What is patriotism and why we should love our homeland. Patriotism - a tribute to fashion or the true nature of man

Test: Matvey Vologzhanin

Patriotism is one of the almost instinctive feelings of a person. The presence of this quality in us, alas, as always, is very vulgarly explained by biological laws. Tigers would be very bad patriots, cows too, but wolves, on the contrary, would make wonderful sons of the fatherland.

The fact is that humans were initially adapted to exist in related pack groups (not very large, most likely 6–10 people: pairs of parents with grown-up children). Our methods of nutrition and self-defense were ideal for such a design. At the same time, the mutual affection of members of one pack is so great that a person is ready to take significant risks in the name of saving his relatives. And this strategy turned out to be the most profitable for us.

For example, among ruminants that graze in large herds (bison, antelope, gazelles), the “die but protect your own” strategy turns out to be a losing one. James Gordon Russell, who spent a long time studying the behavior of wildebeest in the Serengeti, repeatedly noted cases when individual animals, instead of running away from the lions hunting them, went into a frontal attack. Two or three antelopes, each weighing a quarter of a ton, could easily trample a predator with their sharp hooves and injure it. If the entire huge herd joined the actions of the “wrong” wildebeest, all that would remain of the impudent cats would be a dark spot on the dusty ground of the savannah. However, the herd rushed as fast as they could away from the scene of the fight. And even though the brave men prevailed over the lions, they paid too dearly for it. Russell marked fighting antelopes and saw that the wounds received often led to exhaustion of the animal, its death, or, at a minimum, to a complete fiasco on the love front. The cowardly and fleet-footed egoistic individuals lived much longer and multiplied much more abundantly. Therefore, patriotism is unprofitable for ruminants, just as it is not suitable for large predators, who need a large hunting area in their sole ownership for food.

With us, those who survived and won were those who knew how to fight shoulder to shoulder with members of their pack, who were ready to take risks and even self-sacrifice. Groups grew, turned into tribes, into settlements, into the first proto-states - and ultimately we survived and won to such an extent that we created a civilization.

Greek beginning

“Patriotism” is a word of Greek origin, “patria” literally translates as “fatherland”, and the concept itself arose precisely in the era of the Greek city-states. Why did it not exist before this, when, as we have seen, the phenomenon itself is a thing as ancient as the human race? Because there was no need. Before the Greeks, the idea of ​​patriotism was tied by the ideologists of that time mainly to symbols (usually to the symbol of their god or king) as the official embodiment of a deity, or, with a weak influence of religion on public life, as among the northern peoples or in China, to the idea of ​​“blood” that is, to a sense of community with representatives of one's tribe, people who speak the same language and belong to the same people.

The Greeks, who created a civilization of city-states that desperately butted heads with each other, were in complete disarray on this ideological front. All of them - the Spartans, the Athenians, the Sybarites, and the Cretans - were Greeks. Everyone had the same pantheon of gods (although each city chose one or two favorites, considered its special patrons), and as a result, Greek mythology became a description of endless skirmishes between the gods: Apollo and Ares, Aphrodite and Hera, Athena and Poseidon etc. As for the kings, in most cities they simply did not exist, and where they did exist, democratically minded Greeks were least inclined to deify them.

Therefore, they had to look for a different ideological base. And they very quickly found it, proclaiming patriotism to be the first human virtue - the readiness to sacrifice their interests not in the name of sunny Mithras, not in the glory of the great Ashurbanipal, but simply in the name of their fellow citizens, their city, their beloved sunny Athens with its silvery olive groves and old a mother sitting in a modest tunic at a spinning wheel and waiting for her son with victory...

This type of patriotism is now called “police patriotism.” (By the way, when the Greeks began to regularly fight the Persians, their polis patriotism was temporarily, but very quickly replaced by national patriotism, and the speakers of that time, all these Herodotus, Thucydides and Ctesias, very quickly learned phrases like “great Hellas”, “stinking Persians” and “in unity is our strength.”)

The greatest patriots are the Romans

Hellenic ancient ethical norms, as we know, were sometimes taken by the Romans more seriously than the Greeks themselves took them. From the Greek point of view, a patriot is one who regularly pays taxes, participates in public life, does not break laws, and sends horsemen and foot soldiers from his home to the army in case of war. In the era of the Roman Republic, patriotism was synonymous with the word “glory” and was revered above personal valor.

