âPatriotism, The Pledge, and The Anthemâ
Nothing could more contemptible in American politics, and in American opinion, than that of the current debacle that is the NFLâs decision to revoke its playersâ constitutional rights, as well as moral obligations, to protest the current state of depravity prevalent across this so-called âGreat Nation.â This decision comes at a time when people of colour face unprecedented discrimination in the twenty-first century, and violent systemic racism amongst law enforcement. With an issue as emotional as this, did the NFL and the presidency handle this situation appropriately? With such a statement, it is just to evaluate âpatriotismâ and the evolution of said patriotism into nationalism.
The other day when attending a high school commencement ceremony, I found myself in a rather awkward position. My peculiarity began when, for some reason, the pre-ceremony music had a theme to it. This theme was âAmerica.â Now, I cannot comprehend why America would be the best choice for such an event. America has nothing do with the high schoolâs theme, nor does it possess any intrinsic value on the education of these now-graduating students. It was odd that the music did not reflect the ideals of moving forward, or perhaps parenthood, or celebration and comradery. Instead, as if by some intentional effort to support the current climate of the âpatriotismâ debate, it was not only American but also prideful. The music claimed the âfreedomsâ of America and the ideals that America possess.
To further continue my odds with such an event as meaningful and impactful as this commencement ceremony, I felt a certain ray of judgement fall upon, as well as the sound of unmistakable groans, when, participating in my constitutional right of free speech, I politely sat through the duration of the American National Anthem and the presentation of its flag. I, not necessarily with any one injustice or plight on my mind, did not feel inclined to stand up for such a gesture. Every day in school I sit down and do not carry out the recitation of the âPledge of Allegianceâ in the morning. I do not participate for the following two reasons:
Firstly, I do not hold the sentiments of patriotism highly. I often consider myself a âsocial globalist.â This identification is not to be confused with fiscal globalism, a horrendous economic policy that sadly has found its way into mainstream politics in Europe. As a social globalist, I tend to not value my country greater than the countries around me. And, even if America was truly the âbestâ nation by ranking metrics, I still would not be overtly inclined to be or feel patriotic. I think it is arrogant to take pride in oneâs country as being superior to others, especially in a world such as ours when often times it is the meddling of imperialistic America or imperialistic Europe that caused the lower, âthird-worldâ statuses of other countries, resulting in America being in a sense âbetter.â
Secondly, the United States of America is in no-way a superior nation, no-way an âexemplary modelâ of democracy and freedom, and in no way an equal and just nation. The only âsuperiorâ qualities in Americaâs ranking is incarceration, gun-violence, and military. No country should take pride in having one of the largest incarceration rates in the world. No country should take pride in having some of the highest gun violence rates in the world. And no country should take pride in having the most military bases around the world, and the most amount of war spread around the world. These three things are some of the only high-ranking qualities of America. Yet, it is very easy to hear so many people claim with immense pride that this is the âbest nationâ in the world.
I also have political reasons to sit down during the National Anthem and the âPledge of Allegiance.â And, as I have stated before, if these reasons were not prevalent, I still would not stand and place my hand over my heart, as I believe it to be futile. There are two lines in the âPledge of Allegianceâ that I carry the most egregious offences with. These are, âOne Nation Under God,â and âWith Liberty and Justice for All.â
Imagine a nation that consists only of household pets. There are cats, dogs, fish, rabbits, and birds. Yes, there are numerous household pets, but for the purpose of an allegory, I shall limit this number. In continuation, the cats and dogs believe in a supreme bacon deity. This deity, in accordance with their belief, is responsible for their existence as well as the existence of all household pets and everything provided to them. The fish and birds believe in multiple deities, with one central deity being their âcreator.â It also may be pointed out that not all cats and dogs believe in the bacon deity, some believing in the fishesâ and birdsâ deities, and some believing in no deity. This also applies to the fish and birds. And, the majority of the rabbit population, albeit much smaller than the other household pet populations, believe in no deity.
Upon the foundation of this nation of household pets, a list of laws, rights, proclamations, and statements arose in order to ensure liberties for all household pets. One of these assurances included that there would be no laws made in the future, or in the present with respect to any belief in a deity. This would ensure that no belief in a deity would be discriminated against; furthermore, the lack thereof was implied to also not be discriminated against. As such, all pets were guaranteed equality.
