>

In theory, I like this idea. However, the American flag is now so strongly associated with the Republican Party and their ideals that it’s essentially become a hate symbol at this point.
The left has struggled with patriotism ever since Vietnam/ civil rights.  Ever since then they tend to be down on what the U.S. does.  It's never good enough.
However, today's right seems more UN-patriotic than usual.  They're more enthralled with one man or irrationally obsessed with hating Democrats and the left than wanting to do what's best for the country.  Last year they seemed to be cheerleading a recession just so they could blame Biden for it.
So yeah, I think the Dems have an opening. >

Biden is incredibly patriotic and the kind of Christian I try to be. I don’t know why GOP branding dominates but it’s a fraud. >

Biden is a pro abortion catholic, that’s a pretty far out Christian stance to be in.
The far right of the Republican Party isn’t who most proud Americans are just like the far left who hates all aspects of pro American symbolism. 
Most Americans are happily in the middle of politics and hanging their flags in their yards/houses and being productive members of society. >

The Bible provides instructions on how to perform an abortion, and explicitly puts the determination on if one should happen on the parents to be.
I'd say the rights position in abortion isn't based on Christianity at all, since in no part of the Bible does it make any comments against it. >


The Bible provides instructions on how to perform an abortion

Mind citing what passage that's in? >

That passage doesn't say what you think it says.
Yes, there is an instruction on drinking a "bitter water" that might cause a miscarriage, though only if the wife has been unfaithful. It's also referred throughout as the priest placing a curse on her. So, are we getting an instruction for how to perform an abortion, or is this magic mumbo jumbo?
Well, let's look at what's in the bitter water. If the passage called for mixing in a bright yellow flower with fringed petals that we could recognize as fringed rue, then you'd have a pretty strong case for the passage containing a recipe for an abortifacient. 
But that's not what's in the passage. You take a clay jar and put in some water. Then you add dirt from the floor of the temple. Then, you write a curse on some parchment, and wash the curse in the dirty floor water. Then the woman drinks that.
...That's not instructions on how to perform an abortion. Not by a long shot. Go to Planned Parenthood and ask about the dirty floor cursed water option. >

It's definitely fake magic, but the intent is for the woman to miscarry if she has been unfaithful. I'm not a doctor or scientist, so I'm not sure if mixing floor dirt in water can cause health issues that lead to miscarriage, however the passage indicates that termination of the pregnancy is the will of God in an instance of infidelity.
Anyway, I'm not the one who made that comment. I just posted the link. >

Drinking a little bit of dirty water isn't going to reliably induce miscarriage.
And yes, the passage indicates that it is a punishment for infidelity, not basic family planning as folks want to spin it. This isn't "Father, we're not ready to have a child because the last harvest was very poor." It's a man hauling his cheating wife into the temple to be cursed. Not exactly a Biblical endorsement for abortion. >

You're splitting the definition of abortion based on intent. Even today, individuals get abortions for different reasons. Sometimes, it's family planning. Sometimes, it's to hide infidelity. Sometimes, it's because a person isn't comfortable with being physically pregnant. 
I'd say the Bible passage is more like a person who drinks, smokes, and does drugs to purposely trigger a miscarriage. However, the Bible passage is a procedure (effective or not) sanctioned and used by a societal institution. >

Waving a patriotic symbol is easy, doing what's required so people can feel proud of their country is the hard part. >

Patriotism is simply a love or attachment to one's country. It does not have to include being proud of it. Pride in something you just happened to be accidentally born into such as race, sexual orientation, gender, religion, nation, and country does not make sense. Pride and shame are false dichotomy. I am not proud to be an American but I sure as hell love the United States for all it has given me and would like to make it even greater than it already is. >

I’m on this earth for a limited time. I want to contribute to the betterment of my family, community, state, and humanity as a whole, pretty much in that order. I want to give to make the whole better. That is patriotism to me. Waving flags and saying how much better I am than people in out-groups because I got to join what I believe to be a winning team isn’t patriotism. >

Probably. 
I think the midterms made it clear the American people want a party that represents normalcy and sanity. With trans panic, shitting on education, and election denialism taking over the right, I think a lane has opened up for Dems to be that party. 
What’s more normal and sane than loving your country? >

I don't know. Don't take a knee, or or burn a flag ? I hate change. >

There’s nothing inherently unpatriotic about kneeling. The practice was literally recommended by a veteran.
As for flag burning, don’t believe there are any elected Dems who burn flags. >

