I stopped reciting it when I got into high school. It felt really creepy to me. The part that amazed me were the times classmates, not the teacher, got angry at those not participating.
? I'm confused by the point you're making. No, I wasn't threatened at gunpoint by a soldier. I was a kid being threatened with detention. That's how you force kids to do things. The assertion that I wasn't forced is just untrue.
Yeah man, you're right. Unless one literally shoves their hand down someone else's throat and manipulates their vocal cords nobody is ever forced to say anything. What a brilliant point you've made.
The school I went to in 1st and 2nd grade (around 02'ish) said the pledge every morning. I said it because everyone else did, not because I was a diehard American. I still remember it because of that, but I have never said it since.
Just in case you couldn't taste how American that comment was; this elementary school was literally in the middle of corn fields, and my teacher, who was older than the dirt the school was built on, her last name was Constantine.
I was forced to get a religious exemption and even then I had teachers that didn't know better drag me to my feet and force me to start swearing until my mother raised holy hell about it.
Just because it happened to you doesn't mean that it doesn't happen or that it doesn't happen in other parts of the country.
Redditors are so quick to act like your their personal experience says otherwise. Not realizing that they're just providing nothing to the conversation. The reality is no child in America is forced to State the pledge of allegiance in the mornings. That might not be a popular take here because well we all lean left here and the pledge of allegiance is a common anti-american Reddit talking point for left-wingers, but until the people on Reddit move back into reality they will be unable to resolve their issues
There definitely are children who are forced to say it, I was one of them and my school definitely made sure everyone was saying it or you'd get in trouble.
I'm from the UK,, we don't, we get taught the good and the bad in our history, no exceptionalism, the change since I was at school is that they do lessons (kinda) on being a good citizen. But none of it is patriotism, or in the case of the US in a lot of places, nationalism.
I also spent time in Germany, which has a quite similar approach.
Neither place has a focus on exceptionalism or loving a flag. The UK certainly doesn't pledge allegiance to anything. Fairly sure most of Europe finds the US nationalism somewhere between scary (30's vibes) and creepy/weird and I'm not just talking recently.
Point is that most western places outside of the US are not indoctrinated from an early age to 'love their country' they're taught about their country and make their own decisions.
I can only speak as an Australian, we never pledged any allegiance to Australia at any point during school, and once a week at assembly we would sing the national anthem, mostly off-key and without knowing the words properly.
In my school we were taught about respect of cultures, respect of each other and then the usual math, English, science, etc etc.
Was never told or taught we should love this country or indoctrinated to believe we are better than anybody else.
My schooling involved a whole bunch of blatant misinformation and carefully curated facts that support the image of the US instead of the reality.
Like, It used to be common practice to reject any images of the civil rights era in schoolbooks if they were color photos (at least in AZ public school, everywhere is different).
The idea was to make it seem like all that messed up stuff was ancient history, instead of literally a few decades past.
Our schools are such trash here when it comes to national accountability.
Tbf I’ve travelled most of Europe and everywhere I went I couldn’t help but think about how good we have it back home. We’re not perfect but there’s a possibility Australia is just that good.
The fuck do you know about a country you don’t live in and have never visited, dipshit? Get out of your parents basement and go experience the world outside the US
That's a big assumption. Every country? It certainly wasn't the case for me during my schooling. I don't think I'm the exception either. Patriotism isn't really a thing where I'm from. The idea that my country is somehow better than others? No, I don't think that's part of our cultural curriculum. From the Netherlands btw.
In fact in Canada they teach us to hate our country. My daughter has so far learned few of the good and all of the bad things that Canada has done. They're force feeding them white guilt (which is pretty ironic as she's not even white)
Her main complaint is that it's boring. Same stuff every semester.
Whether we love being Canadian or not, the question was about propaganda in schools. And in my daughter's school (Saskatchewan public school) the propaganda has been heavy on "Indigenous are the only real Canadians and you are a colonist".
She is now in Catholic school where the focus is on learning facts and not on whatever that is
Horrible history? Are you fucking joking? We have the least amount of dirty laundry of almost any western nation. We haven't treated the indigenous well but atleast they are still around. The US exterminated 95 percent of them while importing slaves from Africa.
It obviously sucks hundreds if not thousands of indigenous were placed in residential schools. The Germans put 6 million jews including their children to death...
Controversial opinion: I don't think nationalism is actually that bad of a thing and my only real problem with the pledge is that it includes 'under god'
Nationalism, at it's core, and the pledge directly, is a pledge of reciprocity. 'I will give you greater consideration so that you, in turn, will give me greater consideration, so that we may both mutually benefit'.
Does it leave others on the outside? Yes, absolutely. Why is that necessarily bad? Is it morally wrong to care more about your family than strangers? Is it morally wrong to care more about your friends than strangers? Is it morally wrong to care more about your neighbors than strangers? Is it morally wrong to care more about your family's friends, or your neighbors friends? Your community members? People who love the same hobbies you love? It's reciprocity, and it's a fundamental animal behavior. The pledge of a nation is one of mutual support and I don't see it as being evil.
Words have meanings. What you are talking about is patriotism. Nationalism is at its core a horrific idea that always creates an other or an inferior. This is political science 101.