However, over a century later, the pets adopted a new pledge that included pledging to their nation under a deity. This did not affect the cats and dogs who believed in a bacon deity, and this did not affect the fish and birds who believed in a central deity amongst their others. But, the rabbits, who shared no belief in any deity, were obligated to pledge their allegiance to something that they did not believe in. It was revealed to the rabbits, by that pledge, that they did not have the freedom established by their founders to worship in any manner they desired. Furthermore, rabbits and fish suffered abuse and murder from their dog and cat counterparts, who took to hunting and eating them. Then, under their pledge, they had to proclaim that they were being treated âjustlyâ and âequally,â both of which were not so. Birds, noticing their fellow household pets being persecuted, decided to stop saying the pledge. This caused a great deal of disturbance to the cats and dogs, who claimed that the birds, fish, and rabbits that were refusing to pledge were, consequently, âunpatrioticâ and âdisgraces.â Â
This allegory is most definitely a reflection of the current state in America. Unarmed people of colour are persecuted and executed at a greater rate than any other group. Children are being shot in their schools. People are living in third-world poverty, as documented by the United Nations, while a handful of rich CEOâs control more of the money in the United States of America than all its citizens combined. The elderly and the disabled are unable to get adequate funding to cover their needed expenses after spending their whole lives paying into a program, non-optionally, that ensured them security. Veterans, who sacrificed their lives and safety and family in order to promote a cause they believed in, who were sent by the American government to fight in wars unjustifiably, cannot get adequate and proper care in the country they so valiantly defended. Why, under any just conscience, could someone stand up, put their hand on their heart, and say, âWith Liberty and Justice for All?â It sickens me that someone would dare claim that there are liberty and justice for all in this country, or that there ever was. That America was ever âgreat.â
Furthermore, like the rabbits, it is not fair to people who do not believe in a âGodâ to have to pledge their allegiance to him. Such a pledge undermines the value of the U.S. Constitution. The very first amendment states: âCongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.â It is wrong, and that is why I, in good conscience, cannot stand for the âPledge of Allegiance.â I, a firm believer in the U.S. Constitution, and a firm believer in the principles that the founding fathers of America created, cannot support such a blatant tort to the fabric of America. No respectable citizen, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Atheist, or otherwise so should stand for a pledge that undermines the protections given to each group.
Let it also be known that the current United States Pledge of Allegiance is not the same as the original Pledge, written by Francis Bellamy in 1892. The original pledge, which should be the pledge currently, reads as follows: âI pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.â In 1923, the words, âthe Flag of the United States of America,â was added. Then, in 1954, President Eisenhower, an economic intellect, but a social disgrace, encouraged Congress to add the words âunder God,â as a response to the Communist âthreatâ at the time, creating the 31-word pledge said today. So, the very addition of âunder Godâ was a direct measure taken to discriminate against secularists and people who were left-wing and Socialist. This is a very prime example of blatant religious discrimination. If the Congress can get away with violating the constitution, might it be said that this is one of many examples of this violation, who is to stop the state from becoming an authoritarian regime, where complacency now with the pledge could lead to enforcement later?
Now, let me address my grievances with the National Anthem, âThe Star-Spangled Banner.â My grievances are the same as those with the âIce Cream Truck Song,â that famed childhood sound of sugar and deliciousness. That fun, famed song was originally titled, âHa! Ha! Nigger Love A Watermelon.â A deeply racist and provocative song should not be played, even without the lyrics, for the children and youth of America. So, why should âThe Star-Spangled Bannerâ be an exception?
Many people who know of âThe Star-Spangled Bannerâ seldom know that there are four more stanzas to follow. Yes, four. And, contained in the third stanza of this National icon, there is a racist message. The lyrics read:
âAnd where is that band who so vauntingly swore,
That the havoc of war and the battleâs confusion
A home and a Country should leave us no more?
