Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Pledge of allegiance was written by a socialist   ( divider line
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

2432 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jun 2002 at 3:52 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

52 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

2002-06-28 03:54:31 PM  
2002-06-28 03:54:44 PM  
Yes, we KNOW!!! **sigh**
2002-06-28 03:55:36 PM  
written by a socialist? Wow, looks like we need to become socialists to truly appreciate it eh?
2002-06-28 03:55:57 PM  
oh god no. nooooooo
2002-06-28 03:56:39 PM  
In the words of Johnny 5.

"Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too."
2002-06-28 03:57:17 PM  
... And the founding fathers were deists. Can I go back to work now?
2002-06-28 03:57:29 PM  
Jerry Seinfeld sez:
What advertising wizard came up with the pledge of allegiance? And what about "In God We Trust" on US Currency? What's the deal with flamewars on
2002-06-28 03:57:31 PM  
Back in my day, we used to say the pledge with our arms stretched out and our left hands over our yellow onions, which were the style at the time. White onions were rationed because of the war. And you could buy a whole cow for a quarter.
2002-06-28 03:58:05 PM  
I heard that, not sure where though. Also remember something about school vouchers and drug testing. Damn, If I can only remember where.
2002-06-28 03:58:58 PM  
Good way to get your article count up. Post something about the Pledge. Personally, I'd rather spray myself in the face with Pledge than go through this train wreck again.
2002-06-28 03:59:16 PM  
the Pledge was part of a campaign by the ostensibly anti-capitalist owners of the magazine Youth's Companion --where the Pledge first appeared -- to sell a whole lot of flags to schools

Anti-capitalists scheme to sell lotsa stuff? This writer is a grade-a moron. Please make it stop.
2002-06-28 03:59:18 PM  
We know!!!!
2002-06-28 04:00:26 PM  
Thats why its marked followup, otherwise I think it would be filed under ironic. Well, since ironic things usually dont go under ironic, maybe the hero tag or something crazy.
2002-06-28 04:02:03 PM  
I don't know what's funnier.

The fact that this topic just won't die, or the people who piss and moan that this topic just won't die.
2002-06-28 04:02:11 PM  
oh my God, some 9 year-old just told me that George Washington was *gasp* British! Wha?!

*picking my nose*
2002-06-28 04:02:16 PM  
This whole uproar over the pledge shows you where the level of debate is at in this country.

2002-06-28 04:03:11 PM  
at least the comments in this thread aren't as repititious as the pledge articles. oh.
2002-06-28 04:03:54 PM  
drag this issue outside, and shoot it.
its dead already.
2002-06-28 04:04:46 PM  
Everyone who has been involved in the last several flame wars should know this.
That being said, we should ban the pledge because it is commie stuff, forget the god stuff, we just can't be commies.
Anybody who now supports the pledge is officially a commie.
2002-06-28 04:08:56 PM  
Damn I guess I should have done this research myself when I was a young officer in the JROTC forcing freshman who didn't want to say the pledge to say and smile.
I guess I am a nazi like my mom always said.
2002-06-28 04:13:25 PM  
OK I submit what I feel are cool or STRANGE links all the time--never get posted--who OK's the same damn thing 3 days in a row? I think everyone can recite the story of the pledge now!
2002-06-28 04:16:22 PM  
oooh i want to play:

My links are always awesome, but i see repeats.

biatch biatch MOAN MOAN.

Waaah- the only website I can find on the internet is - Waaah.
2002-06-28 04:17:35 PM  
43%--I have that same damn problem. I look for other sites but there are none out there.
2002-06-28 04:20:39 PM  
Bluenovaman: hell, I don't even have an address bar. it's fark or nothing. ; )
2002-06-28 04:21:48 PM  
Urbn, the author wrote "ostensibly" anti-capitalist. He was pointing out the irony of the situation and the hypocrisy of the people who first published the Pledge. It is a very sordid history.

As for the rest of you whiners, I'd say this is a valid follow-up, because, folks, this is a commentary on the article posted (twice) yesterday. Not very good or informative commentary, but at least it's safe for work.

(runs back to the boobies thread)
2002-06-28 04:25:58 PM  
Ahhhhhhhh screw it just keep the Boobies coming--and
43% can blow me--lol.
2002-06-28 04:29:45 PM  
You guys are a hoot! Almost every comment on here says "we know!" Isn't saying "we know!" over and over as bad as what you are complaining about?
2002-06-28 04:30:33 PM  
Why is strict interpretation of the Constitution ok for the Seperation clause, but not for the 2nd Amendment?
2002-06-28 04:34:48 PM  
This just like Total Fark. You see the same stuff submitted over and over and over. You guys are just getting a taste.
2002-06-28 04:39:01 PM  
The pledge is fine, but socialism sucks. We're not pledging allegence to the guy who wrote it, so BFD.
2002-06-28 04:42:15 PM  
06-28-02 04:30:33 PM Daz:
"Why is strict interpretation of the Constitution ok for the Seperation clause, but not for the 2nd Amendment?"

Because both Amendments are exceptionally poorly worded. Especially the Second one, which, as far as I can tell, isn't even a sentence.

Personally, I'm in that rare minority that believes in strict interpretation of BOTH of them.

[Libertarian nut]
Besides, I'll need my guns to fight off the facist theocrats when they take over.
[/Libertarian nut]

(No, I don't really believe that last part)
2002-06-28 04:44:13 PM  
I God allegiance to the God
of the United States of America
and to the God for which it stands
One God under God indivisible
with God and God for all.
2002-06-28 04:54:54 PM  
I pledge allegiance
to the 78% tax
of the united states of canada
and to the crappy health care
for which its paid
fractured nation
under darwin
of pissed off people

I feel like p-didy all the sudden
2002-06-28 05:03:34 PM  
Cclark, the point is that the very idea of a pledge is a solialist idea. It is contrary to American inividualism. It's nobodies damn business how I feel about the Flag and the Constitution. It's un-American to have children salute a flag and mouth patriotic gibberish. It is no different than the ceremonies and parades and phony demonstrations put on in Soviet Russia.

