Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » The Pledge, inspired by Nazis? (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: The Pledge, inspired by Nazis?
Shane Roe
Member
Member # 1542

 - posted      Profile for Shane Roe   Email Shane Roe   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've recently had email correspondence with a guy by the name of Rex Curry who claims that the Pledge of Allegiance was inspired by Nazis. You can read all about it here: Rex Curry's Ideas

Apparently he's some lawyer in Florida.
Anyone ever heard of him or the ideas he espouses?

Shane

Posts: 565 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I went to the site. Two comments.

1) Where is the picure of this guy in his tinfoil hat?
2) Post hoc ergo propter hoc

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Shane Roe
Member
Member # 1542

 - posted      Profile for Shane Roe   Email Shane Roe   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Haggis:
I went to the site. Two comments.

1) Where is the picure of this guy in his tinfoil hat?
2) Post hoc ergo propter hoc

Well, I think he's kind of a nut--at least he sure hammered me when I dared to question him on which phrases he disagreed with (other than "under God") in the document.

Shane

Posts: 565 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Excellent! He is certainly a nutjob. I love his t-shirts where you print your Social Slave Number on it. He's managed to quote at least one correct fact, although it doesn't really fit in well with his "All Things Nazi" theme.

http://archive.aclu.org/news/move/pledgeorigin.html

quote:
In 1892, a socialist named Francis Bellamy created the Pledge of Allegiance for Youths' Companion, a national family magazine for youth published in Boston. The magazine had the largest national circulation of its day with a circulation around 500,000. Two liberal businessmen, Daniel Ford and James Upham, his nephew, owned Youths' Companion.
quote:
The original Pledge was recited while giving a stiff, uplifted right hand salute, criticized and discontinued during WWII.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Shane Roe
Member
Member # 1542

 - posted      Profile for Shane Roe   Email Shane Roe   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
The original Pledge was recited while giving a stiff, uplifted right hand salute, criticized and discontinued during WWII.
Well, he's half right on the salute. The "Bellamy Salute" according to Wikipedia was to bring the hand toward the forehead, like the traditional military salute, and then when the words, "to the flag" were said, the hand was to be extended, the palm upraised as if supporting the flag. Here's the link: Bellamy Salute

Shane

Posts: 565 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If the Pledge was written in 1892 and the Nazi party created in 1919, perhaps it was the Pledge that inspired the Nazis.

One good thing did come out of it all. The Youth Companion building is a Richardsonian masterpiece in a gay end of town [Big Grin] . Today it has a lavish gay gym, a poshy gay restaurant, and houses a couple of macho-feminist nonprofits!

Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Shane Roe
Member
Member # 1542

 - posted      Profile for Shane Roe   Email Shane Roe   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Richard, you sure got me there.

Shane

Posts: 565 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Anglachel
Member
Member # 647

 - posted      Profile for Anglachel     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Though I agree that this dude’s a nutter, the history of the pledge is not something terribly comforting.

The Nazi salute was the same as the original American, but both are references to the ancient 'Roman Salute' so its not some insidious conspiracy there, just mutual neo-Classicism.

That said, Edward Bellamy described himself as a 'socialist nationalist'. He was in the American part of the international socialist movement. In Germany, socialism went was taken to its necessary conclusion in the 40's, so one could assert some common roots, but I don't think it would be fair to consider Bellamy a Nazi.

That being said in his defense, his pledge is highly questionable. The 'liberty and justice for all' is conspicuous in its omission of equality. Bellamy took out equality because it was too controversial for black people to be considered equal, so he thought its inclusion would hamper adoption of the pledge.

What is most objectionable in my opinion about the pledge is that Bellamy was explicitly attempting to make every citizen pledge allegiance to the state (as represented by the flag) in order to make them recognize its authority. That was necessary for socialists because socialism proposed the state to become heavily involved in the day to day life of citizens. When the American state was established in the constitution it was based on the notion that the people were the authority and the state was pledged to them. By the time socialism came around, that ideal was being turned on its head (the pledge being one indicator thereof). Though American socialism never manifested self terribly beyond the New Deal, those countries which followed Bellamies' ideas further, like Germany, ended up just as one would expect a society would when the citizens pledge allegiance to the state rather than the opposite.

Nowadays I don't think anybody is making a philosophical pledge to the state. It seems more a patriotic than a nationalist ritual, but its one with very sketchy roots.

Interesting links about
History of the Pledge and Bellamy
More Stuff

Posts: 214 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ATW
Member
Member # 1690

 - posted      Profile for ATW   Email ATW   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I've refused to say the Pledge for years.

The free people of the US swearing subserviance to the state would have our founding fathers spinning in their graves. They fought a war to insure the government was subserviant to the people rather than the other way around.

As for whether the Nazis adopted any bad ideas that originated in the US, so what if they did? The Nazis were free to choose from the best or the worst we had to offer. It not like we controlled their choices and forced them to take the worst we had to offer.

Posts: 575 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I never had a problem with the Pledge. It was a lot more scary taking an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic"
Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
The free people of the US swearing subserviance to the state would have our founding fathers spinning in their graves. They fought a war to insure the government was subserviant to the people rather than the other way around.
This is exactly how I feel. I'm a free man and intend to stay one. Since we govern ourselves, why would we need to pledge allegiance? Its dismaying how few people seem to understand this argument, or the idea that not saying the pledge can be a patriotic gesture of sorts. As a school teacher I encounter this issue fairly regularly.
Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sunil Carspecken
Member
Member # 1453

 - posted      Profile for Sunil Carspecken     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
here's another fun page if you like wackos:
http://www.timecube.com/

quote:

Hey stupid - are you too
dumb to know there are
4 different simultaneous
24 hour days within a
single rotation of Earth?
Greenwich 1 day is a lie.
4 quadrants = 4 corners,
and 4 different directions.
Each Earth corner rotates
own separate 24 hour day.
Infinite days is stupidity.
***********************************
Wisdom=Cubic testing of knowledge.
Demand right to debate Time Cube,
or you are unworthy of life on Earth.
I can't believe that stupid ass students
allow suppression of the Time Cube.


Posts: 333 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ATW
Member
Member # 1690

 - posted      Profile for ATW   Email ATW   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:
I never had a problem with the Pledge. It was a lot more scary taking an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic"

That one I don't have a problem with. If someone wants to serve the government, pledging an allegiance to that government is entirely appropriate.

The public at large, however, isn't here to serve the government.

Posts: 575 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Shane Roe
Member
Member # 1542

 - posted      Profile for Shane Roe   Email Shane Roe   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, I don't think it's necessarily pledging to serve "the government" but rather "our country". I think there's a big difference between the two.