For the Romans, the absolute hero was not Hercules or some other Perseus, who would have fun spending his life in various interesting exploits, but Curtius. This semi-mythological character was a fifteen-year-old youth who, having learned that the smoking bottomless crack that crossed Rome after the earthquake can only be gotten rid of by throwing there the most precious thing that is in Rome, shouting: “The most precious thing in Rome are its patriotic sons.” !” - he jumped into the crevice together with the horse (the horse, according to the myth, was a so-so patriot, for he tried weak-willedly to retreat in front of the abyss, but his trick did not work). Blind obedience to the law, renunciation of one's own self and willingness to give everything in the name of Rome, including one's own children, is the ideal program of Roman patriotism. This ideology turned out to be the most successful for the aggressor nation: tiny Rome subjugated all of Italy, and then three-quarters of Europe, the Mediterranean and a large part of Asia and Africa. (And here the Romans had to change their national patriotism to imperial patriotism, which was much weaker and unreliable.)

Until now, the patriotism of the era of the Roman Republic is considered a commodity of the highest grade, and many ideologists of statehood today dream in the depths of their souls that the capricious, selfish and lazy idiots called their people would go somewhere, and in return they would have at their disposal millions of true Romans*.

« Probably, I am also an ideologist of statehood. Moreover, I could do without millions of Romans - the first point of the program would already suit me enough. Although I may just be moping: winter, lack of vitamins... »

Christianity is unpatriotic

At first, Christians were active opponents of patriotism in any form. At best, they agreed to give to Caesar what is Caesar's, that is, to pay taxes, but they were still deeply convinced that there is no Greek, no Jew, no Scythian, no barbarian, but there is only the kingdom of God, in the presence of which any earthly states - dust and decay. “Any foreign country is a fatherland for them, and any fatherland is a foreign country.” There was no talk of a Christian going to serve in the army, because any murder is a sin, this is clearly and clearly stated in the Gospel. Of course, the Roman Empire fought Christianity as best it could, for such an infection could wear through the very iron foundations of the state in a matter of years.

But, as it turned out, Christianity turned out to be a very plastic thing. Firstly, it split into several directions, which were not a sin to fight with each other; secondly, it turned into an excellent weapon for inspiring peoples to fight against the filthy infidels, of which, thank God, there were still plenty of all over Asia, Africa and the Americas. As for “thou shalt not kill,” they managed to elegantly bypass this issue: after all, one cannot take ideal but unattainable standards seriously (although any early Christian would have a heart attack if he saw a modern priest busily consecrating an anti-aircraft missile system ). As for the Orthodox Church, which initially relied on closeness to secular authorities, here patriotism is a virtue not only not discussed, but also simply obligatory.

Critics and the flirtatious state

In the “patriot - country” pair, the latter behaves like a notorious coquette. You must love her and be ready to sacrifice yourself in her name. For her, you are an empty place. Moreover, the more insignificant a cog you feel, the more patriotic your essence (“Let me die, but my death is nothing compared to the prosperity of my homeland”). You are a booger, you are a zero, you are a trifle, “the voice of one is thinner than a squeak” *).

* - Note Phacochoerus "a Funtik:
« Mayakovsky wrote this when he compared the individual and the party. They say that when he first thundered these lines with his thunderous bass at a poetry evening, people there crawled out of their chairs »

The Fatherland has every right to melancholy chew you up, chew and digest you, and all other patriots will only welcome this if they consider that what they have eaten has benefited the body as a whole. This imbalance in relations was very clearly expressed by James Joyce in his famous phrase: “I will not die for Ireland, let Ireland die for me!” (IRA supporters now really dislike James Joyce for this phrase.)

Patriotism manifests itself most dangerously where power, in the popular imagination, is a kind of quintessence of the state. The Roman Republicans, who perceived their elected authorities as hired servants, were in little danger in this case: they endlessly debated about what was most beneficial for Rome, and, in general, kept power with a tight grip. But where power was traditionally hereditary, despotic, where the king-priest was the symbol of the country, there the loyal patriotism of the majority of the population allowed rare outrages to happen, often dangerous not only for the inhabitants of the country, but also for the fate of the power itself.

