“How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.”
If you’re an American, you probably know that yesterday was—I shit you not—Loyalty Day. So listen up flip-floppers: Starting yesterday, saying that Pepsi is fine when the restaurant only serves Coke products will land your fence-sitting ass in Gitmo. We’re at war, people. Nothing to be scared shitless of going on here.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:15 pm
Heh Loyalty is something that must first be earned, then re-earned continuously over time. It’s not something anyone can extract by edict. Besides, the Bush stand that loyalty to the Nation means loyalty to him doesn’t hold any water when you consider that he only believes he’s responsible for the people who voted for him rather than the nation as a whole. Add to that the way they turn on anyone who ever contradicts their least assertation, and it’s amazing this administration has managed to keep any sort of positve support at all. Looking after your own ass to the exclusion of all else will get you a lot of things, but loylaty isn’t on the list.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:20 pm
I looked it up, and apparently every sitting President since Eisenhower reaffirms 1st May as Loyalty Day. It was intended to counterbalance the fact that most of the rest of the world celebrates 1st of May as Labour Day — a day to celebrate workers. Apparently, supporting workers was too communist for Americans.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:21 pm
P.S. — It is much creepier now, considering the current political climate of the United States…
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Ahh Brinstar, you’re correct. Here’s the Wikipedia entry.
Actually, I’ll bet it was pretty creepy in 1954, back when we used Communism instead of terrorism to keep people scared. Sweetmeat makes a great point. It should be our government pledging (and earning) loyalty to us, rather than the other way around.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pm
It was a dark day when George W. was elected, but what’s wrong with the dream of a free land where people can openly express their differences with the government without fear of reprisal, where the goals and ideals as expressed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are remembered and re-affirmed?
You don’t have to agree with the current administration to respect the country.
And Brinstar, what are you talking about? We celebrate Labor Day the first Monday in September. Just because we celebrate it on some other day doesn’t mean anything. And why would America not support workers? Most Americans, including me, are workers.
There’s got to be some limits to cynicism. A knee-jerk reaction against everything the government does or stands for is as much unthinking and naive as agreeing with everything the government does, or stands for.
I may be a liberal blue-state weenie, but I do love America. I don’t find any paradox in that.
May 2nd, 2007 at 1:24 pm
I agree in principle, it’s unhealthy to be cynical to such a degree as to disparage every single thing our government does. But like your average MMO player, most of us aren’t going to run around pointing out what we love, but we’ll sure as heck rant about what we hate. Fortunately only about 10% of Americans read the official boards.
I think that in a free society, it’s not the place of our government to demand loyalty of the populace. That’s what got us to the “you’re either for the war or against the troops” thinking. To paraphrase Sweetmeat, loyalty is a quality to be earned, not de facto demanded.
I’ll concede that this was a “knee-jerk” post though. (damn my new found “asides” power!) A friend sent me the link and I rubbed my hands in evil joy and jumped right on it without doing more research. The post probably would have read differently if I had. (”Eisenhower is a dick, Film at 11″) Bad Amber. I concede that, for once, our President was following precedence.
May 2nd, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Of course it’s within the rights of the government to demand loyalty from its people. That’s what the government is; we entrust it with our lives and hope we end up better for it. If you live under a government (and unless you’re reading this in Somalia, you do), but it doesn’t have your loyalty, then you have given it your life without being in a position to demand anything back for it, since you don’t want any part of it.
It’s far better to learn to influence the government than to ignore it and hope everything works out in the end.
Being loyal to the government means being part of it; it means voting for the people who represent YOUR views (or heck, running for office). It means using it as YOUR tool instead of allowing other people to use it against you.
If you don’t like the government as it is, ranting about it on blogs is pretty pointless. CHANGE it.
Figure out who, in 2008, needs to be elected for you to feel you would get a government to which you could be loyal. Then post those here, convince everyone who reads this blog to vote for them, too, and maybe May 1, 2009, you’ll be able to say, I’m loyal to America, because I am America and I did my best and helped make it this way.
Probably not coincidentally, a BBC reporter wrote an article about why, on the whole, it is a good thing the USA exists.
