A Search for National Anthem Consistency

[Nepperhan]

The fact is, the actual national anthem has, for some reason, been deemed wrong, and needed to be replaced.

Where do you get that? Both songs are to be played – you are jumping to an inaccurate conclusion.

I have heard both songs played at functions.

The “raised fist” symbol used in so much protest is a murderous one used by so many communist movements, and even militant black panther black supremacy groups.

That militant Black Panther movement was never about black supremacy and the raised fist has been used for generations.

Let’s get back to the thread subject.

 

[Nepperhan]

That being said, I don’t know who wrote Lift Every Voice and Sing, but I like the lyrics of it and I can see where the revolutionaries might have a problem with it.

James Weldon Johnson, an interesting person.

James Weldon Johnson - Poems, Facts & Harlem Renaissance

 

[Nepperhan]

he phrase “Black national” is a contradiction in terms.

If it’s a national anthem, it’s for the whole nation not just blacks.

If it’s a black anthem, it is leaving most of the nation out.

Maybe a national anthem for black people? Consider when it was written. Thy lyrics are uplifting and mention God a lot more than The Star Spangled Banner. It is also much less warlike.

How can they play bagpipes at police and fire fighter memorials if that’s not everyone’s musical tradition?

 

[Mister_Friscus]

“A national anthem for black people” is by definition advocating for segregation. We thankfully rid ourselves of laws that segregate, and I thought we wanted to eliminate it in practice too. In the past five years especially, it appears segregation is all the rage on the left. The ideology of viewing oneself as belonging to a race, and not as an individual, is poisoning the desires of MLK and the Constitution. Race first ideology should be opposed on moral grounds and Christian values IMO. To treat people of races differently and view them just as the color of their skin is regressive.

 

[Nepperhan]

“A national anthem for black people” is by definition advocating for segregation.

Stuff and nonsense! Is Polish Heritage month advocating for a Polish calendar?

Its time for celebrating diversity a little.

 

[Cirdan_XII]

The phrase “Black national” is a contradiction in terms.

If it’s a national anthem, it’s for the whole nation not just blacks.

If it’s a black anthem, it is leaving most of the nation out.

And if white people start singing it at games, the next thing that’s going to happen is that somebody will shout, you can’t do that, cultural appropriation.

It would be much easier if politics was just kept of sports.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

If there is a black national anthem, then we have a black nation, as distinguished from the white nation? Is this how people are brought together, or further separated? Do we have two separate nations now?

It is just a nice way to show some support or something.

 

[Mister_Friscus]

If Polish Heritage Month were involved in a movement that is attacking America as an evil, racist institution, and condemning anyone who disagrees… it’d be segregating. But Polish Heritage month isn’t lecturing and shaming people. It holds its own month (which I, and probably nearly all, can’t even name), and doesn’t accuse of white supremacy if you don’t glorify it. BLM and the black national anthem do this.

Huge differences here. You’re comparing apples and chainsaws.

 

[Mister_Friscus]

So why can’t all Americans unite to show support of the flag? If the goal is to truly unite, then there’s no better way to do it.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

So why can’t all Americans unite to show support of the flag?

It’s not to support the flag just people of color.

 

[Nepperhan]

If Polish Heritage Month were involved in a movement that is attacking America as an evil, racist institution … It holds its own month (which I, and probably nearly all, can’t even name), and doesn’t accuse of white supremacy if you don’t glorify it. BLM and the black national anthem do this.

Lift Every Voice and Sing happens to be a very uplifting song and attacks no one. Are you at all familiar with it?

You sidestep the question. Foster some diversity for the good of the nation.

 

[Nepperhan]

It’s not to support the flag just people of color.

You’d have to submit that the flag has never been used as a political symbol AND that people of color have never suffered discrimination and exclusion in US society.

 

[Mister_Friscus]

The song is fine on it’s own, I agree. However, the reason for playing it is clear, and has been declared.