Their blood has washâd out their foul footstepâs pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
Oâer the land of the free and the home of the brave.â
Without context, the meaning of this song may be slightly lost. However, in summarised terms, the lyricist of this, Francis Scott Key, who was pro-slavery, an anti-abolitionist, and anti-black, also a Washington D.C. aristocrat, writes about his witnessing of the Colonial Marines, escaped slaves fighting with the British to gain freedom from their oppressors, the Americans, being killed. He writes that their âblood has washâd out their foul footsteps pollution,â and that there is â[n]o refugeâ to save them, from their âterror of flight.â In laymanâs terms, Francis Scott Key wrote a song celebrating slaves dying as a result of them trying to escape. Why would football players who are black have a problem standing for a song celebrating slavery and the victory of the slave masters in maintaining power? Maybe because slavery is wrong, dehumanising, and immoral to the very fabric of humanity. Maybe they are trying to get Americans to address how America came to be. It came to be as a result of the slaves putting in the work against their will. If America had addressed the racism in its country sooner, maybe people of colour would not be dying as a result of police brutality and poverty. Maybe this is what the football players are fighting for.
Again, how can I, in good conscience and a proud supporter of equality, stand and put my hand over my heart for a song that celebrates the enslavement and enforcement of that enslavement of people of colour? I cannot. I refuse. Those people at the commencement ceremony can groan all they want, but I refuse to support a country or a song that believes in such a message. I donât care if the lyrics are not sung, they are still there. They are still written to the rhythm of the song. These football players, who care for their country and their people, are taking a stand against systemic racism in America. There are people who say such racism no longer exists. But, that is impossible. Because such racism was never fully addressed. And, until such time, it can never be fully abolished.
There is another element to examine when discussing this issue, the one that makes many people take up in arms when the football players kneel. And that is the honour of American servicepersons. I wholeheartedly do not support the United States Military. And when I say this, I do not mean to state that I do support the people fighting for this country, because I do. I do not support the institution that sends these brave, caring, serving people into wars that the United States has no reason to be in. The wars for oil and the wars to fill the pockets of the Military Industrial Complex. How dare the American politicians and the President send Americaâs people to foreign countries to fight wars with American money, and die and succumb to injury? How dare they? I believe that American servicepersons are not being honoured by those who say they are. By those who refuse to give Veteranâs Affairs more money for healthcare and support. They blind the American people into thinking that it is standing up for a pledge that honours these servicepersons. No, for the reasons Iâve already stated, and for the reasons I just stated, I cannot stand up. Instead, I choose to honour the veterans by supporting policies that take care of them, and to send more of American tax dollars to them. And to personally give my thanks. âThe Pledge of Allegiance,â the United States Flag, and the National Anthem are not supporting Americaâs military. They are supporting a complacency to injustice. I have family members who have served or are currently serving in a branch of the United States Military. I have no shame sitting down, or taking a knee, because I know that I am not disrespecting them. I am honouring what they represent and I am fighting for true equality.
Currently, there is a president in office who believes that those who take a knee or refuse to say the pledge should be kicked out of the country, or imprisoned, or in some way punished. Like the Congress and Eisenhower who changed the pledge to discriminate against those they disagreed with, like the âPatriot Actâ that stripped away the liberties and freedoms of Americans, and like the illegal wars declared by presidents without the approval of Congress, America is moving towards an authoritative regime. America in many ways is already an oligarchy with the amount of power so few people at the top possess. While blindly, citizens pledge their âallegianceâ to this regime. It is complacency that leads to corruption and to the overthrowal of freedom. Americans must resist. Americans must protest. Americans must fight for the sacred rights established by the founding fathers.
I am not a patriot. I do not support music worshiping America. In many ways patriotism has become nationalism. It has become a blind support of the country, regardless of the countryâs actions. Benito Mussolini rose to power this way in Fascist Italy. Adolf Hitler rose to power this way in Nazi Germany. Joseph Stalin rose to power this way in Soviet Russia. Mao Zedong rose this way in Communist China. The list continues. If America allows itself and its people to be complacent, it will fall as a democracy. It will fall as a country. And madness, and poverty, and depravity will prevail. I refuse to stand and pledge allegiance to a country that is not what it claims to be. The NFL and the current President of the United States of America did not act appropriately, and did not act constitutionally, and they most definitely did not act morally. Those who remain outraged by these football players do not realise the history behind these football playersâ movement. And that is the most dangerous ignorance a person can possess.