Shane

Posts: 565 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, the pledge is to the flag and to the republic for which it stands. Last time I checked, a "republic" was a form of government.
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Shane Roe
Member
Member # 1542

 - posted      Profile for Shane Roe   Email Shane Roe   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
True, but not necessarily in the sense of "my country right or wrong". I look at it as I have allegiance to the republic, but that allegiance includes being able to influence it for good--by voting, by writing to my political leaders, by speaking out--all for the good of the republic.

Shane

Posts: 565 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Fair enough.
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
witless chum
Member
Member # 1643

 - posted      Profile for witless chum   Email witless chum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I like the pledge ok, sans God. I like saying it. I don't see it as allegiance to the government, but to the country, the idea of America, as embodied by the flag. Mark Twain is supposed to ahve said "Loyalty to the country always, loyalty to the government when it deserves it."

I couldn't find the link, but I read some time ago, someone suggested we replace it with the preamble to the constitution, which I think would be better.

Dan

Posts: 642 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Plus, we could sing it, thanks to Schoolhouse Rock.
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks to everyone for not actually disputing a single fact on my website. Some of you show the rampant ignorance of government schools in that you state that you don't like something, fail to actually state any factual refutations, and instead spout an insult, which contrary to what you think, only highlights your glaring ignorance and that you are a tinfoil hat nut. Some of you do not understand how to actually dispute something by citing an opposing "fact" from some original source, so there is no doubt that you will remain unable to do so in response to this post, and will merely repeat insults that apply best to yourself. (Here is an example to help you: you don't refute my contention that the striaght arm salute was not a "roman" salute by merely citing someone else who repeated the myth that the salute was a roman salute (e.g. morons on wikipedia). You refute it by actually citing some roman literature or art that shows and explains that the straight arm salute was used in ancient rome. Here is a tip: You cannot make such a citation because there is none. All you can do is cite other boobs who repeat the same myths that you repeat because you are also a boob and a tinfoil hat nut). The top one is probably the most hilarious in which the poster can not even describe clearly the point: that the pledge of allegiance was the origin of the straight-arm salute of the national socialist german workers' party (nazis). And then of course, there was the usual repetition of the erroneous roman salute myth later on.

Here is a more recent addition to the website, which none can factually refute, thank you very much.

Remove the pledge from the flag, remove the flag from schools, and remove schools from government.

The pledge of allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, cousin and cohort of the also-famous Edward Bellamy, author of the 1888 book “Looking Backward: 2000-1887.”

The Bellamys were self-proclaimed national socialists and they loved the military and the War of Northern Aggression against southern independence. The pledge memorializes their view, especially the phrase “one nation, indivisible.”

The original pledge began with a military salute for the phrase “I pledge allegiance” and then the right arm extended straight outward toward the flag for the rest of the chant. The military salute was not a random choice, and the extended right arm was the origin of the salute for other national socialists who loved militarism: the monstrous National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazis). Historic photographs are linked at http://rexcurry.net/pledge1.html

Many people forget that Nazis were socialists. A mnemonic device for remembering that Nazis were socialists is that the swastika resembles two overlapping “s” letters, and “socialism” begins with the letter “s.” http://rexcurry.net/swastikanews.html

Francis Bellamy’s first description of the pledge had the palm of the hand turned upward for the straight-armed gesture. The gesture changed in use, growing in its similarity to the "Heil Hitler" salute because of the military salute (palm down) extended casually straight toward the flag.

Its as if the pledge was an original wordier "Heil Nation" and "Sieg Heil" (Hail to Victory -victory over the southern states).

The common claim that the salute was an old Roman salute is a myth from old movies depicting fictional Roman scenes that were inspired by the pledge, and by the fact that Francis Bellamy was from Rome, in the state of New York. The term "Roman" was used (and still is used) to refer to people and products from the U.S. city. Bellamy was a socialist northerner and was the original “New York liberal” albeit from Rome. http://rexcurry.net/pledgesalute.html

Government schools teach that the pledge was created to sell flags to schools and Francis Bellamy is described as an advertising pioneer. That is a whitewashed piece of the whole story. A better description is that Bellamy was a propaganda pioneer, comparable to Leni Riefenstahl.

The Bellamys so admired the military that they created a political philosophy that they called “military socialism.” They wanted the government to takeover everything and impose the military’s “efficiency,” as they said.

Francis Bellamy is why there are U.S. flags flying at local government schools or inside classrooms. The Bellamys wanted a flag over every school because they wanted to nationalize and militarize everything, including all schools, and eliminate all of the better alternatives.
During Bellamy’s time the government was taking over education.

The Bellamys wanted government schools to ape the military. Government schools were intended to create an “industrial army” (another Bellamy phrase, and the word “army” was not metaphorical) and to help nationalize everything else.

There is only one place on the web that has Francis Bellamy’s original speech that accompanied the first pledge of allegiance. Http://rexcurry.net/pledgespeech.html

The Bellamys believed that government schools with pledges and flags were needed especially for sons and daughters of the confederacy to embrace nationalism, militarism, and socialism.

Francis Bellamy used his position with the National Education Association (NEA) to promote the pledge. Edward Bellamy published the “Nationalist” magazine and both Bellamys supported its publisher, the “Nationalist Educational Association,” (NEA) named with deliberate similarity to the National Education Association. http://rexcurry.net/pledgelead.html

Fans of the Confederacy are owed an apology by people who blame racism and segregation on the South. The Confederate flag is sometimes criticized. How does it compare with the U.S. flag?

The U.S. flag flew over a country that recognized private slavery for over a century. The legacy of the Bellamys, the pledge, the U.S. flag, and the War of Northern Aggression was massive centralized socialism that resulted in nationwide government policies of racism and segregation, along with a government takeover of schools. Children used the “sieg heil” gesture for flags flying over racist government schools through the rise of Nazism (the hand-over-the-heart spread in 1942). The bizarre practices served as an example for three decades before they were adopted by the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The U.S. practice of segregation even outlasted the horrid party, into the 1960's and beyond. That is why the Bellamys are known as the “American Hitlers” and as the first “American Nazis.” http://rexcurry.net/pledge1.html

Thereafter, the legacy caused more police-state racism of forced busing that destroyed communities and neighborhoods and deepened hostilities.