One thing that's not being made clear here is that the dudes who wrote the pledge where national socialists. National Socialists, in Germany, are better known as the Nazis. These guys weren't just for free medical care and workers' rights. These guys were for a fascist, nationalist (i.e. racist) dictatorial government. These guys wanted the TRAINS to run ON TIME.
2002-06-28 05:15:28 PM  
Me a commmie. You couldn't be more wrong. I probably make you look like a pinko.
2002-06-28 05:16:15 PM  
If it were news, it wouldn't be FARK.COM
2002-06-28 05:24:03 PM  
Playing for the pink team doesn't make me a pinko. Wait a minute, I don't play for the pink team, never mind, I must be a pinko.
2002-06-28 05:26:33 PM  

Let me reiterate - socialism, communism, and facism all suck ass.

You're confused about what I said. Like most people you too think that the converse of every idea is also true (you see cause-effect relationships where they likely don't exist).
Just because one idea is associated with another and another and adopted by group X does not define an idea or word in every case.

Yes, the NAZI's were national socialists. The idea of national socialism in the German sense was unique to Hitler's Germany. The anti-semite, anti-anyone-who-isn't-blond-hair-blue-eyed was a NAZI add-on to national socialism.

Nationalism does not equal racism, especially in a country made up of people from everywhere else on earth (ie the US).
Facism does not equal NAZIism, although the NAZIs were facists.

Facism (which also sucks) is when a government takes control of entire industries or segments of the economy.
2002-06-28 05:34:15 PM  
Daz - Strict interpretation is fine with me in both cases.
Tgirsch - I don't think that they are poorly worded, so much as the current crop of readers are poorly educated. They are crystal clear to me.
2002-06-28 05:38:04 PM  
I think Daz meant loose contstruction. Strict construction is the conservative view of the Constitution,
loose constuction is the liberal view.
2002-06-28 05:41:53 PM  
CClark, that all depends upon whether the conservatives agree with the particular part of the constitution in question.

For example, they are very strict with the second amemdment. We have the right to bear arms, with very few ifs, ands, or buts.

However, they are much looser with the first than liberals. For instance, it's ok with most conservatives if the government establishes a preference for monotheistic religion on all currency, and in the pledge of allegiance. Many of them want prayer in school, ten commandments in courtrooms, etc.
2002-06-28 05:50:46 PM  

No the 1st amendment question is still strict constuctionism for those on the conservative side.
Liberals "read-in" things that are not their.
The 1st ammendment only specifies that CONGRESS can't pass any law to establish or ban any religion. It does not say anything about any other branch of government, nor does it specify anything about any other extention of the government - schools, city halls, states, etc.

That is ALL is says. So to make anything else of the "establisment clause" you must interpret, extrapolate, "read-in" etc.
THAT is loose contructionism.
2002-06-28 05:51:27 PM  
oops, I meant THERE, not their.
2002-06-28 05:55:15 PM  
All the other branches of government derive their authority from the laws of Congress. Conservatives simply refuse to see what's plainly written in front of their faces, because it goes against their agenda.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

If what you say were true, than any state, county, or municipality could pass laws outlawing churches entirely, disallow any speech they wanted to, completely outlaw the press, arrest anyone who attempted to assemble peaceably or complained.
2002-06-28 07:12:32 PM  
(Break it down!)
I'm all word-up
To the colours
Of my hood
And no others
We-all tight
And it's all right
F--k with one
You got a fight
This is my pack
And they got my back
You dis' any here
And I'll show you my Mac
2002-06-28 08:00:39 PM  
Cclark: I think you misunderstood what I said. You said, The pledge is fine, but socialism sucks. We're not pledging allegence to the guy who wrote it, so BFD. To which I reply, the idea to HAVE a pledge was born in a socialist's mind, and is fascistic by nature.

You also said this: Like most people you too think that the converse of every idea is also true. HUH? Like if I think something is true, then the converse is also true? No, I do not.

However, I was mistaken when I lumped Bellamy's "national" socialism in with the "national socialism" that emerged a few years later. You're right, the American national socialists were not nazis. They were merely fascists.

To sum up my point about the pledge, here is an excerpt from a well-written survey you can find here:

Bellamy, like his cousin, wanted to use government schools to help promote a socialist agenda. He felt that one way of encouraging this agenda would be the teaching of State loyalty. To this end he wrote a pledge which students across the country were asked to take. With a few minor changes this pledge is now called the Pledge of Allegiance.

And that, as they say, is that.
2002-06-28 08:10:58 PM  
If you can not give your solemn promise in front of God and everybody to be a good citizen I don't think we, the people, need you in our country. Get out.
2002-06-28 09:03:09 PM  
If you can't exist without cramming your ignorant superstitions down our throats, get out of OUR free country and join the taliban.
2002-06-28 09:24:32 PM  

They mean "fascists" was a typo.

Oh, and all of you living in your "free country" fantasy world, please tell me either what instrument you prefer for your lobotomies, or the number of your dealer...

Sometimes I imagine a totalitarian (official one that is) least the oppression would be acknowledged and recognized out in the open... none of this sneaking around, engineering wars and injustice, and cloaking something that was once noble and true around just pure selfish, materialistic, small-minded, big-walleted corruption.

Yay flame wars!!!
2002-06-28 11:52:51 PM  
This is only, what, the third or fourth time this same exact story has been posted on Fark?
Displayed 50 of 52 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.