Patriots
and Protesters Should Take a Knee for the Constitution
By
John W. Whitehead
“Seems
like in the past 15 years or so the idea of patriotism has changed some. More
polarized, more tied to political or ideological views. I’ve never seen
patriotism or the flag connected to either;
I see the flag more as the symbol of a nation that allows the freedom to
express those ideas. That alone deserves my respect.”— Macy Moore,
U.S. Marine
September
29, 2017 "Information
Clearing House" - By all means, let’s talk about patriotism and
President Trump’s call for “respect
for our Country, Flag and National Anthem.”
At a
time when the American flag adorns everything from men’s boxers and women’s
bikinis to beer koozies, bandannas and advertising billboards (with little
outcry from the American public), and the National Anthem is sung by Pepper
the Parrot during the Puppy Bowl, this conveniently timed outrage
over disrespect for the country’s patriotic symbols rings somewhat hollow,
detracts from more serious conversations that should be taking place about
critical policy matters of state, and further divides the nation and ensures
that “we the people” will not present a unified front to oppose the police
state.
First
off, let’s tackle this issue of respect or lack thereof for patriotic
symbols.
As the
U.S. Supreme Court has made clear, Americans have a right to abstain from
patriotic demonstrations (West Virginia State Board of Ed. v. Barnette,
1943) and/or actively protest that demonstration, for example, by raising
one’s fist during the Pledge of Allegiance (Holloman ex rel. Holloman v.
Harland, 2004). These First Amendment protections also extend to military
uniforms (worn to criticize the military) and military funeral protests (Snyder
v. Phelps, 2011).
Likewise,
Americans have a First Amendment right to display, alter or destroy the U.S.
flag as acts of symbolic protest speech.
In
fact, in Street
v. New York (1969), the Supreme Court held that the government
may not punish a person for uttering words critical of the flag, writing that
“the constitutionally guaranteed ‘freedom to be intellectually . . . diverse
or even contrary,’ and the ‘right to differ as to things that touch the heart
of the existing order,’ encompass the freedom to express publicly one’s
opinions about our flag, including those opinions which are defiant or
contemptuous.”
The
case arose after Sidney Street, hearing about the attempted murder of civil
rights leader James Meredith in Mississippi, burned a 48-star American flag
on a New York City street corner to protest what he saw as the government’s
failure to protect Meredith. Upon being questioned about the flag, Street
responded, “Yes;
that is my flag; I burned it. If they let that happen to Meredith, we don’t
need an American flag.”
In Spence
v. Washington (1974), the Court ruled that the right to display
the American flag with any mark or design upon it is a protected act of
expression. The case involved a college student who had placed a peace symbol
on a three by five foot American flag using removable black tape and
displayed it upside down from his apartment window.
Finally,
in Texas
v. Johnson (1989), the Court held that flag burning was
protected speech under the First Amendment. The case arose from a
demonstration near the site of the Republican National Convention in Dallas
during which protesters marched through the streets, chanted political
slogans, staged “die-ins” in front of several corporate offices to dramatize
the consequences of nuclear war, and burned the flag as a means of political
protest.
In
other words, if freedom means anything, it means that those exercising their
right to protest are showing the greatest respect for the principles on which
this nation was founded: the right to free speech and the right to dissent.
Clearly, the First Amendment to the Constitution assures Americans of the
right to speak freely, assemble freely and protest (petition the government
for a redress of grievances).
Whether
those First Amendment activities take place in a courtroom or a classroom, on
a football field or in front of the U.S. Supreme Court is not the issue: what
matters is that Americans have a right—according to the spirit, if not always
the letter, of the law—to voice their concerns without being penalized for
it.
Frankly,
the First Amendment does more than give us a right to criticize our country:
it makes it a civic duty.
Second,
let’s not confuse patriotism (love for or devotion to one’s country) with
blind obedience to the government’s dictates. That is the first step towards
creating an authoritarian regime.
One
can be patriotic and love one’s country while at the same time disagreeing
with the government or protesting government misconduct. As journalist Barbara
Ehrenreich recognizes, “Dissent,
rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots.”
