The Pledge: USA and Nazi Germany

[~ Gheb ~]

A couple of weeks ago a discussion about the Pledge arose rather randomly in the Decisive Games' Social Thread and ever since then I've kept thinking that it'd make an interesting subject to talk about. I had never heard about that pledge before and thus neither knew that it existed, nor what its purpose was supposed to be. So the people in the thread explain to me that it's the US-American way to promise loyalty and commitment to their country. The first term that crossed my mind when I heard this was "brainwashing", which made the debate heat up quite a bit.
I even went as far as to draw a comparison between having to speak out the pledge in today's USA and to hail Hitler in Nazi-Germany - it was socially acceptable to do so, you are/were required to show unconditioned faith to the leader / the government and the entire basis of its legitimacy is/was authority and force. Again, a conclusion that some might find drastic at first but eventually it turned-out to be an argument unrefuted too.

Here's a link to where the discussion started [please do not post in that topic though, unless it's just random talk!]: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=243825&page=755 - starting from post #30154

An interesting note for those who read through that discussion: Xonar and I are european, Raziek, Evil Eye and Nabe are canadian whereas soup, July, PrivateJoker-Brown, Vinyl, Dark Horse and Sworddancer are US citizens. It should stand out that the people from the USA failed to see the problem the non-americans immediately pointed out. I did - and still do - take this as confirmation that the term "brainwash" is not only appropriate here but that those brainwashing attempts have also has been at least partly successful. As I said in the thread: if it is required for you to repeat a phrase because of appeal to authority - and you're not ought to question it - then it should be clear that there's a problem, especially when the majority of people who make the pledge are children that aren't fully aware of the pledge itself and the implications of having to be able to speak it out.

With all that said there is no conclusion to draw other than that the US government is trying to brainwash its people in order to gain their unconditioned faith through which they can manipulate them into being and doing whatever the government wants them to be or do.

Discuss.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/G/Godwins-Law.html

I pointed out that kids have no idea what those words mean. If they're going to brainwash people, the kids would have to think that. When they have no idea what "pledge of allegiance" means, they aren't pledging their allegiance. It's like mafia; you've got to look at the intent.

As for your hitler argument:

You are aware that the American government is nowhere near as "evil," in a sense, as Nazi Germany? Saying the pledge in America does not mean that you are supporting white supremacy (See what ryker said before you respond with how evil America is.)

 

[~ Gheb ~]

When they have no idea what "pledge of allegiance" means, they aren't pledging their allegiance.

But they have been conditioned into thinking that it's acceptable to make the pledge without questioning its content nor taking note of the fact that its entire basis of legitimacy is authority and force. This is working succefully. Therefore the argument of brainwashing still applies all the same. It's not about what they say. It's the fact that they are required to say it without having the ability to question it yet. Why do you think children are the prime targets of being indoctrinated with the pledge? Certainly not because of their outstanding abilities in critical thinking.

You are aware that the American government is nowhere near as "evil," in a sense, as Nazi Germany?

No, I'm not aware of that and even if it were true it'd be beside the point - I'm just drawing the comparison between the USA and Nazi Germany to illustrate what disastrous result this kind of unconditioned faith in authority can lead to. It is still brainwashing in either case, even if america supposedly isn't as "evil" as the Nazi germany leadership was.

 

[GwJ]

I think what Dark Horse said is important. The fact that the kids don't actually understand what exactly they're saying and what their "pledge" implies is indicative of the fact that these kids aren't being brainwashed like they were in Nazi Germany.

To brainwash somebody, they must be able to comprehend the information being fed into them.

I stopped saying the pledge around junior year in high school because I was a rebellious little buttmunch that didn't want to say "one nation under god", but even at that time, that was the ONLY part of the pledge I even actively recognized. The rest of it was verbal muscle memory.

 

[Claire Diviner]

You need to remember that in Nazi Germany, I'll hazard a guess that refusing to pledge allegiance can result in death as a penalty, while in America, refusing to say the pledge will result in nothing. I've been saying the pledge for years in school until around high school when I simply didn't care to say it. Didn't hold my hand over my heart or anything. The big difference is that Nazi Germany made it an obligation to pledge, while the U.S.'s freedom of speech removed said obligation.

 

[Muhti]

You need to remember that in Nazi Germany, I'll hazard a guess that refusing to pledge allegiance can result in death as a penalty, while in America, refusing to say the pledge will result in nothing. I've been saying the pledge for years in school until around high school when I simply didn't care to say it. Didn't hold my hand over my heart or anything. The big difference is that Nazi Germany made it an obligation to pledge, while the U.S.'s freedom of speech removed said obligation.

