Patriotism or Fascism or
Something in Between?
A law was recently upheld in
Nebraska establishing a mandatory period during the school day which
will be devoted to reciting the United States of America's
pledge-of-allegiance. Albeit mandatory, students are provided the
option to abstain from actively participating. However, they must
observe the mandatory pledge period in silence. Is this obligatory
recital a benign form of collective patriotism or is it
representative of state sanctioned paramilitary propaganda on line
with the Young Pioneers of the former USSR?
When we consider the
litany of American patriotic symbolism there are some unavoidable
icons in that arsenal. Symbols like the affable Uncle Sam with his
red white an blue tuxedo with tails and a stovepipe hat are
emblematic of America throughout the world. The Statue of Liberty
amid Liberty Island in the New York Harbor stands as an anchor to the
American ideology of hope and fortune. As witnessed at the Olympic
Games recently in London, the American Flag and American's
corresponding national anthem help to define the elusive concept of
Americanism. Those moments are when the ethnically and culturally
diverse nooks of America are able to collectively participate in a
benign form of patriotism. Americans engage in a national catharsis
as the flag is hoisted into the rafters and the orchestra begins the
first notes of the Star Spangled Banner.
Regardless of the symbolism
employed or by which country, these are all forms of propaganda which
engender national identity and a sense of otherness. The American pledge-of-allegiance is just another tool to propagate a unique and
divergent national identity from others. However, the
pledge-of-allegiance is rife with constitutional infringements and
misguided ethical protocols.
The pledge-of-allegiance
has not been with us since the inception of the flag which was
purportedly sewn together by Betsy Ross. The pledge was originally
drafted by the Baptist minister Francis Bellamy in 1892 to
commemorate the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus'
landfall in the Americas. As part of the National Public-School
Celebration of Columbus Day the pledge was intended for children to
recite and was published in the then popular magazine “The Youths
Companion”. The pledge was finally officially adopted by Congress
in 1942 as the world was at war and America's entrance into the fray
looked imminent. However, the US Supreme Court ruled in 1943 that
public schools could not make reciting the pledge-of-allegiance
compulsory to their students.
The pledge-of-allegiance
as it exists today has been an evolutionary process which has seen it
undergo ideologically distinctive changes. The most significant
alteration came in 1954 with the adoption of “under God” in the
congressionally mandated verses. In 1951 the words “under God”
were added by The Knights of Columbus which is coincidentally the
worlds largest Catholic fraternal organization. A strange and
befitting irony that in 1954 “God” would be attached to American
patriotism as the country was fully embroiled in the Red Scare
communist witch hunt know today more pejoratively as McCarthyism. The
case could be made that McCarthyism ran roughshod over the 1st
Amendment of the US Constitution in much the same way the
pledge-of-allegiance mandate is today.
Many affirm that the
mandate of school recitals of pledge-of-allegiance is tantamount to
negation and circumvention of the the right to free speech. The
constitution holds basic tenets of dissent in its allowance and
protection of free speech to every citizen which would also logically
include standing and silent observation. Notwithstanding the possible
ridicule and demonization of school children who invoke their right
to dissent by not participating in saying the pledge-of-allegiance,
there is a more insidious moral infringement on children which 1stAmendment supporters adduce.
Those who are most likely to recite the pledge most
often (e.g. every day in public schools) are children. The advocates
of 1st Amendment rights claim that these K-12 students
shouldn't be subjected to honoring the obligations put forth in the
pledge. Furthermore, they cannot realistically comprehend what the
pledge entails so giving their consent to something they don't
understand is on par with brainwashing.
There must be a higher ethical code which doesn't
manipulate children into subscribing to a myopic view of America
patriotism while simultaneously aggrandizing a whole spectrum of
American patriotism. Hopefully the US Supreme Court will be the next
battleground between those in favor of the pledge-of-allegiance as it
stands and advocates of upholding the integrity of 1st
Amendment.