“The Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is…the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.” – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (Letter from Birmingham Jail)

With this year being the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the word “patriotism” carries a strong emotional connotation throughout the United States. Many people think of classic American symbols like the red, white and blue of the American flag, the strength of the bald eagle, or the individualist pride of the “American Dream.” Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines patriotism as a “love for or devotion to one’s country.” It is the interpretation of that definition, however, that causes friction in politics today, and what really embodies that love and devotion.

The idea of patriotism often suffers from a dangerous misconception. There is a critical difference between “love for one’s country” and a love for one’s government. The latter actually echoes values of nationalism, an ideology that elevates one’s nation above all others and promotes its established culture and interests. In a nationalist system, the ones in power are the ones who dictate what “patriotism” means. They often demand that people follow their rules, respect their social traditions and buy into their culture of manufactured national pride.

The one problem with a government controlling the national narrative is that it can use its definition of patriotism as a weapon of division rather than a tool of unity. If someone tries to stand up against a negative government action or criticizes American actions involving other nations, they often will face backlash and be insulted as “anti-American” and “unpatriotic.” The irony is that pushing back against government malpractice is arguably the most American and patriotic tradition. The American Revolution started due to colonists’ outrage about what they perceived as “tyranny” of the British Empire. The Bill of Rights was ratified with the purpose of protecting unalienable rights of the people from government overreach. By using the First Amendment’s freedom of speech clause to voice concerns, call out tyranny and organize movements of change, the people effectively place a check on the government’s power.

The dangers of nationalism can be seen today in the actions of the administration of President Donald Trump. Millions of Americans have been vocal in opposing many of his policies, organizing “No Kings” protests across the country. Trump has attempted to discredit these protests as “hating America” and “being unpatriotic.”

In one case, at the 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan-Cortina, American freestyle skier Hunter Hess sparked controversy when he downplayed representing the U.S., citing he did not agree with increased immigration enforcement back home: “If it aligns with my moral values, I feel like I’m representing it. Just because I’m wearing the flag doesn’t mean I represent everything that’s going on in the U.S.” Many conservative critics fired back at Hess’s claims, with Trump posting on Truth Social: “Hess, a real Loser, says he doesn’t represent his Country in the current Winter Olympics. If that’s the case, he shouldn’t have tried out for the Team, and it’s too bad he’s on it.”

While on the surface it appears that the president is simply brushing off criticism, this controversy encapsulates the struggle between public commentary and weaponized nationalism. Trump uses patriotism as an excuse to discredit Hess, ironically embodying the antonym of patriotism by doing so. By calling out the flaws in the current government, people demonstrate their love for their country not by ignoring its problems and pretending everything is OK, but rather by bringing awareness to them and pushing for it to change the country for the better. So when the president attempts to discredit protestors for doing their constitutional duty of holding a negligent government accountable, he is the one being unpatriotic. He is the one opposing the values of free speech and the right to petition the government.

This was the very logic that progressive leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. used to justify the disruption of the status quo. The pushback was justified as a means to better society as a whole. An argument that may come from this is, “But the Confederacy rebelled against the government, too! Why were they in the wrong but King was in the right?” The reason is that they fought the system. King fought for bettering the social rights of Black people because the government and society had refused to truly treat them as equals since the beginning of America. His goal was to fix the country for the good of supporting all Americans. 

The Confederacy seceded from the Union, committing treason, to continue to have the ability to own human beings. They did not secede out of love for America, but out of a desire to protect their individual rights to own slaves and continue to put them down. And while people argue that it was “about the state’s rights,” it was about their states’ rights to have slavery. Almost every one of the Confederate states’ documents that made them secede explicitly mentioned slavery as the main reason, with Mississippi’s stating: “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world.”

Many people view history as just that, the past. However, it impacts everything in current events, from the political climate to economics to education. A notable landmark that encapsulates this in our community is the Arden Hills Army Training Site, which takes up the northern portion of Arden Hills. Purchased by the U.S. government in 1941, the land was used to build the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) during World War II. However, the land was anything but empty, with several family farms located in the area. According to the city of Arden Hills, the government, using eminent domain, forced the removal of everyone living in the 2,370-acre area, giving them 30 days to leave their homes behind. Additionally, several indigenous mounds located on the land, the namesake of Mounds View High School itself, were destroyed and removed to make way for the plant. 

While the complex was built for the “patriotic” war effort that took form as nationalist, it altered families’ lives for generations. It supported the U.S. government at the cost of civilians and in contradiction to the American value in the right to own land. The area continues to be used as a military training base, but the tragic history of the site has often been forgotten with many current residents of the district being unaware of its past.

Pointing out flaws in the national metanarrative of American history does not mean someone hates their country. It means that they refuse to accept the story that society tries to push on them and they recognize the facts of what actually happened. History is not an interconnected story of heroes and villains, but rather a complex and nuanced record of both what happened and what will continue to happen if we fail to address it. By honoring the positive contributions of those before us but recognizing their flaws, we can continue their positive legacy while ensuring that their negative actions are never repeated. 

Nationalism blinds people, but patriotism allows them to see the truth. Nationalism is what makes us carve a massive sculpture into a sacred Dakota mountain in the Black Hills, worshipping our presidents. Patriotism is what makes us think critically about the evils of our past and try to fix what happened and prevent a similar event from occurring again. It makes us think, “How would we feel if invaders stole our land, destroyed our monuments and carved their own faces into our cultural icons?”

While the people have the power to hold the government accountable, the problem occurs not when the people use their power, but rather when they choose not to. As stated by King, the most dangerous obstacle to progress is the indifferent moderate. “Neutrality” is not neutral. Rather than actively opposing the beliefs of a movement, they choose not to participate, helping the status quo stay in effect while they stand aside and watch. Due to their larger numbers, their lack of participation is often more detrimental than the direct opposition itself.

I disagree with a lot of what our country has done throughout its history, from its inception to the current events of today. I’m not proud of what America is doing overseas. I’m worried about the state of our economy and politics. But that’s because I love America. I love our values of freedom and equality. I want to support those who actually want to make our lives better and call out those who make it worse. Protesting ICE for arresting and terrorizing communities is not anti-American. Being skeptical of the president for mishandling the Epstein Files is not anti-American. Criticizing the government for murdering civilians of another country is not anti-American. If someone’s house has termites, they do not ignore it and pretend everything is OK. They point out the problem, get it fixed, and learn from it so it never happens again. Standing up for fellow Americans and trying to make the country better is the most “American” thing someone can do.