I don't know how your school was, but I hear different. My school encouraged and strictly tells kids to recite the Pledge. (Now this is in NJ)

In Northern Michigan (That's where I believe it happened) a student was scolded for not reciting the Pledge. Her parents finally came to confront and said she doesn't have to say it since she is Atheist.

In my old school in NY, a student was also yelled at since he didn't say the Pledge.

Onto Darkhorses statement on Brainwashing, I have to agree. I never knew what the Pledge actually meant until mid-6th grade. If I go ask a little child what it actually meant, they wouldn't know less than half of it.

Here's an article on kids reciting the Pledge:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...kids_understand_the_pledge_of_allegiance.html

Scroll mainly down to part of the Pledge being stated at 9th Grade Level.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

Also gheb, I'm pretty sure the reason why every American is disagreeing with you is not because we're being "brainwashed to think it's good," it's that we feel like you and the other people who are against it (Who all seem to not be from America) think matters far more than it actually does. Can you name an example of it working aside from "hurr durr you all are disagreeing with me, therefore it is working."

Also, if we're supposed to pledge our allegiance to 'Murica, why are we allowed to move to different countries?

 

[~ Gheb ~]

It seems people are still missing the point I am trying to make so I'll have to repeat myself.

The problem with the pledge is *not* that you pledge loyalty to your country. In fact, it doesn't really matter what the pledge itself is about at all - it is the fact that you are required to show unconditioned faith into an authority and are not supposed to question it that makes me draw the comparison the Nazi Germany. You could change the content of the pledge and the issue would remain the same. If you had to pledge loyalty to Santa Claus' beard it would still be a problem because you're still required to speak out something merely because you've been told to and you're not ought to question it.

Claire, you raise a decent point but you also have to keep in mind that I'm not saying that having to make a pledge in the USA is equal to hailing Hitler in Nazi germany. It's not on the same level, it's just a very similar direction with similar implications.

 

[Claire Diviner]

Well, the thing is, one isn't exactly required to site the pledge of allegiance (don't know or care if "pledge of allegiance" is supposed to be capitalized). Yes, kids are told to say it in schools, but they're not given some moral obligation; they're just told to do it, and in the schools I come from, not doing so results in no penalty of any kind. In fact, I distinctly remember other kids parodying the pledge as it goes (myself included in many instances), simply because kids are rambunctious, and want to do things destructive or disruptive with as little penalty as possible (unless they know they can get away with the big things), and botching the pledge is definitely on the list of things to do, and no one (at least in Massachusetts - Springfield public schools, to be specific) cares. Heck, even some teachers tell students to just not say anything if they don't want to site the pledge, if that's anything to go by. I can understand if it was during some important political or military event, but for the most part, saying the pledge is not something citizens are obligated to do more so than asked.

If this isn't a counterpoint to what you're trying to tell me, Gheb, then please explain your point in a little finer detail, so that I can understand the point and try to discuss it better.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

I think what Dark Horse said is important. The fact that the kids don't actually understand what exactly they're saying and what their "pledge" implies is indicative of the fact that these kids aren't being brainwashed like they were in Nazi Germany.

So? They say it not knowing the implications. That's a bad thing. After that, it's common ground, and there's peer pressure and the like to keep it going while the kids know full well what they're saying. It's creepy.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

@Claire

Yours is merely an example of children not being required to do it without facing consequences. This could just be a regional thing, especially since New England is typically considered more liberal than other parts of the country. Muhti has also named examples that proved that there can be consequences and I don't think that should be ignored. A problem is a problem, just because in certain parts of a country people deal with it differently doesn't mean it's not a problem in other places.

Having to speak out the pledge in public schools is socially acceptable, correct? Apart of some exceptions you are not supposed to question the fact that you have to make the pledge [regardless of its content], correct? Apart from some exceptions you might have to except consequences for not making the plegde, correct? You could just as well say that you have do action X because authority figure Y has told you so. Do you really not see the problem there?

 

[Claire Diviner]

I'm beginning to understand the point now. Doesn't your point apply to just about every other country though? At least ones considered a superpower? I've never been outside the U.S. or even thought about studying whether people - namely children - should recite things like this. Then again, national anthems are different than pledges, and goodness knows if I could ever think of another country with a pledge. Was Nazi Germany's issue a pledge too, or some national anthem? Maybe they go hand-in-hand, perhaps?

