Reflect on patriotism

Reflect on patriotism

Zhou Baosong

Thanks again to the three of you for your wonderful conversation tonight. I gained a lot from it, and I believe other friends must feel the same way. As the host, my responsibility is to coordinate the discussion, so I can’t talk too much just now. The discussion has come to an end. Please allow me to share some thoughts (added below).

Let me first say a few words about my feelings about this discussion tonight.

I have held various book clubs, salons and lectures over the years, but this is the first time that two thousand people have gathered in an online space for such an intensive ideological dialogue. When I unmuted the sound in the settings and asked everyone to state their city, the entire conference room was instantly filled with voices from all over the world, one after another, echoing endlessly. At that moment, I felt so truly that this kind of free discussion across regions and borders was so beautiful. We made this happen together tonight, and I want to thank you all for that.

Back to tonight’s discussion. The three speakers are all well-known liberals and have quite consistent philosophical positions. One of Mr. Qian’s basic points is that patriotism deserves attention because it can provide emotional impetus for liberalism. Liu Qing and Zhou Lian also believe that patriotism is a very strong political discourse in China today, dominating the thoughts and emotions of many people. If liberalism wants to have influence and vitality in China, it is necessary to respond to and intervene in relevant discussions. It is in this context that "Is liberal patriotism possible?" becomes the focus of tonight's discussion. Below I will focus on a few points.

First, tonight’s discussion is mainly carried out on two levels. The first is whether liberalism and patriotism are compatible in concept, and the second is what needs to be done in the specific historical context to make this possible a reality. Mr. Qian's report focused on the first issue, while Liu Qing and Zhou Lian based more on their life experiences and pointed out that there are indeed various tensions between the two in today's China. The significance of tonight's discussion may not be to provide any feasible solutions, but to present the problem and make everyone aware of the importance of the problem and what resources are available to think about this problem.

What is so controversial about patriotism?

Just imagine, if the country is just one of many human unions, and patriotism and love of family are emotions of the same nature, then patriotism is a natural and harmless thing. The problem is that in reality, the state is a political organization with huge power. In order to rationalize its rule, the state will use various tangible and intangible means, through education, media and social manipulation, to require people to accept a rule of law without reflection. A view of patriotism as defined by those in power. If anyone expresses dissent, he or she will be politically suppressed and even pay a heavy price.

In Hong Kong, we have often heard a saying in recent years that "patriots govern Hong Kong." This means that in order to participate in politics, citizenship alone is not enough; you must also be officially regarded as a "patriot." "Patriotism" has become a label that distinguishes friends and foes, and even determines a person's political rights. These are realities. This reality tells us that there is a fundamental difference in the nature of family and country, and we cannot abstractly talk about patriotism in isolation from specific historical circumstances.

Second, we must conceptually distinguish between patriotism as an emotion and patriotism as a political obligation. We love our motherland often voluntarily rather than forcefully. As a kind of virtue, patriotism, like the cultivation of other virtues, always needs to give the parties involved enough space to learn and develop. This is a milder version of patriotism. If patriotism is seen as a political obligation, the meaning is quite different, because that means that patriotism is the moral and legal responsibility of citizens. A person who is not patriotic enough in thought and behavior may be subject to moral condemnation and legal punishment. In other words, patriotism is not a choice, we do not have the freedom to love or not to love, but an obligation that must be fulfilled. This is a strong version of patriotism.

In China today, this strong version has become mainstream. As a result, whoever has the right to speak about patriotism can use patriotism as a means to make arbitrary demands on others. It is common for those who are considered unpatriotic, especially influential intellectuals, to be attacked by public opinion, banned from speaking, reported anonymously, and lost their jobs. The recent experiences of writer Fang Fang and some other scholars are living examples.

