© Charles
D. Hayes
The early European
settlers who first came to America were a diverse lot, but they had one thing
in common. They shared a history in which feudal and monarchical authority had
a way of encroaching upon those who failed to follow the protocols of deference
to the signs and symbols of their time. As I explained in Existential Aspirations, the perils for misinterpretation included
the gallows, the rack, having molten lead and sulfur poured into one’s open
wounds, and in some cases, being drawn, quartered, and pulled apart by horses.
Today, when
Americans observe students of Wahhabism endlessly reciting from the Koran, some
see it as brainwashing. But when American students daily recite the Pledge of
Allegiance, these same people seldom see a connection with behavioral
conditioning, even though both are a means of indoctrination. Symbols can indeed bring people together, but,
as often as not, they are used as wands of authority. The power to fix meaning
represents absolute power.
As I see it, the
Pledge of Allegiance amounts to a pledge of obedience. While obedience is
important to a civilized society, genuflecting in rote submission before
symbols and icons is incompatible with a democracy that depends on knowledgeable
citizens to hold their representatives accountable to high standards.
I would wager that
most of the people who are adamant that students repeat the Pledge religiously
are unfamiliar with its history. Few are aware that the current Pledge was not
only penned by a socialist but also written as a means of protesting growing
inequality in what was known as the robber baron era.
The Pledge was
originally written in 1887, by Colonel George Balch, a Civil War veteran.
Francis Bellamy, a socialist minister rewrote the Pledge in 1892. The original
flag salute during the ritual was to hold one’s right hand upward, palm down,
at an angle that shared similarities with the Nazi “Sieg Heil” salute. This was
changed in 1942 to putting one’s hand over one’s heart to disassociate it with the
symbolism of the Third Reich.
Bellamy lectured
about the socialistic nature of Christianity with speech titles like, Jesus the Socialist and The Socialism of the Bible. His version
of the Pledge was simply ad copy, first published in a children’s magazine, to
sell flags to public schools. In the early years, several versions of the Pledge
were in play, and in 1954, the words “under God” were added to distance America
from Communism.
The creation of
the Pledge of Allegiance and its current role in society are deeply ironic. Bellamy
had argued vociferously that men are not born free but are bound by the
obligations of their ancestors and their culture. The selfish nature of capitalistic
materialism, he said, must be defeated at all costs.
Because of the
growing fear of immigrants, Conservative politicians have found the Pledge
useful as a form of demonstrative ethnocentrism. It provides a way of overpowering
alien loyalties. Those of us who oppose or differ with this view maintain that
creating a flag fetish is antithetical to democracy, that forced recitation is
in fact oppressive, and that opting out is untenable because of social pressure.
Unavoidably, I
have left out a lot of the history of the Pledge, but I’ve included enough to
make some points. First, the people who are most fervent about the need for
reciting the Pledge, for the most part, have no idea about its history or why
and how it came to be.
Moreover, those
who insist that school children recite the Pledge daily often know very little
about the civic obligations necessary to sustain a democracy, even though
reciting the Pledge is something they are familiar with. It’s something they
can do, and they think that by practicing this ritual, they are doing their
part. Thus, they are thoroughly invested in the act as a demonstration and
proof of one’s patriotism at a deeply emotional level. I know this to be true
because I grew up in this culture.
In red states, especially,
learning is viewed to a significant degree as behaving. Symbols and icons are
treated as authoritative reminders that obedience is required and you are
expected to get A’s.
Instead of having
children recite the Pledge daily, I would rather see their time spent learning
what kind of behavior is necessary to sustain a democratic republic. How about
lessons in understanding the psychology of propaganda, the dangers of blind
obedience, and the importance of transparency in government to foster a
complete understanding of how government works, its structure, its history, and
the kind of responsibility citizenship demands?
We are experiencing
an alarming, fear-based rise in authoritarianism in this country. When a president-elect
of the United States starts talking about putting people in prison for flag
burning, look out. Flag waving, flag burning, and Pledge of Allegiance issues
are going to be used as clubs and as distractions for the foreseeable future.
We need to be knowledgeable
enough to deal articulately with dog-whistle bigotry, racism, fear mongering, contemptuous
propaganda, and agenda-driven demagoguery.
Simply put: We
need to be prepared to do what the founding fathers intended. Instead of bowing,
saluting, and genuflecting with obedience at the appearance of symbols and icons,
we need to speak truth to power and hold our elected officials accountable. At
the same time, it would be helpful to remember that the Pledge of Allegiance
was written to check power, not to reinforce it.
My Books and Essays on Amazon
New Fiction: A Mile North of Good and Evil
My Other Blog
No comments:
Post a Comment