Patriotism vs. Universal Humanity

What I found most interesting in Sandel's consideration of loyalty dilemmas was his discussion of patriotism.  Sandel cites Jean-Jacques Rousseau's argument that communal attachments, such as patriotism, are vitally important to an idea of universal humanity.  Rousseau argues, though, that we are limited in our ability to sympathize.  He writes, "It seems that the sentiment of humanity evaporates and weakens in being extended over the entire world."  I thought this was fascinating.  He seems almost to suggest we should feel a sense of universal humanity, but it is an ideal that is, because of our limited capacity to sympathize, impossible.  For this reason, patriotism is important because it encourages us to sympathize with one another.

It seems problematic, though (and Sandel mentions this, too), that patriotism also compels us to place more concern upon those within our community, whatever that community may be, than those in other communities.  It's a complex problem.  We cannot sympathize with everyone, so it is good that we practice sympathizing with, for example, other Americans.  Doing so is good, because it means we feel a communal responsibility, but it also means that we perhaps unrealistically overvalue those within our community.  This complicates our sympathy for the rest of the world.  Patriotism means that we feel an obligation toward one another that is stronger our obligation toward others.  To me, this actually seems to discourage our sense of universal humanity.

Strong patriotism is good for the country, but if Rousseau is correct that we ought to feel a connection to every human being (and our patriotism is just that feeling as far-reaching as it can go--only to the boundaries of one's country), then too-strong patriotism does something wrong by obscuring our feelings about other countries by imploring us to value one another, as Americans, over every other human being. 

Rousseau seems to suggest that we ought to feel this kind of sympathy with the world, but because we cannot, patriotism is a good substitute.  Really, though, it seems like we would be more compelled toward universal humanity if we did not value citizenship in the same country as some special connection requiring special loyalty.  By valuing one another over other people, we're actually making universal humanity even less possible.  It seems to me that, if it is the ideal, we should seek to achieve it, even if we can't fully get there.  If Rousseau is right, I mean, we should encourage a more communal vision of the world. 

I think Rousseau is probably right that we cannot feel tied to everyone, but so often we see near-religious patriotism causing strong antagonism between countries.  I think we, as humans, want to feel communal ties, but perhaps we cannot expand those beyond the borders of our country, and unfortunately this causes us lots of problems.  What are your thoughts?