The Smear-Spangled Banner
by
Gail Jarvis
In
a recent
LewRockwell.com article, Steven Yates catalogs and critiques
the detrimental effects of political correctness on our society.
Reading his article, as well as the many others addressing this
subject, you come to the unavoidable conclusion that this noxious
PC juggernaut must be stopped. If not, it will ruin our society.
In fact, it has nearly succeeded. But how can it be stopped? It
has the support of government, academia, the entertainment field,
and, more importantly, the mainstream media.
And
it’s not just the New York Times that makes its reporting
conform to politically correct dogma. Newspaper editors all around
the country seem to apply a PC litmus test when deciding what opinions
may be expressed, not only by their columnists but also by those
who write letters to the editor. And, like an epidemic of Mass Hysteria,
political correctness has saturated the minds of journalists themselves.
Or possibly their word processors contain an editing device that
will only allow certain opinions to be expressed; opinions that
are becoming so bizarre, I often have trouble deciding if a column
is a serious editorial or a parody of political correctness.
An
example is a headline I recently spotted in the Coshocton Tribune
that read: "U.S. anthem should face up to slavery." The journalist,
Russell Benjamin, stated: "I believe the time has come to change
the national anthem of the United States of America. The main reason
I feel this way is because the anthem we have now does not face
up to one of the worst injustices committed by this country. That
injustice is slavery."
So
Mr. Benjamin wants The Star Spangled Banner to be scrapped. He says:
"For as long as I can remember, people have said that America is
the 'greatest country in the world.' To me, truly great countries
are those which can face up to their wrongdoing. A good start for
us is to have a new national anthem that condemns slavery and other
injustices, such as racism, sexism, and the horrors done to Native
Americans. The anthem should also commit Americans to making sure
that everyone is treated equally."
You
can understand why I would think editorials like this one are simply
satirizing political correctness, but that is not the case. Russell
Benjamin is serious. My initial reaction to his demand that The
Star Spangled Banner be replaced with a more politically correct
national anthem was probably the same as yours: this will never
happen! But over the past few decades so many foolish and inconceivable
things have happened that we can no longer assume that common sense
will prevail.
Years
ago, no one would have believed that a government agency would be
created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that could
override the employment decisions of a privately owned company.
And who could have imagined that NASCAR would someday hire a diversity
consultant in response to Rev. Jesse Jackson’s complaints about
the paucity of minority racecar drivers? When reparations for slavery
was first mentioned, the idea was hastily dismissed as being unimaginable.
But accommodating city councils in several large cities have passed
ordinances requiring corporations to disclose their "slavery profits."
Now some states are also considering similar ordinances. With laws
like these on the books, it is only a matter of time before reparations
become a fait accompli.
I
honestly believe that most Americans disapprove of the actions cited
above. The same is true for Mr. Benjamin’s proposal. But, although
it sounds completely farcical to us, we must realize that our opinions
will be ignored. The issue will be decided by others regardless
of what we think. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if elitist do-gooders
made a politically correct national anthem their next cause celebre.
The
arguments against The Star Spangled Banner will be the same ones
used in other cultural cleansing endeavors; i.e., how it might be
perceived and what it may symbolize. For example: It is a song about
a flag that waved above a country where for years slavery was condoned.
It celebrates a flag that flew on the ships the New England slave
traders used to bring Africans to America. It is outdated and stale,
a vestige from the 19th Century. Maintaining The Star Spangled Banner
is like trying to turn back the clock whereas we should be moving
into the 21st Century.
I
can envision a national contest encouraging aspiring songwriters
to submit their suggestions for the new national anthem. At first
blush, a new national anthem that meets Mr. Benjamin’s objectives
seems like a tall order, especially composing the words because
they will be more constraining than the music. Politically correct
jargon is not very lyrical because it has been cleverly crafted
to sound scientific in order to bolster complaints of victim groups.
But words in a song, like poetry, must be lyrical and should rhyme.
There
are four words that the new anthem must contain: slavery, bigotry,
equality, and diversity. And, luckily for songwriters, they rhyme!
Also racism rhymes with sexism. So if one line in the national anthem
ends with racism, the next could end with sexism. Mr. Benjamin does
not mention immigrants or gays, lesbians, and transgendered people.
This was probably an oversight on his part. But songwriters could
appease these groups in the second verse because homophobia rhymes
with xenophobia.
Finally,
there is Mr. Benjamin’s insistence that the national anthem must
include a commitment that Americans make sure that everyone is treated
equally. This is easily accomplished. One line of the new national
anthem would be sung: "Our intolerance and prejudice we readily
admit" followed by "And, to make sure everyone is treated equally,
we firmly commit."
We
shouldn’t expect our new national anthem to be suitable for celebrations
because political correctness requires that it focus on our wrongdoing
rather than our virtues. In fact, if political correctness continues
to gain momentum, celebrations will soon belong to the dear dead
past.
July
2, 2003
Gail
Jarvis [send
him mail], a CPA living in
Beaufort, SC, is an advocate of the voluntary union of states established
by the founders.
Copyright
© 2003 LewRockwell.com
Gail
Jarvis Archives
|