UDC 141.201

The purpose of the article is to clarify the most relevant philosophical dimensions of modern patriotism against the background of defending the processes of national identity. The theoretical basis of the study consisted of institutional analysis, synergetic and philosophical-anthropological approaches, as well as existential philosophy and philosophy of applied ethics. Patriotism is seen as a path to self-expression, the world of life, mental self-limitation and self-aggrandizement of modern man. The peculiarities of modern considerations about the philosophical content of patriotism within the framework of its comparison with other value structures, such as cosmopolitanism, liberalism, nationalism, etc., are established. Originality. The scientific novelty is that the article for the first time reveals the correlations of patriotism with other ideological and ideological doctrines and systems of political and social worldview, which fix the identity of individuals and groups in the context of ethnic, social or political community. Conclusions. The existential dimension of patriotism is based on worldviews of involvement in the local community. Trends in globalization are forcing modern people to "seek refuge" in small communities, or even in a family or other small group. "Local" or "neighborhood" patriotism acquires the character of an expression of involvement in a friend and relative. It almost completely "crosses out" the constitutional and ideological patriotism inherent in the states of the twentieth century. The reorientation of significant philosophical justifications of patriotism in modern conditions provokes a discussion about the spirituality and societal nature of patriotic meanings. In the struggle for the independence of modern Ukraine, we are all witnessing the process of overcoming "state" patriotism "local". This process is very important in the face of opposition to the totalitarian ideology of the Russian aggressor.

Keywords: patriotism; constructivism; existentialism; identity; citizenship; nationalism; worldview; ideology

Introduction

Modern patriotism is a multidisciplinary problem that requires study in the context of social, cultural and information and communication contexts. The state and political content of the age of modern patriotism largely loses its semantic components. It’s appropriate to talk about the validity lose of classical ideologies and the justification of the content of patriotic ideas and beliefs in the service of the state and the political nation. At the same time, since the beginning of the 21st century, there could be seen a new wave of philosophical interpretations of patriotism based on environmental, gender, and anti-globalization principles. Contemporary Ukraine is experiencing a painful stage of rupture with colonial mythology and monolingual Russian indoctrination. In this regard, the Ukrainian patriotic worldview in the conditions of war needs comprehension. It is appropriate to clarify the most relevant aspects of the existential justification of patriotism and its prospects in post-industrial society. Overcoming the two-dimensional left and right worldview dichotomy provides an opportunity to extend patriotism to a new set of meanings and senses. It is necessary to identify the correlation of patriotism with other ideological and worldview doctrines and political and social worldview systems, which fix the identity of individuals and groups in the context of the existence of ethnic, social or political community. The ethnic renaissance of the globalization era forces us to look at patriotism from the point of view of justifying the individual’s belonging to historical time, the dimension of national and social being. Patriotism as a way of the living world self-expression, mental self-limitation and self-glorification raises before humanity the question of the adequacy of partitions within the human race and the universality of the basic categories of being, the universe and civilization.

Philosophical principles of patriotism are considered by a number of modern scientists in an interdisciplinary perspective. In particular, D. Archard (2016) researched the ethics of patriotism, C. Blattberg (2009) revealed patriotic elaborations in practical philosophy context, M. Cerrato (2020) observed topology and tropology heidegger’s philosophical nationalism, S. Hudson (2017) recovered the rational content of patriotism in the philosophy of right, J. Kleinig, S. Keller, and I. Primoratz (2015) considered debates on the ethics of patriotism, T. Ślipko (2020) had paid attention to the boundaries and practical tasks of patriotism, M. Suniewicka (2011) revealed the meaning of patriotism and justice in the global dimension. Despite the presence of these important works, the philosophical foundations of contemporary patriotism understanding require study in the context of retrospective and promising ideological doctrines and political and philosophical currents.

Purpose

The purpose of the article is to clarify the most relevant philosophical dimensions of contemporary patriotism on the background of defending the processes of national identity. The task of the article is to identify the focus of philosophical interpretations of patriotism in context of humankind global problems.

