For many years, this is a question i return to  ocasionally but, time and again i turn up empty handed. Maybe it's me. With all the craze with the world cup circus... here i am, trying to make sense.

From early education, this is one of those concepts that is barely ever challenged... if at all. Like god, we are so naturally exposed to it that we seldom really think about the practical extent of the claims. Concepts like this, are so ingrained in every modern culture (in one way or the other) and they become so invisible, so seemingly self-evident that they are rarely eligible for serious discussion. You are born in a country, therefore you are expected to love and feel pride for the nation you were born to and that gave you, your family, language and culture. But, what does it really mean? and why is it so important?

Broadly speaking, the idea lays on culture identity, which most likely evolved from tribal dynamics being affected by certain technological extensions (eg. writing). In any case, a nation's identity is roughly made of language, history, religion, territory, and a whole set of political and traditional values (ideas). Early on, we are taught of the importance of preserving what these concepts imply. There is a flag, there is an hymn, there are special national days, and, of course, and most importantly, there is a defined measurable territory that defines where our country ends and the rest of the world begins. At first glance, these seem pretty clear and easy to understand, even if, in the whole of human history, these ideas are in fact, quite recent. An invisible wall layered over reality.

To me, this has been a real personal challenge because i seem to have a hard time embracing this idea at all. As so, i often think about what does it entail? if i am unable to "love" my country, what does it say about my identity and my limping notion of nationalism? To clarify, this does not mean that i am against my country (i can't also understand the idea), what it means, is that i am neither pro, nor against my country. I accept the constraints but, currently, i see very little reason for praise. It is also important to note that, i have no wishes to belong to any other nation or country. By examining what are the traits that make me an indvitual belonging to my nation in particular, i always fail to find objective unique traits, beyond territory and language, and these, feel so incidental, that i am unable to extract any significant cultural value from it. 

I am officially portuguese and yet, here i am, expressing myself in english. I have lived all my life in portugal (small caps intentional). I do not travel much and, except for a brief 6 months period in england, i have mostly remained within the confines of "my" country's borders. I work, pay my taxes and as an individual i am officially registered as a portuguese citizen with name, number and driver's license. More specifically, i am from the north and as such i carry a peculiar accent and set of expressions that characterize the region i was born. As such, i am not only portuguese, but a portuguese from the north with whatever that carries.

Many years ago, i started asking myself the question: What does it mean to be portuguese today? To have pride in "my" nation? It is important to note, that this question must always be framed in time. My parents portugal was certainly different than today's portugal, not only in language but also, in our case, territory. To be clear, language does not change at structural levels, but the vocabulary does change constantly, as new words enter the lexicon and new experiences are described. After all, language is not only a national trait but, first and foremost, a tool of perception and interaction. From this perspective, it becomes clear that a country's national identity is also subject to change, like everything under and above the sun.

On close inspection, we realize that even language is more vapour than solid. In our case (portuguese), the structural and grammar basis is latin (which is not exclusive to our country) but in time, many factors are shaping the continuous development of the portuguese language, from local variations spreading across of the whole territory, to the adoption of foreign languages words (even of non-latin origin) and even expressions. On local variations i would hypothesise that local weather patterns are influential on language development (just an hunch). As events unfold and portuguese meet the non-portuguese, new levels of experience are gained which in turn are recorded in language (or with). As many linguists will (probably) mention, languages are living repositories of experience and perception. They both shape and are shaped by usage. Also, through colonialism, portuguese expanded to other territorial regions of the planet and so, new patterns of expression of the portuguese language emerged. As an example, we now have portuguese-portugal and portuguese-brazil. The idea, is that, even if, there is an official portuguese language with grammar rules and vocabulary, territorial variation can create a situation where a portuguese may not understand portuguese. And while, this is mostly an oral experience, it is nonetheless meaningful, and i think this can be applied to many other nations. I guess, my point is that while language may be an identity trait, in practice, language boundaries are harder to define, as most spoken languages in the world, were contaminated by other languages. As an example, portuguese, while latin, contains words from either anglo-saxon or arab origins.

