America

Current Issues  /  Music
Replacing The National Anthem
August 31, 2016
charles i. letbetter - change the national anthem

If you forget the words to your own song, you can always claim artistic license. Forget the words to the national anthem, and you’re screwed. —Lyle Lovett

 

charles i. letbetter - change the national anthem

The National Anthem is difficult to sing, is fraught with negative connotations, and fails to fully represent our country. So why do we still use it?

I’m looking at recent headlines and having an incredible sense of having been here before. Once again, we’re arguing about the National Anthem. This instance happens to be the result of some random football player exercising his right to sit during the pre-game ritual. This isn’t the first time someone has done that. It won’t be the last. This whole incident has been played out multiple times during my life. Yet, for all the talk, nothing has actually changed.

I’ll admit that, as a musician, I rather like the music portion of The Star-Spangled Banner. I like that not just anyone can sing the song well. The song harmonizes well when arranged correctly. The melody is open to a lot of personal interpretation. As a piece of music, The Star-Spangled Banner works well for me.

However, as a national anthem, the song sucks. The language is stilted and the entire third verse is offensive. Textually, the song doesn’t so much say, “Hooray for the United States,” as it says, “Hey, we didn’t get beaten this time.” As a nation, we have been divided over the anthem since the middle of the 19th century. Continuing to force it upon generation after generation just for the sake of tradition removes any real meaning. What we sing at the beginning of ballgames and political events today does not represent us. We need a national anthem that speaks for us all.

Why Have A National Anthem?

If we’re going to get all riled up about the issue of a national anthem, we first must consider why we have an anthem in the first place. Why is it an anthem and not just a national song? I don’t find it unrealistic should we just have a national jingle. After all, we are one of the most commercially driven and materialistic people on the planet. Perhaps an anthem isn’t what we need at all.

Most music dictionaries define an anthem as a song that identifies the ideals and values of a specific group of people. For example, when our friends directly to the North of us sing Oh, Canada it’s pretty obvious from the start what the song is about and who it represents. Russia’s national anthem (which is not without similar controversies itself) is also highly recognizeable. That one starts out:

Russia – our sacred homeland,
Russia – our beloved country.
A mighty will, a great glory –
These are your heritage for all time!

Sort of. The translation is a little rough, but the general sentiment is there. My point is that an anthem makes it clear that it holds a relationship with a specific group of people.

The Star-Spangled Banner doesn’t exactly fit that definition. People only relate the song to the country because we keep playing it every time we decide to get sweaty or have an election. The song does not contain the name of the country. The song does not represent our ideals. Our song is about a flag not getting blown to smithereens. That’s it. So, it fails in the definition of an anthem.

A National Anthem Should Be Inclusive

Singer/songwriter John Legend, who I respect, went on record yesterday as saying he believes we should change the national anthem to America The Beautiful. A lot of people have made the argument for Katherine Lee Bates’ song before. At the very least, it is certainly more descriptive of the country and contains the word “America.” That’s more than the current anthem does. Plus, it is easier to sing and is already well-known. There’s just one little problem in the chorus:

America, America,
God shed his grace on thee.

Uhm, yeah, there are going to be a lot of people have a problem with that reference to a specific deity. The case isn’t made any stronger by the fact that the original poem has at least eight verses, one of which contains a phrase some might find a bit frightening:

America, America,
God shed his grace on thee;
‘Til nobler men keep once again
Thy whiter jubilee!

What the fuck? Okay, if we give Miss Bates the benefit of the doubt, she might have meant “whiter” in the sense of more heavenly, maybe. Still, the inference here is totally unacceptable in a national anthem. The same is true for God Bless America and I’m Proud To Be An American. The religious references divide us, not unite us.

Some (Slightly) Better Suggestions

We have some existing songs within the American catalog of music that have the potential for being a great national anthem. If we’re going to get all caught up in the flag thing, then perhaps the late George M. Cohan has the answer:

You’re a grand old flag
You’re a high-flying flag
And forever in peace may you wave.
You’re the emblem of
The land I love,
The home of the free and the brave.
Ev’ry heart beats true
‘Neath the Red, White and Blue,
Where there’s never a boast or brag.
But should auld acquaintance be forgot,
Keep your eye on the grand old flag.

