Some argue that patriotism is the primary cause of wars globally. Others feel that it serves to prevent less ethical politicians from running a country and starting wars. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some people opine that patriotism will trigger conflict among nations,

while

others believe that it is good for avoiding wars sparked by some less ethical politicians.

This

essay will elucidate

thus

of these views which will be elaborated in subsequent paragraphs. Let's start by looking at the vulnerability of national loyalty. First and foremost, excessive nationalism enhances the superiority of the community, and people are easy to underestimate other countries' beliefs and cultures. To exemplify

this

, superiors tend to offence opposite perspectives since they feel they are better than

thus

.

Consequently

, it can erode mutual understanding among counties and a spark of riots is very fragile to escalate. Irrespective of that, national pride tends to be more exclusive to seeing opponents' opinions,

whereas

we live in very diverse societies. Despite aforementioned the detrimental of nationalism, some opine that it is good to prevent political abuse by aggressive politicians. Patriotism makes the community aware to protect their home country from external threats. Take the American people as an example, because of the political interest of their government's intention to be involved in the conflict of Arab countries, the patriots are against

this

decision

due to

national security concerns where they campaign anti-war.

Consequently

, The government will revoke their foreign policy to protect their residents. By

this

example, it can be seen that nationalism can

also

avoid a county go to the battlefield.

To sum up

, I reckon that devotion to the country can be seen as having positive and negative sides.

However

, I believe that national pride can avoid prophesied conflict, yet society ought to respect others' perspectives in order to maintain global peace.