No.
There have been countries that have followed this doctrine. Examples are Germany 1933-45, Italy 1922-45, North Korea (present day), USSR (of old).
In general, unconditional support for your country right or wrong leads to the country oppressing its own citizens and can lead them to attacking others.
As has been noted, it is important to love your country, and that means accepting when it goes wrong, and working to make it better.
2007-08-06 08:24:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by The Patriot 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, becuse it allowes Nazi thinking to dominate people's minds.
When my country UK is wrong, it gets a swift response from me and everyone else included, no matter what.
Anyone who clings limply to the tenet "My country right or wrong" is not thinking for themselves.
We're supposed to have a democracy, so lets have some freedom of thought and not be hidebound by waffle!
2007-08-06 08:18:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Patriotism is a good thing but blind patriotism is not. This breeds extremism. Tenets like this are extreme and if used improperly are quite dangerous. A perfect example is the Islam tenet that non-believers are infidels. more people have died because of this tenet in recent history that anything else.
2007-08-06 05:25:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
The quote you give is incomplete, so the "tenet" is somewhat misleading.
As I recall, the whole quote goes more like this:
"My country, may she always be right, but, right or wrong, my country."
It's not a statement of blind support so much as a combination of allegiance and responsibility.
2007-08-06 06:10:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by oimwoomwio 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
All the time. While there opening the boozers for 24 hours, they put up the price of beer. There urging people to use public transport but not putting a cap on the cost of train and bus fares. There calling themselves a democracy when its really a money hungry dictatorship. Britian sucks
2007-08-07 02:10:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The source of the quotation, according to Bartleby.com, is a comment intended to be critical of that stance, made by Carl Schurz:
"Carl Schurz (1829–1906)
QUOTATION: The Senator from Wisconsin cannot frighten me by exclaiming, “My country, right or wrong.” In one sense I say so too. My country; and my country is the great American Republic. My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.
ATTRIBUTION: Senator CARL SCHURZ, remarks in the Senate, February 29, 1872, The Congressional Globe, vol. 45, p. 1287. The Globe merely notes “[Manifestations of applause in the galleries]” but according to Schurz’s biographer, “The applause in the gallery was deafening.” This is “one of Schurz’s most frequently quoted replies.”—Hans L. Trefousse, Carl Schurz: A Biography, chapter 11, p. 180 (1982).
Schurz expanded on this theme in a speech delivered at the Anti-Imperialistic Conference, Chicago, Illinois, October 17, 1899: “I confidently trust that the American people will prove themselves … too wise not to detect the false pride or the dangerous ambitions or the selfish schemes which so often hide themselves under that deceptive cry of mock patriotism: ‘Our country, right or wrong!’ They will not fail to recognize that our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: ‘Our country—when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.’”—Schurz, “The Policy of Imperialism,” Speeches, Correspondence and Political Papers of Carl Schurz, vol. 6, pp. 119–20 (1913)."
2007-08-06 14:26:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by Austin W 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe that often my country is either right or wrong. They aren't usually both, and never are they neither. So, I guess I would rephrase the tenet as "My country, right or wrong."
2007-08-06 05:09:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by C.S. 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
i know of no rational thinking person who would believe so.
one should realize that the average citizen is not privy to many issues that make up the decisions for a particular actions.
luckily we have a good system of checks and balances and our condition.
the Judaical, legislative and executive branches that make up our system of government and provide these checks and balances.
we have laws that govern civil disobedience if the majority have grievances that they feel are not being address.
it is not perfect but darn near close and i much prefer it to other forms of government.
2007-08-06 06:02:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is usually quoted in English but it is not a particularly English sentiment. The difficulty and challenge here is that if your Country is in the wrong would you allow it to meekly surrender to another one, or would you help to fight it out.
I think I know the answer
2007-08-06 05:30:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by Scouse 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. In a free democratic society everyone should have the right to express an opinion.
The only exception to this is the Military. But they understand that when they sign-up.
2007-08-06 05:18:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by Jack 3
·
1⤊
0⤋