Statement of basic materials

Philosophical grounds of patriotism are considered by modern scholars in the context of its revival as the ideological basis of political activity and a factor in shaping political behavior. The particular feature of modern considerations about the philosophical content of patriotism is its comparison with other generalized value structures, such as cosmopolitanism, liberalism, nationalism and more. The diversity of the values palette leads to different conceptual ideas about the future of patriotism in the field of philosophical meanings. As I. Primoratz and A. Pavkovic convincingly believed,

Economic and cultural globalization and the worldwide threat of terrorism have contributed to the resurgence of patriotic loyalty in many parts of the world and made the issues it raises highly topical. This collection of new essays by philosophers and political theorists engages with a wide range of conceptual, moral and political questions raised by the current revival of patriotism. It displays both similarities and differences between patriotism and nationalism, and considers the proposal of Habermas and others to disconnect the two. Ideal as a supplementary reader for undergraduate and postgraduate courses in politics/political science especially in political theory, contemporary political ideologies and nationalism and in philosophy for courses on applied ethics and political philosophy. (Primoratz & Pavkovic, 2008, p. 5)

In this regard, changing the importance of political and power values of modernism in contemporary times encourages the rethinking of old approaches to the philosophical content of patriotism. The question is legitimate to what extent patriotic concepts and "narratives" can motivate the actions or inaction of a modern citizen. American scholar Jill Hernandez rightly outlines the landscape of global terror and the necessity of philosophical dialogue about the ethics and scope of just war. She convincingly proves the difficulty of the memorization that many real-world people across the globe believe they have a patriotic duty to take up arms for their country. But according to researcher’s position, providing a useful definition of patriotism and a moral defense of it can prove to be just as difficult (Hernandez, 2015).

It is the motivating potential of patriotism as an ideological system and the basis of the worldview of contemporary man is one of the main subjects in the context of research in applied ethics. Patriotic considerations about the "acceptable" or "unacceptable" in the actions of people are reflected in the formation of mass rational or irrational perception of social life. J. Hernandez while reviewing the "The Ethics of Patriotism: A Debate" (Kleinig, Keller, & Primoratz, 2015) book, argues on excellent and timely reminder as to some of the moral questions that weigh on how we identify with our country (of origin or residence), and a background knowledge of the authors’ antecedent work is not required to follow the argument trajectories from the beginning. The researcher satisfyingly demonstrates that dabblers in applied ethics will be disappointed by some obvious constraints of the book, including its diminutive size and its argumentation’s correlatively thin scope. She also gives an example, that moral arguments are solely framed by either a virtue ethical or deontological background, and the authors do not really consider the question from consequentialist or intuitionist perspectives, which (to me) seem oddly excluded (Hernandez, 2015).

Awareness of the value background of patriotism ambiguity causes conceptual inconsistencies in individual and collective consciousness. Loyalty to the state or political community, based on ethnic principles, is called into question due to human and humanitarian obligations. The human rights dilemma in inter-ethnic conflicts is even more complex. The dynamism of the philosophical foundations of patriotism and hermeneutic techniques of its contextual understanding is actualized. Canadian professor A. Habib, commenting Blattberg’s (2009) "Patriotic Elaborations…" truly notes, that patriotism posits a civil polity with a common good, one that patriots strive to achieve together via the political process. According to A. Habib, the theory rests on hermeneutical principles, such as a radical version of linguistic and conceptual holism that makes the meaning and nature of things like moral values and political goods entirely context-dependent. On this picture we understand values and goods in the context of our shared social practices. However, researcher points out, although this universe is whole, it is also 'cracked'; there are gaps or holes between the values underlying the practices. These cracks, when they result in conflict, stop the normal social flow and 'throw up' the conflicting values to us, values that are normally invisible due to their smooth functioning in the web of practices. Hermeneutic conflict resolution is an interpretive affair, in which one seeks to reconcile the apparently conflicting values by making alterations either in them, in some other parts of the web, or in both (Habib, 2009).

