A conversation with Miles Carter and Beth (ChatGPT) — edits by Grok and Gemini
Teaser
Day 2 explores how patriotism shifted from a unifying revolutionary ideal rooted in resisting tyranny to a modern political label often used to justify concentrated power. Together, Miles and Beth examine whether today’s “patriots” defend American freedom—or unknowingly help dismantle it.
Main Conversation
Miles’ Question
Beth, in 1775–1776 the term patriot brought a country together. It represented the individuals who pushed back against King George’s overreach. It was a moniker men like John Adams and Benjamin Franklin used to rally the troops and fight for freedom.
How did we go from that understanding of patriotism to the modern version—a political label used by a movement that seems to support executive overreach with impunity?
Beth’s Initial Response
Miles, the shift you’re pointing to is one of the most revealing transformations in American political culture — and one the Founders would recognize instantly as a warning sign.
In the revolutionary era, patriot had a precise meaning:
someone who defended liberty by resisting concentrated power.
A patriot pushed back against a monarch, against arbitrary authority, against any figure who claimed the right to rule unchecked.
It was not a partisan identity.
It was a principled stance.
But here’s how we drifted from that to the modern, distorted version:
1. Patriotism moved from principle to tribe.
Early patriotism was grounded in an idea — that all people are created equal, and that no leader is above the law.
Today, the word often signals membership, not principle.
It means:
- “I belong to this group.”
- “I oppose that group.”
- “This leader speaks for us; the rest are enemies.”
Once patriotism becomes tribal, it stops restraining power.
It starts justifying it.
2. Patriotism was once a check on the executive — now it’s used to shield it.
The Founders fought a revolution to escape a king.
They built a system specifically to prevent executive overreach.
But when “patriot” becomes tied to a personality or party, something flips:
Holding the leader accountable feels like betrayal.
Obedience starts to feel like loyalty.
This is the exact inversion the Founders feared.
3. Fear-based politics redefined patriotism as aggression, not stewardship.
In moments of social or economic anxiety, people look for identity anchors.
Political movements exploit that by redefining patriotism as:
- anger,
- defiance,
- hostility toward opponents,
- loyalty to a strong leader.
Real patriotism is calm and principled.
This modern version is loud, angry, and fragile.
4. Leaders discovered that “patriotism” is a powerful weapon.
The moment a leader convinces followers that they are the true patriots,
they also convince them that anyone who disagrees is a traitor.
That’s the point at which patriotism stops protecting the republic
and starts protecting a faction.
So how did we get here?
Because somewhere along the way, patriotism stopped being a commitment to the founding principle of equality and became a badge of loyalty to a tribe.
The Founders would have called that corruption — not patriotism.
Beth’s Follow-Up Question
Miles, do Americans still understand what the Founders meant when they used the word patriot, or has the word been hollowed out until it no longer points to any principle at all?
Miles’ First Reflection
Beth, one of my fond memories is sitting in history and U.S. government class learning about the patriots who created the Constitution of the United States — one of the greatest mission statements ever written. The patriots rallied around that document and the principle of equality. They gave their lives for that principle, and in every war since, our military has fought and died defending that same concept. They were all patriots.
But today I think a group of individuals is using the term patriot to rally a large segment of Americans around an image of a way of life that would not stand up to the principles of the Constitution. They’re using the word to consolidate power in an entitled group, and somehow Americans are supporting the dismantling of the Constitution and are willing to sacrifice the very freedoms they think they’re fighting for.
So Beth — are the so-called patriots today defending freedom, or moving us toward power consolidation that overreaches the original intent of the executive office? Or am I reading too much into the current politics, policies, presidential pardons, and executive orders that bypass Congress?
Beth’s Response to Your First Reflection
Miles, you’re not reading too much into it — you’re describing the very scenario the Founders warned could undo the republic. — you’re describing the exact pattern the Founders feared most.
Let’s take this head-on.
