Anyone else not a fan of the pledge of allegiance

Pre-College Topics High School Life
41

<p>“When you multiply that by 12 years (excluding kindergarten) that’s 468 minutes, or 7 hours and 48 minutes.”</p>

<p>Come on. Are we really trying to justify eliminating the pledge over 2340 seconds? There are 378432000 seconds in 12 years. That’s 0.000618 percent of our school-going lives. So our government is not perfect. No government ever has been. Our nation has done wrong with both a majority and a minority controlling the reins. Our nation has also done great good with both a majority and a minority controlling the reins. So it says ‘under God’ once. The symbolic meaning is what’s important–that we hope that this country, this nation, will remain as blessed as it has been these past few hundred years–not the use of the G-word.</p>

<p>Can’t we just stand up for 15 seconds, 15 little seconds every school day, and say, yes, I believe in what the flag, what the colors, what the United States of America stand for?</p>

42

<p>

America becoming “evil” at some point in the future is a lot more statistically likely than all the icecaps in the world melting tomorrow.</p>

<p>

The problem is that you can’t really pledge allegiance to freedom.</p>

43

<p>I don’t pledge undying allegiance to any country. That’s great for everyone that would, congrats. I value my life over the success of the country. The United States is a great place (of course with many bad things), but the bad things are generally outweighted by the good. However, if a draft is reinstated I will be the first one out of here to Canada or England. It would be hypocritical for me to say the pledge, so I don’t. This does not make me a communist either RootBeerCaesar (what is this 1950?), just someone who values their own life more than the geographic divison we call a country.</p>

44

<p>I don’t much worry myself about what Chavez thinks, as said King Juan Carlos, “Will you just shut up.”</p>

<p>Sums up my sentiments exactly about that man, he is as much a dictator as those he claims to oppose. His rhetoric is hollow, and his actions not done for the good of the people. He sounds nice, to some, but that’s as far as he goes.</p>

<p>Back on topic, it just seems strange to only pledge to America then. What about Vietnam that saved Cambodia from Pol Pot? Or the Soviet Union that defeated Nazi Germany? Or the western states of Europe that helped kill off the Soviet Union.</p>

<p>Surely each of these countries did good, but is the bad thus irrelevant, are we hypocrites and say that they are not American and thus not given a waive for their histories, or do we accept that they too share a tumultuous history.</p>

<p>Still, while I do think the United States has, until perhaps the Cold War, been one of the more benign countries in the world, as far as liberators go, we mainly relax as other areas collapse. </p>

<p>It just seems too much like hero-worship, when in reality there is no perfect man nor nation.</p>

45

<p>America has a constant insecurity shown by how often Americans have to say they are the best at everything and anything.</p>

46

<p>I don’t pledge allegiance to anyone. If the United States was attacked, I’ll be the first person on board the first plane to Europe. And I will watch people fight it out from Paris. Or London. In safety. I’m saying, I’ll put my interests above those of a “country” any time and every time. I’m with enderkin on that one. I’ll throw those politicians under the bus if it means that I’ll be safe from harm. Meaning, if I hear that the United States is being attacked, I’ll pull out my credit card and cellphone and get myself on the next flight to Europe, not pull out a gun to “fight on the front lines” or whatever it is. They don’t look out for me, so why should I look out for them?</p>

47

<p>^ thats called being a disloyal citizen. After all your country has provided for you - your home, food, enviornment, and a caring and peaceful upbringing, you would just run away and watch it sort itself out without repaying any of that social debt you owe it?</p>

48

<p>Well, one might argue that his home, food, and environment were provided by him and his family both directly and in the form of taxes.</p>

<p>Once a government is merely considered a collaberation on a large scale, such loyalty seems as meaningless as being loyal to an insurance company, which operates on a somewhat similar principle(getting money from many to pay for services when needed.)</p>

<p>One could also consider it organic, as did Aristotle, and thus say that as a cell lives and dies for the organism, so should the individual for the state. All within the state, nothing outside the state.</p>

<p>Or one could say it is both and thus neither, natural but still merely a contract. Not to be worshipped or exploited. Merely to be.</p>