Indeed,
I would venture to say that if you’re not speaking out or taking a stand
against government wrongdoing—if you’re marching in lockstep with anything
the government and its agents dole out—and if you’re prioritizing partisan
politics over the principles enshrined in the Constitution, then you’re not a
true patriot.
Real
patriots care enough to take a stand, speak out, protest and challenge the
government whenever it steps out of line.
There
is nothing patriotic about the lengths to which Americans have allowed the
government to go in its efforts to dismantle our constitutional republic and
shift the country into a police state.
It’s
not anti-American to be anti-war or anti-police misconduct or anti-racial
discrimination, but it is anti-American to be anti-freedom.
I have
come to realize that what many refer to as polarization—certainly, what the
government refers to as “extremism”—is actually Americans challenging the
status quo, especially the so-called government elite. Martin Luther King Jr.
put it best when, after being accused of extremism, responded, “The question
is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremist will you
be?”
How
many times over the years have I been criticized for being anti-American and
unpatriotic, reprimanded for being too negative in my views of the
government, admonished to have “faith” in our leaders, and ordered to refrain
from criticizing our president because Americans still live in the best
country in the world?
Is
this really what patriotism or loving your country is all about? If so, then
the great freedom fighters of history would be considered unpatriotic.
Too
many Americans seem to think that faith in the government and a positive
attitude are enough to get you through the day… that you’re not a good
citizen if you criticize the government… and that being a good citizen means
doing one thing: voting.
The
problem we face today, however, is that America requires more than voters
inclined to pay lip service to a false sense of patriotism. It requires
doers—a well-informed and very active group of doers—if we are to have any
chance of holding the government accountable and maintaining our freedoms.
After
all, it was not idle rhetoric that prompted the Framers of the Constitution
to begin with the words “We the people.” In the words of Supreme Court Chief
Justice Earl Warren, “there is an implicit assumption [throughout the
Constitution and Bill of Rights] that we, the people, will preserve our
democratic rights by acting responsibly in our enjoyment of them.”
This
ultimate responsibility for maintaining our freedoms rests with the people.
Third,
we need to stop acting as if showing “respect” for the country, flag and
national anthem is more important than the freedoms they represent.
Listen:
I served in the Army. I lived through the Civil Rights era. I came of age
during the Sixties, when activists took to the streets to protest war and
economic and racial injustice. As a constitutional lawyer, I defend people
daily whose civil liberties are being violated, including high school
students prohibited from wearing American flag t-shirts to school, allegedly
out of a fear that it might be disruptive.
I
understand the price that must be paid for freedom. None of the people I
served with or marched with or represented put our lives or our liberties on
the line for a piece of star-spangled cloth or a few bars of music: we took
our stands and made our sacrifices because we believed we were fighting to
maintain our freedoms and bring about justice for all Americans.
As
such, responsible citizenship means being outraged at the loss of others’
freedoms, even when our own are not directly threatened.
The
Framers of the Constitution knew very well that whenever and wherever
democratic governments had failed, it was because the people had abdicated
their responsibility as guardians of freedom. They also knew that whenever in
history the people denied this responsibility, an authoritarian regime arose
which eventually denied the people the right to govern themselves.
All
governments fall into two classifications: those with a democratic form and
those that are authoritarian, ruled by an individual or some oligarchic
elite.
Acting
responsibly, however, means that there are certain responsibilities and
duties without which our rights would become meaningless. Duties of
citizenship extend beyond the act of voting, which is only the first step in
acting responsibly. Citizens must be willing to stand and fight to protect
their freedoms. And if need be, it will entail criticizing the government.
This
is true patriotism in action.
What
this means is that we can still be patriotic and love our country while
disagreeing with the government or going to court to fight for freedom.
Responsible citizenship means being outraged at the loss of others’ freedoms,
even when our own are not directly threatened. It also means remembering that
the prime function of any free government is to protect the weak against the
strong.
Love
of country will sometimes entail carrying a picket sign or going to jail or
taking a knee, if necessary, to preserve liberty and challenge injustice. And
it will mean speaking up for those with whom you might disagree.
Tolerance
for dissent, we must remember, is a vital characteristic of the citizens of a
democratic society. As Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “If
there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for
attachment than any other, it is the principle of free thought--not free
thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we
hate.”