Both Bellamys were bigots. http://rexcurry.net/pledgebigot.html

There is only one place on the web with a historic photo of a segregated class chanting the Pledge with the original straight-arm salute. http://rexcurry.net/pledgeracism.html

No one can measure the monstrous impact of government schools imposing racism and teaching racism as official policy for so long. Government school racism did much more damage than private enterprise could ever have afforded to do. It would have been better if government had stayed out of schools altogether. http://www.rexcurry.net/stopthepledge4.html

The famous desegregation case of Brown v. Board of Education ignores how government schools started the problem that Brown ended. When government began socializing schools in the late 1800's, it expanded government-mandated racism. Brown is another example of government peeing on everyone and then claiming that it was rain. In addition to ending government’s racism, Brown should have ended government schools.

If the government had taken over all churches then the same horror would have resulted, with government-mandated racism in government churches. The libertarian solution would have been to end socialized churches. It is fortunate that the Constitution prevented government churches. It is unfortunate that the Constitution did not prevent government schools, though they are no where authorized.

Did the Bellamy scheme for schools work? Edward Bellamy’s book “Looking Backward: 2000-1887" predicted society in the year 2000 as totalitarian socialism. Did Bellamy propaganda make the predictions come true?

Most Americans now support Bellamy’s vision of a massive government-school monopoly, and the social security system with socialist slave numbers, massive government spending, and other widespread socialism. They submitted to socialist schools that imposed racism and segregation. Sons and daughters of the confederacy robotically chant the socialist’s pledge daily on the ring of a bell, like Pavlov's lapdogs of the state.

Some socialists chuckle knowingly at the spectacle.

The pledge is about submission. The only saving grace seems to be the last sentence, “with liberty and justice for all.” When a socialist says “liberty and justice for all” he means the exact opposite of everyone else. When a socialist says “liberty and justice for all” he means that he wants to rob, enslave and kill you.

Socialists robbed, enslaved and killed 62 million in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; 35 million in the People’s Republic of China; 21 million under the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. (Death tolls from the book "Death by Government" by Professor R. J. Rummel).

Edward Bellamy’s book was an international bestseller, translated into all major languages, and inspired socialists in all the hell-holes worldwide.

Francis Bellamy’s pledge is a chant of capitulation, and the U.S. flag in a school is a white flag of surrender, to government, to the Department of Education, to nationalization, to socialism, to militarism. The Bellamys gave the red stripes a loathsome connotation for socialized schools.

It is not too late to separate school and state. The separation of school and state is as important as the separation of church and state. The government should not run Sunday school, nor Monday school through Friday school. Southerners should remove the pledge from the flag, remove the flag from the schools, and remove the schools from the government.

RexCurry.net made the historic discovery that exposed the pledge of allegiance as the origin of the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazis) and refuted the Roman salute myth. http://rexcurry.net/pledgesalute.html

The first to collect, display and market historic photographs of the original straight-arm pledge to the U.S. flag. http://rexcurry.net/pledge1.html and at http://rexcurry.net/pledge_reward.html

The first to expose the scary speech "The Meaning of the Four Centuries" by Francis Bellamy, author of the Pledge, and a self-proclaimed national socialist. http://rexcurry.net/pledgespeech.html

The first to discover that the phrase "under God" appeared in the original pledge program. http://rexcurry.net/pledgegod.html

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Wow. I didn't think you were a tin-foil nutter until now, Rex.

While I don't think anyone here is going to argue that the Pledge is not at least mildly fascist and overwhelmingly nationalist in tone and concept -- and it's to avoid those fascist overtones that we no longer use a straight-arm salute -- your passion for the subject is, quite frankly, amusing. You don't bring any genuinely new insights here; you haven't done any original research. You just layer hystrionic paranoia on top of what people already know.

You aren't scoring points by trying to simultaneously redeem the South's besmirched "honor," either; I'd leave that out of your screed, if only because we Northerners will roll our eyes patronizingly at you when we hear it and dismiss everything else you have to say on the subject. [Smile]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
Wow. I didn't think you were even more of a tin-foil nutter until now, Shane.

Thanks for conceding what I said about your original post.

You state "While I don't think anyone here is going to argue that the Pledge is not at least mildly fascist and overwhelmingly nationalist in tone and concept -- and it's to avoid those fascist overtones that we no longer use a straight-arm salute..." Thanks for conceding that, the amazing part is that you fancy the salute as the only part that applies to your point, and you ignore all the rest about the pledge.

Your passion for the subject, and your complete inability to factually dispute anything I said, even after I pointed out that you could not and would not, is, quite frankly, amusing. Thanks again.

You don't bring any factual dispute here to any point on my website and you have no genuinely new insights here, just vague pointless attempts to criticize; you haven't done any original research. You just layer hystrionic baseless criticisms on top of things you repeatedly demonstrate you cannot factually dispute at all.

You aren't scoring points by trying to simultaneously pretend that the pledge has nothing to do with the national socialism that spread after the War of Northern Aggression, another point you do not factually dispute, and merely attempt to besmirch vaguely again. I'd leave that out of your screed, if only because we thinkers in the north and south will roll our eyes patronizingly at you when we hear your lame comments and dismiss everything else you have to say on the subject.

Thanks for conceding everything on my website about the pledge and for doing exactly what I said you would do.

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
While I may be Spartacus, I am not Shane.
Really. [Smile]

"Thanks for conceding that, the amazing part is that you fancy the salute as the only part that applies to your point, and you ignore all the rest about the pledge."

Nope. As I said, the Pledge itself is at the very least mildly fascist and nationalistic. And, in fact, I pointed out that we no longer used the straight-arm salute precisely because it reinforced those perceptions -- not because I considered that a full remedy.

"You aren't scoring points by trying to simultaneously pretend that the pledge has nothing to do with the national socialism that spread after the War of Northern Aggression..."

Except that this is the most ridiculous of your points. If anything, the Pledge is a product of a desire for nationalism; it's a symptom of the daddy-statism that spread following the Civil War, not the cause.

What I find amusing about your site is that you focus on the Pledge as a cause and tool of oppression, and in so doing apparently miss the entire point; it's like you're saying little red bumps cause measles. People don't like big government because they say the Pledge; people say the Pledge because they like big government.

And this point, if you made it, would IMO be a powerful and effective one. It would serve to shock awake, in my opinion, many libertarians and so-called conservatives who say they believe in limited government while still feeling the need to waggle their nationalism in everyone's face. Why, you might ask, are we pledging allegiance to a country that exists to serve us? Does this serve as a form of indoctrination, or was it a genuine sort of admiration for the power of the nation that motivated this tradition -- and is either a good thing?

These would be interesting questions. Sadly, you dance around them -- and choose instead to concentrate your loathing on silly bugaboos like "socialism" and "Northern Aggression" and the author of the Pledge himself.