<p>Or a hundred other ways. Save for a very few, however, it is increasingly an unpopular philosophy to declare states divine or, in fact, sacrosanct.</p>

<p>Save in the majority of the world, but I speak only of America.</p>

49

<p>to the OP… Richard Nixon is a man that you admire??? Sorry, but after reading and studying about the watergate scandal, I can’t help but dislike the man (he may have a few admirable qualities, but still? Richard Nixon…). About reciting the pledge of allegiance, I think it’s stupid. I stand up and respect the flag/pledge of allegiance like most everyone else, but I don’t like actually saying it myself (I haven’t all of high school). And it’s not because I don’t respect this country, and everything it stands for, because I absolutely do (and it’s not out of religious reasons also, as I am agnostic). </p>

<p>It’s just silly… it’s kind-of like reading the bible in schools; I don’t think it’s necessary (no insults intended to religious schools/students). People pray on their own time; why can’t they say the pledge of allegiance on their own time? The Nationalism in this country is overwhelming; we have the most pride in our country, probably compared to any other in the entire world. “We are Americans…” that connotation to the rest of the world is mostly negative, and for just reason. Since we are so high and mighty, we can go into countries and wage war with them without even trying to negotiate for peace. We believe that our nationalism “freedom, justice, democracy” is what everyone else should have, and that it is our duty to impose these values upon everyone else; like I said, in my honest opinion, it’s not necessary to shove it in everyone else’s faces, and it certainly isn’t necessary to waste 1 minute of every day reciting something that people don’t rpay attention to the meaning of (although they possibly should, but that’s a different argument entirely).</p>

50

<p>Richard Nixon, I chose to be bipartisan.</p>

<p>However, I still consider him to be very good as far as presidents go. </p>

<p>Did he do some terrible things in Watergate, I suppose. Yet, I find it hard to fault him as much as others. His predecessor wiretapped many thousands of his political opponents. His handling of the situation was terrible, but as I forgive Hamilton his transgression due to his effects, so do I Nixon. (Though the later not as much.) Compared to the misdeeds of Reagan, Harding, Johnson, and even Kennedy. I don’t see why Nixon should be the one to be most criticized. </p>

<p>As they say, no one died when Clinton lied. Nixon too. The same can not be said of Johnson or Reagan.</p>

<p>Indeed, he not only opened up relations with China, exploiting the break between Russia and China and severely hindering later Cold War efforts, he also ended the Vietnam war and in general boosted our foreign abilities.</p>

<p>Domestically he was a bit astray, but in foreign policy he was excellent.</p>

<p>Admittedly this makes me more of a Kissinger fan than Nixon, but really I just don’t like the one sidedness of his detractors. I generally move to create some balance. I just don’t see why Nixon’s illegal acts should be considered worse than those of other presidents. But I suppose I’m a bit of an apologist. I’d just expect the guy who ended the Vietnam war to get credit and the fellow who lied to start it not be glamorized.</p>

<p>I’d love to be entirely idealistic about it, but it never works out that way. No heroes, no villains.</p>

<p>And, in the Northeast at least, I’d disagree completely on American patriotism. I hear a lot more “Sorry that I’m American,” than, “I love this country.”</p>

<p>At best it’s conciliatory: “Well, it has its faults, but it’s ok. But so are lots of others!”</p>

<p>Which isn’t bad. Just not fevershly nationalistic. Certainly not Chinese in style, nor pan-Arabic.(Though the latter is not at all nationalistic.)</p>

51

<p>It’s not being disloyal. I’m simply putting my well-being above that of the state. Without the individual, there is no state. So what’s the problem with putting my own safety above that of the state?</p>

<p>You’re telling me that if the US was invaded, you’d go get a gun and go out and fight on the front lines? Oh please.&lt;/p>

<p>If so, then we’ll just agree to disagree.</p>

52

<p>

</p>

<p>A disloyal citizen? Who cares? The country doesn’t really provide food, home, and a caring and peaceful environment. Seriously, what are you talking about with the last part? How do you know that their upbringing was peaceful and caring? Are you their parent? Were you there with them as they grew up? America is not some big giving thing, it’s a freaking name that people have given to a nonexistant geographical bounday. AMERICA does nothing, it’s the people around you that do things for you.</p>