The song only works, however, if we just adopt the chorus. The first verse has an uncomfortable reference to, “Way down yonder in the land of cotton.” I can understand a lot of people not being particularly fond of that little element.

Perhaps we just do away with lyrics altogether. After all, that seems to be what largely upsets folks about any of the songs. Maybe John Philip Sousa’s The Stars and Stripes Forever, which is already our national march, could fit the bill. We like singing, though, and again, it doesn’t match the definition of an anthem.

Time To Write Our Own

We need a new national anthem. We need a song that is singable, one that unites us  rather than divides us. The United States deserves a national anthem that actually contains the name of the country in its text. A song that can be sung by little children or mass choirs should be the goal of our effort. Any anthem representing our country needs to reflect all of us, not just the privileged few. To have a song that marginalizes so many of our own people is unacceptable.

We have too many wonderful and talented composers in our country for us to not have one kick-ass national anthem. We need to get behind the concept and tell Congress, who ordains such things, that we demand a new song. Maybe have John Legend write it, or maybe Beyoncé and Taylor Swift could team up. Anyone accept Kanye. Please, don’t let that idiot near our national anthem.

For too long, we have argued and fussed over a national anthem that fails to represent us well. We need to get over the whole aspect of tradition and write something new; something  that gives us all a reason to stand with pride and sing.

Or maybe we just need a jingle.

Continue Reading

Advertising  /  Current Issues
NRA Ad Is Insulting To U.S. Military
May 27, 2016
charles i. letbetter - NRA ad insults the US military

No other country in the world does what we do. On every issue, the world turns to us, not simply because of the size of our economy or our military might – but because of the ideals we stand for, and the burdens we bear to advance them. —Barack Obama

 

charles i. letbetter - NRA Ad Insults US Military

If you want to see the real strength of America, look no further than the US Military

[Caveat: While I was not able to serve myself, both my fiancé, Kat, and my middle son, Ben, are US Marines. My Uncle Joe was US Air Force and saw active duty over Korea. We have great admiration and respect for the military and all those who volunteer to serve. Therefore, there is some chance that my opinion on the topic below is a bit biased. Maybe. I doubt it.]

Advertising can get really, really strange and quirky. One of the stranger events this week was when the city of South Bend, Indiana had to apologize for stealing, almost in whole, Salt Lake City’s tourism campaign. I can’t remember the last time we saw such blatant theft of an entire campaign. Of course, the agency responsible tried saying it was an homage to the Salt Lake campaign, but no one with a brain in their head is buying that excuse. When ad agencies get something wrong, the results can really be deplorable.

We tend to give advertisers a lot of leeway when it comes to what they say and do in their ads. Advertising is, to a great extent, a form of free expression. While there are limits on certain products that have been deemed potentially harmful to public health, such as tobacco and prescription medicines, most ads have more than sufficient space to creatively represent their product without falling into the trap of false advertising.

During election years, however, we see a form of advertising that is special and rather exempt from some of the restrictions we put on normal advertising. Political ads aren’t selling a product, but rather an idea or concept. Therefore, they can legally say just about anything they want and get away with it. We may not like what they say, but one of the strengths of our Constitution is that they are guaranteed the right to say what they please. Even if it is totally wrong and insulting.

Such is the case with the most recent ad for the National Rifle Association (NRA), fronted by country music legend Charlie Daniels. I’m not embedding the video on purpose. This is a political ad and, in tune with the tenor of this entire political season, the number of lies and misinformation is substantial. That, however, is not the ad’s worst crime. Those are simply opinions, and Mr. Daniels has the right to express them.

Where the ad errs is in the way it insults our United States  Military and the patriotism of the men and women who serve. The copy, which is erroneously directed at “the Ayatollah’s of Iran,” wants to do two things: paint President Obama as weak, and make America sound tough. Daniel’s presentation almost sounds like a bully’s challenge: you come over here and we’re going to whip your ass. What’s insulting, though, is when he says, “… you haven’t met America.” He then goes on to tout the toughness of steel workers, “hard rock” miners, or “swamp folks” as though they are some vicious breed of monster capable of defeating all comers.