In my opinion, Rex, you're missing the forest for the trees. It's a common tin foil problem, and one that I didn't necessarily think you suffered from until I saw your post on this thread. You need, IMO, a bit LESS focus. [Smile]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Anglachel
Member
Member # 647

 - posted      Profile for Anglachel     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Didn't think the classical origins of the Bellamy salute were that much a matter of controversy I needed to go back to primary sources, but if you insist:

This is a link to theMarcus Aurelius Equestrian statue circa 100 AD. He is clearly giving the same salute discussed.

For evidence of the perception in modern times of the Bellamy salute's origins in neo-classicism, this is a link to Jacques David's "Oath of the Horatii" from the late 18th century.

Their is no dispute on the eras these works are dated to, and both far predate the Nazis.

Posts: 214 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
I Didn't think the lack of classical origins of the Bellamy salute would be so much a matter of controversy after my clear explanation. You need to go back to primary sources, but if you insist:

These are links to the Marcus Aurelius Equestrian statue circa 100 AD. He is clearly not giving the same salute discussed. Further there is no evidence on the statue or about it anywhere that would indicate otherwise. Your choice of the view suggests that you have never actually witnessed the statue or that you deliberately wanted chose the photo to provide a misperception. Oh, and thanks for only coming up with that one. It makes me confident that there actually is no support anywhere for your claim, or you would have done better.

http://www.davis-art.com/artimages/slidesets/slide.asp?catalognum=4758&partofset=596

from behind:
Link

http://www2.truman.edu/~capter/jins343/aure.htm

Here are some other interesting comments made by others about the statue. "Marcus Aurelius, AD 161-180. Bronze, over life-size. The most complete equestrian statue to survive from Roman times, found in the Piazza del Campidoglio in Rome. The horse, going forward at an active but controlled trot with the head a little overbent as he takes the bit, is a fine and strong steed, fit for royalty. The emperor, bare-legged in his short tunic and laced sandals, is at ease, sitting well into the horse on just a saddlecloth. He is clearly ready to correct the horse's line as it leans slightly away to the right. This is a genuine horseman, not just an emperor in equestrian apotheosis. John Fairley (1995), The Art of the Horse, Figure 26, page 36."

Here is another funny comment: The equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius, of which a faithful copy can be seen in the centre of the square and the original is in the museums, managed to pass unharmed through the Middle Ages, a period when metals were melted down and reused, only thanks to a misunderstanding: the popes, who were its owners until the 15th century, had identified the person depicted as Constantine, the first Christian emperor. Legend has it that when the screech-owl between the horse's ears will hoot, the end of the world will arrive. This event seems to be very far off, however, considering that the owl is, in reality, a tuft of the horse's mane!"

You said "For evidence of the perception in modern times of the Bellamy salute's origins in neo-classicism, this is a link to Jacques David's "Oath of the Horatii" from the late 18th century."

Thanks for using the word "perception" because that word is correct, as you apparently know that the painting has nothing to do with ancient rome. Also, I have already written about it at
http://www.rexcurry.net/pledgehoratii.html

The scene / story was taken from Titus-Livy. The oath is not mentioned in the historical accounts and the scene may not have happened at all anyway. And as you know the painting is not even of a fictionalized "pledge of allegiance to a flag" or anything like it, other than a fictionalized painting about reaching for weapons and saying that they will fight.

You said "Their is no dispute on the eras these works are dated to, and both far predate the Nazis." Of course the issue is that Bellamy & his ilk created his salute and it was the origin of the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party, so your statement does not dispute that. And your only other mild effort -the statue photo argument -has been thoroughly demolished.

You guys make me feel like a true genius, really.
Thanks.

Edited by OrneryMod to fix page width on link.

[ December 23, 2004, 07:38 AM: Message edited by: OrneryMod ]

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
Tom,
You said "If anything, the Pledge is a product of a desire for nationalism; it's a symptom of the daddy-statism that spread following the Civil War, not the cause."

Accept that this is the most ridiculous of your points. It is especially ridiculous in that you agree with everything I said and then apparently think that you are disagreeing in some manner.

What I find amusing about your comments is that you focus on the Pledge as a cause and tool of oppression, and in so doing apparently miss the entire point; It is also amusing that you have no website that addresses any other issues while I on the other hand have written voluminously on other topics. It's like you're saying little red bumps cause measles. People not only like big government because they say the Pledge and were trained to do so in government schools; people also say the Pledge because they like big government.

And this point, if you made it, would IMO be a powerful and effective one and it is a point I make repeatedly on my voluminous website, which of course you don't make because you have no website. It would serve to shock awake, in my opinion, many libertarians and so-called conservatives who say they believe in limited government while still feeling the need to waggle their nationalism / socialism in everyone's face. Why, you might ask on your website if you had one, (as I do) are we pledging allegiance to a country that exists to serve us? Does this serve as a form of indoctrination, or was it a genuine sort of admiration for the power of the nation that motivated this tradition -- and is either a good thing?

These are interesting questions that I write on constantly. Sadly, you dance around them and ignore them because you don't consider them important enough to write about on a website -- and choose instead to concentrate your loathing on silly bugaboos like people who point out the same issues in regard to the pledge and "socialism" and "Northern Aggression" and the author of the Pledge himself.

In my opinion, Tom, you're missing the forest for the trees. It's a common tin foil problem, and one that I didn't necessarily think you suffered from until I saw your post on this thread. You need, IMO, a bit MORE focus.

You don't bring any factual dispute here to any point on my website and you have no genuinely new insights here, just vague pointless attempts to criticize; you haven't done any original research. You just layer hystrionic baseless criticisms on top of things you repeatedly demonstrate you cannot factually dispute at all.

You aren't scoring points by trying to simultaneously pretend that the pledge has nothing to do with the national socialism that spread after the War of Northern Aggression, another point you do not factually dispute, and merely attempt to besmirch vaguely again. I'd leave that out of your screed, if only because we thinkers in the north and south will roll our eyes patronizingly at you when we hear your lame comments and dismiss everything else you have to say on the subject.

Thanks for conceding everything on my website about the pledge and everything else and for doing exactly what I said you would do.

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yippy, skippy.

I'm amazed you're not getting more traction on this issue. [Embarrassed] Even if one concedes that everything on your site is factual, here's the problem: nobody cares what Bellamy's goals were. The schools have not churned out legions of children into "industrial armies" and universal nationalization has not come about. Since the pledge itself can be interpreted in many ways, I think people choose a more benign interpretation than National Socialism. If you want to advocate the government getting out of schools, try to find something tangible that people will care about.

