The power and meaningfulness of symbols in any culture, country or ethnicity is often palpable, always prevalent. For America, the Liberty Bell, the Pentagon, our various national monuments to presidents, the bald Eagle, Pearl Harbor, all represent something important to each and every American.
And then there is the flag - Old Glory.
As important a symbol of our country and our freedom as any other. Steeped in history, from its creation at the hands of Betsy Ross, to the inspiration it provided Francis Scott Key, to the struggling, brave men who hoisted it on Iwo Jima, to the proud display of our enduring strength depicted in pictures of the flag on heaps of concrete and steel in the aftermath of 9/11, the Stars and Stripes is perhaps our most iconic of national symbols, and most controversial.
The most recent controversy centers around well paid athletes, predominately African American, who chose to kneel during the playing of the national anthem, rather than standing and facing the flag. Many people who do not follow professional sports, and American football in particular, may not be aware that the first athlete to "take a knee" did so during last year's season. But when President Trump chose to enter the fray in the past two weeks, it suddenly became the biggest topic in town, discussed on everything from day time to late night entertainment shows, to talk shows of all types, and even to business shows.
And, as is true of so much of today's discourse, passion on both sides often exceeded compassion for other viewpoints, and thinking before opining.
A quick question here. How many verses are there in the Star Spangled Banner? If you said one, that is because we generally only here the first stanza. If you said two or three, you may be guessing, or perhaps you heard someone sing more verses at some point in your life. If you said four, you would be correct, and, I would bet in the minority, small minority, of Americans.
Click here for complete version -- https://amhistory.si.edu/starspangledbanner/pdf/ssb_lyrics.pdf
An easier question might be, how many stars and stripes are on the flag? I would like to think that a majority of Americans might say 50, but all? And, if 50 is your answer, why 50? Hopefully, one for each state in the union, is your answer.
And, assuming one has scored 3 out of 3 so far, do we know when the playing of the national anthem while presenting the flag before sporting events began? Which sport was the first? Was is always before the game started or did it perhaps first occur during a game at the time when people stood up for a different reason. (Yes, there is a hint at the origin there).
So, one last question then, are we any less patriotic if we don't know what each star and stripe represents, or if we don't know all the verses of the Star Spangled Banner? Or if we stand and face the flag but mouth the wrong words?
Conversely, are we more patriotic because we perform the ritual of standing at sporting events and removing our hats when the anthem is played and the flag displayed even if we don't know the origin of the action?
The flag and the anthem are symbols of everything we have overcome to this point in our nation's history. Symbols of our victory over England, twice, our ability to recover when attacked by foreign enemies. And perhaps most importantly, they represent our unique form of government, and those most extraordinary documents, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.
But even more incredibly, more powerfully, the flag and anthem evoke different memories, different experiences for the citizens of our country. One thing to a veteran who can still remember the horrific sights and sounds of his fellow combatants as they sacrificed their lives on the battlefield. Another to the immigrant who is grateful each and every morning as he prepares for work, and his children for school, in a country that judges him and his family, not by his native origins or fluency in English, but by his work ethic and character.
When we see various politicians and pundits rail for or against those athletes, does it matter if, when asked to defend the flag in Korea or Vietnam or the middle East, they choose to hide behind their family's name or money? Does the fact that they wear a flag pin on their lapel over ride their avoidance of service, or lessen the harshness of their tone in judging someone else's patriotism?
While being respectful of our national symbols is certainly important, is it also important to understand what those symbols really mean, and that our country is great precisely because freedom is a tough act, requiring us to, if not understand, at least permit other citizens to voice their concern when they see freedom diminished, even if it conflicts with our version of respect and patriotism.
Finally, is it more patriotic to stand and face the flag, or to pass legislation that improves the ability to access and afford health care? More patriotic to remove one's hat when the anthem is played, or to draft tax reform that elevates the take home pay of the millions of hard working poor and middle class Americans rather than those already in the top 5%? More patriotic to worry and fret and argue over the interpretations of other people born in the land of the free, or to label and then demonize groups of Americans that look, love and worship in a different way?