These are good patriotic looks? And assigned to which party like it or not? Reread the thread. Besides, personally, I've never  accomplished much from my knee. >

I'd say having a personal set of values and kneeling in response to them is deeply patriotic.  Patriotism without principles is absolutist nationalism. >

While you were down there, I walked over and fixed the problem. >

You...fixed police brutality and lack of oversight? >

Re-read the thread. >

Loving a child means cleaning up a bunch of shit and not expecting a thank you. Loving America means cleaning up a bunch of shit and not expecting a thank you.
Lots of shitty babies demanding to have their asses wiped is how I see those flag waving fools. >

Patriots like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez have already claimed their Patriotism. They actively advocate for the purposes of Government set forth in The U.S. Constitution: Preamble

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

These are the guidelines to decide should "We the People" do this?
Alexander Hamilton even wrote in Federalist Papers: 84 about the importance of the Preamble.

Here is a better recognition of popular rights, than volumes of those aphorisms which make the principal figure in several of our State bills of rights

Out of these purposes of government, Promote the General Welfare, Education for All are square in the sights of this idea. 
John Adams wrote a bit about the importance of education in a democracy.

the social science will never be much improved untill the People unanimously know and Consider themselvs as the fountain of Power and untill they Shall know how to manage it Wisely and honestly. reformation must begin with the Body of the People which can be done only, to affect, in their Educations. the Whole People must take upon themselvs the Education of the Whole People and must be willing to bear the expences of it. there should not be a district of one Mile Square without a school in it, not founded by a Charitable individual but maintained at the expence of the People themselvs they must be taught to reverence themselvs instead of adoreing their servants their Generals Admirals Bishops and Statesmen*

Here he makes clear the importance of the People being an integral part of the system. It gives us ownership of our own destiny together. He emphasizes the idea of the Whole People and Whole Education. This would include anything preschool and anything after high school, not necessarily just college, but also trade schools, etc.
The rest of the letter John Adams wrote to John Jeb is absolutely fantastic. He goes on to discuss why it's important to create a system that makes people like Martin Luther King jr, Susan B Anthony, Carl Sagan, and Mr Rogers, and Washington. Good leaders should not be a product of the time, but of the educational system and culture of the people. If a country doesn't make good leaders then when that leader is gone there's no one to replace them and that culture and movement dies with them.

Instead of Adoring a Washington, Mankind Should applaud the Nation which Educated him. If Thebes owes its Liberty and Glory to Epaminondas, She will loose both when he dies, and it would have been as well if She had never enjoyed a taste of either: but if the Knowledge the Principles the Virtues and Capacities of the Theban Nation produced an Epaminondas, her Liberties and Glory will remain when he is no more: and if an analogous system of Education is Established and Enjoyed by the Whole Nation, it will produce a succession of Epaminandas’s.

In another short work by John Adams, Thoughts on Government, YouTube Reading, he wrote about the importance of a liberal education for everyone, spared no expense.

Laws for the liberal education of youth, especially of the lower class of people, are so extremely wise and useful, that, to a humane and generous mind, no expense for this purpose would be thought extravagant.

100 years ago we built in mass the first major wave of highschools in the United States.

In 1910 18% of 15- to 18-year-olds were enrolled in a high school; barely 9% of all American 18-year-olds graduated. By 1940, 73% of American youths were enrolled in high school and the median American youth had a high school diploma.

This was a dramatic shift in education and economic gain for the United States. Not all of our grandparents went to highschool until the public saw it necessary to build them. 
The future is going to need more local experts than ever and a high school education that was good 100 years ago just isn't going to cut it on a global scale. People will need to change careers in the future and probably more than once. We will need continuing education as a society so that people can adapt and change with the coming times. This includes ensuring that after graduating high school people are able to attend and easily afford the education they need to participate in the community.
As long as a person puts in their work to learn and change themselves, our citizens shouldn't be overly burdened with expenses for attending a public education program.
It's not that students shouldn't pay anything, but it shouldn't be so much as to keep them from working and meaningfully participating in the economy. Not as indentured servants, but free citizens.
Bernie and Alexandria along with Huge populations of Americans believe that the future of America worth the investment. >

