Did saying the Pledge of Allegiance in school mean anything to you?

[Anonymous]

It didn't mean anything to me growing up but always thought it odd that we were pledging to a flag. When I traveled to the former Soviet Union, I was struck by the indoctrination parallels. I've refused to say it. I'm not pledging to a flag or to God. I have no problem swearing to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.

[Anonymous]

Nope. I also hate the playing of the national anthem before sporting events.

[Anonymous]

As a teen it put the spotlight on the hypocrisy of adults. I had years of on and off conflict with teachers who tried to force me to say it when I (quietly and respectfully) declined to participate. My family participated in Friends Meeting (many Quakers refuse to participate in oaths due to religious principles) and I knew that forcing me to participate was a violation of my first amendment rights.

[Anonymous]

As a young African American girl, it gave me a sense of pride in a country that I later found out I should not be proud of.

[Anonymous]

I hated it. I hated everything we were made to do on a rote basis. Reminded me of the Hitler Youth.

[Anonymous]

No, it was just something we had to do.

[Anonymous]

As an expat who has lived in DMV for decades, I have noticed that Americans are much less emotional about it now than when we first arrived. Even when playing the national anthem at sports events, fewer people get choked up and place their hands over their Hearts. I do feel like there is more ambivalence around the pledge of allegiance and national anthem in our area.

On the other hand, bizarre forms of hyper Christian Right wing nationalism are on the rise around the country - perhaps that is what many are having pause about.

The famous Samuel Johnson quote “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel” (1775) was not about patriotism in general (as widely believed) but about what the British conservative intellectual perceived to be the false use of patriotism by William Pitt, 1 st earl of Chatham and his followers. Johnson opposed self professed patriots but valued true patriotism that demonstrated a generous and genuine love of country.

Although times have obviously changed a great deal since 1775, the distinction remains valid. I would place people who fight for the integrity of US democratic values and elections or who serve in the military without brandishing US flags on every available surface if their cars/ yards/swim towels/ mailboxes etc. as true patriots.

[Anonymous]

Nope. I actually grew up in a military family and I grew up hating how politicians wrapped themselves in the flag and used servicemembers as a shield from criticism while treating them like crap.

My Dad was a long-term medical officer and was constantly fighting with those above on budgets and care for his patients. I've learned real patriotism is serving your community. My Dad spending time volunteering in free clinics, that's real service. I try to do the same doing pro Bono work.

I've been extremely wary of performance patriotism since a kid of that reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope. I actually grew up in a military family and I grew up hating how politicians wrapped themselves in the flag and used servicemembers as a shield from criticism while treating them like crap.

My Dad was a long-term medical officer and was constantly fighting with those above on budgets and care for his patients. I've learned real patriotism is serving your community. My Dad spending time volunteering in free clinics, that's real service. I try to do the same doing pro Bono work.

I've been extremely wary of performance patriotism since a kid of that reason.

Excellent distinction - service to community versus performance patriotism …

[Anonymous]

No. Went to a conservative private school and had to say the pledge for 12 long years. I'm proud to be an American but the pledge meant nothing to me.

If anything, I had a lot of time to ponder why we were pledging allegiance to a "flag".

[Anonymous]

No, but daily recitations aren't necessarily intended to feel meaningful each and every time you say them. They are meant to create a habit, maybe discipline, and often take on meaning at other moments of reflection. Their effectiveness can be subconscious.

All that is to say, it was as meaningless to me in grade school as lining up silently to go to the lunch room. Later when I thought about, I realized how creepy it is to require schoolchildren to mindlessly pledge their patriotism on a daily basis.

[Anonymous]

Yes, very meaningful.

It belongs in every school, without exception.

[Anonymous]

Nah, it was just part of the routine like the repetitious stuff I used to say and sing at church. I don't go to church anymore, for the record.

[Anonymous]

Didn't mean a thing, except a chance for us to change the words and stifle laughs and think we were cool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, it was just part of the daily routine, and kids like routine so I’m thinking that was the main benefit.

I think this is a benefit but schools don't seem to agree nowadays.

Why do you say that? It’s been a daily routine in every school I’ve taught in over the last 20 years, across 3 states and 5 school districts. Saying it isn’t mandatory (obv!) but it is recited over the intercom or the news station every morning for those who wish to say it. All others are expected to be silent.