I don't know if that is necissarily the case. Particularly in new governments when it's the most clearly self imposed regulation. Additionaly with stockholm syndrome it's a sympathy for, an affinity for the captor whereas patriatism goes much deeper to an identification through the "captor" which then produces the affinity. And sometimes a person is patriotic yet they want to overthrow the current government because they feel it violates all their country stands for. I think this is where America is headed [at least with those who haven't become apathetic]. A lot of my personal patriatism is tied up less in my leaders and more in my fellow citizens and the land. You can see similar rationale in the armed forces because unlike kingdomes American souldirs generaly fight for their neighbor not for "the crown" or whoever's in power.

so you're making me justify my cheeky, half-cocked statements, eh?  i don't know that i can, but i'll give it a go...  i thought the affinity felt by hostages for captors was caused by the fact that they came to identify with their captors' situation...  and even though hostages can come to care for their captors, it doesn't mean that they'd mind if they stopped having guns pointed at their faces...  they care for their captors, but not to the point where they care more for their captors than themselves...  that seems typical of patriotism...  people care for their countries (insofar as their countries care for them), but never more than they care for their families...  i think that most see countries as a means to protect their families, so, their love for their country is really just a roundabout expression of their love for their family (and other families they know, and themselves)...  people will come to love and respect whatever loves and respects them, and if one's captors/country shows them a bit of respect, people will respect THAT...

and i could have sworn that american soldiers generally fight for money...  it is the biggest industry in the country...  and when they're in the thick of things they fight for their own necks...  there's nothing poetic about 99% of the world's warriors...  $$$...  war is easy money when victory is assured... 

Of course we would write a book on what motivates a soldier to signe up, to fight, to resigne, to do something heroic etc but looking at what the soldier gets paid you have to wonder who sells out for such a cheep price. I think it's true that some join because they have no real marketable skills at home but they can hold a gun and blindly follow orders which will earn them food and shelter and a similar chance of serviving as they would have in a ghetto. I know several who joined merely for lack of other options and they are at this point some of the most unhappy people I've ever known. Some however joined up for that poetic reason I mentioned and I think many who stick with the millitary could be catagorized as that say type.

If we were to look at it from the ecconomical aspect [which I will admit I know little about I just go on my sociological knowledge of advertising and consumer behavior] I think the fact that it is the biggest industry has less to do with the grunts and more to do with the people writing and signing the big contracts, politicians and some 'big business'. Perhaps that trickles down to the grunts through promotion of military service but even then the poetic ideas of civil service and noble protection of the innocent and freedom are what are promoted. There are occasional money incentives but I have found the army uses them as a last ditch effort AND whether or not they are actually paid out as promissed is a coin toss.

So basicaly when looking at the low level soldir I believe there are two kinds. One motivated externaly by the fact that it's the best way he can make any sort of living and then the second who is motivated by internal ideas of 'the noble cause' whatever he defines that to be.

yeah, i think it's safe to say that with almost every soldier, it's a case of the road to hell being paved with good intentions...  most of them see it simply as a way to get paid and make a "positive" contribution (and get health insurance), at least when they join the military (my ex brother-in-law was/is a marine, so obviously i'm an authority on this subject...)...  and you're right about big businessmen, they get most of the money that war leeches from the world because they own the companies that produce the shit that troops use...  all low-ranking troops take part of their pay in patriotism, whether they want it or not...  i don't blame the grunts for much, although i do think they're crazy for enlisting considering who they ultimately take orders from...  then again i think anyone who voted for bush (or harper up here) is a bona fide lunatic...  come to think of it i think at least three quarters of the people in the world are crazy for one reason or another...  alot of soldiers see through the bs they are force-fed every day, but they can't come up with anything better/more reasonable to believe in, so they play along with the whole sadistic charade...  i can relate much more easily to the iraqi who picks up a gun to fight than with the american who enlists to kill iraqis, or other totally outmatched "threats"...  america is the bully of the world, and it's easier for me to relate to the guy who feels justified in trying to kick the bully's ass than it is to relate to the bully himself...  i'm sure most americans and most people would agree with that, so why do they continue to fight and enlist?  pride and money...  a man's gotta eat, and a man's gotta feel like a man, or at least like what the propaganda propagators (mass media and the government) tell them a man should feel like...  what do you think?      

I am thankful for nothing because with out it something will not be here.

Your friend Conspiracy.