Thanks for the thoughtful reply >

I think what a lot of people here are doing is confusing right wing xenophobia that uses the symbolism and imagery of America as patriotism. I like to apply Systems Thinking for understanding how things function and then applying that to a company's strategy. In that process one of the main things you need to do is determine what the purpose of whatever you are looking at is. And you need to be objective about it. 
As an example, the United States government will say its goal is to promote democracy across the globe. But if you look at how the US gov't behaves, regardless of which party is in power, we ally and partner with some very terrible regimes that are very undemocratic.  So then what is the purpose of the US gov't then? From my perspective it is to perpetuate the United States and maintain its position of power. From a pragmatic point of view it then makes logical sense that we have relations with the House of Saud, or Erdogan, or despotic rulers in other countries. Do we sometimes support or help Democracy flourish. Yes, of course, but that is not the purpose of the government. 
So Systems Thinking is basically an actions speak louder than words look at how some system functions. So, to look at right wing Americans and if they are being patriotic or not you also have to define patriotism. You can find a lot of definition of patriotism that run the gamut of full blown nationalism to just liking a certain culture. For my response I am going to use Orwell's definition as it provides the clear deviation from nationalism that I think patriotism should take: 
By 'patriotism' I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force upon other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.
My interpretation of Orwell is, as an American, you love this country, for its natural beauty, for its cultural mix, for its opportunity, and you love this country for its way of life, which is enshrined and handed down through our Constitution, which, to update a tad, states all people are created equal and those people are endowed with certain inalienable freedoms. 
So, with my definition of patriotism in hand and objectively looking at right wing positions I find it hard to allow them the moniker of patriot. How could one be when one does not accept the equality of every citizen? How can one claim patriotism if one tries to take freedoms away from people, how can one be when one tries to deny access to those freedoms to other people. The right wing can dry hump the Constitution all day long and wear as many flag themed clothing as it wants, that does not make you a patriot. Because their actions tell you otherwise. 
There is nothing for liberals to reclaim, for liberalism has always been rooted in the ideals of the Constitution. By liberals I don't mean all leftist or even all progressives. There are those on the left who show no more patriotism than those on the right. But for the vast majority of liberals patriotism is on display every day, in the choices we make, the values we support, in our treatment of fellow citizens. There is no need to stick a big ass US flag in the back of your pickup trick while you blast Kid Rock to let people know you are patriotic. >

The problem is the left are significantly composed of the anywheres, those who think of themselves as cosmopolitan citizens of the world. while the right is significantly composed of the somewheres, the ones for whom where  they come from matters >

Keep it civil. Do not personally insult other Redditors, or make racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise discriminatory remarks. Constructive debate is good; mockery, taunting, and name calling are not. >

If any believe they lost those things than that is sad. I don't believe a single liberal will see things that way. Everyone believes they are a patriot... Even the traitors from Jan 6th. >

Yes! And i also refuse to let tiki torches become a symbol of white racism! I will not lose them! >

I don't really see that being true.
I think you see a different interpretation of patriotism on the Democratic side than the GOP.
Trying to stay clinical about it, the Republicans tend to lean more into visible displays of a style of patriotism that focuses more on the individual and tends to be a little more conceptual. Versus Democrats who generally seem to have a more action oriented view of patriotism, seeing it manifest in things that can be done.
I think one of the better summaries of this I've read was someone pointing out that the Statue of Liberty is pretty much the encapsulating monument for the different camps of American patriotism. Republicans focus more on the statue - that huge visible symbol of an idea. Democrats focus more on the plaque of Emma Lazarus' poem "The New Colossus" mounted on the base - a reminder of what American was for many people.
I'm trying very carefully not to call the Republican approach performative but it's hard to escape that idea. Honestly, I think both camps tend to be pretty performative in their approach to displaying patriotism. 
I don't think the Democrats leaning more into big, splashy displays of flag waving is going to do much. Republicans are going to accuse Democrats of not being patriotic no matter what Democrats do. Remember Obama's flag pin "controversy." >

The issue here is that a very large segment of the progressive left wouldn't consider themselves patriotic by any measure of the word, and in fact they quite openly hate and despise the US. They hate the country they live in to such an extream that they even embrace alternative realities that aren't supported by any facts purely to further their partisan hatred.
So getting them to embrace national symbols of a place they despise isn't going to happen. They are more likely to burn the flag than wave it.
A democratic candidate trying to run for office with a contingent of supporters showing up and burning flags or otherwise desecrating popular national symbols isn't going to work out well in the polls. Which is why Democrats outside of very controlled rallies don't embrace  national symbols. 
Until Democrats can push the wacky fringe away, they're not going to try and play a game of patriotic symbolism. >

