My spatial priorities are as follows:
1) Local
2) Global
.
.
.
100) National
I consider nationalism to be a mostly terrible thing, and I do very little to defend any one country over another. I usually say that I am from Seattle, not that I am an American (particularly because I have dual citizenship and draw from three countries for my background). I like to think in terms of localities rather than nationalities, and if I must think on a larger scale, I move to the global.
I don't like to think in terms of America's best interests only; I prefer to think in terms of what would benefit all countries best, which is often *not* what America's foreign policy is concerned with. E.g. with the immigration debate, if we would focus less on building a stinking (and useless) Berlin Wall between us and Mexico and rather look at the long-term of how to truly free up trade and equalize wages so that people would no longer have a huge incentive to migrate... now, that would be a more effective, transnational/global answer (to me) than the short-term, national-interest model of putting up a massive wall (that Mexicans will figure out how to get around, no matter what).
Back on topic... Now, not to say that I think soldiers are less than noble (they certainly are, for the risks they take), but there is a lot more going on with recruitment these days than "nobility" of service. But yes, I have an easier time talking with and connecting with local public service workers than those who sign up for the military. And I have an easier time talking with local soldiers (people from my area) than I do with those who are not. But I think that would be the same for most people? I dunno.
__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran
|