The Libertarian Pledges
by Max Raskin
by
Max Raskin
DIGG THIS
As a high school
junior, it always entertains me when I see how people get so worked
up over the Pledge of Allegiance. I hate to break it to you, but
honestly, most students don’t care one way or another what they
have to say in the morning. As Lewis Black says, the Pledge is nothing
more than coffee to wake up groggy students; no one really cares
about philosophic ideology at eight in the morning. But let’s say
that I was an extremely contentious young person and did
care about issues like the nature of our federal union first thing
in the morning.
I delved into
the recesses of my memory to recall the single incident I have ever
had with pledging allegiance to a flag.
The story begins,
as most stories of civil disobedience do, when I was in second grade.
Because my school was celebrating multiculturalism, along with the
usual Pledge, the class had to sing "The Star Spangled Banner"
along with "O, Canada." Normally, I would have been fine
with this, but I had been reading Thoreau the night before – after
Goosebumps, of course – and I didn’t feel like praying along
with the rest of the class. So, in an act of political defiance
akin to standing up to a column of tanks or reading a book in front
George Bush, I started laughing about halfway into the singing of
"O, Canada." While it may have been unintentional, with
the laughs simply coming from my mirth with Canada (I still get
a little chuckle from those wonderful people), I was nevertheless
sent down to the principal’s office. Needless to say, I did not
mount a carefully reasoned argument against statist inculcation
or the tacit coercion involved in making us swear allegiance to
any flag, but rather shut my mouth while I was chastised for my
flippancy. Looking back on the event, not only do I not regret insulting
the Canadian National Anthem, but much in America would have to
change before I felt any compunction about not saying the Pledge.
Had I been
the contrarian that I am today, I would have offered some sort of
cogent argument against the Pledge and its message that would have
resembled what follows:
First off,
however unruly I was behaving, there is no way that I was any less
disruptive than stopping class time to say our statist prayers.
However insignificant the time may seem, the very fact that we have
to stop class so that we can pledge allegiance to an inanimate object
is pretty absurd. School is a place for learning, not indoctrinating.
There has been much argument over the words "under God,"
yet no one questions the basic premise of the Pledge. That’s what
I want to do.
Our country
was founded upon the classically liberal position that government
is designed to protect our life, liberty, and property. In other
words, we are not created for our government – our government was
created for us. If anything, it should be the politicians
who begin their days with a pledge to the people who elected them.
The politicians’ only purpose, if they have any, is only to secure
our rights. Although, expecting a politician to secure our liberties
is like anticipating a successful AA meeting at Oktoberfest.
We have to
give our allegiance not to our family, our friends, or even our
communities, but to the abstract concept of the federal government.
I don’t know about most people, but I don’t feel particularly loyal
towards things that don’t really exist. The government is not a
living entity that can feel happiness or sorrow, yet we are expected
to treat it the same way we do our loved ones. Another point to
note is that most people are unable to distinguish a country from
its government; they confuse society with state.
Don’t forget
– they’re the
government and you’re not.
Now for a brief
history lesson. These facts may shock some of you, but the Founding
Fathers would never have consented to pledging allegiance to the
federal government. Thomas Jefferson didn’t even think to put that
he was President of the United States on his tombstone. Far from
being an integral part of our American heritage, Francis Bellamy
wrote the Pledge in 1892, over a hundred years after the American
Revolution. Like Das Kapital and John Edwards’s speeches,
the Pledge of Allegiance was written by a socialist who was simply
furthering his own statist agenda. When Bellamy wrote the Pledge,
he didn’t even think to include the words "under God"
– so I don’t really understand why religious people want this prayer
praising the left’s secular deity, the state, said in public schools.
The final point
I want to note about this horrid piece of poetry is its pernicious
language. Now had the Pledge been written before the War
for Southern Independence (that’s the Civil War for all you Lincoln
worshippers), I could understand the description of our union as
"indivisible," but last time I checked, and I’ll need
some eminent historian like Harry Jaffa to confirm this, but the
1890s, were, in fact, after that devastating war. Indivisible
means that a country cannot be divided. When eleven states secede
from the United States to form their own Confederate States of America
complete with a president, legislature, and constitution, then it’s
safe to say that the country was kind of…well…divided. Here’s what
Bellamy had to say about our indivisible republic: "…what does
that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political
word for the Nation the One Nation which the Civil War [sic]
was fought to prove." These words once again show, not only
that the war was not about freeing the slaves, but also that the
voluntary union of states that had existed before the war, ceased
to exist and was replaced with an expansive, centralized government
– the exact kind of government our Founding Fathers warned against.
It’s simply
impractical to ask students to do this kind of thinking outside
of school. Now I’m not being overly dramatic when I say it is indoctrinating
because, while most students won’t go on to contribute to political
thought, they have a subconscious need for the state, imbued in
them at a young age. There’s really no point asking them to put
in extra work after school to try and dispel such nonsense, but
one can hope. Instead, the burden is on people who can vote and
have a desire to effect political change. But while voting is certainly
an important aspect of change, it cannot be our sole method. We
need to fight the ideas of
the state on our terms, not theirs. Electoral politics
can only take us so far – we need to have a real reawakening in
this country where we rediscover the principles of liberty and freedom
from coercion. I hope that just thinking about why we say
the Pledge is one small step in that direction.
February
28, 2007
Max
Raskin [send him mail]
goes to high school in New Jersey.
Copyright
© 2007 LewRockwell.com
|