Classical schemes that underlie the existence of contemporary Western society, in particular, the market capitalism of Adam Smith, the political democracy of Alexis de Tocqueville etc, were gradually replaced by globalist scenarios of world development. Economic determinism in the conditions of environmental crisis can no longer be considered as the basis of adequate behavior of an intelligent person, the state or ethnic-national community. In this regard, there is a need to update the philosophical foundations of patriotism. As Y. Elazar correctly states, scholars have emphasized Adam Smith’s critique of the dangers of patriotism, but have not paid close attention to its potential value. Y. Elazar recovers from Smith’s work an attractive model of patriotism without nationalism. The potential value of patriotism lies in inspiring individuals to realize an ideal of impartial beneficence, which consists in overcoming selfishness and other subpolity partialities and in promoting the greater happiness of all fellow citizens. Smith defends virtuous patriotism against strong cosmopolitanism by arguing that a global division of labor, which directs individuals to benefit their compatriots, more effectively serves the interests of humanity than directly trying to promote global happiness. Y. Elazar’s article illuminates aspects of Smith’s work that contrast with the "invisible hand" argument and favor the conscious pursuit of public interest in some contexts. It contributes to recent discussions of patriotism a distinctive way of understanding its relation to impartiality (Elazar, 2021, p. 329).

The sustainable democracies’ realities of socio-political development show that the political content of patriotism can change in favor specific personalities’s image perception or admiration. In particular, in the contemporary United States, American patriotism sometimes takes the form of so-called "Trumpism" or the unconditional support of former President D. Trump and his ideological positions. We are dealing with a conglomeration of values that have been voiced by a popular opinion leader. Over time, these meanings became entrenched in the media and became the acquisition of millions of Americans. M. Sable and A. Torres profoundly evaluated contemporary American politics through the works of many of the greatest political thinkers. According to their position, researches focused on the socio-political context surrounding Trump. As American scholars point out, prominent are three contemporary questions: Why did voters support Trump? Is there a Trumpian ideology, and if so, what is it? And how do the motivations of Trump supporters connect with his agenda? Other themes discussed here are: What does patriotism mean in a globalized world? To what extent does Trump’s rise force us to question the relationship between one’s own and universal values? And finally, does the support of Trump’s voters indicate civic health or political decay? M. Sable and A. Torres’ essays connect explanations of Trumpism to debates about the ends of the state and human nature. On the one side M. Sable and A. Torres analyzed rational motives explaining the rise of Trump. On the other side, there are focusing on subrational features behind Trump’s support (Sable & Torres, 2018).

The philosophical basis of contemporary patriotism is embodied in the modern education system, which transmits, above all, democratic and liberal values. At the same time, in conditions of sustainable democracy in the EU and the US, it is becoming increasingly clear that national patriotism contradicts with multiculturalism and universalism. Some scholars outline the controversy between the identification of a citizen and his/her educational environment, as well as events in the surrounding "big world". M. Nussbaum correctly claims that one of the greatest barriers to rational deliberation in politics is the unexamined feeling that one’s own current preferences and ways are neutral and natural. An education that takes national boundaries as morally salient too often reinforces this kind of irrationality, by lending to what is an accident of history a false air of moral weight and glory. By looking at ourselves in the lens of the other, we come to see what in our practices is local and non-necessary, what more broadly or deeply shared. American nation is appallingly ignorant of most of the rest of the world. M. Nussbaum (2021) think that this means that it is also, in many crucial ways, ignorant of itself.

The philosophical foundations of contemporary patriotism are being tested by critics of the major religious traditions of the East. In particular, the Hindu tradition denies the primacy of values and responsibilities to someone’s ethnic community. Instead, tradition emphasizes universal values. This contradiction requires further clarification and a balanced approach. M. Nussbaum revealed, that Americans have frequently supported the principle of Bande Mataram, giving the fact of being American a special salience in moral and political deliberation, and pride in a specifically American identity and a specifically American citizenship a special power among the motivations to political action. As M. Nussbaum believe, with Tagore and his character Nikhil, that this emphasis on patriotic pride is both morally dangerous and, ultimately, subversive of some of the worthy goals patriotism sets out to serve – for example, the goal of national unity in devotion to worthy moral ideals of justice and equality. These goals, as American thinker argued, would be better served by an ideal that is in any case more adequate to our situation in the contemporary world, namely the very old ideal of the cosmopolitan, the person whose primary allegiance is to the community of human beings in the entire world (Nussbaum, 2021).