1. America is racist, and was founded on evil principles.
2. The national anthem and flag aren’t good enough, as it is also racist, so we must resist it, kneel before it, and offer up better options.

Do you agree with these?

This movement can choose a nice loving song to play, but the movement isn’t so nice, and they hold western civilization in contempt.

Meanwhile, diversity is fine when it happens. However, diversity for the sake of diversity is intrinsically immoral, as it is based on race quotas and allowing people opportunities based only on the color of their skin.

I have no idea how enforcing diversity automatically helps the nation. If anything, as we’ve seen, it will promote those who aren’t as qualified into positions, based on skin color alone, where they are more likely to fail, fall into debt, and further cement a stereotype.

Think of it this way. If we both had basketball teams, and you were “Team Diversity” and I was “Team Qualified”… I would more than likely have 5 black males. You, if following the “diversity is better” ideology, would have something to the tune of a black woman, an asian male, a transgender latino, a black male, and a middle eastern woman… or something like that. Given the parameters and cultural norms, my team would smoke your team. We would be non-diverse, but better. You would be diverse, but in your quest to be diverse, you’d sacrifice talent and quality to pat yourself on the back. That’s not a good thing.

Diversity is not a virtue. It might make you feel fluffy, but I wouldn’t fall for that if I were you.

 

[Odilon]

Well sometimes one needs to stand up, not remain silent, and be counted. I am an over-the-road truck driver and sometimes I hang large signs with a political statement that I have made on the back of my trailer for everyone to see. You should see some of the reactions I get.

 

[Odilon]

They are at the in-your-face level at this point. Isn’t the fact that three quarters of all NFL players are of the black race enough “diversity”?

 

[Odilon]

We all recognize the terrible things that were done to black people over the years, but the United States of 2020 is not the United States of the 1950’s, 1960’s or even the 1970’s. Black people are in all professions and there are laws that seek to prevent discrimination in all facets of society, so what is the end game now? Oh that’s right, all this injustice stuff needs to be ginned up for the big pay day, yep, I’m talking about the “R” word - REPARATIONS!

 

[Odilon]

Hah! Not quite. It said: “Say no on Marxist cancel culture”. No one tried to cut me off or shoot at me, so I figured it wasn’t too controversial.

 

[Odilon]

If there is a Polish heritage month (October!), the we have a Polish calendar? Celebrate diversity a little.

I am all for a little diversity as I like to eat kielbasa once in a while, but I don’t want the Polish National Anthem played before football games

 

[phil19034]

neophyte:

Offensive? Who told you that nonsense?

You know, I actually figured it out for myself.

“No refuge could save the hireling & slave/
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave:/
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave/”

If you don’t understand that celebrating the lack of refuge for a fleeing slave might not be a tad offensive, then there’s not a lot of ground for conversation.

That’s not what the verse is about. It’s all about the battle during the War of 1812. The verse about hireling & slave is regarding the King’s soldiers. Not about American slaves.

The hirelings were the mercenaries that British hired from other countries to help them in their war. The “slaves” were the British subject themselves because Americans in 1812 were “free from the King” while the British were “slaves to the King.”

Just because a slave owner wrote something doesn’t mean the writing automatically promotes slavery.

National anthem's third verse stirs passions, but the reading is erroneous

 

[pnewton]

Well, I think you should watch the NFL this fall. It will be eye-opening for you.

I think I may pass, though I have been a football fan my whole life.

I do not care for this song, on many levels, not the least is the complexity of lyrics. Who knows this? I mean, it is not as bad as the Star-spangled Banner, musically, but it is close. It makes no sense to have two national anthems, and if they choose to replace the one they play, I want nothing to do with such anti-American sentiment.

I would think a better tradition would be to emulate something akin to the 7th inning stretch before the second half. To me, the natural choice, one all could sing would be “We Shall Overcome.” It is easier to add something at a different time that try some replacement. Also, we could just stop worrying about who kneels and who stands.