Forced "Patriotism"?

Now that we're back up north enjoying ... well, summer & whatever, I had planned to post on the trip experiences. (Good). Instead it's time for another rant.

In case you can't tell from the title, this regards the ruling by the NFL on taking a knee. I put "patriotism" in quotes because the taking a knee protest was never about that. It was about the deaths of young (mostly) black men by police under circumstances where, were the victim white, that extreme of a reaction would never be tolerated by the police or the public.

It wasn't about police as a whole, either, nor is this post an effort to criticize them. It's about the few who keep getting away without repercussions for killing over minor actions when skin color alone seems to be the ruling factor determining their response level.

If I were capable, I'd take a knee too. I know however, even with my new improved knees, that would be a monumental effort requiring assistance, particularly the getting up part. Just being on my knees is a uniquely unpleasant experience anyway.

The knee-jerk reaction to this form of protest is disturbing. Shades of Fascism, anybody? When that anthem plays at the start of an athletic event, it never means vendors stop selling, hot dogs aren't being eaten by spectators so they couldn't sing along anyway, toilets stop flushing, side conversations stop happening. Shots of the crowds show very few with their hands over their hearts facing the flag, and many fewer even attempting to sing along or at least pretend they have a clue what the words are. That was noted even at the US gold medal ceremonies at the recent Olympics in the winners on the podium. And how many at home watching even consider standing for the Anthem?

For the NFL, the protest ruling is about one thing and one only: $$$$$. Their revenues are going down and they find the player protests a convenient place to place the blame. The never consider that all TV viewership is decreasing, that fewer kids are growing up playing football because their parents don't want to risk their getting TBIs, that electronic media, games and toys are taking up more of everybody's time and attention. They conveniently forget that players weren't even on the field during the anthem until about 2009 and their so-called patriotism wasn't called into question back then: after all, there was a GAME to prepare for.

If the Anthem is so sacred, why is it such an ugly, impossible-to-sing song anyway? All it does is glorify war and test the voice range of its singers. If it were so sacred, why does the Supreme Court continue to support our right to protest, up to and including the burning of a flag?  Surely the taking of a knee during a song in an effort to call attention to something that needs to be changed in order to make this the great nation that it claims to be is a much less offensive act.

Why do so-called patriotic people defame the flag by turning it into clothing, plaster it on their cars to get filthy and tattered, hang it outside in all weather even after nothing remains but a faded shredded rag? This is honoring it? Really? Ever read the guide on how to properly treat, and not treat, the flag? Do you even know that burning the flag is the only proper way to retire it?

On a similar note, let's put in two cents on the Pledge of Allegiance. It would make so much more sense, to me anyway, to omit the part about the piece of cloth and go straight to the pledging of allegiance to the Republic that is this country. I find less and less appeal to the idea of honoring a bit of cloth and more and more to upholding the Constitution and the principles upon which it is based. Of course, that includes the upgrades we have added about things like making women and non-white Americans full and equal citizens. We have demonstrated we are capable of growing up a bit as a nation and as a people.

Well, at least until recently. But that's another post or twenty.

I have other issues with the Pledge as well. It's that "under God" part. I'm so old that I grew up before it was added. I manage to pause at that part and come back in at the "indivisible" bit, hoping it's still true. Whose God? Why is it necessary? Your faith, any of you, is not what rules whether I honor my country. I honor the part where you can each chose your own, but what in that mandates that this whole country is "under God"? It's about a human as can be, and sometimes as inhuman as well. That's kinda why we need a constitution, eh?

I have been conflicted enough about these shows of public patriotism, why they are necessary, and what they mean or whether they have any actual meaning at all, that I took another, silent and unannounced, stand concerning the Pledge a number of years ago. For 8 years I was the Mayor of the town I'm summering in. One of my duties was to set the agenda. There was a flag on a pole in the corner. Fine. But the agenda never included the Pledge as part of the meeting. Yes, we were a unit of government, under, ultimately, the Federal Government. Each of us, at the start of each term, swore an oath that included upholding the Constitution. I took that seriously. I didn't need a monthly or bi-monthly pledge to a piece of cloth. I trusted my fellows on the council to take their oaths seriously as well. Even after being asked by a fellow council member to put it on the agenda, I managed to never get around to it.

You will never convince me that any ritual outward professing of patriotism means a single thing about how the person saying or singing or otherwise declaring their patriotism actually feels, thinks, or acts. I do see precious little meaning for too many people in what they have just said or sung, or concern about whether they have even bothered to participate, to equate any of it with actual patriotism.

I find it outrageous that the NFL puts on the face of equating taking a knee during the Anthem with lack of patriotism and making it a fireable offense. That is one of the most patriotic acts a player can perform, and in no way affects their job performance on the field. It'll be interesting to see how the player's union responds, but even if the monopoly ownership "wins", in no way will it be a moral victory.