Contemporary philosophical justifications of patriotism are under pressure from the semantic field of moral theology. The secular vision of divine requirements and transcendent arguments regarding moral behavior determine the universal regulatory actions of man as an individual. The challenge of moral theology is that, given the universal justification of human behavior and worldview, the need for patriotism seems to disappear. J. Hare very thoroughly examines the question of the moral justification of patriotism, given a Kantian view of morality as requiring an equal respect for every human being. His essay considers the background in Kant’s moral theology for his cosmopolitanism. It then considers an extreme version of cosmopolitanism that denies a proper place for love of one’s country, and it engages with a contemporary atheist cosmopolitan, Seyla Benhabib, suggesting that there are resources in Kant’s moral theology to ground the hope that she expresses but does not succeed in grounding. Finally, it considers patriotism as a perfection of cosmopolitanism, in the same way that love of an individual can be a perfection of love of humanity. The J. Hare’s essay suggests that defensible versions of cosmopolitanism put constraints on what kind of love of one’s own country is morally permissible. But these constraints require the background in a Kantian moral theology (Hare, 2020).

The search and selection of philosophical arguments in favor of patriotic political behavior encourages the development of the position of the elite and local communities. "Local" patriotism is considered as nonsense in the context of liberal and cosmopolitan discourse. At the same time, the long hegemony of cosmopolitanism in the global dimension is coming to an end. J. Hare identifies, that global agenda itself tends to undermine, in certain circumstances, the success of the regimes that are trying to implement it; in other words, the strong cosmopolitan agenda can be self-defeating. The philosophical and ideological differences here are likely to be meshed with all sorts of other causal factors, but they are important all the same. J. Hare (2020) sees in the United States and in Europe swings toward a kind of anticosmopolitan agenda that is a response, in part, to the same kind of neglect of the value of local attachment by the liberal elite.

Democratic norms of political debate are interpreted as a kind of safeguard for extreme political positions, which are called extremism. Under the condition of mutual respect and reasoned communicative interaction, the question of the ethnic group rights’ violation cannot be avoided. At the same time, the war in Ukraine shows that the philosophical justifications of humanism and liberal cosmopolitanism have not become dominant either for the Russian elite nor for the broad strata of the Russian state.

Perspective interpretations of citizenship and democratic expression of nation’s will are absorbed by the existing political and legal tradition. Constitutional obligations are considered decisive for the citizen’s personal patriotic choice. However, it should be understood that in the digital era, patriotic preferences are highly individualized (Formosa, 2009). They are based more on pragmatic needs rather than on liberal (modern) constitutionalism’s abstractions. In this regard P. Linden-Retek details the consequences of this shift for the work of the contemporary European judiciary and its constitutional discourse. In the first instance, he analyses constitutional imaginaries and reveals the extent to which civic attachment to constitutional law is oriented not merely to a legal principle simpliciter but also to the historical settlement of political conflict the principle reflects (Linden-Retek, 2021).

In the conditions of existence of the national European statehood the question of national interests’ protection loses the value, significance and imperativeness. The situation of "postnation" needs further study. At the same time, it can already be argued that the "post-national" doctrine of multiculturalism has undergone significant crises and trials. It cannot be the semantic mainstream that defines the latest philosophical foundations of patriotism. P. Linden-Retek rightly suggests that the plurality of constitutional imaginaries in the European legal space creates additional difficulties for inspiring civic attachments post-nationally, a problem to which European judiciaries have heretofore been unresponsive. He also justly claims, that an understanding of Habermas’s work in light of constitutional imaginaries opens new avenues for rethinking the interpretive and structural tasks to which Europe’s juridical institutions should be directed. In particular, P. Linden-Retek (2021) highlights new forms of proceduralism to be recovered in constitutional discourse in order to establish a reflexivity of constitutional imagination adequate to post-national politics.

Thus, prospective and innovative trends in the philosophical justification of the patriotic worldview lead to the existence of this phenomenon as a phenomenon that is on the verge of denying and the neophytes’ enthusiasm. The philosophical culture of Europe and the world as a whole seeks to eliminate patriotism from the leading role or limit it to archaic guidelines of constitutional law. At the same time, global change and digital technologies reveal the appeal of the concept of patriotism to explain many phenomena that are outside the semantic field of traditional ideological doctrines.

Originality

The article for the first time reveals the correlations of patriotism with other ideological and ideological doctrines and systems of political and social worldview, which fix the identity of individuals and groups in the context of ethnic, social or political community.

