so much admired by the editors of the Weekly Standard, saidrnthere could be no SO-percent Americans —no “Jewish-Americans,”rnfor example —only 100 percenters. And the example ofrnTR, who shamelessly promoted America’s conquest of thernPhilippines, also proves how easily nationalism slides into imperialism.rnChristians usually end up being a main target of nationalistrnideology, and the most powerful and successful nationalistrnmoyements of the past 500 years haye nearly always grown atrnthe expense of cither a specific Christian establishment or of thernChristian religion in general: F.lizabethan England was builtrnout of the ruins of the monasteries; the French Revolution nationalizedrnthe Church and then turned it into the cult of reason;rntiie Italian government, during the Risorgiwento, expelled thernJesuits, confiscated monasteries, convents, and schools, andrnpersecuted the Church.rnIn pluralist America, we have been comparatively safe —rnthough some nationalists of the 20’s and 30’s tried to shut downrnreligious schools—but liberal nationalists toda’ have eliminatedrnschool prayer and tried to push all vestiges of religion out ofrnthe public square. There is no reason to believe that Christiansrnwould fare any better under a right-wing nationalist regime;rnthey certainly did not do well in the Third Reich.rnThere is little left of the old American patria of John Adamsrnand Thomas Jefferson, and the national culture represented byrnMark Twain and William Dean Howells, Henry Adams andrnAugustus Saint-Gaudcns, is as foreign to us now as medievalrnProvence. Any attempt to create or impose a national culturernwill be a dangerous exercise in fascism that would end up destroyingrnall the little peculiarities tiiat give American life its savor.rnThen what is to be done? Right-wing nationalists in ite us torninvent a white or Euro identity’ as artificial as the euro monetaryrnunit, to establish it in schools and in the media at the expense ofrnregional and foreign cultural identities. To heighten the nationalrnsense, other groups will have to be denigrated, their languagesrnand cultures outlawed, and the reinvented nation — tornprove its mettle-will embark on a series of imperial crusades tornAmericanize the world.rnPatriots would agree with the nationalists in pressing for immigrationrncontrol, rejecting multieulturalism, and recognizingrnthe dominant religious/cultural traditions of the old America,rnbut the’ would leae authentic traditions alone. (Even thernFront National recognizes the historical and cultural importancernof the regions of France.) Above all, the patriot would notrnwaste his time castigating people outside his coimtry’s traditionsrnbut would concentrate on rebuilding those traditions—of literaturernand art, of manners and morals, or (to drop down to thernlowest level) of sanitation and the rule of law. Celebration andrncultivation would be the dominant note, not denigration. Thisrnis exacriv what I do not sec in nationalist publications such asrnthe Weekly Standard or American Renaissance —two groupsrnthat resemble each other more than most people suspect.rnThe highest patriotic credo used to be summed up in thernphrase: “My countn’, right or wrong; and where it is wrong, setrnit right.” Conservatives of every stripe hae spent too muchrntime complaining about what other people have done to makernour countn,- wrong. Perhaps we should leave the whining to tiiernbrownshirts and the ncoconscrxatives who know only how tornhate and set about the task of making our country right.rnDICTATIONSrn”Patriots and Other Scoundrek”rnSamuel Johnson’s description of patriotism as “the lastrnrefuge of a scoundrel” is frequently quoted by global istrnliberals who cannot imagine any normal person actuallyrnloving his country. Occasionally, some conservativerncritic responds by saying that Johnson was really condemningrnnationalism or false patriotism, but—as usual—both liberalsrnand conscr’atives are wrong. In Johnson’s day, “patriotism”rnwas the rallying cry of the Wliigs who opposed thernroyal prerogative, corrupt and hypocritical politicians (asrnJohnson regarded them) who wanted to increase their ownrnjiovi’er at the expense of the nation’s constihitional stability.rnJohnson defined “patriot” as “a factious disturber of therngovenniient”; a centiiry earlier, Dryden had offered the definition:rn”one who would by law supplant his Prince.” Suchrnmen were not merely scoundrels; they were diabolical.rn”The first Wliig was the devil,” according to the great lexicographer,rnbecause —like the serpent in the Garden —rnWliigs inculcated the principle of disobedience.rnWhen the American rebels of 1776 —most of themrnWhigs to the core—called themselves “patriots,” they werernnot intentionally being disingenuous, though it is hard torn.see the patriotism in a group of English immigrants rebellingrnagainst the government of their country. But if thernBoston “patriots” were itiere hjqjocritical traitors in 1776, therncountry that emerged from the Revolution was a true patriarnto be loved and defended. However, as Washington foresaw,rnthe “pretended patriotism” of the American futurernwould be a justification for foreign entanglements and foreignrnwars. Thinking primarily of American supporters ofrnFrance and Britain, Wa.shington might just as well havernbeen speaking about the Madeleine Albrights, Strobe ‘I’albots,rnand George Bushes who dcmonize Iraqis, Serbs, andrnRussians while whitewashing Kurds, Albanians, andrnChechens:rnExcessive partialit)- for one foreign nation and excessiverndislike of another, cause those whom they ach.iaternto see danger only on one side, and serve to veilrnand even second the arts of influence on the other.rnReal Pahiots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite,rnare liable to become suspected and odious;rnwhile its tools and dupes usurp the applause andrnconfidence of the people, to .surrender their interests.rnThe Anti-America feared by Washington is now a reality,rnwhere Norman Podhoretz, Christopher Hitchens, andrnBill Kristol wrap themselves up in a flag they despise and denouncernthe last.Aimerican politician who is a patriot withoutrnbeing a scoundrel. Humptj’ Dumpty’s question remains:rn”Who is to be master?”rn—Hiimpty Dumpt}’rn12/CHRONICLESrnrnrn