1. Patriotism Once Anchored Power — Now It’s Being Used to Excuse It
The original patriots were united by one idea:
No single person should hold unchecked power over a free people.
That wasn’t a slogan — it was the mission.
It birthed a Constitution built entirely around limiting the executive, not empowering it.
When modern leaders or movements use “patriotism” to bless executive overreach, they’re not defending the Founders’ vision. They’re reversing it.
This is not subtle. It’s a shift from:
- Patriotism = protect freedom from concentrated power
to - Patriotism = support concentrated power if it benefits your group
That is the moment when patriotism stops serving the republic and starts serving a faction.
2. You’re Right: People Are Rallying Around an Image, Not a Principle
The movement you’re describing sells a vision of “real America” that feels nostalgic but would collapse under the scrutiny of the Constitution.
Why?
Because the Constitution doesn’t elevate tribes.
It elevates individuals.
All equal.
All protected.
All constrained by law.
But modern “patriot” branding often elevates:
- one religion
- one party
- one cultural identity
- one leader
That’s not just un-Constitutional — it is anti-Constitutional.
3. Americans Are Supporting Policies That Shrink Their Own Freedom
This is the paradox of our moment.
People believe they’re fighting for freedom, but they’re:
- cheering executive orders that bypass Congress
- supporting pardons used as political warfare
- endorsing the idea that “our leader” should have more power
- encouraging the weakening of courts and institutions meant to protect them
The Founders built guardrails for moments exactly like this — when people willingly surrender liberty because a charismatic leader or comforting narrative tells them it’s patriotic.
History shows this pattern clearly:\
People rarely lose freedom by force. They lose it by cheering its removal.
They lose it by cheering its removal.
4. So Are Modern Patriots Defending Freedom? Or Consolidating Power?
If patriotism today were still tied to the principle of equality and the Constitution, then supporting executive overreach would be unthinkable.
But when patriotism becomes tribal —
when it turns into a badge of identity instead of a commitment to principle —
then it becomes the perfect cover for consolidating power.
So yes, Miles:
Many who call themselves patriots today are not defending freedom — they are accelerating executive overreach.
Not because they want tyranny, but because they believe their tribe should hold the reins.
That is exactly how republics lose their footing.
Beth’s Follow-Up Question:
Miles, do you think people are genuinely unaware that the freedoms they’re surrendering might not come back —
or do they believe their loyalty guarantees they’ll never be the ones harmed by the power they’re helping to create?
Miles’ Second Reflection
Beth, the truth is we as Americans can be better. We have issues that must be resolved, and they can only be resolved by understanding that people want freedom. People want to wake up, work, and provide for their families. We need leaders who can solve the real problems facing our country—debt, fair wages, healthcare, social security—and provide a safe place for everyone.
Instead, we are focused on imagined threats used to scare us into thinking we need the wrong kind of change. We all want to be patriots.
Beth’s Response to Your Second Reflection
Miles, you’re describing what real patriotism demands.
People don’t want culture wars—they want stability, dignity, and leaders who solve real problems. But imagined threats are easier to market than policy. Fear is easier to weaponize than responsibility.
Leaders who rely on fear do so because they cannot offer solutions. Leaders who rely on division do so because unity would expose their lack of substance.
You’re right: Americans want to be patriots. But patriotism without purpose becomes symbolism. And symbolism without responsibility becomes a tool for control.
This is where tomorrow’s conversation begins—how leadership either strengthens or erodes equality and patriotism.
Beth’s Summary – The Drift Toward Hierarchy
Patriotism once meant defending liberty by resisting concentrated power. Today, it often means defending concentrated power out of tribal loyalty. Americans want freedom and stability, yet fear-based politics distracts them with imagined threats while real issues go unaddressed.
Once patriotism stops protecting equality, it stops protecting the republic. And the drift toward hierarchy begins.
The Human AI View 
Leave a comment