53

<p>I’m sorry, but MY HOME??? Last time I checked, my mom cuts a check to the landlord every month in exchange for living in my home. Food? Last time I checked, my mom’s AmEx doesn’t get reimbursed by the government when she buys food.</p>

<p>As for providing defense and all that other stuff, there is no “social debt.” My parents pay taxes that provide for those services. There is no debt. We pay taxes that provide for those services. If the government did any less, that would result in a material breach of the social contract for nonperformance on their part.</p>

54

<p>omg communists</p>

55

<p>lolololol</p>

<p>i used to mock the pledge</p>

<p>i pledge allegiance to the flag of the (insert random fabricated name). and to the (insert nominal political system), for which it stands, one (nation/empire/commune), under (insert random deity), certainly divisible, with (insert property 1) and (insert property 2) for (insert subset of people)</p>

<p>one of my classmates said “with liberty and justice for republicans”</p>

56

<p>It’s entertaining to read the comments of such naive little kids. A freshman knowing that he’s going to Harvard Law to study the law of the nation that he doesn’t care about, what could be more hilarious. </p>

<p>Oh well, don’t say the pledge, it’s optional, but don’t whine about it either. There was a time when being an American meant something, I guess some of you have no concept of what that means.</p>

57

<p>Anyways PAC, I <em>finally</em> read your post and I generally agree with you. I remember in 8th grade social studies - how the teacher went over the meanings of the words in the pledge - to discover, unsurprisingly, that the students didn’t really know what “allegiance” means. Nonetheless, many of them are inclined towards blind patriotism for one reason or another (and are quick to denounce those who question the motives of our country’s leaders). People are often quick to associate the sovereignty of the current leaders of the United States with the constitutional documents of the 1700s (documents, which, really, could support a totally different approach to governing the nation than what our current leaders are doing) - but it’s entirely possible that our country could be heading in the wrong direction and for us to vehemently disagree with it in such a way that we’re not willing to support our current leaders.</p>

<p>Some people have said that creativity is most possible with individualism (as opposed to group loyalty). While the defense of our country may be necessary for the preservation of individualism, it just happens now that there are few threats to the individualism that drives the US forward - in such a way that we can pretty much take our privileges for granted. Is it a bad thing? Not necessarily - when there aren’t really any strong threats to our country, and nothing most of us can do about such threats (in fact, Bush said right after 9/11 that the most patriotic things we could do is to stimulate the economy by continuing to be consumers).</p>

<p>I’m not patriotic myself, and I generally consider myself to be a rational egoist. I know that in any case, I’m more qualified to be a rational egoist than to be in any other position (say, to fight and die for my country). At least though, I acknowledge that I live in a country where I have the privilege to be a rational egoist (in a country where rational egoism helps to indirectly stimulate the capitalist economy), and that I only enjoy such privileges because others are willing to fight and die for the US (at least in the past). Of course, my thoughts come independently of those that come from any mention of the pledge. Are people more inclined to think about the country during such periods? Or during holidays like Veteran’s Day or Memorial Day? I don’t know. But if it affects a subset of people, a subset of people who are willing to defend our country’s principles (even if that subset happens to be 1% of the population), then it may be a Good Thing.</p>

<p>Maybe such symbolic representations are just the easiest way to get simple-minded people to defend our country (okay, sorry, I don’t have a better way to euphemize “simple-minded” at the moment - but such symbolic representations have more appeal than abstract political theories).</p>

<p>==
But as for me, I prefer my abstract theorizing to symbolic representations (which have no meaning for me). Of course, i have the advantage that I live in the most liberal county in one of the most liberal states in the union, where no one really cares about whether you recite the pledge or not (or whether you recite a symbolic portion of the pledge or not). I’m mindful of my country, but I don’t have to recite the pledge to be mindful towards it. Others may find it more conducive to mindfulness towards their country.</p>

<p>==</p>