You're not a southerner, quit lying. You're from the northern hemisphere. Poser.

Hey we out here even in WV. Nobody needs to feel alone.

Gonna explain the modern view. Don't know older eras, but can go.

First of all, on the list of things that we are taught in the US that "you’re constantly told that you’re a patriot simply because you were born here", the Bill of Rights of the Constitution is treated as a sacred document. and like the Bible, it's overquoted without much understanding. But most pertinent to your discussion is Amendment 2.

A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

Yup, that's all our constitution has to say about guns.

Understand, when we're talking about the Bill of Rights, really everyone's focus is Amendment 1, where all sides agree on it (at least for their own people and are convinced the other is trying to take it away), 3 hasn't really come up, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 has been pushed and broken over the years... and 10 will come up thanks to our Civil War. But 2 can be the issue.

While there's of course a massive mix in our country, there are two predominant sides, left and right, democrat and republican, liberal and conservative, blue and red... there are arguments that these are different labels but the way our countries politics have ran in the last couple decades those terms are completely interchangeable. And this divide is HEAVILY where the gun argument exists. The democrat side of the aisle has been wanting gun control, the school shootings being the discussion but so many other reasons, the Democrats run the gambit from a minority who says "Take all the guns, they're unnecessary in today's society" to a different minority being completely pro-gun (they've been less quiet over the years) and everywhere on the spectrum in between, but usually the party lands on gun control. The Republicans on the other hand run the spectrum of "NO gun control" to guns are sacred and burning one is like burning a Bible to a US flag. Now... the "NO gun control" is also a bit of a red herring because the Republicans are REALLY happy to pass gun control bills, especially when minorities have guns... I've always said it's going to be a Republican who does the whole take their guns because some of the Republicans are getting to the mood of "Take the guns" because they're in power... when a pro-gun democrat is ignored for a more anti-gun republican by the single issue voters when it comes to guns because they'll just parrot "Gun grabbing Democrat." I live in a red state where this sort of thing happened. (Jesus... how many footnotes I have to put in, like here... our politics are ran by single issue voters too, that's important). When it was said up top where "Americans seem to be “don’t push me” but when they actually get pushed they’re all “uWu please more daddy” it’s odd." our loudest bunch is the ultra-far right which is the loudest about their gun rights, but have to circle the square that they also are the biggest bootlickers pro-police, pro-military etc while the group that's mostly against guns are the the ones also against the expansion of enforcement power of the government. I can get into some tin-foil hat theories but I think it's more "It's not a bug, it's a feature" as those that worship the guns also fetishize the military and just want to be them, just without the restraint.

So now we've got the political divide when it comes to guns. Now lets get into organizations. The NRA, National Rifle Association. Originally in 1871 they were a club that was about improving marksmanship, firearm safety, and competency as well as hunting and conservation. But they are now pretty much a lobbying group for "gun rights", they oppose any gun legislation (unless minorities are going to be affected, then they are suspiciously quiet), this really started in the 70s where they started aligning with the Conservatives where most Republicans were at the time and has only further solidified there with the NRA being a mouthpiece of the Republicans for decades. It's to a point where if a Republican wants elected in the Midwest or the South they need the NRA seal of approval. And this organization is ALL ABOUT heavy advertising, which is free political press. Now this following part is a guess but adding on we had the Citizens United (I can go on pages long rants about this group, good to know that their leader took a hiatus in 2016 to be Trumps campaign manager for election) decision in 2010 where the group sued the FEC at the supreme court saying that corporations are people thus they couldn't be prevented making expenditures in federal elections which infringe on their 1st amendment rights and won allowing companies to donate to political campaigns. Some of our biggest companies are the military industrial complex and it's definitely in their interests for the open doors to guns so they can be sold to the public.

So you can now see that it's a weird mixture of political divide and being pushed further by the politics and economics of the country, lets get into the history and the revisionist history that's known in the US. The being a "patriot" in the US, it is hammered in our heads about the Revolutionary War that we fought back the British and it's super important that we keep ready to keep from another totalitarian government from taking control (you don't need to point it out, I am well aware of the irony.) The "Don't Tread on Me" Gadsden flag is a recall from the OG Revolutionary War (and pretty much flown by one side of the political aisle, I'll let you guess which one, and I'll give you a hint, it's the one that keeps using patriotic jingoism). This is adding with the Bill of Rights being sacred, that our Revolutionary War is taught as almost a mythical struggle against good and evil. I'd honestly love to see how other countries teach their history compared to the US. Now my views are going to be colored because I was raised in the South, and since our education isn't standardized across the country federally that can be VERY important (There is some standardization, but it's corporate based... Texas is the largest buyer of schoolbooks so they can bully the schoolbook company to leaving out some of the things that paint them in a bad light.)

I've brought up the South a few times... and here we go and my constant statement that we're still in the middle of our Civil War from 160 years ago. Our Civil War was the South deciding to secede from the US and the followup to that. I'm going to lay it out, the Civil War WAS about slavery and yes that is a controversial statement to say this day and age, as people will say it's about "States Right" (10th amendment) but that's part of the "Lost Cause Myth" which propagates that slavery wasn't important and was already on its way out but it was the abolitionists pushing too quickly, that it was about the states rights that it wasn't the federal governments place to step in, that the slaves were happy and cheerful in their position, that the soldiers were chivalric and not traitors as secession was granted by the constitution, and that the south actually wasn't defeated because they were the better at military and had the better generals and it was simply because the North outnumbered them. This seems like an aside, but read all of those and see how that is the sort that also would cling to their guns, hell they like to try to use the revolutionary war as a mirror... and this isn't some little tiny myth... if you live in the south the (revisionist) confederate flag is flown all over in the south, infested in the north, and even flown over some state houses. It is not unusual to hear "The South will rise again!" ANYWHO: Lost Cause Myth... South lost, if being outnumbered was their failure then it was bad strategy. Slaves weren't happy and anyone who believes that are fucking idiots. This wasn't a war of northern aggression: The south shot first because Lincoln when elected much to their being upset wouldn't give them ALL the US military bases even when he was willing to let the South otherwise govern itself. The South had made a purpose of using the federal government to bully abolitionist states to follow their laws (see fugitive slave acts). And on the "Slavery isn't important" and "States rights" arguments, lets take a look at the CSA Constitution. Article I Sec. 8 (4) "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." and Article IV Sec. 2 (1) "The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired." (3) "The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States." ..... Yea... slavery was totally on the way out and states were allowed to govern themselves. Europe had Nazis, we have Confederates... and we've done a piss poor job of getting rid of them. And while the confederates were Democrat, they moved to the Republicans with the signing of the Civil Rights Act.

As I said, guns cannot protect one from Fox News.

In other words, we are taught, from childhood, to resist classic tyranny, like a British King, or external propaganda like Nazism. That's gun culture: people ready to tell foreign soldiers stepping foot on their home exactly how they feel, from the end of a barrel. A sort of 'people's militia' is the fantasy, and part of our history.

It's so engrained that I think it blinds people to internal propaganda, and surpresses critical thinking. And that was kinda OK for awhile, but now it's gotten out of hand and, well...

See my reply below.

But in short, I think its not so much a cult as an outddated fantasy. We're taught to resist external invasions as a people's militia; that's what the Founding Fathers mean to people, kicking out foreign kings. It's what the pledge allegiance meant to me, along with valuing our own diverse ideals and disunity.

...Not to resist internal propaganda.

Hence, that philosophy is easy to exploit internally. On the flip side, it doesn't work when we have to look at ourselves so critically. The patriotism itself isn't a cult, but it's fertile ground to get one rolling when there are enemies to point to.