Therefore, since the Enlightenment, there have been thinkers who have tried to modify the idea of ​​patriotism - undoubtedly, the most useful for the survival of society, but fraught with the most unpleasant complications. Kant, Montesquieu, Voltaire, Hobbes, Henry Thoreau - dozens and hundreds of the smartest heads tried to develop the norms of a new patriotism. And as a result, they all came to the conclusion that a true patriot not only does not have to be blind and submissive, but his first duty should be to look for spots in the sun. In order to lead his fatherland to the ideal, it is necessary to monitor him more strictly than a teenage girl - instantly stopping, albeit at the risk of his life, any of his attempts to behave dangerously, stupidly or wrongly. This is how the phenomenon of “critical patriotism” arose, in which a person not only does not praise his country, but, on the contrary, meticulously examines it under a magnifying glass and yells in a loud voice when he notices some nasty thing. One of the programmatic works of this direction was the work of the American writer Henry Thoreau “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” in which he called the first duty of a citizen and patriot a categorical refusal to comply with “wrong” laws, “destructive” for the country.

Critical patriots always advocate maximum freedom of the press. For the vigilant supervision of society over the work of officials at all levels. For the honest teaching of history, no matter how disgusting the role of the fatherland may look in some cases, for only such knowledge will give society immunity from repeating mistakes.

Usually the authorities, and the majority of the country's residents, do not like critics of patriots and call them enemies of the people. They are sure that love should be blind and unreasoning and perceive critical remarks as a humiliation of their ideals, as a betrayal.

There is no hope that both of these types of patriots will ever come to an agreement.

Modern patriots

In the modern world, attitudes towards the concept of “patriotism” have changed greatly since the times of the Romans. Such unpleasant words as “chauvinism”, “Nazism” and “xenophobia” are dangling too close to him. Nevertheless, there is no point in saying that the time of patriots has passed: they still have a lot to do on this planet.

Even in Europe, which still shakes at the memory of Schicklgruber, there is a rise in patriotic sentiment. Either in Austria Jörg Haider comes to power, then in France Le Pen's ears rise proudly in the elections, then Pino Rauti seduces the Italians with the promise of clearing Milan and Parma of gypsies and Moroccans. This is Europe’s response to two factors: globalization and the mass emigration of Asian and European residents there.

“Immigrants are uneducated, they work for pennies, they claim our benefits, they bring an outdated culture that is alien to us, they rape our daughters and eat our infant sons!”

“Transnational corporations are strangling small entrepreneurs, they are destroying our identity, they are turning our fields and gardens into asphalt-filled sites of dull progress, they are lobbying for their idiotic laws and feeding us their rotten McDonald’s!”

National patriotism as a rejection of foreign influence is undoubtedly appropriate in a world that wants to remain consistently diverse. Therefore, no matter how decent people wince, looking at Tymoshenko in wheat braids and Haider in an Alpine hat, it is worth understanding: as long as patriotism of this kind remains in a position “from below”, as long as it is not supported by laws, as long as it does not call for cannibalism and pogroms - his role cannot be called exclusively negative. It is much more dangerous when national patriotism begins to walk hand in hand with state patriotism.

There are only a few countries in the world in which state patriotism is one of the mandatory components of the ideology carefully instilled by the authorities. These are, for example, the USA, Russia and Japan.

In the United States, a country with an extremely heterogeneous population, it serves as the cement that holds together the motley bunch that is the American people. At the same time, ethnic patriotism in the States, as everyone understands, is practically excluded.

In Japan, national patriotism and state patriotism are one and the same. For the Japanese, it is a way to preserve their specific way of life (nevertheless, it is eroding from year to year: modern Japanese are already much closer psychologically to representatives of post-Christian cultures than their grandparents). And since almost exclusively Japanese live in Japan, and there are very few other peoples there, then there is no harm in “Japan for the Japanese!” A little. Of course, for the Japanese! Please, no one is against it, eat your tofu and be healthy.

As for Russia, national Great Russian patriotism, which swelled like a mushroom in the rain after the collapse of the USSR, is now coming into contact with state patriotism, which is diligently spread by the official ideology. The task here is to concentrate power in the hands of the ruling elite and keep the country from the influence of centrifugal forces. Historians again began to lie a lot about this, on television they endlessly talk about evil beeches sitting around the state border, and young people in the evenings go to slaughter Kalmyks and Uzbeks as desecrators of the holy Russian land. Ideologists, of course, realize that national, ethnic patriotism in a multi-ethnic country is a suicidal phenomenon, but so far they cannot come up with anything to eat the state-patriotic fish and avoid a nationwide performance of “Horst Wessel” to the balalaika.

So the time for patriotism is far from over. It is even possible that it will not pass in the distant future, when the entire planet will be a conglomerate of small atomized countries, united in free unions and inhabited by people who choose their citizenship not by birth, but guided solely by personal sympathies. Still, as we already wrote above, patriotism is an instinctive feeling of a person, and each of us feels the need to divide people into “us” and “strangers”. Even if in reality we are all our own.

