What do you think?
Rate this book
To the Flag: The Unlikely History of the Pledge of Allegiance
For over one hundred years, it has been deeply ingrained in American culture. Saluting the flag in public schools began as part of a national effort to Americanize immigrants, its final six words imbuing it with universal hope and breathtaking power. Now Richard Ellis unfurls the fascinating history of the Pledge of Allegiance and of the debates and controversies that have sometimes surrounded it.
For anyone who has ever recited those thirty-one words, To the Flag provides an unprecedented historical perspective on recent challenges to the Pledge. As engaging as it is informative, it traces the story from the Pledge's composition by Francis Bellamy in 1892 up to the Supreme Court's action in 2004 regarding atheist Michael Newdow's objection to the words "under God." Ellis is especially good at highlighting aspects of this story that might not be familiar to most readers: the schoolhouse flag movement, the codification of the Pledge at the First National Flag Conference in 1923, changing styles of salute, and the uses of the Pledge to quell public concerns over sundry strains of radicalism.
Created against the backdrop of rapid immigration, the Pledge has continued for over a century to be injected into American politics at times of heightened anxiety over the meaning of our national identity. Ellis analyzes the text of the Pledge to tell how the very words "indivisible" and "allegiance" were intended to invoke Civil War sentiments-and how "with liberty and justice for all" forms a capsule expression of the American creed. He also examines the introduction of "under God" as an anti-Communist declaration in the 1950s, demonstrating that the phrase is not mere ceremonial Deism but rather a profound expression of what has been called America's "civil religion."
The Pledge has inspired millions but has also been used to promote conformity and silence dissent-indeed its daily recitation in schools and legislatures tells us as much about our anxieties as a nation as it does about our highest ideals. Ellis reveals how, for over a century, those who have been most fearful about threats to our national identity have often been most insistent on the importance of patriotic rituals. Indeed, by addressing this inescapable paradox of our civic life, Ellis opens a new and unexpected window on the American soul.
For anyone who has ever recited those thirty-one words, To the Flag provides an unprecedented historical perspective on recent challenges to the Pledge. As engaging as it is informative, it traces the story from the Pledge's composition by Francis Bellamy in 1892 up to the Supreme Court's action in 2004 regarding atheist Michael Newdow's objection to the words "under God." Ellis is especially good at highlighting aspects of this story that might not be familiar to most readers: the schoolhouse flag movement, the codification of the Pledge at the First National Flag Conference in 1923, changing styles of salute, and the uses of the Pledge to quell public concerns over sundry strains of radicalism.
Created against the backdrop of rapid immigration, the Pledge has continued for over a century to be injected into American politics at times of heightened anxiety over the meaning of our national identity. Ellis analyzes the text of the Pledge to tell how the very words "indivisible" and "allegiance" were intended to invoke Civil War sentiments-and how "with liberty and justice for all" forms a capsule expression of the American creed. He also examines the introduction of "under God" as an anti-Communist declaration in the 1950s, demonstrating that the phrase is not mere ceremonial Deism but rather a profound expression of what has been called America's "civil religion."
The Pledge has inspired millions but has also been used to promote conformity and silence dissent-indeed its daily recitation in schools and legislatures tells us as much about our anxieties as a nation as it does about our highest ideals. Ellis reveals how, for over a century, those who have been most fearful about threats to our national identity have often been most insistent on the importance of patriotic rituals. Indeed, by addressing this inescapable paradox of our civic life, Ellis opens a new and unexpected window on the American soul.
318 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2005
1 person is currently reading
83 people want to read
About the author
Richard J. Ellis
44 books5 followersRichard J. Ellis is Mark O. Hatfield Professor of Politics, Policy, Law, and Ethics at Willamette University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
December 15, 2014
Recently I attended an event where the Pledge or Allegiance was recited. Having not seen it in years, the authoritarian and militaristic nature of the ritual struck me as being, well, un-American. How did we as a nation end up participating in something that on the surface seems to have more in common with fascism than American ideals?