If we don't fully understand the profound meaning of our national symbols, then it certainly doesn't matter if stand, kneel or lay prostrate on the ground when we hear a song for which we don't know all the words, or why it is being played at that moment in the first place.
Friday, September 29, 2017
Monday, September 11, 2017
President Trump is Right on DACA, for all the wrong reasons
President Trump's recent decision to end the Deferred Action for Child Arrivals program (DACA) was met with swift condemnation from the Democrats, lukewarm support from the GOP establishment, and loud applause from his base and those on the far right. Same old same old.
For me, Trump's decision is the correct one, but for all the wrong reasons.
First, let me be clear when I say that deporting children whose only crime is to have parents who risked everything to cross illegally into our country is cruel, certainly not Christian, and clearly not the action of a nation which aspires to be viewed as the moral standard of the world.
We know we need immigration reform. We know that, like those who fled Europe in the late 19th and early 20th century, there are millions of people born south of Texas who are fleeing from economic hardship and poverty. And we know that our borders must be secured to permit entry by the vast majority of people who we should welcome while still identifying and removing those who do not deserve to participate in the opportunities which America can afford. So why has there been literally zero progress in the past 50 years to reform our immigration laws?
It is politics, pure and simple, inflamed by our natural tendency to distrust people unlike ourselves, the proliferation of garbage news on the internet, the insidious rhetoric spouted daily by politicians and pundits who prefer power and money over truth, and the philosophy of the Grand Old Party in general and Candidate Trump in particular who had convinced enough Americans that people born in Central America can not be trusted.
You see, once you demean someone based solely on their race, country of birth, sexual preference, or any such characteristic, it is hard to go back. When economic parity is disappearing, it is much easier to point the finger at the immigrant, illegal or otherwise, who has a darker complexion or different facial structure or disparate cultural traditions. The fact that those people generally earn the lowest wages doesn't matter, as the real culprit in the growing income disparity are those with the most wealth and resources. Those same people who donate large sums of money to campaign war chests, who create patriotic sounding organizations with one issue agendas, and who manipulate our legal system by encouraging laws which favor their needs or using the courts to tie up legal challenges by victims who don't have the resources to withstand lengthy hearings and appeals.
When President Obama attempted to spur Congress to create new immigration policy, he was thwarted multiple times by the GOP controlled Senate and House. Finally, Obama signed an executive order creating DACA, and since then about 800,000 individuals have taken advantage of it.
Unfortunately, Obama attempted to expand the scope of DACA and these expansions were successfully challenged in court and the changes were struck down. In the meantime, challenges to the original DACA rules moved through the courts. It was in the defense of this program that Trump and Attorney General Sessions found themselves at odds with Obama.
Trump couldn't very well defend DACA in court because he has spent the last two years convincing some Americans that a Wall was one of the solutions to our problems and that once the scourge of illegal immigration was defeated, all would be right with our country. The fact that upwards of 10% of those "bad hombres" are children, did not enter into his rhetoric, and could not be walked back. Also, Trump couldn't defend DACA, simply because it was Obama's plan.
Still, despite the obvious politics behind President Trump's DACA decision, the pandering to his base and the clear discrimination against those born in Central America, President Trump is right in demanding that Congress be responsible for immigration reform. The House and Senate need to do their job, difficult as it may be, and stop hiding behind political aspirations. By crafting a policy that allows for citizenship for those brought to America as minors, for those who become productive members of America, for those who were foreign born but have raised their children to appreciate and respect the opportunities that America has presented to them, Congress can reform our outdated immigration policies in a bipartisan way that Trump can sign into law.
Remember, America exists today precisely because of the flood of immigrants, from Europe, Asia, Africa and now Mexico and Central America. The circle of diversity which brings new ideas and energy, which creates proud first and second generation Americans, which allows for tolerance of the next wave of immigrants, separates us from those countries that reject non native born peoples outright, or isolates them in areas within their cities which provide the least opportunity and upward mobility. People are not crossing illegally into Russia or North Korea for a reason.