May 2nd, 2007 at 2:23 pm
We might be talking slightly past each other, because I actually agree with you. What I’m talking about is blind loyalty. The kind of loyalty your dog has. Our government shouldn’t ask for that kind of loyalty, and I think that’s what a “Loyalty Day” asks for.
May 2nd, 2007 at 2:42 pm
Good quote from that BBC article:
“As the writer and poet John Ciardi put it: ‘The Constitution gives every American the inalienable right to make a damn fool of himself!’ ”
The Constitution gives us the right, the internet gives us the opportunity.
It’s a rare event to witness such a beautifully ironic scene, a poster ranting on a blog about how pointless it is to rant on a blog. Well played!
May 2nd, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Nothing in the proclamation of Loyalty Day you linked to asks for blind loyalty or even to support administration policy. It just says to remember and support the historical ideals of the United States.
Amber, you know I’m a loyal fan of your blog. But taking up straw man, populist opinions like “Sony is evil” or “our government stinks” is just jumping on a bandwagon. It’s easy to point out what’s wrong with the world when everyone else is doing the same thing. I liked the goodbye to Sanya Thomas. You wrote that and it meant something.
You could have taken the Loyalty Day proclamation and pointed out which parts of it you didn’t support or found stupid, but instead you compared it to a Nazi loyalty oath (proving Godwin’s Law) and went on as if the Loyalty Day proclamation said the same thing, which it didn’t…
It’s a small thing, but your post was just a disappointment, as knee-jerk as you accuse everyone else of being, you can and have done better. Taking the low road toward mindless ridicule that only shows you didn’t read what you’re mocking is beneath you.
May 2nd, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Point taken. I didn’t research the original link, and made some assumptions that turned out to be false. Knowing what I know now, I wouldn’t have written the post, or I’d have at least taken a different angle. As I see it now (which is a relic of the cold war), it seems less nefarious and more quaint, like those old “Your uterus and you!” 50’s era “health class” films.
FWIW, here’s the requested positive take: the fact that most of us have never heard of Loyalty Day tells me that this holiday hasn’t stood the test of time, and that a free society really can be self-correcting. That’s encouraging. (and I mean that with all sincerity.)
May 2nd, 2007 at 5:15 pm
Wait just a damn minute. This is the internet. Nobody admits mistakes! L2P noob! Do you even…..kittens? OOOOOHHHH KITTENS!!!!RAWR!!!1!11!!!
May 2nd, 2007 at 8:28 pm
My what and who?
May 3rd, 2007 at 8:41 am
I guess my reaction was less about a national loyalty day and more about how certain words have been poisened by the administration so that they no longer evoke what they aught. Patriot, Loyalty, American: these are all words that have been taken by the administration and twisted to mean things other than what they meant for me growing up. I love America. Indeed the fact that I say America rather than the USA is a hint that I’m just as damn fool proud of my country and what I believe it represents and stands for as any other ignorant, smug, reactionay koot in the nation.
Unfortuantely over the past 5 years or so America has come to represent something less. Less good, less steadfast in the protection of goodness. Less, and less, and less. Looking at the author of that degradation ask for a loyalty to something he’s tried his best to undermine was really more than I could take without saying something about it. If I choose to say it here rather than else where, well I feel like there’s a decent discourse here that is hard to find in more polarized places. People come here for reasons other than the polotics mostly so it brings a real discussion to the political posts that is lacking in places that exist to push a political agenda.
May 3rd, 2007 at 1:41 pm
“Actually, I’ll bet it was pretty creepy in 1954, back when we used Communism instead of terrorism to keep people scared.”
Let me start out by saying that I think that Bush is not very bright. Even though he attended Yale and did well there, that does not mean is the brightest lamp in the room. When compared against the average American Bush shines (because the average American is extremely dim) but when compared against bright people his lamp seems a bit dim.
Given that Bush is not the brightest lamp in the world, terrorism is not a red hearing created by a mediocre presidency to distract the press from blunders. Terrorism is not a fictional thing that was created to “wag the dog”. The terrorism that we have in the world today has been built by the neglect of many, many administrations.
If you think that chopping the heads off of infidels started only after 911 you are ill informed. It just became popular to show it in the news after 911 but similar things have been going on for millennia. There are many places in the world today where most Americans would be executed for living what most Americans would think are normal lives.
