(Written
and posted 20 March 2022)
There was a recent kerfuffle on social media here in Racine, Wisconsin, about the behavior of two of the members of the Racine Common Council. Let me state that I am not, in the least, a fan of our Common Council, as they are to the Mayor as the Russian Duma is to Putin – a legislative rubber stamp and part of the local kleptocracy. This is a council that voted unanimously in a secret meeting to repurpose a park for the private sector at the behest of the mayor, and then attack those who have tried to hold them accountable. The Racine city government has never met a shady developer or some lame idea that it hasn’t happily shoveled taxpayers dollars towards, while coming up with every flim-flam excuse to justify its actions.
Interestingly, the good people of Racine are quite happy and content with this level of incompetence, as they keep voting for the people who are all too eager to perpetuate it. You would think that these two council members going to a public meeting and saying they did not know what they were voting on and still voted “yea” would be the type of behavior to cause a kerfuffle, but it wasn’t, because people are okay with grifters and con artists in public office; just look at the current GOP members of any body politic as proof. We have entire states run by a morally bankrupt cartel called the Republican Party that delights in enriching itself at the expense of others, that eagerly promotes cruelty to fellow human beings and still wins elections. On the other end of the political spectrum, we have white “progressive” do-gooders, wealthy elitists who pretend to care about the poor but in reality use every opportunity to help for self-enrichment and self-promotion; it is amazing they have not had to go to a chiropractor from patting themselves on the back so much. Do-gooders are as morally bankrupt as the reactionaries in the GOP, only in a kinder demeanor. One justification I have heard for the do-gooders is intense self-loathing because of the life of privilege that they lead, but I do not buy it; if they really hated their elite position that much, then be like Francis Assisi and walk away from it and be just a commoner, and I have yet to see any of the white “progressives” be like Francis.
So why the kerfuffle? If the good people of Racine don’t have a problem being openly insulted, duped, and conned, then what behavior is so bad to cause social media outrage? Turning the cameras off during the “Pledge of Allegiance” at a virtual meeting. One of the good citizens was so outraged that a strong e-mail was sent, accusing the two of being unpatriotic; it is, after all, the “Pledge of Allegiance”, and we all know that that is totally unacceptable. Lie to me, steal from me, enrich yourself at my expense as a member of a government body; that is perfectly acceptable and very patriotic. Disrespect the pledge? A pox on your house! Traitor!
Of course, when one is accused of being unpatriotic, one’s first instinct is to fight back, because no one wants to be falsely accused. There are good ways and not so good ways to respond. The not-so-good way is to say that the camera is focused on certain body parts, which is quite conceited (no one thinks you are “all that”) and quite disturbing as it ventures into an area that only a warped mind would go into; I have been in many, many virtual meetings and I have never ever worried or even thought about that. The correct response is that, as an American, I have the right to not say the pledge.
Of course, right about now, I will hear people grumbling about how I am a Godless socialist, how I am evil, and I am not a patriot. Fair enough, but before you go there, how much do you really know about the pledge? The pledge as we know it was first created in 1892 by a socialist (very unpatriotic) who happened to be a Christian minister by the name of Francis Bellamy. Let that sink in – a Christian and a socialist created the pledge, the epitome of patriotism. The original pledge, as written, was similar to, but not the same, as the one so zealously defended. “I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” Remember, that at this time, women had few rights, so the “liberty and justice for all” only applied to men, as only men really had the right to participate in the republic.
The flag that the original pledge talked about; what was that flag? For starters, it was not the flag as we know it now. The flag in 1892 had 44 stars, as five states (Utah, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, and Alaska) were still territories and one state (Hawaii) was a sovereign nation that had not yet been annexed by the United States. Let’s think about those missing stars for a moment, and the idea of “liberty and justice for all.” Utah was settled by a group who fled persecution from other people in the United States, crossed the national boundary, and were annexed against their wishes; a bit spartan on the “liberty and justice.” Oklahoma was created as a giant reservation for native peoples who were forcibly removed from their land; to add insult to injury, this reservation was then reduced in size so that white people could settle on it. Not a lot of “liberty and justice” there. Arizona and New Mexico were part of a Spanish speaking country that was invaded by white English speaking men to expand the number of states where it would be legal to own non-white people and exploit them, not to mention the suppression of the Spanish language spoken by the people who lived there before they were forcibly annexed by the United States. Not much on the “liberty and justice for all” there, either. Alaskans were never given a choice, either they stayed a territory or they became a state, despite not being contiguous to the rest of the country, because there was just too many natural resources to be exploited for independence to be an option. Finally, the government of an independent nation, Hawaii, was overthrown to satisfy American business interests, and the native population was exploited on plantations owned by wealthy white Americans; not much “liberty and justice for all” there, either.
Okay, okay, so the number of stars has changed since 1892, but the number of stripes has not. Other than the flag flown during the First War of American Aggression (otherwise known blandly in the United States as the War of 1812), the flag has had 13 stripes, 6 white and 7 red, representing the 13 original states. At the time of the revolution, there were six heavily slave states and seven not-so-much ones. Do you know what the colors represent? White represents purity, and white purity was so important to the slave states, they would later fight a war to preserve it, and then follow that up with the evil of Jim Crow. Think about that – part of our flag represents the white supremacy of slavery. Kind of goes against the “liberty and justice for all”.
In the 1920s under Republican rule, when the country was in the throes of its first Red Scare and the accompanying nativism and xenophobia, the words “my flag” were change to “the flag of the United States of America”. Heaven forbid if any immigrant dare still have any loyalty at all to their homeland; America, despite abandoning the world, was obviously superior. Love it or leave it. No “liberty and justice” for you, scummy immigrants! “Liberty and justice” only applied to whites who spoke English and were born in this country.
In the 1950s, during the second Red Scare, when the xenophobia and nativism of Republican McCarthyism dominated the land, one final change was made that created the pledge that the xenophobic, nativist, white supremacist Republicans are so devoted to. This change was a mere two words, but these two words validated the fundamentalist Christian nationalism that is a plague on our country – “under God”. Since only true Christians refer to a deity by that name, adding those two words changed us from a secular country, where all white English speaking people born here of all beliefs are welcome, to a country that is only for Christians. As it stands now, “liberty and justice for all” only applies to Christian English-speaking whites who were born here; for the rest, not so much.
The real irony is how utterly disrespectful these flag zealots are to the flag. These same people will wear flag clothes, or allow their flag to become a tattered rag, or even make the flag out of rags. If you think not saying an oath or pledging fealty to a piece of cloth that represents the supremacy of one group of people over all others is unpatriotic, then how is wearing that same image as a bathing suit or using it as toilet paper considered to be patriotic? It isn’t. Why would you expect anyone, especially people who have been disrespected and brutalized by the people who worship this symbol, to want to pledge an oath to it? Displaying the flag or pledging allegiance to it does not make you patriotic. Prior to the Civil War, few flags were flown outside of military and government installations, yet people, with the exception of the white supremacists, were loyal and true to the country, and were willing to sacrifice for it. Unless you are willing to personally sacrifice for the country, you are not a patriot, regardless of the size of your flag or how well you recite the pledge.