Excuse me? First of all, let’s talk to the correct people: Daesh, Al Queda, and the Taliban. Those are the people responsible for much of the terror you see on the evening news. And I’ve got news for you, Charlie, they’ve already met America.

Terrorists meet America every time an M16 bullet passes through their skull and leaves their brains splattered on the ground.

Terrorists meet America every time a squadron of planes launches from the deck of a US aircraft carrier.

Terrorists meet America every time a group of Marines sweep into a known terrorist compound and reduce the place to rubble.

Terrorists meet America every time a US drone strike takes out yet another one of their leaders, as we’ve done repeatedly over the past eight years.

Terrorists meet America every time a US Navy Seal time sneaks up from behind and slits their throats.

We’ve been at war with terror nearly 15 years now. Terrorists have had ample opportunities to meet America and the ground shakes beneath them every time they do.

You want to know why you don’t see acts of terror in the US on the scale we do in the Middle East and Europe? Because terrorists can’t get past the men and women of the United States Military. There’s a reason the rest of the world looks to us when bad things happen. Our Marines can move into a position and take total and complete control of an area faster, better, and with fewer casualties than anyone else in the world. Our military intelligence isn’t always perfect, but it’s better than what anyone else has to offer. The soldiers we have deployed on the ground around the world are better trained, better equipped, and badder, tougher, and meaner than anyone else out there.

Our United States military and National Security Administration are the reason you can go to a concert in the United States and not worry about terrorists getting through the gate. They are the reason you can attend a sporting event without thinking twice that someone might try to bomb the stadium. They are the reason over 300,000 people can attend a race in Indianapolis this weekend and know they are safe.

When the NRA ad implies that steel workers, miners, and “swamp folk” can somehow protect our country better, they’re not only insulting the men and women of our military, they’re demonstrating an unprecedented amount of ignorance. You think steel workers are tough? Put them through a military boot camp and see how many survive. You think “hard rock” miners are strong? Let’s see how many can handle the Navy’s basic training. And I’m not sure exactly who these “swamp folk” are, but let’s put them through the Crucible at MCRD Parris Island and see how many of them are crying for their Momma half-way through.

You want to see the strength of America? Just look at our United States Military. Every man and woman who takes the oath and puts on one of those uniforms represent our best. They are our best. They are trained tough, ready for the most impossible situations in the world under unimaginable conditions, and they’re good to go at a moment’s notice. There are no steel workers, hard rock miners or swamp folk or anyone else who can stand up to the United States Military. No one.

Being strong and being prepared is more than just having physical muscle; it’s having the training to know which weapon to use under which conditions and knowing how to use the weapon properly; it’s knowing how to engage an enemy with as few civilian casualties as possible; it’s knowing how to work as a team, everyone doing their job together, and no one ever being left behind; it’s having the mental strength to endure torture if captured and still find a way to survive and escape.

The NRA ad is nothing but hot air and tough talk from a bunch of old white men who are scared. Let’s see, who would I rather have protecting me, a 79-year-old fiddle player with a big mouth, or a US Marine who earned his/her Eagle, Globe, and Anchor in the mud and sand of Parris Island? I’ll take the Marine every damn time. And who’s the better American? The orange-skinned, draft-dodging politician who yells and blathers and incites hatred from behind a podium, or the soldier who right now is holding point on a terrorist cell, waiting for the order to move in? You know who the better American is.

Don’t tell me terrorists around the world haven’t met America yet. They know damn good and well who we are and they live in fear of what our military can do to them. Maybe it’s about time the folks at the NRA figured that out as well. Our US Military doesn’t wait for terrorists to come to us. We go to them and the terrorists die. Remember that this Memorial Day.

