In search of the patriotic center

Most people would assume that patriotism and nationalism are synonymous, but Michael Gerson argues otherwise in his latest diatribe against self-styled nationalist Donald Trump. "The president's defiant nationalism is strangely lacking in basic patriotism," Gerson writes. How can that be? For Gerson, it seems to come down to two failings of Trumpian nationalism. First, Trumpism fails to idealize the exceptional goodness of the U.S. To show this, Gerson cites comments he interprets as proof that Trump sees his own country as little different from other nations. Exhibit A is Trump's "You think our country's so innocent?" comment, made when he was pressed to distance himself from the "killer" Vladimir Putin. Less well known is something the President said when pressed to criticize Turkey for cracking down on dissent: "When the world looks at how bad the United States is, and then we go and talk about civil liberties, I don't think we're a very good messenger." It's unclear what Trump thought Americans were "bad" at at that moment, but clarification wouldn't matter to Gerson, who is just as critical of a left wing that "finds the meaning of America in its defects." Comments like those cited are hardly outrageous regardless of the source, but the offense Gerson takes helps us understand the distinction he draws between patriotism and what he might call mere nationalism. However skeptical the President may be about American exceptionalism or the nation's moral superiority, his attitude clearly doesn't compromise his commitment to defending his country or its interests as he understands them. That commitment falls short for Gerson because Trumpian nationalism is a materialist form of conservatism concerned with enhancing American wealth and military power as ends unto themselves, regardless of what anyone thinks America stands for. Patriotism, for Gerson, is distinct and superior to nationalism because it's a twofold moral commitment, both to the nation itself and to a moral purpose that justifies the nation's claim to exceptional power, if not its very existence. To be a patriot, in other words, is to be loyal to American values above all. In Gerson's own words, "love of country entails a love of decency and human dignity" allegedly absent in Trumpism. There's no semantic basis for the patriot-nationalist distinction, of course, nor any basis apart from recent history's identification of "nationalism" with military aggression and hatred for minorities. Self-conscious nationalists would seem to have every right to challenge the distinction and claim the "patriot" label for themselves, but Gerson has another reason for denying it to Trumpian nationalists.

It's highly debatable whether patriotism must treat national power as a means to a higher end, but Gerson also argues that real patriots should recognize their nation's real enemies, while Trump either fails or refuses to do so. You probably can guess where this is headed. Trumpian nationalists will not dispute that the nation has enemies, but their lists may have at least one significant difference from Gerson's. The columnist recalls that Trump jumped the shark for him when, as President-elect in late 2016, he questioned intelligence reports of Russian meddling in the election campaign. Trump's advisers made the not-irrational point that some of the Russophobe accusers "are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction." That remark apparently convinced Gerson that "Trump and his team are willing to sell out the people defending our country for political reasons." Worse, he finds proof in the Mueller Report that "the Trump team anticipated and welcomed the practical assistance of a hostile power" in 2016. In Gerson's mind, Russia isn't necessarily an existential threat, but it is an almost inevitable enemy of both the United States and what he sees as American values. Whoever fails to recognize this is no patriot, as far as Gerson is concerned. As usual, a Russophobic commentator ignores all the ways, especially in the economic realm, in which the Trump administration challenges Russia, because none of that has anything to do with why he thinks we need to challenge Russia.  An American patriot, by Gerson's standard, must defend democratic values and universal human rights against the rising tide of authoritarianism in Russia, Turkey and elsewhere, while a nationalist, presumably, thinks he can maximize American power without concerning himself with ideas or values but actually betrays his country by neglecting them.

2020 is going to be a hard year for Gerson. The moral vacuum he perceives in Trumpism leaves an opportunity for the opposition to claim the mantel of patriotism, but many on the left have reasons of their own to see their country as "bad" or not "so innocent." However sincere or legitimate their criticisms may be, Gerson warns that a successful challenger to Trump will need to affirm that "American ideals are a force for good in history, and that America is a force for good in the world." In other words, there's no place for the anti-imperialist left or domestic politicians preoccupied with mistreatment of minorities on a pragmatic Democratic platform. This isn't good news for many Americans for whom Trump has confirmed the fundamentally flawed nature of the American experiment, not to mention all those eager to vent their anger at the disrespect they feel Trump has shown them. It should be possible to vent that anger yet argue that Trump represents a deviation from a benign American norm, but it seems less possible now than it would have been before Trump was elected. It should also be possible to assert an essential goodness in the American experiment without declaring the sort of crusade against authoritarianism that would thrill Gerson. It might be wise for Democrats to tone down their anger at America, as Gerson advises, but if he wants to topple Trump next year he should be prepared to scale down his demands as well. He could start by acknowledging that one can run against Donald Trump without also running against Vladimir Putin, and not be a traitor to the cause or the country.