Whenever I gently point out that public schools are and always have been government indoctrination centers people look at me with gimlet eyes. Not always of course but enough. This is weird in that schools don't obscure this reality.
For example, with little exception, no matter what school you went to, no matter the grade you were in, the first thing you did every morning was the Pledge of Allegiance. Through the magic of repetition, this deeply symbolic act was just seen as either the natural way to start the day or a mindless formality to complete before getting down to business. In actuality, it is neither.
Think I'm making a mountain out of a mound. When was the last time you pledged allegiance to anything else? I'm not saying you haven't. But such pledges are rare, and can usually be counted on one hand. Now how many of those pledges have you recited daily? School is generally 180 days a year. If one averages 13 absentees a year after 12 years they will have recited these words about 2000 times. With that in mind, I think it's only fair to lawyer through this pledge. Let's see if it makes sense or if it's like I suspect, government propaganda camouflaged as a cultural tradition.
Before I begin, let me say it's not my intent here to persuade anyone to pledge or not allegiance to the flag. I intend only to demystify this national prayer. To bring any pledge of allegiance from the unconscious to the conscious part of our mind where it will either thrive or wither away.
Ok, let's begin.
“I Pledge Allegiance”
This is a pretty boilerplate intro. Let's proceed.
“To the Flag of the United States of America”
This is where it gets interesting. It does not ask us to align with the ideals of the nation but to a symbolic representation of it.
Weirdly it does not even ask us for loyalty to a governing body, which is something I would be skeptical of. But that at least would make sense from an authoritative caste of characters. Instead, it only asks us allegiance to the flag. On the surface, This doesn't make any sense. Let's say America is invaded by Nazi, liquid Terminators hybrids. They oppressed us in every conceivable way but they let us retain our flag and it ties to our nation's identity. By the logic of the pledge, we would have to have allegiance to these new overlords. After all, we did not pledge our allegiance to any ideas of freedom or egalitarianism but to a symbol. Whoever waves the flag gets to make the rules
“And to the Republic for which it Stands. ”
So now we are asked to swear allegiance to a particular method of government. There is nothing special about a republic. As a system of governance, it's only good as much as it keeps tyranny away. Any number of atrocities can legally happen under a republic though. All it would take for our sacred republic to endorse genocide or slavery is a majority of the population to elect enough congress critters to have a 2/3rds majority to amend the constitution to endorse such madness. This is a decent safeguard but it's far from perfect. If such atrocity befalls us I hope people feel no obligation to partake in the legally sanctioned madness because it has the blessing of the republic.
“One Nation under God”
This line gets all the attention. Not part of the original text the phrase "Under God" was amended by Dwight Eisenhower as a safeguard against communism which is generally an atheist political system. And predictably enough people who are sensitive to theocracy no matter how embryotic it may be have been clamoring for its removal ever since.
When everyone is done being triggered though, we should acknowledge God is a vague term. It can refer to the Judeo-Christain head honcho, but it can also imply a more ethereal force that coded the law of nature. One doesn't have to believe in "God" in any classical way to acknowledge a God. One can simply acknowledge that as a nation we exist in something far bigger, such as a universe with natural, immutable, and somewhat understandable laws.
Oddly enough there seems a correlation between people who object to the removal of the phrase "Under God " with those who endorse the idea of American exceptionalism. This is odd in that the idea of American Exceptionalism is that as a nation we exist out of historical cause and effect. That we are somehow distinct from other nations. This to me always struck me as silly. If it was true it would either remove us from any sort of divine dominion or render such divine forces to a political partisan. We are distinct from every other nation of course because our historical and geographical circumstances are distinctly ours. But that is also true for every other nation that ever existed. We are special not in the same way but by the same means as every other nation is special.
"Indivisible"
Perhaps the most timely word in the pledge. Many people now are advocating for a national divorce. I'm not one of them. I don’t think it would do much good. But I do think people should be free to associate with who and how they want. No one let alone everyone should feel obligated to identify and be ruled under one name if that, is not their desire. We should ask ourselves regularly if re-grouping in different ways make sense. I can think of far worse things than states or territories succeeding.
“With liberty”
Liberty is the legal recognition of freedom, which is the idea that we are in complete control of ourselves. That we only have power over other people to the extent they have consensually given us. And that such consent can be revoked at any time. I agree with this concept and have no reservations about pledging allegiance to it.
“And Justice for All”
This a poetic note to end on but contain the potential seeds of many poisonous fruits. Who gets to define justice? Is justice an eye for an eye because it's an equal exchange? Is it 2 teeth for a tooth justice, as seems fairer that an aggressor suffers more inconvenience than their victim? Is a severed tongue for speaking against those in power Justice? Many would claim so as they see far more value in social uniformity than in individual liberties.
Ultimately justice is defined by the one who can dish it out. "Justice for all" put too much agency in the hands of bureaucratic legal bodies that have their agenda for me to be comfortable with.
Now whether or not you agreed with my dissection of the Pledge is not important. I hope you have your own thoughts that conflict with mine. What is important is that this is likely the first time you analyzed something you repeated over 2000 times as your mind was developing. If that's not indoctrination I don't know what is.