The GOP hijacked the flag, making everyone think it somehow represents what they stand for.  Couldn't be further from the truth.  I say take it back.  They're not remotely close to the definition of a "patriot." >

A patriot does not adorn themselves with the symbols of their homeland and scream only it's glories from the rooftops while denouncing other nations as crude and barbaric. That is the job of fools and nationalists, and that is what most modern self professed "patriots" are.
If the left were to try and reclaim the title of patriot from the GOP it would first need to stamp out nationalism, which I personally can't see happening. >

Proud democrat here! I fly the American flag and the Ukrainian flag. I support our military and claim Christianity as my belief system. I have nothing in common with MAGA who I see as anti-American and anti-Christ. >

Yes they should.
They should say America is a free and liberal country love it as it is or leave it, and you can't only love it when your side is in power. >

Way ahead of you fam.
The overwhelming issue is that Liberals have no earthly idea what to be proud of, preoccupied as they are with our past failings.
Conservatives have leapt upon this lack of Liberal American Identity, to try to redefine what it means to be an American through the lens of Race, Religion, and Common Ancestry - in short, only White Christians are really American.
Frankly, I find this evil and as unpatriotic and as unAmerican a movement that I have ever seen in my days, but I am slowly realizing and learning we've had these folks trying to do this work for centuries and thus far they have utterly and completely failed. >

yes actuallly all that 'america is a racist shithole' narrative is getting tiresome >

Does this narrative actually exist? I am in a lot of liberal circles and this kind of talk just doesn't really exist. It's mostly a made up thing on the right to criticize liberals, just like you are doing here!
What is a real narrative is the GOP's narrative that blue states are shitholes. The nonstop disparaging of California or Illinois or New York etc. It's so natural for Republicans, including Trump, to disparage huge chunks of this country as scum that we barely even notice it anymore.
For example, Trump called Baltimore a shithole where no human being would ever live. I cannot, for the life of me, imagine Joe Biden saying that about a rural conservative county in Nebraska or somewhere. Or any Democrat for that matter. >

they're not mutually exclusive you know
turn on Fox and they describe a country run by coastal elites that basically tolerate if not outright foster crime while they focus on their true passion: 'transing' the children
turn on MSNBC and you'll find out that apparently USA is probably the most racist and sexist country on the globe, in which everyone who's not a cis gendered, pale, blue eyed male is oppressed and discriminated against on a daily basis and that pretty much everything is sexist and racist or the byproduct of sexism and racism...
i've heard crazy stuff on both red and  blue media, so both are playing flase narratives to at least some extend >


turn on MSNBC and you'll find out that apparently USA is probably the most racist and sexist country on the globe

Again, do you have any evidence of this at all? Provide some links or something, because this is absolutely not my experience. >

When I see the flag I think of car dealers, real estate agents, and other hucksters who want to hide their bullshit behind symbols.  Seldom do I see people who love their country.  Reclaiming this will be a hard row to sow.  How does one reclaim an image from someone who desecrates it in the name of commerce, factionalism, and selfish hucksterism  without following suit? >

I live in a very conservative state. Almost every person who flies an American flag is a republican and and very often you will see a Fuck Biden flag, a Trump flag and then an American flag all right next to each other.  It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.  It is so bad that this last fall I was driving down a local highway and a farmer was diving his combine with the three flags I mentioned above flying off the back end.  Combines do not go very fast, perhaps 20 mph at top speed.  There were no other vehicles on either side so I pass and then slowed to his speed while giving him the middle finger.  He was livid!  So he can say "fuck the President"  but I can't say fuck you, hilarious! >


and very often you will see a Fuck Biden flag, a Trump flag and then an American flag all right next to each other. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

and for trumps entire presidency including until now, the left screams fuck trump. why is that any different? >

Not for nothing, but I rarely saw any "Fuck Trump" flags in both urban and rural America during his presidency. I see "Fuck Biden" flags all of the time in my conservative neck of the woods. One of them is right across from a church, which I kind of find mildly amusing. >