Loving
your country does not mean being satisfied with the status quo or the way
government is being administered. Government invariably, possibly inevitably,
oversteps its authority. As human beings are not perfect, governments,
because they are constructs of human beings, will necessarily be imperfect as
well.
Love
of country, it must be emphasized, is always strengthened by both a knowledge
of history and of the Constitution and, when need be, acting on that knowledge.
“If we have no appreciation of the past,” Justice Warren recognized, “we can
have little understanding of the present or vision for the future.”
The
problems facing our generation are numerous and are becoming incredibly
complex.
Technology,
which has developed at a rapid pace, offers those in power more invasive and
awesome possibilities than ever before. Never in American history has there
been a more pressing need to maintain the barriers in the Constitution
erected by our Founders to check governmental power and abuse.
As I
make clear in my book Battlefield
America: The War on the American People, we’re at a very crucial
crossroads in American history. We have to be well-informed, not only about
current events but well-versed in the basics of our rights and duties as
citizens. If not, in perceived times of crisis, we may very well find
ourselves in the clutches of a governmental system that is alien to
everything for which America stands. And make no mistake about it, the mass
of citizens will continue to be misinformed, and as astute political leaders
have recognized in the past, they can be easily led.
Therein
is the menace to our freedoms.
Stop
falling for the distractions. Stop allowing yourself to be fooled by
propaganda and partisan politics. Stop acting as if the only thing worth
getting outraged about is whether a bunch of football
players stand or kneel for the National Anthem.
Stop
being armchair patriots and start acting like foot soldiers for the
Constitution.
Remember,
it’s all a game, a ruse, a dance intended to keep you in line and marching to
the government’s tune instead of freedom’s call. In this age of spin doctors
and manipulation, those who question the motives of government provide a
necessary counterpoint to those who would blindly follow where politicians
choose to lead.
Past
regimes understood well how to manipulate and maneuver. As Hermann Goering,
one of Hitler’s top military leaders, remarked during the Nuremberg trials:
It is
always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy,
or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the
leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being
attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the
country to danger. It works the same in any country.
Constitutional
attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His
new book Battlefield
America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks,
2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted
at johnw@rutherford.org.
|
Paul Craig Roberts Translations
What part will your country play in World War III?
CROATIAN ENGLISH GREEK NEDERLANDS POLSKI PORTUGUESE ROMANIAN SPANISH РУССКИЙ
What part will your country play in World War III?
The true origins of the two World Wars have been deleted from all our history books and replaced with mythology. Neither War was started (or desired) by Germany, but both at the instigation of a group of European Zionist Jews with the stated intent of the total destruction of Germany. The documentation is overwhelming and the evidence undeniable. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
That history is being repeated today in a mass grooming of the Western world’s people (especially Americans) in preparation for World War III – which I believe is now imminent.
Labels
- A Arte da Guerra
- Announcements
- Articles & Columns
- Comitato No Guerra No Nato
- Croatian
- CZECH
- Dave Kranzler
- ENGLISH
- ERIC ZUESSE
- Finnian Cunningham
- FRENCH
- GERMAN
- GREEK
- Guest Contributions
- HELLENIC
- INTERVIEW
- ITALIANO
- Manlio Dinucci
- NATO & NUKES
- NO WAR NO NATO
- NORWEGIAN
- POLISH
- PORTUGUESE
- PUTIN
- ROMANIAN
- RUSSIAN
- SPANISH
- US NATO War Agenda
Sunday, October 1, 2017
Constitutional Attorney John Whitehead Tells Us What Patriotism Is
sister site
CROATIAN ENGLISH GREEK NEDERLANDS POLSKI PORTUGUESE ROMANIAN SPANISH РУССКИЙ
What part will your country play in World War III?
The true origins of the two World Wars have been deleted from all our history books and replaced with mythology. Neither War was started (or desired) by Germany, but both at the instigation of a group of European Zionist Jews with the stated intent of the total destruction of Germany. The documentation is overwhelming and the evidence undeniable. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
That history is being repeated today in a mass grooming of the Western world’s people (especially Americans) in preparation for World War III – which I believe is now imminent.
