Consumerism, Tragedy, and Patriotism September

Consumerism, Tragedy, And Patriotism September 11, 2001, was a tragic day. It was the day when America was attacked on its soil and around three thousand Americans died in one day, not to mention many others who were physically or mentally crippled by it. But the day was also tragic in another way. It was a day when Americans, instead of reflecting upon the incident in a critical way, embraced blind patriotism that threatened much-cherished American ideals -- perhaps more than terrorists did.

People in the government, lawyers, media commentators, and ordinary folks overly simplified the incident and its consequences, calling for a war that disregarded civil liberties and democratic due process which were enshrined in the Constitution of the United States. In "The Threat to Patriotism," Ronald Dworkin explains the real threat to American patriotism. His piece is especially interesting, as Dworkin presents a different definition of patriotism than the one espoused by George W. Bush and the majority of conservatives and liberals at the time.

For Dworkin, patriotism is not blind support for a war. Patriotism is belief in American ideals of freedom and liberty as enshrined in the Constitution. Patriotism means that we need to believe in these ideals even during the time of war. But in the name of fighting the enemy after 9/11, our government leaders and law enforcement agencies began to undermine this American patriotism, propagandizing instead uncritical support for endless war that threatened civilians in Muslim countries and the liberty of Americans at home.

The 9/11 and the Bush Administration's response to it were simplified not just in the government discourse. The patriotic fury that supported the government actions proliferated into popular culture through popular songs, poems, symbols, flags, and images reinforcing American victimhood. Daniel Harris describes this coping mechanism the "kitschification of Sep. 11." Harris's main argument is that we stopped asking critical questions about the actual reasons of why 9/11 happened.

Instead, he says, we resorted to mythologizing history, viewing ourselves as the absolute good and depicting the enemy as the absolute evil whose actions could never be explained with reason. I think, Harris is pretty harsh in his scathing criticism of our response to 9/11. But looking back at what happened and the consequences of government response, I think, his criticism is justified.

The only point where I disagree with him is in his suggestion that we turned our commemoration of 9/11 into a national euphoria and became "excited." I do not remember any sense of excitement over the tragedy though Harris might have been more alert than me. Reading William Hart's article was also eye-opening. It gave me a different look at the role of country music.