And even if Hitler adopted a straight armed salute after it had been used in the U.S., you fail to show causation. In fact all you can show is temporal sequence, hence, post hoc ergo propter hoc.

It's like saying that Hitler built the Autobahn to last 1,000 years for the glory of the Third Reich so the Autobahn should be destroyed. No traction there either.

Seriously, if you want to influence more people, hire a web designer as well. Your website is way to cluttered with too many backgrounds, with no real organization. Clean it up, and make it look somewhat professional because it looks amateurish. Nobody wants to read through all that to find a single article. Simplicity and organization encourage people to explore a site.

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Rex - citing yourself as a source is hardly considered factual evidence. As for the statue, the cited sources predate the "Nazi Salute", and could very well be considered the source of that salute - regardless of whether the statue is actually performing that salute, these well know "scholars" say that he was - and can therefore be considered possible sources, undercutting the authority of your arguement. That is the point here.

Please, let's all cut out the name calling - it's rather, umm, disturbing.

Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
Haggis, Yippy, skippy. Thanks for conceding everything in the pledge article and for not disputing one iota.

Even if one concedes that everything on your site is factual, as you have, here's the problem: you pretend that you don't care what Bellamy's goals were because you like those goals, becuase you were taught to like them, just as I said that was Bellamy's goal, which you are again thereby conceding. The schools have churned out legions of children who behave as "industrial armies" by en masse robotically chanting a pledge upon the ring of a government bell, like Pavlov's lapdogs of the state (and you like it because you were taught to like it), and there are various examples of universal nationalization that have come about including the government takeover of education (and you like it because you were taught to like it), racism and segregation taught by government for decades (and you like it because you were taught to like it) social security with socialist slave numbers that children were given as infants, that track their incomes, locations, jobs for life, stealing all the way, a national income tax, various forms of nationalization and government operations, massive spending, massive debt, the massive industrial-socialist complex (and you like it all because you were taught to like it by the schools Bellamy supported). If you want to advocate national socialism and more government control through schools etc, then try to find something tangible that people will care about.

And even if Hitler adopted a straight armed salute after it had been used in the U.S., as you also concede, you fail to dispute (and you concede) that there is no "roman" salute proof as is the myth (conceding that I am correct again) and you concede the temporal sequence as well as the manner described and all the other details which are much more than a temporal sequence. You have no alternative origin explanation for the origin of the salute of the national socialist german workers' party and you do not dispute the articles' explanation.
Thank you.

Your comment is like saying that Hitler created his costumes and symbols and salutes to last 1,000 years for the glory of the Third Reich, but since those items don't necessarily involve slaughtering people then you think there is no reason to have stopped using those costumes, symbols and salutes, and that you believe they should be resurrected. No traction there either.

Seriously, if you want to influence more people, hire a web designer as you have no website, but then the reason you don't is because you have nothing of importance to say that would result in any cluttered backgrounds, and you have no real organization. Clean it up your mind, and make it look seem professional because it looks amateurish. Nobody wants to read through all your gibberish to find a cogent thought.

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
Javelin - your conceding all of my factual evidence is appreciated. As for the statue, the sources cited that you refer to as predating the "Nazi Salute", are irrelevant because they do not show a salute nor anything that looks like the salute, and could not be be considered the source of that salute and there are no well known "scholars" who say that he was saluting (why do you make stuff up?) and that was all the imagination of the person desperately stretching to find an explanation for the roman salute myth that he (and you) had been erroneously taught and never given a moments critical thought to in your lives -undercutting the authority of your arguement. That is the point here.
Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
The military salute in the USA became the salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The pledge of allegiance was the origin of the salute of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi Party) because Francis Bellamy was a self-proclaimed national socialist who promoted “military socialism” (a Bellamy term). To promote militarism, Bellamy started the pledge of allegiance with a military salute.

The military salute was held for the phrase “I pledge allegiance” and then the right arm extended straight outward toward the flag for the rest of the chant. Historic photographs are linked at http://rexcurry.net/pledge1.html
and at http://rexcurry.net/pledge_military.html

The first description of the pledge had the palm of the hand turned upward for the straight-armed gesture. The gesture changed in use, growing into the "Heil Hitler" appearance because of the military salute (palm down) extended casually straight toward the flag.

James Bailey Upham suggested to Bellamy part of the gesture (the straight-arm with the palm upward). Upham’s suggested gesture (palm up) was like saying “Here is the flag.” It was because of Bellamy’s alteration (the addition of the military salute) that the pledge evolved into the Nazi-style.

Upham was also familiar with Bellamy's "military socialism" dogma because Edward Bellamy, cousin and cohort to Francis, had written of it in the international bestseller "Looking Backward" in 1888, and both Bellamys had been openly involved in the national socialism movement and the "Nationalist" magazine.

Even with the palm turned upward, people would later see the relationship to the National Socialist German Workers' Party and that is why the straight-arm salute was disfavored in 1942, and the hand-over-the-heart was adopted.

It is interesting to note that Upham's father had operated a school in New Hampshire that included Roman and Greek classics and Upham had attended that school. It is not clear how this might have influenced the “Roman salute” myth that eventually arose about the straight-armed salute.

Upham was the head of Premium Department of the Youth’s Companion Magazine and was also a junior partner in its firm, the Perry Mason Company of Boston, which was owned by Daniel S. Ford, Uncle-by-marriage to Upham.

Ford had supported churches where Francis Bellamy preached socialism. Ford was attracted to socialism and was interested in the Social Gospel which, to his friend Francis Bellamy, meant Christian Socialism. At his death Ford bequeathed almost one million dollars to the Baptist Social Union of Boston, and that money was used to build Ford Hall, the meeting place of the Ford Hall Forum, which still exists. In leaving money to the Forum, Ford said that the Social Union and the nation should foster closer personal relations between Christian businessman and the workingman because of the latter's "religious indifference, his feverish unrest and his belief that businessmen and capital are his enemies.”

Before Bellamy worked for the Youth’s Companion, Upham had promoted the use of the Flag in government schools. In 1891 and 1892, Upham coordinated a national celebration of Columbus focused on government schools and a flag ceremony with the as yet unwritten pledge. Upham wrote many drafts of a pledge and asked for comments from the magazine’s staff. He was never happy with his drafts and he asked Bellamy to take over.

