[grandpa]

I've seen in my local bookstore a series of books called "The Politically Incorrect Guide." It tackles a variety of different issues, all basically from a rightwing perspective (one book even suggests it dismantles the theory of evolution). I've honestly been tempted to buy at least one of them, and not just for a few good laughs. I'd honestly like to know how supporting the status quo is "politically incorrect" in any meaningful way. It's true that there is an aspect of American culture that could be called the PC left, but why the need to pretend this cultural trend is increasingly more impactful than, say, the Iraq War? More generally, has not the Neo-Conservative/Religious Right experienced a strong and not entirely nascent influence over America?

Such books as the PIG series--that's actually an abbreviation they use, and they also use a little piggy as a mascot on virtually every page--give the impression that rightwing, establishment views are the underground and that people with Leftist inclinations are on the top and cruelly dominant (this is, of course, when "liberals" aren't portrayed as extremely to the margins and small in number). Fox News's Fred Barnes even wrote a book on President Bush called "The Rebel In Chief," which obviously implies that Bush rebelled his way into the White House (apparently, being a rich, white and well-connected son of a President now constitutes rebellion).

I would not say the Left is completely at a loss, of course. For example, there actually seems to be a growing consensus in America that pollution is harmful and that Climate Change is real. It's also very obvious that "liberal" predictions about the disastrous Iraq War were highly accurate. From any practical standard it's now incorrect to say the Iraq War is a great success, so technically it'd be politically incorrect as well.

But what about the fact that variations of the radical Left were born out of struggles against systems of domination, and therefore "politically incorrect" in their own right? For a decent historical example of this we can consider Mother Jones, a great figure of the American left. She was once called "the most dangerous woman in America" because, among other things, she organized children working in mills and mines in the "Children's Crusade" to oppose the childrens' 55 hour workweek. The "Children's Crusade" was a 1903 march from Kensington, Pennsylvania to Oyster Bay, New York, the home of President Theodore Roosevelt, where they walked with banners demanding "We want time to play!" and "We want to go to school!" This is perhaps even a modest example of why people move in a Leftist direction, but a great glimpse into what "politically incorrect" has meant historically.

In the spirit of such political incorrectness, I'd like to make a common sense point: Even though plenty of liberals/leftists do not hate America, it's important to note that hating America is not some great immoral crime. In fact, a good argument could be made that it's THE morally acceptable attitude to adopt for the abstract entity called America. For example, why love an entity that not very long ago instituted chattel slavery? Or how about the fact that the FCC exists? Or how about the naivete involved in believing politicians can adequately represent our interests? I can hardly even claim to represent my own interests, so how could some brainwashed rich guy I don't even know, who spends my taxmoney on bombing campaigns I don't even agree with? These are some practical questions and, if we're at all in tune with reason, it'll make us at least dislike America a bit. Personally, I think that with each passing day I could probably find yet another reason to hate America and not even feel guilty about it. In fact, it'd be an entertaining way to use a calendar. It needn't even be the kind of hate that threatens my own mental health, but rather a constructive one.

This attitude of mine shouldn't surprise anyone. The very existence of any type of warfare or authority title makes humans look contemptible, like they can't even govern themselves. And it's even worse when you suspect people actually could govern themselves, only they've been brainwashed by institutions that dominate us and our resources in order to establish American Culture, Inc. And, of course, there are examples of people governing themselves in non-hierarchical, relatively non-coercive ways.

This brings me to a caveat: When I say "Hate America," I of course don't mean literally every person within its imaginary boundaries or every aspect of it's culture---though even that negative view would have no worse impact than goose-stepping patriotism. I mostly mean I despise hierarchical, so-called "representative governance" and a cultural system that, taken as a whole, seems to shun intellectualism. But to go again into the hypothetical, more extremely politically incorrect realm, let's say I actually express genuine hatred for literally anyone serving in the military. What if I suggest all the troops are simply terrible people? I might upset some people, but who cares? What's the big deal? At worst it'd mean I've got a bad attitude and that I'm unfairly generalizing (though those claims are debatable as well). The point is, unless I have magical powers I'm unaware of, such hostile viewpoints aren't nearly as deadly as pushing buttons to drop bombs on cities full of "Dune Coons" in the Middle East (I've actually heard that term used, along with the term "Palesimian"--proving that patriotism still easily ties into genuinely racist sentiments).

So why are people patriotic? Any smartly run institution of power and privilege will promote itself as sacrosanct and (embarassingly often) as absolutely essential to human survival. Of course, any rational person should be able to understand that:

A. no politician or voting process is essential to anyone's survival and that

B. existing instutions could be peacefully and fairly made less hierarchical, perhaps even to increase the odds of human survival.

But such elementary observations are easily lost in the thick smog of patriotism and general ideology. Patriotism is indeed a weapon, perhaps the best tool for shaping people into usable and disposable tools for state (and, of course, corporate) power. So, next time some rightwing sycophant accuses you of hating America for not being patriotic enough, why not "outpig the pigs," so to speak, and just say "thank you"?

Grandpa h.