 

[GwJ]

So? They say it not knowing the implications. That's a bad thing. After that, it's common ground, and there's peer pressure and the like to keep it going while the kids know full well what they're saying. It's creepy.

I was only responding to the claim that we're being brainwashed, not whether or not the pledge is a "good" thing to say.

 

[Muhti]

Was Nazi Germany's issue a pledge too, or some national anthem? Maybe they go hand-in-hand, perhaps?

Nazi Germany had the Hitler Oath:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_oath#section_1

This meant soldiers and officers pledged personal loyalty to Hitler.

Speaking of Hitler ad Nazi Germany, has anybody heard the inspiring speech Charlie Chaplin made at the end of The Dictator?

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

I was only responding to the claim that we're being brainwashed, not whether or not the pledge is a "good" thing to say.

Even brainwashing is introduced at a young age. It's part of the process.

 

[GwJ]

Which is why I said you can't really call it brainwashing since they can't even comprehend what they're saying.

 

[Claire Diviner]

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary (app), the definition to "brainwashing" is as follows:

1 : a forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up basic political, social, or religious beliefs and attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas
2 : persuasion by propaganda or salesmanship

brain·wash transitive verb
brainwash noun
brain·wash·er noun

So basically, the pledge of allegiance doesn't brainwash anyone. If anything, the pledge goes as follows:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation (under God) indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

You can break down the pledge as much as you wish, but nowhere in the pledge does it imply pledging allegiance to anything other than the country and perhaps its ideals. Isn't that what other countries want their citizens to do; simply say one is proud and loyal to their own homeland? Perhaps one must rethink the term used for such a thing, because "brainwashing" doesn't seem to quite fit the bill, does it?

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

You could just as well say that you have do action X because authority figure Y has told you so. Do you really not see the problem there?

You are aware this is how laws in general work, right?

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

Which is why I said you can't really call it brainwashing since they can't even comprehend what they're saying.

You're ********. Why did I even bother

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

You say that brainwashing is introduced at a young age
He says that he showed how it isn't brainwashing
You say he's ********

what

Also, though there have been cases of teachers punishing kids for not saying it, I've never heard anything about peers being an influence.

 

[Battlecow]

No, I'm not aware of that

phew almost posted in this thread then I saw this. Narrow escape.

 

[GwJ]

You're ********. Why did I even bother

Did I miss something?

 

[Claire Diviner]

You're ********. Why did I even bother

Rather than blatantly insulting someone, why don't you try coming up with valid counterpoints?

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Because he has none. It's the same pathetic attempts at trolling a discussion that Battlecow also uses. Neither actually comment on something of interest and instead sidetrack the discussion with stupid comments. Get out of here, you two.

I would also like people to focus a bit more on the issue at hand in general. All this nit-picking about the term "brainwashing" is really beside the point I'm making. If you don't like it you can just call it indoctrinating or manipulating or whichever word you prefer. The point is that people are being taught to show unconditioned and unqestioned obedience to authority in a children's age. Not only is that already a problem in itself but it becomes even more problematic due to it being socially acceptable, if not demanded. This issue has yet to be tackled in this thread.

You are aware this is how laws in general work, right?

Why yes I am. Don't tell me you think that laws are not supposed to be questioned.

 

[Dre89]

Thing is Gheb, I agree with you, but a lot of people won't see a problem with this because they don't see a problem with unquestionable authorities in general. There's obvious things like religion, but even the schooling system is an unquestionable authority.

 

[#HBC | ZoZo]

No it is not. He just completely misses the point. Do you a "brainwash" introduced at a later age will be as effective? No. Making that stuff commonground at a young age allows you to use peer pressure to keep it in.

 

[Dre89]

....Was that a troll post?(Genuine question).

 

[GwJ]

The problem still arises in the fact that the kids don't know what they're saying. It doesn't matter if they've been saying it all their life; if they don't actually know what they're saying, there's no possibility of being brainwashed or indoctrinated. At least in religion, they dumb down the language to stuff like "God is love" or "God is always watching and loves you" so that any age that can understand English can understand a certain level of theology.

 

[Claire Diviner]

No it is not. He just completely misses the point.

So then elaborate us on what the point is, if you please?

Do you think a pledge introduced at a later age will be as effective? No.

