In the book, Viroli discusses the meaning of fatherland and patriotism through the centuries. But in the epilogue of the book (available from Amazon and worth reading, page 161 and following), Viroli first describes different takes on patriotism by contemporary philosophers and thinkers. Then it becomes more explcitely some kind of manifesto of a “patriotism of liberty”, that while based on universalistic values, it is meant to serve one’s community (that in its own turn is supposed to serve the citizen:“Love and loyalty are demanding passions; they may require us to make serious sacrifices. We ought to be entitled to demanding in turn as to whom we should love and be loyal to. … to demand that our country be committed to liberty and justice…“)
Patriotism, as understood by Viroli, is strongly connected with political liberty, civic virtue and the idea of justice. Besides, he claims that love for your homeland does not imply (and did not imply in past centuries) hate for your neighbours or other countries in general.
So if you are interested in alternative views on patriotism (that clearely opposes it to nationalism, and actually see it as the best tool to fight nationalism), Viroli’s book is definitely a good start.

Besides, also Hamermas defined patriotism in a way that clearely differentiates it from nationalism… while sometimes claimed to be too rational and not passionate enough to be actually successful in a country, the whole idea of “consitutional patriotism” (wikipedia has a short article about it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_patriotism) is definitely part of the larger debate on patriotism VS nationalism.

I’m not sure how all of this relates to the Caucasus… but anyway, I feel, these readings are good food for thought.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Problem is indeed that some power: politicians or mafia, or whatever, always makes use of this fear to keep the people under their total control.

There are some good quotes on this:

Patriotism is proud of a country’s virtues and eager to correct its deficiencies; it also acknowledges the legitimate patriotism of other countries, with their own specific virtues. The pride of nationalism, however, trumpets its country’s virtues and denies its deficiencies, while it is contemptuous toward the virtues of other countries. [...] — Sydney J. Harris

http://www.mahablog.com/2006/02/19/patriotism-v-nationalism/

Even more interesting is how both terms fit in with the concept of democracy. Well, let me rephrase that — how democratic societies will be tolerant of alternative views on how countries and societies should develop, whereas nationalism is totally at odds with the concept of democracy and is more akin to fascism. Unfortunately, some people consider patriotism to be the same as nationalism, or at least dress up the latter as the former to make it seem more palatable.

Probably, you can argue that this has happened in this region (although also among certain sections of US society), and so, as a result, I have become uneasy about the use of either term. Besides, I never liked labels anyway…