Is it disrespectful to sit during the Pledge?

[San Montalbano]

This is complete contrarian nonsense. "A nation is a stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, identity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture." You're pledging allgeiance to the community in which you were born and/or raised. If you're a civic nationalist, you're pledging allegiance to particular values and ideals - such as liberty as descripted by the Constitution. Do they not teach people civics?

Then my community was not the United States, my community was a very limited group of people within my surrounding area. I do not for instance share the same culture as someone who was raised in say Texas. My language is a different variant of English from those raised in say...Georgia or Arizona. My history is different from many other Americans because my family arrived not long before WW2. My ideals are different to many Americans because there is not really one ideal in America.

If your allegiance is to your small community, why follow any laws that would violet your community standards?

[Salandriagado]

I think its disrespectful if you sit out of laziness. If you have a problem with the pledge or what it says, by all means, express it. I stand for it because I stand for much of the things it says (I admit my definition of "under God" is pretty broad), as goals if nothing else. But I understand not everyone is like me.

Also, the pledge is not about soldiers, its about the flag, and the republic for which it stands.

I find it ironic when people who talk openly about civil war, or killing/imprisoning/hating other Americans, or hating immigrants, or for that matter abusing political correctness, are simultaneously enthralled with the pledge, which talks about "indivisible", "liberty and justice for all", and even for many "under God". These days, outside of being forced to say it, the pledge is much more left wing than right wing, from what I can see, which makes some of the left/right discussions about it odd.

A final thought. If you are an American, and don't like the Pledge for some reason, what would it take you to stand? What would make a difference? And is there anything you could do to make that difference?

Good luck, all.

I can't think of anything that would make me swear allegiance to an organisation as widely variable and problematic as a national government.

[Plzen]

"A nation is a stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, history, ethnicity, identity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture."

It's precisely because I've taken years of political theory that I feel the need to poke holes in definitions. Many political concepts have no real basis in physical reality, and while there's nothing inherently wrong with that, some deeply odd conclusions can be justified if one confuses imagined abstractions for concrete entities.

Given that definition of a nation, I'd ask you to then justify, what makes this community meaningful? Why should I consider people to be special just because they share my language, come from the same region, or have the same ancestors? I'd also ask you, what is "culture?" I've met and spoken to people around the world who share the same sort of weekly routine I live through, who have the same attitudes I have, who share my profession, my hobbies, preferences, and interests. So why do I share a "culture" with other people in my supposed "nationality" that I have almost no understanding of, rather than these people that I share so much with?

[Salandriagado]

Yes, but that's the point. It pisses people off when I don't say the magic sky cloth song, and thus calls attention to me and whatever I'm promoting.

The pledge is more than “ the sky cloth song” it is a symbol of what the nation represents and a oath to protect those things.

This coming from someone who explicitly hates and wants to destroy those things.

[Neutraligon]

Just because indoctrination fails, does not mean it is not indoctrination. Original intent is not particularly important. As to it being the functional purpose now, I disagree that there is not indoctrination in the intent of usage of the pledge.

What makes you assert its indoctrination if that was not its intended purpose, cannot be demonstrated to be its present functional purpose, and results in no measureable indoctrination with quite a few cases of open dissent being shown?

Namely that it is trying to instill unthinking loyalty in children to a something they cannot understand.

[San Montalbano]

I agree it has failed miserably after culutral marxists infiltrated the education system

>cultural marxism

Oh, we're dealing with that sort of argument now.

A valid arguement given todays political climate and the rise of such things as social justice and “woke” culture.

[The Blaatschapen]

I think in this discussion there is a question that needs to be answered that haven't yet been adequately discussed: what is a nation?

When we say Americans should pledge loyalty to the United States, what exactly is the United States to which that loyalty is being pledged? "The United States" is an imaginary abstraction. What concrete entity are we referring to?

The nation is the state, they are one and the same as the state is created from the nation.