How quickly time flies, seasons change, pictures flash before our eyes, sometimes it seems that life is rushing inexorably past us, and it’s not always possible to follow the ongoing cycle of events. How long ago, as it seemed, all the prohibitions were demolished, the covenants and instructions of future generations were forgotten, the country was rushing at breakneck speed towards new ideals and values ​​that had nothing in common with such boring slogans of the Soviet Union. And here again they are trying to make a new trend, or rather a return to the past that was already beginning to be forgotten, a part of everyday life. The state machine was actively working.

But is it really possible to “instill” in a person, a citizen, a feeling of love for? And are we moving on the right road again? After all, if we analyze the existing experience, it becomes, unfortunately, clear that not all citizens of the Soviet Union, despite loud slogans, understand what patriotism is and what it means to be a patriot.

On the contrary, if you ask the question “Patriotism, does it exist now and does the country need it?”, many will brush it off, not wanting to think, or even these questions will cause a smile or dissatisfaction, as if they have become boring over many years. So a reasonable question arises: “Is patriotism a tribute to fashion or is it still the true nature of man?”, and if it is nature, then how not to ruin the sprouts in the younger generation, but, on the contrary, to promote their development...

We all know from kindergarten that patriotism is a feeling of love for the Motherland. But, unfortunately, no one explained how to love her. As they have not explained what it means to be a patriot, this is why many people think that these are again just big words that have no real basis. In fact, true patriotism has nothing to do with fashion, external attributes, loud and pretentious speeches, it is embedded and exists in every person.

It cannot be instilled or instilled, but can only be helped to reveal the best qualities of a person, such as: respect for oneself and others, tolerance, hard work, responsibility, honor, conscience, duty, morality, principles with which everyone goes through life. But, if patriotism is in everyone, why don’t we feel it? And everything is very simple: in our society, from the very beginning, one erroneous concept was allowed, which causes the failure of the entire system. It is believed that a patriot is a person who knows how to sacrifice his own interests for the sake of the interests of the state, country, homeland...

Not sparing himself, putting the interests of others first. That is, initially a person, his personality is placed in a lower position. But can a person be a patriot who considers himself a grain of sand, a part of something, who does not understand his true purpose? Of course - no, such a person can be anyone, a good worker, performer, even an excellent citizen, always doing everything correctly, but not a patriot.

The feeling of patriotism, the very love for the Motherland, comes to us only through awareness of our own significance, the significance of our family, and, therefore, the significance and value of our country. Only a person who respects and knows himself can be a patriot, but this should not be confused with selfishness. After all, a patriot, having an awareness of the value of himself, respecting himself, values ​​and respects those around him, since he understands perfectly well that everyone is responsible for their own life, and by being responsible for ourselves, we, willingly or unwillingly, are responsible for what is happening around us.

That is, in order for a sense of patriotism to grow in a person, it is necessary that he, first of all, be an educated, thinking person who knows how to evaluate what is happening and make decisions. But besides this, awareness of oneself and one’s purpose plays a big role, and one can only understand oneself by knowing everything that came before me. We must have a clear idea of ​​how the generations preceding us lived, how they thought, what they did, how they acted in certain situations. Not a single little thing should be forgotten, because in order to feel a sense of pride in one’s family, it is not necessary to have a general as a relative, but it is enough to know that perhaps a familiar and beloved grandmother baked wonderful pies or pickled cabbage, and perhaps was the best seamstress in the factory .

And only through realizing the value and significance of your family, the value of your family’s work, can you understand yourself. Everyone has long known that a person values ​​only what he has done himself, what he has put effort into, what he has achieved through backbreaking labor. Consequently, only a person who thinks, works on himself and the surrounding reality can be a patriot. When a person does not want to lose the world he himself created, only then can he be called a patriot who values ​​and loves his Motherland.

Patriotism is revealed through awareness of oneself and the value of one’s work for the development of one’s state. Therefore, it cannot be indoctrinated, instilled, or made fashionable; there is only one chance to become a patriot - to understand yourself and work on yourself, changing the world around you. That is why these days you can often hear the words that there are very few patriots now, people are fixated on themselves, their immediate problems. Why? And all because there is no awareness of oneself and one’s kind. People are isolated from each other, lonely, do not feel their importance and need for others, the state, the Motherland... It is no coincidence that a surge of patriotic feelings always occurs in times full of hardships, the war and post-war years, everyone knows that he is needed, his family is needed, If not us, then no one. Everything depends on us, we are heroes and participants in events, and not just incomprehensible grains of sand or pawns of someone else’s game... Patriotism is an innate feeling, but it requires help for development.

