[Helpful_Bunny]

As a non-American responder, are you talking about the original pledge, or the 1948-1954 changes that added the words "under God" to it?[1] The original was formally adopted in 1942 by Congress, prior to this change:

The original: I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

This change was largely brought about by the realization that the pledge was dangerously close to the NAZI party's way of indoctrinating Nationalism (however Fascistic it was)[2] and that there should be some manner to differentiate between the good, moral, American version and the evil, unethical German version.

Nationalism (and Socialism) were ideologies of the 19th Century, and America does not have a great history of citizenship for all, with certain cultures not sharing in it until post WW1.[3]

So, I'm afraid: the pledge does, and always has had, a streak of Nationalism a mile wide to it. I find the modern American denial of this fascinating.

And, if you cannot see how it is used to indoctrinate children, then I am happy to provide non-wiki specific psychology papers proving that it does.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance#Addition_... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute [3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Citizenship_Act_of_1924

[newbie12]

Actually adding "under God" happened in the 1950s and was about the Cold War and the fight against godless Communism.

[Helpful_Bunny]

Please read what I wrote, and the links provided. I stated 1948-1954, and this is exactly correct:

Louis A. Bowman [in 1948], an attorney from Illinois, was the first to initiate the addition of "under God" to the Pledge. The National Society of the Daughters of the American Revolution gave him an Award of Merit as the originator of this idea...

President Eisenhower had been baptized a Presbyterian very recently, just a year before. He responded enthusiastically to Docherty in a conversation following the service. Eisenhower acted on his suggestion the next day and on February 8, 1954, Rep. Charles Oakman (R-Mich.), introduced a bill to that effect

The "Daughters of the American Revolution"[1] were a political group that had considerable influence in American politics pre-WWII and their initial drives had nothing to do with fears of Communism (they were also against the revocation of the Bellamy salute until the declaration of war in 1941). So, your blase claim is not wholly correct ~ they're also a fascinating element of female power within the United States and the influences of matriarchal organization "behind the scenes of power" are little known, sadly. Well worth looking into.

However, yes, of course this period includes "the Red Scare", and this pledge was tied into this new strand of the American National Psyche. I apologize, I assumed this was a given at this level of debate.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daughters_of_the_American_Revo...

[jlgreco]

Correct, though the Bellamy salute was phased out because of the Nazis.

[cpher]

I'm talking about the current incarnation which makes the most sense to me anyway. I know there were different versions but I like the current version the best. And it's clearly the most "liberal" in language.

[jlgreco]

The only differences between the current pledge and the pledge as it was many decades ago are superficial. Changing the salute and adding the (problematic for other reasons) reference to a god serve to change the appearance of the pledge, but not its substance. It remains as nationalistic as ever.

(Also, the addition of the words "under god" and a reference to a particular government hardly make it more "liberal"?)