Sometimes(most of the times?) with a lot of "internal" bloodshed.

And sometimes the nation and the state are wholly different. Belgium comes to mind. The Flemish and the Walloons are not one nation. But they are the same (federal) state. So the statement is not always true. Given the whole American south thing, I have my doubts about America being one nation.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Having a vested interest in the nation and community and having knowledge stored in your noodle about them doesn’t necessitate swearing allegiance to said nation and community, swearing allegiance only really matters in military or civil services where those things genuinely hinge on the loyalty of their service members.

No, it matters for all citizens. A bunch of citizens with no concern for anyone beyond themselves does not make a healthy nation.

Not having everybody indulge in mindless nationalism doesn’t somehow turn them all into narcissistic sociopaths or whatever.

[The of Korea]

It can be, but it beggars belief that the United States is engaging in widespread indoctrination by reciting the pledge in schools. If it is, it has quite obviously failed.

I agree it has failed miserably after culutral marxists infiltrated the education system

> Cultural Marxists

you do know that is an antisemitic dog whistle right? or do you just not care about that?

[Neutraligon]

Then my community was not the United States, my community was a very limited group of people within my surrounding area. I do not for instance share the same culture as someone who was raised in say Texas. My language is a different variant of English from those raised in say...Georgia or Arizona. My history is different from many other Americans because my family arrived not long before WW2. My ideals are different to many Americans because there is not really one ideal in America.

If your allegiance is to your small community, why follow any laws that would violet your community standards?

I never said my allegiance was to my small community, just that using your definition, the US is not a nation, and the community I was born an raised in is not the same thing as the United States.

[Fahran]

But when social pressures make it impossible to speak out against things that are objectively wrong with society, like police brutality against racial minorities, without feeling intimidated or threatened, that definitely needs to change.

A few journalists have made their livelihoods by speaking out against police brutality against racial minorities. I don't buy the argument that social pressure has kept us silent on the whole. It's the same here. Plenty of people feel at liberty to dispute whether the nation deserves our respect or discuss the pledge of allegiance in sober terms. Nobody is afraid that they're going to suffer for it overly much most of the time.

[San Montalbano]

The nation is the state, they are one and the same as the state is created from the nation.

Sometimes(most of the times?) with a lot of "internal" bloodshed.

And sometimes the nation and the state are wholly different. Belgium comes to mind. The Flemish and the Walloons are not one nation. But they are the same (federal) state. So the statement is not always true. Given the whole American south thing, I have my doubts about America being one.

Yet the south still submits itself to the federal government, it clearly dosn’t have too much of an issue being ruled.

[Necroghastia]

>cultural marxism

Oh, we're dealing with that sort of argument now.

A valid arguement given todays political climate and the rise of such things as social justice and “woke” culture.

Oh great, "social justice is a bad!!!1!"
And as I said before, that wasn't a valid argument when the Nazis made it up and it isn't a valid argument now.

[Neutraligon]

The nation is the state, they are one and the same as the state is created from the nation.

Sometimes(most of the times?) with a lot of "internal" bloodshed.

And sometimes the nation and the state are wholly different. Belgium comes to mind. The Flemish and the Walloons are not one nation. But they are the same (federal) state. So the statement is not always true. Given the whole American south thing, I have my doubts about America being one nation.

I believe the United States of America can be described as both many nations within a state and many states within a nation

[Fahran]

No, it matters for all citizens. A bunch of citizens with no concern for anyone beyond themselves does not make a healthy nation.

Not having everybody indulge in mindless nationalism doesn’t somehow turn them all into narcissistic sociopaths or whatever.

You're indulging in mindful anti-nationalism. Why not allow others bountiful opportunities to engage in mindful nationalism? And, on the contrary, removing emphasis on community and nation has led to a proliferation in narcissism and sociopathy. Those who complain about the pledge of allegiance are just as like to complain about the wealthy shirking their responsibilities.