You do know there are older individuals who take pledges whenever they decide to join groups and cults. These include groups, like the Neo Nazis and the KKK, as well as street gangs. Thing with these pledges, is that they brainwash the people into forcing them to be something (almost always a destructive human being), while the pledge of allegiance simply tells one to pledge their allegiance to the flag with no consequence.

In gangs, breaking that allegiance almost always results in death, while the American pledge does no such thing. If one leaves the country to live somewhere else and becomes a citizen of said somewhere else, they're technically breaking their pledge to the U.S., but no one will care, including the U.S. itself.

There is no brainwashing tactic involved when it comes to the American pledge of allegiance no matter how you go about looking at it, or rationalizing it. If that was the case, then you may as well say that sending children to school is brainwashing, because they're taught that they need to go to school, no? Or maybe teaching to perform chores is brainwashing them into becoming clean freaks, since really, parents clearly force their children to do chores.

The point is that no one is obligated to say the pledge, damn the conservative schools that try to discipline those who don't. I mean, what can they do for discipline, other than get butthurt and try calling a parent who may not even care themselves?

Again, I can understand what people are trying to say about this pledge of allegiance, but to label "brainwashing" is just not the right term, though goodness if I know what the correct term should be, because there really is no propaganda involved either.

Making that stuff commonground at a young age allows you to use peer pressure to keep it in.

What peer pressure do you speak of? Last I checked, the only peers are other schoolmates, and from my personal experience, they can care less if one cites the pledge or not.

 

[GwJ]

Here's the thing with the pledge. In theory, it looks like a brainwashing thing meant to indoctrinate our children with the idea that the government deserve your complete loyalty. The PROBLEM is that the idea of that isn't enforced in any way throughout their years. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that nowadays, children are being brought up to criticize or even dislike our government. Look at the south for example. They're ALWAYS complaining about our government. Our pledge is the only thing people do in regards to praising our government on a regular basis.

If we taught in our schools that our government was flawless, our congressional leaders deserved our loyalty and respect, THEN the pledge would have more of an impact as a brainwashing scheme.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Stop responding to Xonar. Responding to trolls will only derail the thread and that is clearly his intention. Just pretend he isn't there or else you'll only give him what he wants. He has no intentions of making legitimate contributions to this subject so the less you respond to him the sooner he'll realize that his trolling attempts are futile.

The problem still arises in the fact that the kids don't know what they're saying. It doesn't matter if they've been saying it all their life; if they don't actually know what they're saying, there's no possibility of being brainwashed or indoctrinated.

Please stop posting before you read everything carefully. You clearly haven't because you still argue that children not being able to understand the pledge renders my points invalid. I've mentioned thrice that this is beside the point and yet you continue to argue the same way.

The point is that people are being taught to show unconditioned and unqestioned obedience to authority in a children's age.

 

[GwJ]

The point is that people are being taught to show unconditioned and unqestioned obedience to authority in a children's age.

But does our youth reflect this fact?

 

[Jam Stunna]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

 

[Claire Diviner]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

If I understand correctly, this means the debate was doomed from the start, no?

 

[Jam Stunna]

Pretty much

 

[GwJ]

The comparison to Nazi Germany is actually relevant in this case though, isn't it? So why bother posting that?

 

[Jam Stunna]

No, it's not, and the point of Godwin's Law is that there's almost never a legitimate comparison between x and Nazi Germany, and that in the rare examples where there is a legitimate comparison, it's watered down by the overuse of the comparison everywhere else.

Now, if you actually wanted to compare the Pledge to Nazis legitimately, you could use this, but that would still be a stretch since they changed it because it resembled the Nazis.

 

[GwJ]

Obviously a few people in here think there's a legitimate comparison. If you disagree, can you explain why?

 

[Claire Diviner]

Now, if you actually wanted to compare the Pledge to Nazis legitimately, you could use this, but that would still be a stretch since they changed it because it resembled the Nazis.

In the "Controversies" section of the link, it makes mention several times how the court has ruled that citing the pledge of allegiance is not required by any student, and forcing them to do so goes against the 1st Amendment of the United States. In some states, citing the pledge in schools is more a recommendation than it is a requirement, so to the ones on the "brainwashing" bandwagon, I'd really like to know what it is that makes one think children are being brainwashed for their country, given that it's clearly an option to cite the pledge.

 

[Jam Stunna]

Obviously a few people in here think there's a legitimate comparison. If you disagree, can you explain why?

How does the Pledge of Allegiance come close to level of indoctrination in Nazi Germany? When's the last time anyone in this thread actually said the Pledge of Allegiance?