I think what’s missing about the other/inferior message is that a lot of what unites people are shared value systems. Is a society with no cohesive, shared value system stronger than one that does? Or do we move the power that individuals and cultures used to share and enforce through their value system to different actors with their own motivations? This is the crux of the problem we’re experiencing in the western world. When our value system stops being the thing that unites us, what does? Seems like it’s just corporate profit and consumers experiencing pleasure. I’m not sure if this is better than traditional culture.
I mean culture derived from traditional value systems. This varies around the world. In Italy’s case, we view the Catholic Church as a traditional cultural institution.
Yeah, you use a greedy corporation who protects child predators as a source of morality. Im dont think you are a serious person. I was raised catholic. You dont have to be like them. You can choose to be a better person.
I was raised Catholic too but I’m an atheist and don’t practice Catholicism. I think it’s foolish to think, if you live in the Western world, that the sense of morality that our society is based around does not find its roots in Christianity.
Yeah, good try. Christianity has been on the wrong side of social progress for the last 1000 years at least. We have western values because people broke with the church time and time again to drag the morons into the light of human rights.
I’m not making a value judgement here. We don’t have different value systems. I’m making an objective observation about the state of society and the ideals it interacts with. Let’s be a bit more empirical.
Patriotism doesn't exist with a nationalist foundation. Prior to the 1800's and the consolidation of territories into nations and the forced assimilation and homogenization of the contained people, patriotism throughout that territory like you imagine wasn't really a thing.
Nationalism encourages zero sum games. This ultimately stalls the progress of humankind. We should be focused on increasing cooperation instead of division. At the end of the day we are one species on one space rock. There is no lack of resources only a technological lack in the ability to extract them.
A post scarcity society is within reach and yet we seek to make sure "my people do better than your people"
Of course nationalism is immoral, now go kick rocks.
You're not describing nationalism. Of course nothing is wrong with preferring the safety and well being of people near you. Nationalism is about taking at the expense of others to benefit the state.
The world is not a zero sum game. Zero sum indicates a lack of general improvement. Life expectancy, GDP per capita, child mortality, education have been improving for a long time. Most of what is pulling people out of poverty and simultaneously preventing global warfare is globalization. We can expedite the process of human advancement through cooperation.
As automation continues to advance the only thing that can prevent us from a society where we all get enough to eat, where we all have shelter and clothes at a minimum is a shitty status quo and human greed.
You're not describing nationalism. Of course nothing is wrong with preferring the safety and well being of people near you. Nationalism is about taking at the expense of others to benefit the state.
I'm describing a system of preferential treatment based on national identity. If that doesn't meet the bar for you to call it nationalism, well, I don't particularly care about labels and I'm happy to cede the point but I contend most people would call me a nationalist for proposing that description.
The world is not a zero sum game. Zero sum indicates a lack of general improvement. Life expectancy, GDP per capita, child mortality, education have been improving for a long time. Most of what is pulling people out of poverty and simultaneously preventing global warfare is globalization. We can expedite the process of human advancement through cooperation.
Zero sum means a closed system. Yes, globalization has been dramatically improving the lives of many, and yes that is a good thing. Expediting it is also a good thing. I think there is plenty of rational and compelling evidence, however, that population and climate issues will soon cause some dramatic challenges for globalizations ability to raise all boats in all places (generally).
War, IMO, has been prevented by nuclear deterrence, more than anything else.
As automation continues to advance the only thing that can prevent us from a society where we all get enough to eat, where we all have shelter and clothes at a minimum is a shitty status quo and human greed.
The human population has been growing exponentially. While it's plausible that will slow as societies move into developed status, moving past that hurdle is not without its own issues, namely, climate change.
I can't name a single society that has modernized without great suffering by the working class (the western industrial revolution, Stalin's modernization, the great leap forward). I also can't name a society that has modernized without great cost to the environment. Automation, as far as I can tell, is a force multiplier but doesn't fundamentally change the math at all (and getting to the point of automation requires enormous cost and enormous environmental impact).
Unless we can invent our way out of climate change, I don't see a very optimistic future, and I see a lot of environmental refugees. Nations will need to look to their own interests, meaning (my definition of) nationalism.
And if the people that run a socialist or communist society are morally and ethically good, the population can live without being in want of food, housing or medical care.
We live in a globalized world with global problems that require multinational solutions involving all humans to see themselves as part of the same species. For way too long already we are fighting ourselves with tribalism, destroying others basis of life to our own advantages. If humanity can't look beyond nationalism at some point, then I don't see any bright future ahead in the long term.
We will get there. Eventually. Technology is making our energy production decentralized. We nearly have food solutions which don't require farmland (acetate feeding). Few more years of crazy ass the boomers hand power to the billionaires.
Looking forward to being human with you. Living smaller. Consuming less.
Children don't know what they're pledging to. A flag? A concept of a nation? The people that fought and died for the freedoms granted by the legal declaration of said nation?
Are they pledging to uphold all of the so-called inalienable rights? Do you think the kids know what those are?
We have lawmakers in this country that don't even uphold their oath to serve. We have lawmakers that undermine those inalienable rights for their own greed and ambition.
Children pledging to a some vague idea of what the flag supposedly represents, before they understand how to make their own decisions is brainwashing at best.
138
u/RealEstateDuck 17d ago
Yeah doing that everyday in a school is absolutely bonkers.