[Biscany]

I think in this discussion there is a question that needs to be answered that haven't yet been adequately discussed: what is a nation?

When we say Americans should pledge loyalty to the United States, what exactly is the United States to which that loyalty is being pledged? "The United States" is an imaginary abstraction. What concrete entity are we referring to?

I'm assuming we're pledging allegiance to the constitutional ideals of America; freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. etc., rather than pledging allegiance to the physical entity that is the US. That's the idea I've gotten whenever I took the pledge, I'm not pledging myself to literally the nation of the United States, I'm pledging myself to its ideals. Hence "to the Republic, for which it stands."

[Neutraligon]

Is it disrespectful? To those who've served in the military, yes it's sort of disrespectful, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed or illegal in any way.

How is it disrespectful?

[True Refuge]

Considering how often you use this term, I think we deserve a clear definition now.

Firstly, you deserve nothing

Second it is the actvity or movement to initaite marx-esque change in a nation, such things include class struggle, oppression politics, political correctness etc etc

Okay, you don’t deserve any respect for slinging around buzzwords.

That definition is too broad considering the garbage understanding of Marxism that most Americans have. Using that you can characterise any left-wing activism as scary Cultural Marxism (never mind that there is more to left-wing thought than just Marx...). Perhaps that’s intentional.

Most es jay double Yus don’t even have a coherent politician position beyond their cultural beliefs.

[San Montalbano]

A valid arguement given todays political climate and the rise of such things as social justice and “woke” culture.

Oh great, "social justice is a bad!!!1!"
And as I said before, that wasn't a valid argument when the Nazis made it up and it isn't a valid argument now.

That depends on your definition of social justice and the implications of it.

The Nazis were also fools, placing race above their nation, no race is above the state.

[Fahran]

Namely that it is trying to instill unthinking loyalty in children to a something they cannot understand.

It's not really unthinking loyalty if you teach them civics and history, and then do not mandate the pledge.

[Neutraligon]

I think in this discussion there is a question that needs to be answered that haven't yet been adequately discussed: what is a nation?

When we say Americans should pledge loyalty to the United States, what exactly is the United States to which that loyalty is being pledged? "The United States" is an imaginary abstraction. What concrete entity are we referring to?

I'm assuming we're pledging allegiance to the constitutional ideals of America; freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. etc., rather than pledging allegiance to the physical entity that is the US. That's the idea I've gotten whenever I took the pledge, I'm not pledging myself to literally the nation of the United States, I'm pledging myself to its ideals. Hence "to the Republic, for which it stands."

For which it stands is speaking about the flag. basically it is saying I pledge allegiance to the Republic but more convoluted since it sound better I guess.

[The Blaatschapen]

Oh great, "social justice is a bad!!!1!"
And as I said before, that wasn't a valid argument when the Nazis made it up and it isn't a valid argument now.

That depends on your definition of social justice and the implications of it.

The Nazis were also fools, placing race above their nation, no race is above the state.

Except for RuPaul's drag race. tyvm

[Neutraligon]

Namely that it is trying to instill unthinking loyalty in children to a something they cannot understand.

It's not really unthinking loyalty if you teach them civics and history, and then do not mandate the pledge.

Civics is not taught till much later, namely 9th grade. History is taught...a very white washed version of history.

[Plzen]

Second it is the actvity or movement to initaite marx-esque change in a nation, such things include class struggle, oppression politics, political correctness etc etc

So you defined an imagined abstraction in terms of more imagined abstractions. But fair enough. Let's look at those things one by one.

"Class struggle" - so do you not believe that people in similar economic situations ought to collectively advocate for their common interests?
"Oppression politics" - is political oppression not an issue that concern you a great deal? should we not seek to reduce societal oppression?
"Political correctness" - this is a meaningless term. "correct" according to what standard? the original definition was the CPSU party line, but those guys don't exist any more

[The Strangers Club]

Yes, and you'll probably end up like this poor kid: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... qC82zZzQMc