"Fundamentalism is not unique to religious people, but is instead a certain approach to the world, rooted in mistaking limited knowledge for wisdom"
"Where the capacity for destruction in the hands of the most powerful state in the history of the world is exacerbated by a pathological hyper-patriotism that tends to suppress internal dissent and leave many unable to hear criticism from the outside"
I extremely agree with Jensen's bit on nationalism. American nationalism in its rooted definition is inherently contradictory. Citizens may believe that we all should support and follow this nation abstractly, as Jensen said, "when in reality it is lines on a map, not an occurring object," so that we may all connect and reinforce the strength of our home and all that it provides for us. This is a reasonable notion to positively influence our abstract love for the feet under our ground.
But if you look at the U.S. as an occurring object, you could see its occurring prevalence on what it was founded on and must survive through, which is democracy. And in a true democracy, fundamentalism would cease to exist, so it makes no sense for nationalism to be ever be based on fundamentalist ways of thinking. Democracy is for the people, by the people. Time changes and the people with it. Within a democracy, a nation must coincide with its ever changing and evolving situations. Fundamentalism fundamentally resists change, so to actually be a supporter of what America stands for more than anything, you would truly only be anti-American by being the type of fundamentalist Jensen mentions.
No comments:
Post a Comment