To summarize, I just want to add: let people get to know you and reveal their abilities, and you will see true patriots...

Bibliographic list.

1. Babochkin P.I. Youth in the structure of modern Russian society // Methodological problems of youth research. -M.: 2002. 132 p.

2. Berdyaev N.A. The fate of Russia // Russian idea. The fate of Russia. - M., 1997 – 754 p.

3. Gumilev L.N. From Rus' to Russia / L.N. Gumilev. M.: AST Publishing House LLC, 2004. - 396, 4. p. - (Classical thought).

4. Demidov A.I. Order as a political value // Polis: political studies. - 1992.- No. 3.

What should be national in Russia? Do they have to be war films? About the educational significance of war cinema for our younger generation and the preservation of its traditions Pravda. Ru was told by director, actor, president of the Yuri Ozerov International War Film Festival Oleg Uryumtsev.

"Cinema should instill love for the Motherland"

— What is patriotic cinema and how to distinguish it from non-patriotic?

— We had actor Igor Lifanov at the festival. There was a conversation on the sidelines, and he asked: “How can I become a patriot?” This is the question I asked, although I myself have played many heroic roles. I answered simply: “You need to love your Motherland, your land and be ready to defend it.”

— You gave a prize to the Chinese at the festival... Somehow unpatriotic...

— The Chinese are in the same boat with us. Since 1939, they have fought for the liberation of their homeland from Japanese militarists. In World War II, they defended their homeland two years longer than us.

Every nation has the concept of “Motherland,” even one as young as the Americans. Another thing is that the concepts of “Motherland” and “patriotism” are deep in our blood, but with them they are on the surface. They use any occasion to promote and instill patriotic feelings for their small homeland and relatives. Their family is elevated to the absolute, to the highest level.

What does the word “patriotism” mean from the point of view of word formation? Patros - dad, father, translated from Greek. So the Chinese, the Americans, and Europe have patriotism. In any country - no matter what.

— And your festival is ready to accept any patriotism?

— If this patriotism is without a hint of militarism or nationalism, then why not?

— When we talk about patriotism in art, I cannot help but touch upon the problem of sincerity. In fact, patriotism can be cruel, and sometimes it kills.

— At the festival we have a prize named after Yevgeny Rodionov, which is awarded for the truthful reflection of patriotism in war films. Indeed, we see a lot of falsehood in modern cinema. This year the prize went to the film "72 Hours". This film by the young director Kira Angelina will only be released in wide release in November or December. The movie turned out to be true. The topic itself is not an easy one - betrayal among classmates during the war.

— Still, we made excellent patriotic films. Ozerov's school - is it still there?

- Of course, but she is transforming. Let's take, for example, Fyodor Bondarchuk and his "Stalingrad" - this is a completely different movie.

— Making a good movie is important. But, in my opinion, it is much more important to make sure that this movie reaches people, and above all, children. In fact, they know the American film industry better than our domestic films.

“That’s why we hold our festival.” The current one is already the 13th in a row. It started in 2003, by which time Americans had already managed to “inherit” their Hollywood in their minds, souls, and cinema, capturing the screens of different countries. A holy place is never empty: Soviet cinema left and American cinema immediately appeared. In their “dreamland” everything is verified down to the last step, dramaturgically correctly built. The only ones who are keeping to themselves and not letting Americans in are the Indians with their Bollywood. In Russia, our cinema is just beginning to revive.

— Yuri Ozerov is an excellent director and, from a technical point of view, very interesting...

— Two and a half thousand extras were involved during the filming of the Kursk Bulge...

- Do you mean "Liberation"?

- Yes, we are talking about this picture. Two hundred and fifty roles - can you imagine? There were no computers back then!

— And everything looked in one go...

— At that time there was no computer graphics - the tanks were real, the planes were real. When we were filming with Ozerov in Stalingrad, the planes stood for hours waiting to film several episodes. The director was the “head” of the entire process; he did not have any producers.

— Why was filming carried out in Kaliningrad?

— Change this trend, including at the legislative level. It is necessary to reduce the number of screenings of American films, but at the same time improve the quality of Russian films.