Fanatics in the world today do not want peace. The fanatics causing terrorism in the world want nothing less than the death of all who will not believe in “exactly” what the terrorists believe. Even if you believe in almost the same things you are still considered a worthless person to the typical terrorist.
This fanaticism leads to only one end in the fanatics mind, the extermination of most of the world.
They do not hate Americans because we fiddle with the politics of the world. They do not want a peaceful coexistence. They hate Americans because we exist. They will stop hating us when we cease to exist…and that is their goal…to ensure that we cease to exist.
You cannot reason with them. If you try to reason with them they will be polite and seem to listen only to lull their target into a false sense of security so that they can continue with their master plan…the eradication of all who they deem unfit.
“Sweetmeat makes a great point. It should be our government pledging (and earning) loyalty to us,”
In a way I agree. Plus the above quote makes a great sound bite.
The thing is though, all those in elected office do raise their hand and make a pledge of loyalty when they accept the office that they were elected to.
No, thankfully they do not pledge to a specific person but rather the Constitution and laws that regulate.
When you say “us”, who are the “us” that the government should pledge their loyalty? To the radical “us” that live in some rural place, in bomb shelters and think stranger things than the average person? If you meant the “us” as in U.S., well then you have your wish because they do that.
“I think that in a free society, it’s not the place of our government to demand loyalty of the populace.”
The only loyalty that the government asks from the citizens of America is the Loyalty that is the opposite of treason. Other than that they do not really care much.
Now some may point to how many officials called some of the recent discussions against the war, disloyal. The accusations were not against the populace but against those that swore the oath when they took office. The accusations were against those who’s yelling and screaming seemed to be done more for political gain and had little to do with saving America. To this type of action many did use the term disloyal.
It is not disloyal to show dissent or to disagree with the policies of the administration but for elected officials to disagree with policy in a way that could cause harm to America when other, though less politically advantageous, methods are available is disloyal to the public and disloyal to America.
I see nothing wrong with politicians disagreeing. They will disagree. If one group of politicians takes the disagreement and creates potential harm to members of the armed forces or they create potential harm to their country and they do it for the main purpose of creating political hardship for their political opponents…it shows a total lack of morals and total disregard for the oath that they took when accepting office…it is disloyal.
It is disloyal for politicians to put their own political party and political loyalty before the loyalty that they were sworn to put first. (This does not exclude dissenting political opinions.)
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:18 pm
I have a relative who was a Marine sharpshooter. One of the guys who goes in before the guys who go in before the army goes in. During his 2nd tour, while on duty in a place he can’t talk about, he was injured in some ways that will leave him uncomfortable for the rest of his life. He mustered out at 30, about 7 years ago.
Since Viet Nam, he tells me, the average number of kills for Marine snipers during an entire career was around one. That’s because we weren’t doing many things that required that kind of work. That was the case until the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has buddies still in the Corp who are now into triple digits. Guys who will, psychologically, never be the same or, probably, quite whole in spirit.
I’m a Blue State Liberal. I believe in socialized health care, PBS and NPR, waaaaay more money for public education and the right of any consenting adult to screw and marry (not necessarily in that order) any consenting adult they choose. I don’t think George Bush and Co. are stupid; I think they’re evil.
But none of that precludes me loving my country, being patriotic, having pride in those aspects of our history and culture that deserve it, and being loyal. And when I think about the stuff that thousands of people like those Marines have gone through — whether or not it’s for an evil plan and bad ideas — I know I have to be loyal to them, too. Not to the current administration; not to a particular party or platform; to my brothers and sisters.
That’s what being part of a Democratic and free country is about. Your responsibility to your fellow citizens even when you don’t agree with the choices your current crop of leaders has made; even when you don’t agree with a particular citizen.
We forget that all the time in the heart of our heated, vitriolic rhetoric. We forget that we owe each other our loyalty — because there is *no government* here other than that made up of citizens. The ideals of democracy and liberty are good and great, even when our elected officials smear them with corporate greed and transparent cynicism. The idea of personal responsibility balanced with personal freedom is important and deserving of loyalty.
I hate lots of the particulars of what goes on in any given day in the US. I hate the bickering, the spending riders on bills, the special interest groups, the pandering, the lying. And I’m certainly not loyal to that. The same way I’m not loyal to my friends’ bad habits. But I’m loyal to my friends.