I like to tease by stating that the first portuguese was not portuguese. I think this highlights the importance of recognizing that a "nation" or  a "country" is a concept, an idea... which is also reinforced by the fact that there is a date for the foundation of any nation (or at least an approximation). A timestamp. A moment of birth, which, following the natural motion of most cosmic phenomena, implies a possible death (but that is a whole different post). Anyway, since our foundation we have been recording all sorts of events from politics, economy, religion and so many others. From monuments to books, there is a whole set of artifacts and elements that have come to shape what we call our history, our national symbols. Some past events are deemed so important that eventually they become crystalised in anual celebrations or majestic buildings. Preserved in a different way, are local traditions and celebrations, but once, a nation is born, all (or most) traditions become part of the national identity, even if, in some cases, some traditions can even precede the nation's birth. Take religion for example. Many will claim that portugal has christian roots and values, however, on close inspection, christian religion has it's "heroes" and roots in the middle east, moves to greece and italy and finally spreads across europe reaching portugal. Except for a couple of recent events, there is not a single portuguese role in estabilishing the foundations of our own religious structure. Of note that, portugal has deep roots both in celtic and arab culture. From food to infrastructure both are relatively easy to find. Same can be said for our political foundation. Neither the concept of republic nor the concept of democracy are of portuguese origin. We sure have our own unique laws, but when looked more widely across europe, for example, portugal is hardly distinguishable than any other european country (most of my friends pull their hair when i make such statements... and they may be right). But, again, as in other issues, this is my opinion. What i am trying to say, is that structurally speaking europe is more alike than different: "democroligarchies" pretending to be democratic, with elections, parties and news-corporate-propaganda show the "farce"... sorry, could not resist ;) In other words, if you go to norway, germany or portugal, politicians will talk about "democracy", "freedom", "progress", in very similar (superficial) ways, but they will also claim these to be identiy traits. Some friends are fuming at this stage "you're oversimplifying!"... maybe they are right ;) Again, my point is that, like language, values or even religion, identity traits become harder to define, once you move beyond your own borders.

I was born and raised before the rise of the internet. I learned to read and write in portuguese and used portuguese for all my communication interactions. My contact with foreign cultures was mostly from music, translated books and subtitled tv or cinema. As relatively small and closed country in a corner of europe coming out of a fascist regime (until 1974), in the portugal i grew up, meeting foreigners was rare, and so, the need to speak a foreign language was relatively low. Today, however, it's hard not to meet a foreigner even the remotest areas of our "nation".  It's hard not to use foreign words and expressions and even harder not to use foreign technology. From street signs to festivals or food, "my" country is radically different than the one i grew in, absorbing new traditions and even values. And so, what does remain that is uniquely portuguese? Beyond the past and the territory, i do not know. I live in the present.

I am a bookworm. My book reading passion, is also an insatiable hunger and so, in my twenties (after the internet), i understood that there was more reading material in english than in portuguese and the subject matter was also much wider, and so, i decided to switch to reading books in english. Not because english is better in any way, but for the practical reason of trying to sooth my curiosity. It was not easy and to this day an english dictionary is my constant companion. With the advent of the internet, exploding as i finished my university degree, this only expanded. More and more i was browsing english websites, forums, media. Fortunately, I was able to estabilish professional connections in the u.s. that allowed me to work regularly with english speaking people. It became so natural to me to express myself in english that, all my work is now built and created from scratch, in english. Again, not because i am "refusing" or "rejecting" portuguese but because, in the internet world, english allows me to reach a wider number of sources and people. It became obvious to me that, english became a sort of digital esperanto (for good or bad) and that, the more i undestood it, the better. I am sure, there are many other portuguese in a similar path, as there are those that may think this is just silly and unpatriotic.

In the end, identity is how one sees oneself. Ultimately, how we accept or challenge this external identity symbols. I mostly regard myself as a citizen of the world and portuguese by happenstance. First and foremost, i am a member of the human species experiencing life on this planet. I was born to a family and raised in what we call a country, yet, for a long time i been failing my patriotic duties. I do not like "my" flag, barely know my "hymn", I do not like soccer ("national sport") and i have a strong allergy to christianism (as an institution). I rarely read portuguese newspapers or watch portuguese tv and there are very few portuguese musicians that i do appreciate.  Overall, my "consumption" of portuguese culture, apart from ocasional books is extremely limited, even if, i am living and breathing from within. And so, i see no reason to raise a flag and celebrate my country, since there is barely anything i identify with that i see worth celebrating. I love a lot of portuguese people, from friends, family or co-workers but for me they are just humans that happen to be portuguese. 

Finally, and i speak for myself, I can only feel love for real organic life with which i interact or experience (a plant, an animal, a person). As such, i feel love, as a relational transaction that requires active involvement, a country has none of it. A country is just an idea. Of all the traits i attribute to love, like kindness, empathy, care, warmth, and so forth and so on, i see none of them in my relation to my country (static), i see that in my countrymen, as i see in many of the foreigneirs i met. And so, in the end, i am left with the love for an idea, which, personally, i fell, is actually a very slippery (and potentially dangerous) kind of love... but, maybe it's me.