“Even our good modern films about the war cannot be shown to preschoolers and children of primary school age.” What about this age category?

— During the Soviet era, we had children’s and youth cinema. This direction was handled by the Gorky Studio, which was allocated a decent budget. In general, there was a whole layer in our cinema that has now simply fallen out.

- What should we do now?

- Revive!

— Can the film festival play a role in this?

— We have a program “Sokolenok”, which is aimed at children of the “6+” category.

-What is she?

— Well, firstly, it presents a new children's movie. Unfortunately, there are few such pictures. That's why we turn to retro films - these are films that were once produced by Gorky Studio, Mosfilm, Lenfilm.

— So it is necessary to restore the film?

— No, it has already been digitized, it can even be found in the public domain. We are now systematizing this cinema, including new films, including animated ones. For example, the cartoon "Belka and Strelka" is doing great, but, unfortunately, there are few such films - this is a one-off product. "Masha and the Bear" is also on this list.

- We are talking about war...

- But it doesn’t matter for children. I will emphasize once again that patriotism is the Fatherland, it is love for your heroes, your country, your land, the same Masha the hooligan from whom even the Bear runs.

- Let's talk about plans. What's in the near future?

— We will hold the 14th festival. I can’t say yet where it will take place. It is unlikely that it will be Moscow. We usually hold anniversary festivals in the capital. Moscow is still fed up in this regard; cinema needs to be taken to the regions. Unfortunately, with our budget we do not reach Vladivostok or even Siberia, so we are focusing on the western part of the country.

— Will the Chinese take part in it?

— The Chinese are always with us. Since 2004.

— What interesting things are they filming?

- All. And for military themes, they even have a studio called “August 1”, which specializes in this kind of cinema. Every year they present at least one or two films to our festival.

- What about joint plans?

— There are joint projects. The first was with Nikita Mikhalkov - “Ballet in the Flames of War”; others are planned. But the arms are not so long until they can reach.

Should a street street kid who grew up in a slum somewhere in Brazil or Africa, in hunger and dirt, love his homeland? And should a decent person and compatriot of this homeless child love his homeland? Does every homeland need to be loved? Which homeland should you love and which should you not?

You can also cite Hitler's Germany and its citizens as an example. And for Russian patriots who hate the modern United States, this country can be cited as an example.

Should Americans (US citizens) love their country like this?
And should the Germans of the times of Hitler’s Germany have loved theirs accordingly?

You can also imagine some kind of extreme fictional case. Some terrible country.
And then it becomes quite obvious that not every homeland should be loved.

Which means being an anti-patriot is not always a bad thing. Sometimes this is even good. Sometimes it’s good to love not your own country, but someone else’s.

That is, an anti-patriot can also be a good person.
Conversely, a patriot can be a bad person.
But it seems to me that in some countries this is often not understood.
And you can see the ideology that if you are an anti-patriot, that means a bad person, and if you are a patriot, that means a good person.
This needs to be fixed.

And in general, in my opinion, thinking about the concept of homeland as an argument for love is, to put it mildly, not very smart.

Because you have to love good countries, regardless of whether you were born in this country or not.

And accordingly, bad countries should not be loved, but pitied, and also regardless of whether it is your homeland.

And in general, I don’t understand why, when talking about love for Russia, one should drag in the word patriotism. Personally, when I hear the word patriotism, I immediately associate it with the word fanaticism. Associations with something too unreasonable, indiscriminate, selfish.

And why focus on love specifically for Russia, for one country? Wouldn’t it be better to list at least a couple or three, so as not to look like a completely thoughtless fanatic?
It wouldn’t hurt to also justify your love somehow.

For example, I like many modern countries (adjusted for the fact that I don’t know them well).

Switzerland, for example, for the possibility and accessibility of voluntary euthanasia for seriously ill patients.
Finland, for a high level of social support for the poor, and for a fairly high level of morality.

And I also like my homeland, Russia, for free medicine, for example, and for its often worthy position in foreign policy, for the decent, sensible behavior of our diplomats. Unfortunately, it is not always like this, in my opinion. And also for a happy childhood, although strictly speaking it was in many ways even Soviet, not Russian. Since not a small part of it took place in Soviet Russia. I was born in 80.

But I also like the USA in my own way. Although the positions of Russia and the United States, as is known, often differ greatly. But I don’t really like it, and it’s hard for me to even immediately say why, for example.

Anyone who wants to add or object to something, please join in.
In general, I propose to talk about patriotism.