The only well known flag salute at that time was Colonel Balch's salute, written in 1889. That salute went as follows: "We give our heads and our hearts to God and our country; one country, one language, one Flag." During the speel, the youngsters would point at their heads, their heart and then at the flag. Thus, Balch’s chant ended with a straight arm pointing at the flag. Balch had first used his pledge on Flag Day, June 14th, in his free kindergarten for New York City's poor and immigrants where he served as a principal. It seems to have become a daily salute in the classroom for all of his students.

Bellamy and Upham wanted a better pledge.

When Bellamy finished writing the pledge in August, 1892, he showed it to Upham. The pledge still did not have a salute. Upham came to attention, snapped his heels together and chanted, "I pledge allegiance to my flag," and he stretched out his right arm and hand with palm up while he recited the rest of the Pledge.

Later, the first program for the pledge stated: “At a signal from the Principal the pupils, in ordered ranks, hands to the side, face the Flag. Another signal is given; every pupil give the Flag the military salute - right hand lifted, palm downward, to a line with the forehead and close to it. Standing thus, all repeat together, slowly: "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands; one Nation, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all." At the words, "to my Flag," the right hand is extended gracefully, palm upward, towards the Flag, and remains in this gesture till the end of the affirmation.; whereupon all hands immediately drop to the side.

Because of Bellamy’s military socialism and his addition of the military salute, the pledge’s salute evolved into the Nazi-style salute.

Government schools teach that the pledge was created to sell flags to schools and Francis Bellamy is described as an advertising pioneer. That is a whitewashed piece of the whole story. A better description is that Bellamy was a propaganda pioneer, comparable to Leni Riefenstahl.

Bellamy believed that government schools with pledges and flags were needed to entice children to embrace nationalism, militarism, and socialism.

Bellamy wanted the government to takeover everything and impose the military’s “efficiency,” as he said. It is the origin of the modern military-socialist complex.

Bellamy wanted a flag over every school because he wanted to nationalize and militarize everything, including all schools, and eliminate all of the better alternatives. During Bellamy’s time the government was taking over education.

Bellamy wanted government schools to ape the military. Government schools were intended to create an “industrial army” (another Bellamy phrase, and the word “army” was not metaphorical) and to help nationalize everything else.

That is one of many reasons why Francis Bellamy and his also-famous cousin Edward Bellamy are known as the "American Hitlers" and as the first "American Nazis." http://rexcurry.net/pledge1.html

There is only one place on the web that has Francis Bellamy’s original speech that accompanied the first pledge of allegiance. Http://rexcurry.net/pledgespeech.html

Germany and the entire world is owed an apology for the horrid influence that government had inside the U.S. in promoting socialized schools, military socialism within government schools, the creation of industrial armies, and daily robotic pledges of allegiance in military formation with the infamous straight-arm salute. http://rexcurry.net/pledgeapology.html

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
REX: Despite Davidson's snide asides (which are always justified), you answered my question on anachronism -- and thank you [Smile] .
Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Wow. What a thread you guys have made here.

Who Bellamy was does not reflect on the current Pledge.
What his views were about socialism, nationalism, and so forth do not matter to the 99.999% of the country that has not the fuzziest idea who he was.

The current debate on the Pledge should be on the merits of the Pledge itself, not on its origins. It's a pretty sad reason to keep living on this earth if we're going to voluntarily enlave ourselves to the ignorance of those who have gone before us. Bellamy isn't teaching kids nationalist socialism today, and truthfully msot kids don't understand what they're reciting.

I myself came out of a high school where half the kids felt no compulsion or coercion regarding whether they said the Pledge every day. It was on the loudspeaker, but many kids stayed sitting, didn't say the words, or (like me) leaned on our desks and changed the words. For example, I much of the time I only said the last phrase, "with liberty and justice... for all who can afford it." Just to be cynical.
Only once did a teacher do anything about it, shouting about disrespect. But as she had no power to enforce disciplinary action (and she knew it), it didn't matter and the same kids were doing the same thing two days later when her next class convened.

What matters here is nobody is ever held accountable for the Pledge. No one takes it seriously enough to hold someone else to those words. It's not an oath with consequences.

Andwhen you suggest to someone that the nation is divisible, and that you want to establish Cascadia out of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia, the response is not gonig to be "This nation is indivisible! Don't you know the Pledge of Allegiance?" It's going to be "Haha, great idea buddy, go ahead and try that." Note, it's not denounced as unpatriotic, it's mocked as something stupid.

Not like vows to protect/defend the US Constitution, which we require of all law enforcement and government officials. This is a contract. This is supposed to have consequences. This is truly about the spirit of the words being recited -- we loan you power so that you will defend rights as enumerated in the supreme law of the land.

Is there any parallel in the Pledge? Has anyone, ever, been taken to task for not living up to the Pledge? "Hey, pal! You weren't showing your allegiance to the flag and the republic it symbolizes! Report to Sector 6A immediately!"
Liberty and justice for all? That's the ideal we all know about already. A shared ideal that is enumerated by the many negative rights of the US Constitution. You cannot be denied this, such and such right must not be abridged, you do not have permission to go beyond X, Y, and Z when making laws.

Does anyone feel such an influence from that rote recital that they suddenly are pulled toward the historical roots of the Pledge? No.
Is it legal for anyone to force a student to recite the Pledge word for word? No.
Do we still salute the flag when reciting a Pledge of Allegiance "to the flag"? Nobody I know does, though it is still traditional for people to stand and take their hats off -- more a sign of respect than subservience no matter what the object is.

*None of this is enforced.*

Now, I'm no fan of socialism. I'm practically neolibertarian. But this is a foolish exercise in historical finger-pointing. Let's all move on.

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well said Warrsaw. Here's some fashion tips that I found. Enjoy!

New winter fashions!

[ December 22, 2004, 08:56 PM: Message edited by: Haggis ]

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
You pretend that you don't care what Bellamy's goals were because you like those goals, because you were taught to like them, just as I said that was Bellamy's goal, which you are again thereby conceding. The schools have churned out legions of children who behave as "industrial armies" by en masse robotically chanting a pledge upon the ring of a government bell, like Pavlov's lapdogs of the state (and you like it because you were taught to like it), and there are various examples of universal nationalization that have come about including the government takeover of education (and you like it because you were taught to like it), racism and segregation taught by government for decades (and you like it because you were taught to like it) social security with socialist slave numbers that children were given as infants, that track their incomes, locations, jobs for life, stealing all the way, a national income tax, various forms of nationalization and government operations, massive spending, massive debt, the massive industrial-socialist complex (and you like it all because you were taught to like it by the schools Bellamy supported). If you want to advocate national socialism and more government control through schools etc, then try to find something tangible that people will care about.