The problem is that a sizable part of the left have very negative opinions about the United States, or at minimum have a very anti US bias. Consider the follow statements:
"America is a third world country"
"America is a racist hell hole"
"America is an evil imperialist empire"
"Americans are stupid/fat/ignorant" 
If you spend time in left leaning spaces and you're going to see comments like this semi regularly, but almost never in right leaning spaces. One of the easiest way to get upvotes on Reddit is to just say something negative about the US (even if it's misleading or flat out untrue). Whenever you see a negative generalization on the internet about America/Americans it's almost always from someone on the left. It's going to be really hard to convince the public that the left doesn't hate the US when it seems like a decent chunk of the left genuinely does.
Contrast this with statements like:
"America is the greatest country on Earth"
"I'm proud to be an American"
"America is the land of opportunity."
Statements like this seem to mostly come from the right. The right will complain about specific parts of the country, but rarely say bad things about the country as a whole. >

To give a non-Reddit example:
The 1619 Project.
It's central thesis is that the core defining event of the United States is not the Revolution, not the drafting of the Constitution, but the introduction of slavery.
This was publishing by the New York Times, won a Pulitzer Prize, and taught in thousands of classrooms around the country. >

What's the argument against that thesis? Are you suggesting that the introduction of slavery in 1619 hasn't remained one of the core defining features of this country? 
You can argue that it isn't #1, but its a significant event in our history and paved the way for much of our history and culture. >

Well, just to start, I'd point out that 1619 was more than 150 years before the founding of the country, so that's an odd date to pick...

one of the core defining features of this country?

I'll also note that the 1619 Project doesn't couch slavery as one of the core defining features, but rather the defining feature. In fact, it argues that the country was founded in order to perpetuate slavery. Not that it allowed slavery to continue, but that it was founded for the purpose of continuing slavery.
As for if it's one of the defining features, we can run a simple thought experiment to show it is not:
Imagine the Constitution made good immediately on its promise that all men are created equal. Imagine in 1787, the constitutional convention included a prohibition on slavery in the new nation.
...Would that country be identifiable as the United States? An alternative United States to be sure, but is it the same country? Or, would you say a wholly different country was formed in this hypothetical?
And to clarify the question, imagine an alternative past where Article I established a monarchy. I think there quite easily we can look at it and say "That's a different country." It has changed an essential part of the country, even if it keeps the name.
I'd say with a monarchy, that's a different country because not being a monarchy is a defining feature of the United States. By contrast, not having slavery would be the same country but different. Slavery is not defining for the country. Significant, yes. Defining? No.
If you still think it's a defining feature, then do you believe that the country called the United States today was founded in 1865, and the prior nation that occupied that territory ceased to exist? >


Well, just to start, I'd point out that 1619 was more than 150 years before the founding of the country, so that's an odd date to pick...

1492 was nearly 300 years before the founding of the country and people still use that as a historical marker for the early history of America.
1619 was when the first ship carrying African slaves docked on what is now US soil. That's why they call it the 1619 Project.

In fact, it argues that the country was founded in order to perpetuate slavery.

Again, you can argue that it wasn't THE defining feature, but it was absolutely a feature! NHJ can be criticized for putting too much historical emphasis on its importance, but it was absolutely a driver for the founding of the country. I mean, half the states for the first 80 years were created as slave states. Protecting slavery was a significant factor for many in the South at the time of the revolution.
As for the rest of your comment, I honestly don't think it makes a ton of sense. You almost seem to be refuting your entire argument LOL >


you can argue that it wasn't THE defining feature, but it was absolutely a feature!

But the 1619 Project's thesis is that it's the defining feature.

Protecting slavery was a significant factor for many in the South at the time of the revolution.

Are you saying
(a) Protecting slavery is the motivating for the South joining the revolution, or
(b) Protecting slavery was a condition of the South joining the revolution?
These are very different things, and only one holds up to scrutiny.
Of course it's (b). The South wanted assurances from the North that they would keep slavery after the Revolution.
Why would they even think to ask? Because the North already had slavery on the way out. But if the North was already wrapping up slavery... (a) makes zero sense. The 1619 Project argues that Boston took up arms against England to protect slavery. >

it would be good if they did. The time may come when we need patriots. And also, military is having a hard time meeting recruitment targets. >

A bit tangential to the OP's subject, but I've read in the past on NPR that military families are far less likely to nudge their children towards the military. That's highly problematic for them, as that was their primary form a recruitment for a long time. I couldn't find the NPR article, but here's a military article on effectively the same subject. >