And lastly, also remember that had immigration quotas existed in the late 1800's and early 1900's, and had the xenophobic opinions of the day outweighed those with more tolerance, many of us, those who are first, second and third generation Americans might not have been born here.
For me, Trump's decision is the correct one, but for all the wrong reasons.
First, let me be clear when I say that deporting children whose only crime is to have parents who risked everything to cross illegally into our country is cruel, certainly not Christian, and clearly not the action of a nation which aspires to be viewed as the moral standard of the world.
We know we need immigration reform. We know that, like those who fled Europe in the late 19th and early 20th century, there are millions of people born south of Texas who are fleeing from economic hardship and poverty. And we know that our borders must be secured to permit entry by the vast majority of people who we should welcome while still identifying and removing those who do not deserve to participate in the opportunities which America can afford. So why has there been literally zero progress in the past 50 years to reform our immigration laws?
It is politics, pure and simple, inflamed by our natural tendency to distrust people unlike ourselves, the proliferation of garbage news on the internet, the insidious rhetoric spouted daily by politicians and pundits who prefer power and money over truth, and the philosophy of the Grand Old Party in general and Candidate Trump in particular who had convinced enough Americans that people born in Central America can not be trusted.
You see, once you demean someone based solely on their race, country of birth, sexual preference, or any such characteristic, it is hard to go back. When economic parity is disappearing, it is much easier to point the finger at the immigrant, illegal or otherwise, who has a darker complexion or different facial structure or disparate cultural traditions. The fact that those people generally earn the lowest wages doesn't matter, as the real culprit in the growing income disparity are those with the most wealth and resources. Those same people who donate large sums of money to campaign war chests, who create patriotic sounding organizations with one issue agendas, and who manipulate our legal system by encouraging laws which favor their needs or using the courts to tie up legal challenges by victims who don't have the resources to withstand lengthy hearings and appeals.
When President Obama attempted to spur Congress to create new immigration policy, he was thwarted multiple times by the GOP controlled Senate and House. Finally, Obama signed an executive order creating DACA, and since then about 800,000 individuals have taken advantage of it.
Unfortunately, Obama attempted to expand the scope of DACA and these expansions were successfully challenged in court and the changes were struck down. In the meantime, challenges to the original DACA rules moved through the courts. It was in the defense of this program that Trump and Attorney General Sessions found themselves at odds with Obama.
Trump couldn't very well defend DACA in court because he has spent the last two years convincing some Americans that a Wall was one of the solutions to our problems and that once the scourge of illegal immigration was defeated, all would be right with our country. The fact that upwards of 10% of those "bad hombres" are children, did not enter into his rhetoric, and could not be walked back. Also, Trump couldn't defend DACA, simply because it was Obama's plan.
Still, despite the obvious politics behind President Trump's DACA decision, the pandering to his base and the clear discrimination against those born in Central America, President Trump is right in demanding that Congress be responsible for immigration reform. The House and Senate need to do their job, difficult as it may be, and stop hiding behind political aspirations. By crafting a policy that allows for citizenship for those brought to America as minors, for those who become productive members of America, for those who were foreign born but have raised their children to appreciate and respect the opportunities that America has presented to them, Congress can reform our outdated immigration policies in a bipartisan way that Trump can sign into law.
Remember, America exists today precisely because of the flood of immigrants, from Europe, Asia, Africa and now Mexico and Central America. The circle of diversity which brings new ideas and energy, which creates proud first and second generation Americans, which allows for tolerance of the next wave of immigrants, separates us from those countries that reject non native born peoples outright, or isolates them in areas within their cities which provide the least opportunity and upward mobility. People are not crossing illegally into Russia or North Korea for a reason.
And lastly, also remember that had immigration quotas existed in the late 1800's and early 1900's, and had the xenophobic opinions of the day outweighed those with more tolerance, many of us, those who are first, second and third generation Americans might not have been born here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