And even if Hitler adopted a straight armed salute after it had been used in the U.S., as you also concede, you fail to dispute (and you concede) that there is no "roman" salute proof as is the myth (conceding that I am correct again) and you concede the temporal sequence as well as the manner described and all the other details which are much more than a temporal sequence. You have no alternative origin explanation for the origin of the salute of the national socialist german workers' party and you do not dispute the articles' explanation.
Thank you.

Your comment is like saying that Hitler created his costumes and symbols and salutes to last 1,000 years for the glory of the Third Reich, but since those items don't necessarily involve slaughtering people then you think there is no reason to have stopped using those costumes, symbols and salutes, and that you believe they should be resurrected. According to your argument you think the original straight arm salute to the US flag should be resurrected. No traction there either.

You agree with all the laws in many states that force teachers in government schools to daily attempt to lead the class in chants, and they used to require student participation until the supreme court said no, all of which you would have liked because you were taught to, and now don't like because the government taught you so.

You are dismissive of the hundreds of millions killed in the socialist wholecaust (of which the Holocaust was a part): 62 million in the Union of Soviet Socilaist Republics, 35 million in the Peoples' Republic of China, 21 million by the National Socialist German Workers' Party. All of them influenced and inspired by the Bellamys, their pledge, government schools, government racism and segregation, industrial armies, military socialism, and national socialism.
You are all perfect examples of how such hellholes come to exist and last so long and kill so many. You are intellectually dishonest.

Other than that thanks for conceding all my factual statements.

You all make me feel like an utter genius in comparison. Thanks.

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Paladine
Member
Member # 1932

 - posted      Profile for Paladine   Email Paladine   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
You don't have to begin and end every post with "thanks for conceding all my factual statements". If you feel like a genius, it's because you're either delusional or willfully self-deceived. But now on to your inane ranting....

quote:
...since those items don't necessarily involve slaughtering people then you think there is no reason to have stopped using those costumes, symbols and salutes, and that you believe they should be resurrected.
Hitler also wore pants. Pants had nothing to do with slaughtering people, but.....he wore them, and I bet you could find a socialist or two involved in the production of blue jeans.

So, here we all are, a bunch of the state-serving zombies envisioned by Hitler because we wear something to cover our legs! If I wanted to try extra-hard, I could probably open up my own website detailing the Nazi-Pant connection, and cite it as a reference whenever someone told me I was insane. Then I could smugly and condescendingly come on to forums such as Ornery and tell everyone what a genius I am.

If you don't appreciate the coolness in that, you must be wearing a tin hat, right? It isn't your "facts" that are being disputed, it's the astonishingly stupid conclusion drawn from those useless factoids. Patriotism was highly valued by the Nazis. Does that make it inherently evil and wrong? (Note that I don't say that patriotism is saluting the flag or the government, but rather that I'm drawing a parallel case here.)

The Nazis spoke German. Should we purge the language from our school systems? The Nazis used chemistry to help carry out their evil ends. How about we stop teaching that? Do you concede that the Nazis spoke German? That they knew Chemistry?

If so, you're conceding my factual statements, and I must be a genius. Nevermind the obviously incorrect conclusion I draw from there.

[ December 22, 2004, 10:53 PM: Message edited by: Paladine ]

Posts: 3235 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
RexCurry said:
quote:

You pretend that you don't care what Bellamy's goals were because you like those goals, because you were taught to like them, just as I said that was Bellamy's goal

Rex, I'm assuming the above comment was addressed to WarrsawPact. If so, you're really barking up the wrong tree. WarrsawPact is about the most libertarian/State's rights oriented person here [Smile]

I would add that I find it unbelievable that you seem to think that early indoctrination cannot be overcome. Most US citizens love their country because it has done well by them. To claim that the sole reason for that is the repetition of a single phrase is simple, but wrong – there are many levels of complexity to almost anything. The reasons behind a love for ones country changes from person to person.

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
Paladine: You don't have to begin and end every post by conceding all my factual statements but thanks for doing so. If you don't feel like a genius, it's because you're not. But now on to your inane ranting....

I said:...since those items don't necessarily involve slaughtering people then you think there is no reason to have stopped using those costumes, symbols and salutes, and that you believe they should be resurrected.

As part of your inane rant you said "Hitler also wore pants." Thanks for highlighting how correct I am and that the best you can do is create absurd comparisons to pants. You attempt to excuse and cover-up the ideology and philosophy of Nazism as expressed through their costumes, symbols, salutes etc is loathesome.

Thanks for admitting that you are all a bunch of state-serving zombies envisioned by Hitler and that you cover it up with inane comparisons to wearing pants. If you really wanted to highlight your inane reasoning you could open up your own website detailing your the Nazi-Pant connection stupidiy, and cite it as a reference whenever someone told you that you were insane.

Your attempts to excuse and cover up for the National Socialist German Worker's Party and the mass slaughter of the socialist "wholecaust" is equally inane in your generalities about the german language, patriotism, chemistry, etc. Thanks for making me look and feel like an utter genius in comparison.

The reason you engage in your absurd remarks is is because you cannot dispute anything I have said and you concede it all. Your statements are comical.

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rexcurrydotnet
Member
Member # 2206

 - posted      Profile for rexcurrydotnet   Email rexcurrydotnet       Edit/Delete Post 
Firedrake rage:
I said: "You pretend that you don't care what Bellamy's goals were because you like those goals, because you were taught to like them, just as I said that was Bellamy's goal."

You claim that WarrsawPact is about the most libertarian/State's rights oriented person here, yet you can see that in his remarks he made no mention of ending government schools, no mention of the racism and segregation imposed by government schools, no mention of repealing laws that require teachers to attempt to lead classes in the socialist's pledge, no mention of ending social security, slave numbers that children were given as infants, that track their incomes, locations, jobs for life, stealing all the way, a national income tax, various forms of nationalization and government operations, massive spending, massive deb and instead pretended (as you do) that the topic here is simply some obscure history about the pledge of allegiance.

He (like you) had nothing to say about the hundreds of millions killed in the socialist wholecaust (of which the Holocaust was a part): 62 million in the Union of Soviet Socilaist Republics, 35 million in the Peoples' Republic of China, 21 million by the National Socialist German Workers' Party. All of them influenced and inspired by the Bellamys, their pledge, government schools, government racism and segregation, industrial armies, military socialism, and national socialism.

You are all perfect examples of how such hellholes come to exist and last so long and kill so many. You are intellectually dishonest.