BRUTALITY
BRUTALITY IN ACTION
AND NO ONE REACTS AGAINST AND OPPOSES IT!!!....
BRUTALIDADE EM ACÇÃO
E
NINGUÉM REAJE CONTRA ELA E SE OPÕE!!!...
https://twitter.com/backtolife_2023/status/1589485984361873408?s=20&t=7vdffgzpUFi2yeU4FxCHng
What part will your country play in World War III?
By Larry Romanoff, May 27, 2021
The true origins of the two World Wars have been deleted from all our history books and replaced with mythology. Neither War was started (or desired) by Germany, but both at the instigation of a group of European Zionist Jews with the stated intent of the total destruction of Germany. The documentation is overwhelming and the evidence undeniable. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
READ MORE
https://www.moonofshanghai.com/2021/05/larry-romanoff-what-part-will-your.html
Discurso do Presidente da Rússia, Vladimir Putin, na manhã do dia 24 de Fevereiro de 2022
Discurso do Presidente da Rússia, Vladimir Putin, Tradução em português
Presidente da Rússia, Vladimir Putin: Cidadãos da Rússia, Amigos,
Considero ser necessário falar hoje, de novo, sobre os trágicos acontecimentos em Donbass e sobre os aspectos mais importantes de garantir a segurança da Rússia.
Começarei com o que disse no meu discurso de 21 de Fevereiro de 2022. Falei sobre as nossas maiores responsabilidades e preocupações e sobre as ameaças fundamentais que os irresponsáveis políticos ocidentais criaram à Rússia de forma continuada, com rudeza e sem cerimónias, de ano para ano. Refiro-me à expansão da NATO para Leste, que está a aproximar cada vez mais as suas infraestruturas militares da fronteira russa.
É um facto que, durante os últimos 30 anos, temos tentado pacientemente chegar a um acordo com os principais países NATO, relativamente aos princípios de uma segurança igual e indivisível, na Europa. Em resposta às nossas propostas, enfrentámos invariavelmente, ou engano cínico e mentiras, ou tentativas de pressão e de chantagem, enquanto a aliança do Atlântico Norte continuou a expandir-se, apesar dos nossos protestos e preocupações. A sua máquina militar está em movimento e, como disse, aproxima-se da nossa fronteira.
Porque é que isto está a acontecer? De onde veio esta forma insolente de falar que atinge o máximo do seu excepcionalismo, infalibilidade e permissividade? Qual é a explicação para esta atitude de desprezo e desdém pelos nossos interesses e exigências absolutamente legítimas?
ARRIVING IN CHINA
J. Bacque
20 questions to Putin
The President of Russia delivered the Address to the Federal Assembly. The ceremony took place at the Manezh Central Exhibition Hall.
January 15, 2020
State of the Nation
Joint news conference following a Normandy format summit
https://tributetoapresident.blogspot.com/2019/12/joint-news-conference-following.html
índice
PORTUGUÊS
GUERRA NUCLEAR: O DIA ANTERIOR
De Hiroshima até hoje: Quem e como nos conduzem à catástrofe
me>
THE PUTIN INTERVIEWS
The Putin Interviews
by Oliver Stone (FULL VIDEOS) EN/RU/SP/FR/IT/CH
http://tributetoapresident.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-putin-interviews-by-oliver-stone.html
http://tributetoapresident.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-putin-interviews-by-oliver-stone.html
TRIBUTE TO A PRESIDENT
NA PRMEIRA PESSOA
Um auto retrato surpreendentemente sincero do Presidente da Rússia, Vladimir Putin
CONTEÚDO
Prefácio
Personagens Principais em 'Na Primeira Pessoa'
Parte Três: O Estudante Universitário
Parte Quatro: O Jovem especialista
Parte Cinco: O Espia
Parte Seis: O Democráta
Parte Sete: O Burocrata
Parte Oito: O Homem de Família
Parte Nove: O Político
Apêndice: A Rússia na Viragem do Milénio
Daniele Ganser
Açores
Subtitled in EN/PT
Click upon the small wheel at the right side of the video and choose your language.
xmas
“Glory to God in the highest,
and on Earth
Peace, Good Will toward men.”
This Christmas, Give Peace
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.