Absolutely!! In the past decade or so, I feel that many liberals have distanced themselves from being patriotic. Look at photos of the many women’s marches across the country - essentially no flags carried by protesters (there are flags on the poles at the DC one). 
In their effort to distance themselves from some shameful aspects of America’s past, liberals have somehow found themselves in a position where symbols like the flag, the anthem, civics, history etc. are considered “bourgeois or chauvinistic, or man-splaining” etc.  
As a result, they have allowed the GOP to be the sole judge of what being a patriot is and that definition has usurped the public dialogue. The resulting image of a patriot is a stupid caricature of flag-waving, macho nationalism. 
That’s not what a patriot is. A patriot is someone who loves their country and wants to make it better. For everyone. I am an immigrant. My family came here with almost nothing and made a great life for themselves. We all love America. 
Your country is like your city and neighborhood. If you love where you live, you love showing visitors your favorite bars, museums, parks, hikes etc. You love sharing experiences. 
Loving your country should be like that. You should love sharing it with everyone and you aim to make it better. Because YOU LOVE IT. 
That doesn’t mean being uncritical. But the criticism should be constructive and aimed at educating, not antagonizing people. 
One simple example I hate - people posting about how awful Thanksgiving is. Ok, yes. American government has crushed native Americans. However, be thoughtful. Engage people in a dialogue and make them think. Educate. Don’t shit on a beloved Holiday, because that’s counterproductive. 
Show people that being patriotic and being American is about “give me your tired and your poor”. America was built on amazingly progressive ideas for its time. Yes, they excluded black people and minorities, but that was at the time. You have no idea HOW PROGRESSIVE America was at its founding. A true republic that had broader rights for a plurality of its citizens (not all). 
Progressivism is what America was built on. Creating a safe heaven for everyone is what we have been striving for 300 years. It is a sometimes slow, but steady progress. 
We can always do better. But that’s what being an American is. Relentless pursuit of improvement. 
The GOP has managed to convince a large number of people that democrats don’t love America. They have a monopoly on patriotism. 
That needs to change. We need to take back and redefine what being a patriot is. 
Be proud of your country, wave the flag, celebrate 4th of July, see the Blue Angels, say God Bless America. These things are surface level, but they create commonality with other people. They break the boundaries of your bubble and create engagement points. 
You cannot change a person’s vote if they think that a vote for you is a vote against America. 
What you need to show them is that YOUR PATRIOTISM is more real, more humane and aims to improve the lives of fellow Americans and wannabe Americans. 
The American flag should be prominent in every BLM, LGBT, labor, or women’s rights march. Because THIS IS WHAT THE FIGHT IS ABOUT. Making America better about your fellow AMERICANS. >

The GOP did not convince people that Democrats do not love their country, the Democrats did that themselves. >

No, but the left proudly attacked government buildings and attempted to fire bomb them and the rest called it mostly peaceful.   Deal with your blind spots. >

Oh hey look, someone once again comparing property damage to an insurrection. 
Maybe you should prioritize finding someone to explain to you why Jan 6th was bad. >

Maybe you need to examine why you think firebombing buildings with people inside is not attempted murder? >

you mean the one that a right winger was charged with? that time a government building got firebombed with people inside? >

I consider myself very patriotic but I show my patriotism in different ways than the right. 
I do plan on hanging a flag when I own a home as an intentional way to reclaim some of those symbols of patriotism but at the end of the day symbols aren't what makes you patriotic. >

I absolutely love my country. I stopped having pride in it under President Reagan.  As to reclaiming my patriotism, I've never lost it. That's not to say I haven't lost some respect for my country, but that's not what you asked. I'm not sure what symbology you are referring to and so I have no answer. >

Too many progressives think America is an inherently racist, quasi fascist war machine, that was founded to enslave and exploit. Waving flags just to win elections is incongruous with that core belief. >

It is the difference between patriotism and jingoism. While the gop call themselves patriotic they are actually jingoistic. It is more patriotic to want to make your country a better place than driving with twenty flags on your truck. >

I think so. It seems like there are more and more hardcore conservatives who believe liberals hate America and want to destroy the country, so I think liberals embracing patriotism/the flag could serve to dispel that myth to some extent. I think it would be beneficial to demonstrate, as obviously as possible, that we aren’t some dark, mysterious force, but rather just average people. I have a couple American flag hats that I wear often, and I think it’s helped among my conservative relatives. >

Do you think their belief is at least based, in part, on there being some people on the far left who do hate America and want to destroy the country? >