The question is, under normal circumstances, citizens have the obligation to abide by the law, but do citizens have the obligation to be patriotic? Being law-abiding is not the same as being patriotic. The reasons for obeying the law can be completely different from the reasons for being patriotic. We must therefore ask whether the government is justified in using public power to force people to be patriotic in the way it wants. I think liberalism can accept that patriotism is a virtue (under certain conditions), but it cannot accept that in the name of patriotism, the country deprives individuals of their rights that they do not love, and even uses this to brutally harm individual freedom and personality. A basic idea of ​​the liberal tradition since John Locke in the seventeenth century is that the main reason for the existence of the state is to protect the basic rights of individuals.

Third, following the above discussion, we must conceptually distinguish between patriotism and love for the current regime. Patriotism does not necessarily mean having unconditional loyalty to the current regime. Only by making this distinction can the discussion of patriotism have room for reflection and criticism. Otherwise, there would be no so-called "second kind of loyalty" issue.

In fact, if patriotism means personal value identification and emotional belonging to the country, then as reflective beings, we can always ask: Is this country worthy of my love? What traditions should my country preserve, what values ​​should it realize, and what systems should it build that I can be proud of and be willing to pay for? I think this patriotic question is one that any true patriot must answer. That kind of so-called "patriotism" that is blind, fanatical, exclusive, and does not allow any space for reflection and criticism is not worthy of our respect at all, because the love that is truly worthy of our devotion must be supported by reasons that can withstand rational inspection.

However, in the previous discussion, Liu Qing raised this question: Is over-emphasis on rational love just a hobby and self-righteousness of liberal intellectuals? I think not. We can have Confucian patriotism, socialist patriotism, republican patriotism, but no matter what position they take, they have the responsibility to make a case for why the version of patriotism they advocate is reasonable and worthy of our support. If there is some kind of doctrine that claims that you don't need to ask, just love, then this is actually a kind of brainwashing obscurantism. No contemporary political theory worthy of our attention would hold this position.

We can draw another conclusion from this, that is, strictly speaking, patriotism itself is not a self-sufficient and complete set of political doctrines, but must be embedded in other political theories and obtain a basis for the nature of the country and the legitimacy of its power. Only after its discussion can its specific moral and political implications be determined. In this regard, patriotism is always conditional, because we must first know what kind of country our beloved is before we can ensure that the love we give is worthwhile.

Therefore, we must understand that liberalism does not need to oppose patriotism per se, but only needs to oppose arbitrary, exclusive patriotism that is monopolized by a certain ideology and is harmful to oneself and others. Therefore, before talking about patriotism, liberals must first ask: What kind of country is worthy of our love? To answer this question, we need sufficient discussion and reflection. Yes, in reality there are many patriots who are unwilling to reason, and at the same time, our society is extremely lacking in a free environment for public discussion. The goal of liberalism is to change this situation so that everyone can think about his relationship with the country in a free environment and become a sober and reasonable citizen.

At this point in the discussion, some friends will definitely say that your ideas may be ideal, but they are completely useless in the face of reality. Of course I know that liberalism is very weak in China today, so weak that many intellectuals are no longer willing to admit that they are liberals. But does this mean that all our ideological efforts and all our moral truths are doomed to be in vain?

I don't think so. Take tonight, for example. Two thousand of us tonight have spent several hours having these serious ideological discussions, and most of them are young people. Why? Because we care: we care about our country, want it to become free and just, respect human rights and dignity, and therefore deserve our love. After discussion, if we have a deeper understanding of liberalism and patriotism and form our own judgments about what is right, then this change brought about by thinking will itself be a life that is neither cynical nor nihilistic. practice. Although times are difficult, as long as we keep thinking, hope will always be there. You are still young, so you must have such confidence.

Thank you all again.

* This is the conclusion of an article on the dialogue "Liberalism and Patriotism" published in End Media. The full text is here: https://theinium.com/article/20200704-opinion-liberalism-patriotism/?fbclid=IwAR1ioSHKBIsVXQAr4XCGthlPr03rnfi_q101C6A8URxixmjh3wFYSXMIA0Q