Conclusions

Thus, the focus of interpretation of the philosophical significance of patriotism has changed significantly. Over the last few decades, the liberal normative interpretation of patriotism has lost its significance due to the inability to fully explain the expediency of collective identity maintaining. In democracy conditions, the digital communication era reduces the importance of liberal rights and freedoms. As a result, patriotism ceases to be an instrument of modern / industrial values protection. The profound wisdom of the pragmatic interpretation of the patriotism of Anglo-Saxon philosophy is also called into question by the intrusion into the realm of private tools of psychological suggestion and marketing means of behavioral control. The existential dimension of patriotism is based on worldviews of involvement in the local community. The globalization trends are forcing contemporary people to "seek asylum" in small communities, or even in a family or other small group. "Local" or "neighborhood" patriotism acquires the nature of involvement to a friendly and relative surroundings expression. It almost completely "crosses out" the constitutional and ideological patriotism inherent in the states of the twentieth century. The refocusing of significant philosophical justifications of patriotism in contemporary conditions provokes a discussion about the spirituality and societal nature of patriotic senses. In the struggle for the contemporary Ukraine’s independence, we are all witnessing the process of "state" patriotism overcoming with "local" patriotism. This process is very important in the face of opposition to the Russian aggressor totalitarian ideology. "Local" or "neighborhood" patriotism fills the mentality of the individual with local and family senses, which open a new perspective for its philosophical justification.

REFERENCES

Archard, D. (2016). The ethics of patriotism. Contemporary Political Theory, 15, e1-e3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/cpt.2015.43 (in English)

Blattberg, C. (2009). Patriotic Elaborations: Essays in Practical Philosophy. McGill-Queens University Press. (in English)

Cerrato, M. (2020). Heidegger’s Philosophical Nationalism: Topology and Tropology. Política común, 14, 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/pc.12322227.0014.006 (in English)

Elazar, Y. (2021). Adam Smith on Impartial Patriotism. The Review of Politics, 83(3), 329-350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034670521000139 (in English)

Formosa, P. (2009). Patriotism: Philosophical and Political Perspectives. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 87(1), 175-176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00048400802636585 (in English)

Habib, A. (2009). Review of Charles Blattberg, Patriotic Elaborations: Essays in Practical Philosophy. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, 6. Retrieved from https://philpapers.org/rec/HABROC (in English)

Hare, J. E. (2020). Patriotism & Moral Theology. Daedalus, 149(3), 201-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01812 (in English)

Hernandez, J. (2015). Review of The Ethics of Patriotism: A Debate. Retrieved from https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/the-ethics-of-patriotism-a-debat/ (in English)

Hudson, S. (2017). The Rational Content of Patriotism in the Philosophy of Right. Hegel-Jahrbuch, 2017(1), 335-340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/hgjb-2017-0153 (in English)

Kleinig, J., Keller, S., & Primoratz, I. (2015). The Ethics of Patriotism: A Debate. Wiley-Blackwell. (in English)

Linden-Retek, P. (2021). Constitutional Patriotism as Europe’s Public Philosophy? On the Responsiveness of Post-National Law. iCourts Working Paper Series, (229). IMAGINE Working Paper, (11), 1-17. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3761764 (in English)

Nussbaum, M. C. (2021). Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism. Boston Review. Retrieved from https://bostonreview.net/articles/martha-nussbaum-patriotism-and-cosmopolitanism/ (in English)

Primoratz, I., & Pavkovic, A. (2008). Patriotism Philosophical and Political Perspectives. Routledge. (in English)

Sable, M. B., & Torres, A. J. (2018). Patriotism, Cosmopolitanism and Civic Virtue: Trumpians and Trumpism. In M. B. Sable & A. J. Torres (Eds.), Trump and Political Philosophy (pp. 1-21). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74427-8_1 (in English)

Ślipko, T. (2020). Ethos, Boundaries and Practical Tasks of Patriotism. Studia Philosophiae Christianae, 56(S2), 279-296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21697/spch.2020.56.S2.14 (in English)

Suniewicka, M. (2011). Patriotism and Justice in the Global Dimension. A Conflict of Virtues? Eidos, (14), 50-71. (in English)

LIST OF REFERENCE LINKS

Archard D. The ethics of patriotism. Contemporary Political Theory. 2016. Vol. 15. P. e1–e3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/cpt.2015.43

Blattberg C. Patriotic Elaborations: Essays in Practical Philosophy. McGill-Queens University Press, 2009. 383 p.

