Present your perspective on the issue below, using relevant reasons and/or examples to support your views.
"Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation often does more to impede than to encourage progress." • Love and support for one's country is a good thing. Must be understood that no country is perfect and it can become better. In this way, patriotism can impede progress. • Patriotism can be taken too far, if Americans only purchased American cars, this would allow american car companies to become more anticompetative. • American manufacturers need competition to stay strong. • Patriotism can be confused with nationalism. This might encourage people to become more close minded towards those not associated with a country's history - creates xenophobia. • Politicians can take advantage of patriotism by calling those who do not support certain efforts anti-patriotic, can lead to "witch hunts". • Patriotism is hard to define. It is ambiguous as to which actions support a country and can be therefore consider to be patriotic. • To some, patriotism has connotations of self-sacrifice, implying that the individual should place the interests of the community above their personal interests, and in extreme cases their lives and the lives of other individuals, perceived to be members of a different community. In wartime, patriotism as so understood is assumed to be the main driving force for participation in military operations, certainly if it is voluntary. In this context patriotism is seen as an explanation for the apparent suspension of the instinct for self-preservation, which implies that all humans would avoid a battlefield.
"Government should never censor the artistic works or historical displays that a museum wishes to exhibit." • Government should not censor artistic works as such behavior boarders on thought control and impinges on freedom of speech. • Censoring indirectly implies that some works of art are sponsored while others are not. • There are other competing factors, people will ultimately be making the censorship decision and it is difficult to apply completely unbiased judgment. Works of art with religious context such as those depicting the crucifixion of Jesus may be seen as offensive to non-Christians in the sense that a human is shown suffering due to brutal punishment. All art requires some level of understanding and socio-historical context. • The proper role of government is not to monitor works of art, there are more important issues which deserve attention. • What is even more problematic is who decides which arts should even be displayed. Some people may find works such as the Mona Lisa more enjoyable while others prefer works which may seem to be purely pornographic. ———————————————
"Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people." • The reader is supplying a universal statement that should be obeyed always. I do not think the matter is quite so simple. • Preserving some areas of land may be more expensive than preserving other areas of equal area. A cost benefit analysis must be run to determine benefits vs. costs. • Preserving some areas of land may provide jobs near areas which have high unemployment or reduce pollution in areas which have high industrial output. Other factors for land preservation need to be considered. • Preserving wilderness that is accessible to many people is preferable so that people are able to enjoy the preserved wilderness, through hiking or camping in it. However, areas which are not remote could be better candidates for public recreational reasons. • Wilderness accessible to only a few people are typically preserved anyway. Although there are some political figures who suggest that wilderness should be exploited partially because few people are...