Gil Troy is an American academic. He received his undergraduate, graduate and doctoral degrees from Harvard University and is a professor of History at McGill University.
The author of eleven books, nine of which concern American presidential history, and one of which concerns his own and others' "Jewish identity," he contributes regularly to a variety of publications and appears frequently in the media as a commentator and analyst on subjects relating to history and politics. Twitter: @GilTroy. Website: www.giltroy.com.
Thu Jul 10, 2008 1:20 pm Another Obama speech, another hologram - By Gil Troy
Another Obama speech, another hologram
By Gil Troy
July 6, 2008
Barack Obama gave another eloquent, thoughtful, thought-provoking speech this week, this time about patriotism in Independence, Missouri. Obama knew that the July 4th holiday gave him an opportunity to undo some of the damage that Hillary Clinton's primary campaign had done to him.
But rather than being defensive, trying to prove his loyalty to America or refuting the claim that he was not-unpatriotic, Obama did what he did best. He spoke powerfully about patriotism - love of country - in a broad expansive way.
He insisted that "no party or political philosophy has a monopoly on patriotism" - a sharp elbow aimed at critics - and then explained that patriots sometimes have a duty to dissent.
But while using the words "patriotism" and "nation" repeatedly, Obama avoided using the word "nationalism." Nationalism is a word that sophisticates hate, as they idealize the European Union's "post-nationalism" - forgetting how potent nationalism remains in Europe. Nationalism in popular culture is too frequently connected to fanatics who love their country so much they hate fellow citizens who disagree with them.
But both Zionists and American patriots know that nationalism, like religion, can be a force for good - or for ill. Nationalism distorted and perverted ended up degenerating into Nazism. Nationalism constructively channeled created the United States of America 232 years ago, and the State of Israel more recently.
By avoiding the term, was Obama revealing his identity as part of the University of Chicago-Harvard elite who look down their noses at the little people who love their country? Or was he simply being a smart politician and using the popular term "patriotism" rather than the more complicated term "nationalism"?
To those who see Obama as an Ivy League elitist who will be too Jimmy Carteresque, this speech can become one more link in their chain of evidence. But the speech also confirmed the impressions of those who see Obama as a smart, savvy, and eloquent visionary. This is the Obama enigma - and we hope that the campaign, with its many tests, will prove clarifying.