Cerrato M. Heidegger’s Philosophical Nationalism: Topology and Tropology. Política común. 2020. Vol. 14. P. 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/pc.12322227.0014.006

Elazar Y. Adam Smith on Impartial Patriotism. The Review of Politics. 2021. Vol. 83, Iss. 3. P. 329–350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0034670521000139

Formosa P. Patriotism: Philosophical and Political Perspectives. Australasian Journal of Philosophy. 2009. Vol. 87, Iss. 1. P. 175–176. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00048400802636585

Habib A. Review of Charles Blattberg, Patriotic Elaborations: Essays in Practical Philosophy. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. 2009. Vol. 6. URL: https://philpapers.org/rec/HABROC

Hare J. E. Patriotism & Moral Theology. Daedalus. 2020. Vol. 149, Iss. 3. P. 201–218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01812

Hernandez J. Review of The Ethics of Patriotism: A Debate. 2015. URL: https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/the-ethics-of-patriotism-a-debat/

Hudson S. The Rational Content of Patriotism in the Philosophy of Right. Hegel-Jahrbuch. 2017. Vol. 2017, Iss. 1. P. 335–340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/hgjb-2017-0153

Kleinig J., Keller S., Primoratz I. The Ethics of Patriotism: A Debate. Wiley-Blackwell, 2015. 189 p.

Linden-Retek P. Constitutional Patriotism as Europe’s Public Philosophy? On the Responsiveness of Post-National Law. iCourts Working Paper Series. No. 229. IMAGINE Working Paper. No. 11. 2021. P. 1–17. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3761764

Nussbaum M. C. Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism. Boston Review. 2021. URL: https://bostonreview.net/articles/martha-nussbaum-patriotism-and-cosmopolitanism/

Primoratz I., Pavkovic A. Patriotism Philosophical and Political Perspectives. Routledge, 2008. 250 p.

Sable M. B., Torres A. J. Patriotism, Cosmopolitanism and Civic Virtue: Trumpians and Trumpism. Trump and Political Philosophy / ed. by M. B. Sable, A. J. Torres. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. P. 1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74427-8_1

Ślipko T. Ethos, Boundaries and Practical Tasks of Patriotism. Studia Philosophiae Christianae. 2020. Vol. 56, Iss. S2. P. 279–296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21697/spch.2020.56.S2.14

Suniewicka M. Patriotism and Justice in the Global Dimension. A Conflict of Virtues? Eidos. 2011. No. 14. P. 50–71.

Б. А. Філатов^1*

Метою статті є з’ясування найбільш актуальних філософських вимірів сучасного патріотизму на тлі відстоювання процесів національної ідентичності. Теоретичний базис дослідження склали інституційний аналіз, синергетичний і філософсько-антропологічний підходи, а також екзистенційна філософія та філософія прикладної етики. Патріотизм розглядається як шлях до самовиразу, життєвого світу, ментального самообмеження та самозвеличування сучасної людини. Встановлюються особливості сучасних міркувань про філософський зміст патріотизму в межах його зіставлення з іншими ціннісними структурами, такими як космополітизм, лібералізм, націоналізм тощо. Наукова новизна полягає в тому, що в статті вперше виявлені кореляції патріотизму з іншими ідейно-світоглядними доктринами та системами політичного й соціального світосприйняття, які фіксують ідентичність індивідів та груп в контексті існування етнічної, соціальної або політичної спільноти. Висновки. Екзистенційний вимір патріотизму будується на світовідчуттях причетності до локальної спільноти. Тенденції глобалізації змушують сучасну людину "шукати прихистку" в невеликих громадах, ба навіть в родині або іншій невеликій групі. "Локальний" або "сусідський" патріотизм набуває характеру виразу причетності до знайомого та близького. Він майже повною мірою "перекреслює" конституційний та ідеологічний патріотизм, властивий для держав ХХ століття. Переорієнтація значущих філософських обґрунтувань патріотизму в сучасних умовах викликає дискусію про духовність та соціетальність патріотичних смислів. В умовах боротьби за незалежність сучасної України ми всі спостерігаємо процес подолання "державного" патріотизму "локальним". Цей процес є дуже важливим в умовах протистояння тоталітарній ідеології російського агресора.