And I’m loyal to the country (one of several, yes) that proved to the world that democracy and capitalism can do some amazing things together. That gave us quite a few decent inventions, the best summer movies, Gatorade, rock-and-roll and video games. Some awful shite, too… but still.
PS: John? The “average American” is average.
PPS: I had no idea it was “Loyalty Day” until I heard about it here. At home we used to just sing:
Hooray, Hooray! It is the First of May!
Outdoor whoopee begins today!
May 4th, 2007 at 8:45 am
It was also Law Day, also a little creepy but incredibly boring.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:48 am
“I don’t think George Bush and Co. are stupid; I think they’re evil.”
That is interesting. I feel just the same but about Lib Politicians. I guess it would depend on what we would feel or think constitutes evil. Is it intent that determines evil or is it actions? Is it morals? Is it following feelings rather than principles? Is it goals?
If we read about many truly evil people in history, most of them did not think that they were evil but actually thought that they were trying to do good. (Even the truly evil dictators that murdered and tortured millions thought that they were doing good and fighting evil.)
I find it very strange how the concept of evil, if left to personal subjectivity for creating the definition, can mean almost anything and can justify almost any action. That is why I tend to give more trust to those who do not make up their own morals based on how they feel.
I do not think that Libs (non-politicians) are evil (mostly). Most Libs are Lib because they have a heart that is too big and they get sucked in to the concepts of flimflam politicians that know just how to pull on the heartstrings to get the votes that they need. (Note that I am not saying Conservative politicians are immune to being evil. They are not all trying to do ‘good’ and many of them lie. There is evil on both sides. Where there is power there is evil trying to get at it.)
If Lib politicians could actually accomplish much of what they say that they want to accomplish, I too would probably be more of a Lib than on the other side of the fence but…it is just not true. Even most of the Lib politicians do not believe in what they preach…they just want the votes and they want the power. I would rather that most of the power and money not be given to those who hunger so much for it.
Long ago when I was in high school I thought that I was a Lib because I thought that it meant “progressive”. Now that I see what Lib politicians do with money, what they do with power, what they do to others and their goals for society, I realized long ago that even though I am not a right wing person I am defiantly not a Lib.
Concerning Bush. He is not evil. He is just not very bright about all things and he has some advisors that he should not have. He believes he is fighting evil that has attacked the country.
Making mistakes is different than being evil in my book.
–
As to most Americans being just average.
Look at the last election. Half that could vote did not and half of those that did vote were stupid. (Note that it does not matter if you are a Lib or Conservative the above observation is still accurate.)
That means 75% of the population does not care or are silly enough to be sucked in by silver tongue devils that say what ever it takes to get a vote. (Note again that this is true whichever party you belong.)
I interview hundreds of people every year from all walks of life and it is very sad what I find in the “average” person.
Most people tend to make the mistake of thinking that others are like they are (as far as intelligence goes). If we are fairly intelligent then we tend to feel that others are too. Unfortunately most are not highly intelligent.
I guess that if we take an average of the people and use a bell curve, it is true that most are about average…that is what “average” means. The thing is, average is not that great and is actually very low compared to where it needs to be.
May 4th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
@John: “The thing is, average is not that great and is actually very low compared to where it needs to be.”
If you raise the average, it will still be average. If you mean that you’d like the average American (and/or, I assume, the average European, African, Asian… anyone) to be, on the whole, better educated… sure. Who’d disagree with that?
But I think your tone is a bit… offensive, frankly. “Half that did vote were stupid.” I’ve already said I don’t care for George Bush. But do I think that everyone that voted for him was stupid? Do I think his entire cabinet is “average or below” in terms of intelligence? Do I think all Republicans are idiots? Of course not!
That, in itself, being a gross over generalization… would be stupid.
May 7th, 2007 at 7:24 am
“I’ll concede that this was a “knee-jerk” post though. (damn my new found “asides” power!) A friend sent me the link and I rubbed my hands in evil joy and jumped right on it without doing more research.”
Pretty fairly typical of people of your political leanings.
May 21st, 2007 at 7:18 am
Pretty fairly typical of people of your political leanings.
That’s a tendentious thing to say.