without its peoples’ permission is cruel and oppressive. An example of an anti-imperialist is William Jennings Bryan. In his speech “Paralyzing Influence of Imperialism” (Document D), Bryan asserts that U.S. intervention on the Island is unnecessary because the Filipinos are just seeking independence, they do not want any control.