Abstract: Can comparative encounter with another country's constitutional-legal choices-regarding, say, the fabrics of doctrine respectively woven by the judiciaries of the two countries in their efforts to cope juridically with some class of social controversies-ever help us to see ourselves clearly? American constitutional law remains closed to the dichotomizing doctrine, despite the obvious comforts of embracing it. Maybe the path to embrace winds through a form of constitutional patriotism, both communitarian and social democratic, that does not thrive uncontested in the land of the free. What the comparative mirror reflects is the tenacious streak of self-reliant individualism in our ideological soul.