Continue Reading

Advertising  /  Current Issues
Nationalism Is Not Patriotic
May 11, 2016
charles i. letbetter - nationalism is not patriotism

Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first. —Charles de Gaulle

 

charles i. letbetter - nationalism is not patriotic

Patriotism does not mean being a jerk about being an American

The photos I’ve chosen for this topic are intentionally cheesy. I didn’t have any pictures of a bikini-clad model waving a flag or any similar nonsense, but I do have pictures of fireworks and models in bikinis so I put them together with sufficient results. I could easily slap a red, white, and blue “USA” over the top and pass them off as something patriotic, but to do so would be wrong and devalues the concept of patriotism. Instead, this cheese plays more to the concept of nationalism and an attitude that, long term, is rather problematic.

My stomach turned a little yesterday when I saw that the leading “domestic” beer brand, Budweiser (which isn’t American owned, by the way), had changed its name to America through the presidential elections this fall. You can now drink America, become inebriated on America, piss America, puke America, and be arrested for driving under the influence of America. That creates a lovely mental picture, doesn’t it? While Budweiser execs claim that they’re being patriotic, what they’re doing is pandering to a level of nationalism, the same nationalistic ideals that have a leading presidential candidate claiming he can bring America back to greatness. I have some bad news for you: both are full of male bovine excrement.

Many people hold the mistaken belief that nationalism and patriotism are the same, but that would be far from the truth. Nationalistic fervor is rooted in power and exclusion. Patriotism is rooted in emotion and responsibility. While the two can look similar, they are, at their core, quite different. Furthermore, Americans are among the few who don’t already have a good grasp on the concepts. European and Asian countries see nationalism as a power play, often a political stance appealing to pride in national domination. Patriotism, on the other hand, is seen as an act of service, a responsibility one has for living in the country.

One of the best distinctions between nationalism and patriotism comes from the pen of George Orwell some 70-plus years ago. What he said then still holds just as true today, so let’s look at what he had to say:

Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.

Interestingly enough, nationalism wasn’t even much of an issue until the rise of the Romantic period in the early 19th century. Prior to that point, patriotism ruled even in power struggles; people took the dominant perspective that it was their responsibility to defend their country against external attack, but were polite and accommodating toward others. With the Romantic period, though, nationalism, that concept that one country was great to the exclusion of all others, became dominant. We not only see in it the political struggles of the time, but literature, art, and music. Once it took hold, nationalism never left. Unchecked and taken to its extreme, nationalism was a primary factor in the rise of Nazi Germany in the 1930s.

Seeing the United States being pushed toward, and embracing a nationalism bordering on extremism is frightening. Actions are being taken in the name of patriotism that are not patriotic at all. Those who support such nationalistic ideals are using that sentiment to establish a dominating power that, left unchecked, cannot help but lead to horrible crimes against humanity. We need to understand the difference between nationalism and patriotism and realize how dangerous the wrong attitude can be. Consider:

  • Patriotism celebrates diversity; nationalism finds strength in a single race and single religious belief, to the forced exclusion of all others.
  • Patriotism honors those who help others; nationalism preserves all resources for their own use.
  • Patriotism recognizes the responsibility of serving; nationalism exploits the strengths of a strong military.
  • Patriotism learns from criticism and looks for ways to improve; nationalism is insulted by criticism and attempts to dominate those who are critical of the nation’s behavior.
  • Patriotism admits that we make mistakes and learns from them; nationalism attempts to justify one’s actions and admits no wrong.
  • Patriotism values peace and is willing to compromise to avoid conflict; nationalism prefers military domination over everyone.

I love the United States as much as anyone, but as a patriot, I have to see our shortcomings, I have to recognize that we are not perfect, and I have to take responsibility for my participation in that imperfection. While I have no problem defending this country, I have no need or desire to see her dominate the world or outer space in order to be great. As a patriot, I see the greatness that has always existed in this country and I know that greatness comes in part from our diversity and our ability to, since the moment the Mayflower landed on these shores, accept those who are not wanted anywhere else.

There is always room for greater patriotism, but this current nationalistic bullshit needs to stop. And change the name of the fucking beer back to Budweiser. America is better than some two-bit, watered-down, weak-ass excuse for a lager. Please.

Continue Reading