Original salute to the Pledge of Allegiance
I just learned that this salute originally accompanied the recitation of my country’s Pledge of Allegiance(!)
The Pledge of Allegiance is an oath of loyalty to the U.S.A., written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy. According to Bellamy’s indications, the pledge also included a salute that consisted of an extended arm with the palm facing upward.
Over time — probably because hard-working Americans were tired from working so damn hard — the palm position changed to face downward.
Around 1942, when the U.S. was in deep shit fighting Nazi Germany, President Franklin D. Roosevelt officially changed the salute to a simple gesture of covering the heart with one hand.
Like most American children, I grew up having to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in school, and it always made me feel icky. I’ve always disliked being forced to participate in the monotonous recitation, in unison, of supposedly important or sacred ideas, whether they be prayers or the Pledge of Allegiance. The mechanical, perfunctory manner of reciting these mantras always seemed to strip them of their importance while making me feel like a sheep, another brick in the wall.
Another thing about the Pledge that always made me uncomfortable was the mention of God. As a kid reasonably educated about my country, I was aware of the separation of Church and State, and so the explicit mention of God in the Pledge definitely seemed uncool. Why the hell were we talking about God in public school? (The reference to God didn’t exist in the original Pledge of Allegiance; it was added in the 1950s, after a Presbyterian minister convinced President Dwight D. Eisenhower to change the Pledge to mention God.)
I can’t remember ever studying in school what the Pledge means. I never understood what it defends exactly, except adherence to a nation as represented by the American flag. These things always aroused my suspicions and made me distrustful of the conformist, authoritarian educational system under which I was brought up.
The Pledge of Allegiance, as it exists today, goes like this:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
The blog The Legal Satyricon criticizes the use of the word “flag” over “Constitution”, arguing, “We should not fetishize a piece of cloth.”
To better reflect the values of America, The Legal Satyricon suggests changing the Pledge of Allegiance to go like this:
I pledge allegiance to the Republic of the United States of America, and to the Constitution on which it stands.
One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
The anthem´s as bad if you ask me. I got a bolloçking (telling off in Britspeak) in Florida off a bloke ços of my çousin. We were in Sea World, and, at 9, to proçlaim the park open, they played the Star Spangled Banner while everyone stood up straight, hand on heart, and sang along. My çousin, meanwhile, was exçitedly was running about, whiçh this guy had a go at me for. My Spanish, then 5 year old çousin, who wouldn´t know the Star Spangled Banner if it pissed on her, was çommiting the çrime of running about. In a theme park. Çallous bitçh.
Land of the free, the song says. Just don´t move while we´re singing it.
Having studied most my life in Spain the part of “one nation under God, indivisible” makes me think of the saying from Franco’s time of Spain being “una grande y libre”. I believe that in Mexico they also have some Pledge of Allegiance. A Mexican friends told me they had to sing the national anthem to the flag each Monday morning, as it’s so long they sang a different verse each week. Anthems, oaths, pledges of alliance… They all seem to be a load of drivel people just recite in certain social occasions
http://www.national-anthems.net/
They used to play “God Save the Queen” in British cinemas after the film played and the audience had to stand in attention to it. My dad and his siblings fled the place before it started. They’re all republicans, they don’t believe in monarchies.
I was educated with ‘La Norma’ but you did catechism after school if you wanted. Once the angry teacher threw us all to out of class because I drew a starving Jesus kneeling and showing his ass,(…my imagination) I wanted to draw something like Gandhi but I went wrong. I did’nt do it intentionally. She was good people and forgave me the following week. We made great snacks at her home with chocolate and cakes while we watched teley, her son put on video La Vida de Brian. memories
Hello, Rachel:
First of all I would like to apologize if I’m not able to explain what I really want to say. You know, English is not one of my skills but I would like to try.
Anyway, I wanted to be the devil’s advocate in this topic. I haven’t gone to the States and the only knowledge about your country is from general media and places like this, but I certainly have the impression that you love as much as we do the… (let me think how to explain it) common places or ‘cliches’. Ok, I admit it, the picture you choose to ilustrate this post is really shocking but I don’t think your arguments to refuse or reject ‘The Plegde of Allegiance’ were completely correct.
I mean, is the real problem of this society the explicit mention of God -in a completely generic way, let me emphasize- and the real focus of all the american society problems? I don’t think so and I can understand you didn’t want to say this is the only problem. Is not the real problem people that don’t really knows any damm thing about anyplace outside his country? Is not the real problem an absolute standarization of this society perfectly visualized in school (I mean populars, nerds, …)
But let me explain something: in a country like yours, a real democracy (at least if you compare -like someone did before- with Franco’s Regime) a phrase like this belongs only to a ceremony, a simple and unofensive ceremony. It’s funny how people reacts most of the times against it. Reacently I got some thoughts about it and I reach the conclusion that people can’t stand acts in wich they have total control or, better said, the think they have total control of the situation. And I say that’s funny because ceremony are in most of cases necesary. All right, some might say that hundreds of years of progresion allows to do whatever we want showing everybody how free we are. But just a few minutes later, in a marriage ceremony for example, that guy will be so happy in a ceremony when somebody dressed of preacher or Elvis will tell him ‘do this, accept that, etc’. And thats the point, the evolution, hundreds of years trying to be modern or free and we reject a convencional wedding ceremony. But we can’t simply hide, we are social animals and those social acts define us. That guy will disguise the ceremony and will be so proud of him. And that’s fine, if it makes feel him better, but is the same social act. A cool social act.
That’s just an example but there’s hundreds, everyone related with special moments of a human being as life, death, love, respect,… and I don’t think it’s wrong. The real wrong of this is not to show people the meaning of a ceremony, the roots of this, because most of them have it and are the conclusion of hundreds of years.
Anyway, I like your blog and I really have fun with it.
Bye.