The thing is - all of the people on the left that I know that “hate” America are either apathetic or want this place to get better so they don’t feel bad about having kids and raising them here. Not sure where this “destroying the country” but came from? >

There is a growing belief on the (far) left that America is irredeemably rotten to its core. Making it better is essentially just a band-aid, and the only solution is to scrap the project and start all over.
The most prominent example of this thinking is the 1619 Project. It's aim was to change the narrative about the founding of the country and its central qualities. The ordinary version most of us have learned is that the founders wanted democracy and liberty, but of course were very flawed and hypocritical and didn't fulfill the promise of the Declaration of Independence about all men being equal -- but the ideal was still there.
The new version is that the country was founded principally on slavery, to promote slavery, and that the Revolution was fought to defend slavery against British abolitionism. It will always be a fundamentally racist country, with every institution aimed at the supremacy of whites over all others. Making it better is just putting lipstick on a pig (and is probably a Trojan horse for just some more subtle white supremacy). >

The "(far) left" America exists in numbers so small that they don't exist at the federal level and you would be hard pressed to actually find any of them in every day life.
Now the far right on the other hand? Trump flags and fuck biden signs abound. They're sitting in congress talking about Jewish Space Lasers and lying about everything humanly possible. They're launching investigations into Biden's son's dick pics or some shit instead of doing anything useful. >

You have to consider, the leftist teachers and professors, they vote something like 97% dem.. When you these people teaching and brainwashing the youth to hate their country, their gender, their race, their history and heritage.. how on earth can you expect democrats to be patriotic? lol This thread is laughable! I just chkd out what’s in the 1619 Project. It totally distorts history and claims Lincoln only freed the slaves so they would voluntarily go back to Africa.. So insane. Why would they invent this history? Because Lincoln was a republican. Newsflash: go thru any major city and you will find more trans flags and rainbow flags than our own country’s flag. It’s a simple truth.  China and Russia donate to BLM for a reason. It certainly isn’t because they care about being inclusive and pronouns. Wake up, dude! >


When you these people teaching and brainwashing the youth to hate their country, their gender, their race, their history and heritage.. how on earth can you expect democrats to be patriotic

It is patriotism to falsely smear half this county as being under the thrall of an elite institution of educators who seek to undermine and destroy America?
So many conservatives claim to be patriotic and then immediately pivot to insulting their neighbors as un-American trash. What is the definition of patriotism, anyway? >

there are many videos of this phenomenon documented on a wide spread scale. It’s relatively easy to find if you don’t use Google >

So wide spread that you can't provide a single bit of evidence for it.

It’s relatively easy to find if you don’t use Google

LOL okay dude >

I live in a red state that is turning purple and I have already seen that moderate Democrats are starting to feel emboldened to show that not all Democrats are cut from the same cloth and that their values are actually pretty pro-America without the stupid chest thumping. 
Some Democrats:

are for immigration control
responsible gun ownership
entitlement reform
"right sizing" government
reducing the pandering to the fringe left progressive talking points

I do feel like this country is starting to heal after the last 6-8 years of insane party politics for no reason other than the fact that we are ALL sick of it. >

I was thinking the other day that the whole trump thing may fade out of the public eye without any of us realizing it.
And we’d all be better for it. >

In my opinion, no. Playing their game means accepting that that's the game to be played. It lets them set the terms of the national conversation, it accepts their premises. That's a losing hand. The way to go is to attack the foundations that prop up their fascism masquerading as patriotism, and tear them out by the roots. >

There is nothing patriotic left of the Republican party. They stand for supporting attack on the Capitol, [all the while waving scores of U.S. flags]. Waving a flag while destroying Democracy can never be a symbol of patriotism. >

Right now Dems have an opportunity to gain some high ground simply by pointing out the republicans who have chosen an AR-15 lapel pin to replace their American flag lapel pin. >

A really good patriotic start would be to stop encouraging censorship, and stop begging the feds to disarm firearm owners. Gonna be a uphill battle to convince everyone to ignore the media, and start sticking up for our fellow man. We liberals have more in common with the maga idiots than the representatives of special interest groups in DC. We have more in common with each other than the billionaire class that owns our government officials. We can do better than symbols. >

Considering how the far right is embracing the idealogical enemy we are up against and just loves Putin yeah its time to expose them as the liars they are give them a taste of the McArthyism