I would add that I find it unbelievable that you seem to concede that early indoctrination is occurring, but that you remark in passing that it can be overcome, but concede that it is not overcome and say nothing more on your red herring. Your claim that the sole reason for this discussion is the repetition of a single phrase is simplistic and wrong and shows your intellectual dishonesty. You say "To claim that the sole reason for that is the repetition of a single phrase is simple, but wrong – there are many levels of complexity to almost anything." And all of those levels you have ignored as you continue to pretend that the only topic is the "repetition of a single phrase" -which in itself under the circumstances is a bizarre robotic ritual led by government at the ring of a bell in military formation, all of which you make light of as well as ignoring all the other many levels of complexity not only in the past but today.

Posts: 15 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Rex, I don't know what draws me to hopeless causes like a moth to a flame, but here goes again.

You are indeed barking up the wrong tree. I support competition for public schools (and I fully expect public schools to lose that fight in a fair market, where paying for said public schools is not compulsory). I have already established that I don't like reciting the Pledge as authored, and certainly not like Pavlov's dog. I also note that a significant number of my fellow students either feel the same way and act on it or don't care enoguh about the Pledge itself to act on the words.

I am absolutely opposed to racism and racial segregation because quite honestly I am aware that race does not exist. The very concept of a race within the human species is absurd. There is more genetic differentiation within a so-called "race" than between the "races." There is more of a genetic difference between members of two different tribes of Africans than there is between a European "white" and a Japanese person! And we have no sub-species, no complications with interbreeding (in fact, "interbreeding" of people from different geographic and genetic concentrations often improves chances of avoiding diseases like Tay-Sachs and sickle-cell anemia... just like mutt dogs, actually). Again, you barked up the wrong tree big time on that one. And I know for a fact that this is being taught in publicly-funded community colleges, by the way.

If you want to talk about how I feel about Social Security and other collective programs, march on over to the General Comments section of this forum and see how in current threads I've been supporting a dissolution/collapse of Social Security (and I have this crazy theory that George W. Bush just might agree with me). I've been ranting about SocSec for some time now, and my real life friend on this board, Tezcatlipoca, shares my loathing of it. By the way, he voted Libertarian in the last election, and had not the Libertarian Party been controlled by people bent on losing and had the candidates not been so flawed, I would have too. As it stands, I'm wondering whether Bush is a neolibertarian at heart.

I'm also against the other major payroll tax, the income tax, and I've stated so on other threads here.

I'm not dismissive of the body count of Communism or other socialist countries either. About a year ago I posted several times on this forum quotes from Brian Crozier's "The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Empire," specifically the part where he counts up the 100 million people Communism killed, and the part where he denounced socialism and particularly that it seemed to get more disastrous the more it was enacted in a particular place.

In fact, my neolibertarian credentials are pretty darn solid. So kindly stop beating on the poor straw man, sir, and respond to my points. I debate constantly because I want to test my ideas and have people disagree with me. I'm open to changing my mind... IF people present a convincing argument and can convey that to me by not distracting me with disrespect.

As a result, I don't come here ranting and raving. I don't just wait for my turn to speak, I listen first. People have an awful lot to teach you, especially when you're the most certain of yourself.

If you really cared about reform and people understanding your viewpoint, and maybe changing their ways, you'd try to communicate with them. As it stands you're a broken record.

I never addressed the origins of the Pledge precisely because I am of the opinion that the origins do not reflect on how people recite the Pledge today. The character of the nation is not one that takes the Pledge that seriously, that treats it as a sacred oath. There is even a sharp division in this country regarding why we keep the words "under God" in there, and the reason for that is that we're not interested in being constrained by the past. This is a country of people who want to determine for themselves what they say and do, and in case you hadn't noticed this country has a spectacular track record for suspicion of authority. Suspicion of authority is a popular theme in our culture, even in hundred-million-dollar films propped up by massive studios. That you are typing all this stuff about how terrible our country is is a testament to your freedom to say it as well as your ability to cultivate such openly anti-government opinions.

When you published your website denouncing the government, did the Gestapo (or whatever America's parallel organization is) shut you down? Were you harassed? Did the thought police start bugging you and rifling through your financial records and shut down your palce of business? Has anyone on this board reported you for unAmerican activities?
I've got a funny feeling the answer to all of those questions is No.
Even after the Patriot Act, people like you keep on posting freely. And people like me keep on celebrating that even as we pull our hair out in frustration trying to talk sensibly with you.

You want to talk about intellectual honesty? By all means let's do so. Your posting here and maintenance of a website with a patently anti-government message despite a virtual army of intelligence agents and police officers in this country is a monument to your hypocrisy. You are among the freest people in history, with more speech dissemination powers than most human beings throughout the generations.

Despite all the obstacles to liberty that still exist in this world, I'm an outspoken optimist. There's an awful lot of good news out there for those ready to hear it. Get your mind out of the past that no one today feels particularly comfortable chaining themselves down to (as evidenced by our refusal to compare ourselves with either the Nazis or the Romans) and get to noticing just how good we've got it!

I'm willing to talk with you rationally, if you're prepared to approach the rest of us like intelligent human beings. I think you'd find it a lot more productive than rehashing all your tired arguments about how we're still slaves to Hitler and the Romans. Hitler had this idea for a "people's car" and talked to Ferdinand Porsche about how to go about building a cheap Volkswagen (literally, "folk's wagon"). Yet, somehow, I don't feel like slipping into a brown shirt and strapping on a Hitler Youth knife when I hop into a VW Jetta or Porsche Carrera.

The VW started out as Hitler's idea and political pawn, says the following link: History of the Volkwagen. Note the quote:
quote:
In 1948, the British appointed Dr. Ing. Heinz Nordhoff, a former designer for BMW, as director of the Volkswagen. He began his job with a statement of policy. Remembering the history of the car under Hitler, he said, "The future begins when you cut every tie with the past."
They put that foolishness into the past, put faith in the future, moved on, and are still succeeding admirably as capitalists. Can't you?

[Edited to add: And please note something about how we've moved on from the original Pledge, no matter what its original design: we've negated any of the original meaning by choosing to ignore the historical beginnings, willful ignorance because we honestly don't CARE about the Pledge unless some kid is pressured (not even forced, but pressured!) into saying "under God" in that sentence.

We've cut the only meaningful ties to that past even though we're still saying the Pledge. That's America for you. Who else could build a culture that talked about a holiday as if it didn't literally mean "holy day" or even talk about Christmas as if it wasn't short for "Christ's Mass"? We're so freedom-obsessed, we insist that we celebrate other people's religious holidays -- only without all that offensive religion.
]

[ December 23, 2004, 08:09 AM: Message edited by: WarrsawPact ]

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1