As it turns out I wasn't far off. The pledge came into being in the 1890s as a reaction to fears that immigrants were ruining the nation. But not just any immigrants, specifically "non-Ayrans", i.e. Irish, Italians, Polish, and especially Jews. In fact, Francis Bellamy, the author of today's pledge published his reasons. His list of internal foes included, in his own words:
1. The red radicals including direct action communists and revolutionary socialists who are boring into the labor unions and are incited revolt among all classes of working people.
2. The academic radicals, both teachers and students.
3. The radical newspapers in both our own and foreign tongues.
4. The large radical sections of Russian and Polish Jews.
5. The "pink" radicals of older American stock among whom are many clergymen, club women, society people, and even men of wealth who are giving aid and comfort to the extremists.
6. The pacifists who are undermining national security.
7. The several "blocs" which are imposing their special aims upon political leaders of both parties.
Why do we know so much about what Francis Bellamy thought? The modern pledge and its spread into American schools was largely due to the promotion of a magazine where Bellamy wrote advertising copy, Youth's Companion. The magazine's subscription list was well into the millions, largely propelled by their new advertising invention of promoting free merchandise such as flags as an incentive to sell subscriptions to friends and relatives. Maybe its uniquely American that patriotism, xenophobia, advertising and profit were all mixed up together?
The pledge was conceived during a time of enormous social upheaval. While people look at the recent bombing in Boston as something unique, at this time the large numbers immigrants, having been forced to work 60 hour weeks in dangerous conditions started to agitate for a 40-hour work week. There were frequent demonstrations and strikes which could turn violent, including thrown bombs like in the Haymarket Affair. In such an environment many thought that the non-Arayn, non-Protestant immigrants would be more loyal to their county of origin than to their new country. While the adults were considered a lost cause, the flag ritual was dreamt up to indoctrinate children against the ideas of the radicals. When the pledge says "indivisible", Bellamy specifically was referring to class consciousness being promoted by labor unions and communists. Ironically, Bellamy himself was a Christian socialist, who left the ministry because of his congregation felt uncomfortable with his tendency to tie Jesus' teachings to socialism.
I hadn't remembered the militarist overtones of the ritual either: at the same time nostalgia for the civil war had reached its peak, with people looking back to a time when they perceived the country was united, a time before it had been overrun with immigrants. Bellamy and others were enamored of military culture and wanted children to mimic it, including standing at attention and saluting. The separation of salutes between former and current soldiers and the public was because of the large interest in the civil war and its veterans. It is not surprising that the the former southern states were the last to participate in the pledge given lingering bad feelings about the civil war.
The best known fact about the pledge is the late addition of "under God" sixty years after its creation. While Bellamy was strictly against changing the pledge for any reason, its likely he wouldn't have been too opposed to those specific words given that he was an ex-minister, and he intended the pledge to be a national prayer. Its interesting that neither Bellamy's version, nor the other competing flag pledges from that period mentioned God. Just like the original pledge was born out of a national fear of immigrants, this addition was born from a national fear of communists. At the time politicians were trying to combine patriotism and religion, and this change combines both posturing and frugality since it didn't cost anything.
Originally conceived for Columbus Day, by the time fascism was spreading in Europe in the 1930s, the push to make the daily flag ritual mandatory was spreading across the US. At the same time Germans were being arrested for refusing to give the Nazi salute, children in the US were being beaten for not saying the pledge, their parents arrested and fined, even though in most of the cases no laws made the pledge compulsory. In some cases parents even lost custody of their children. The ACLU was started about the same time, and some of its first cases were to defend parents over failure of their children to say the pledge in school.
Given this history its amazing the flag ritual is still done every day in schools. I can see keeping it around for special occasions, but its everyday occurrence is anachronistic at best.
As it turns out I wasn't far off. The pledge came into being in the 1890s as a reaction to fears that immigrants were ruining the nation. But not just any immigrants, specifically "non-Ayrans", i.e. Irish, Italians, Polish, and especially Jews. In fact, Francis Bellamy, the author of today's pledge published his reasons. His list of internal foes included, in his own words:
1. The red radicals including direct action communists and revolutionary socialists who are boring into the labor unions and are incited revolt among all classes of working people.
2. The academic radicals, both teachers and students.
3. The radical newspapers in both our own and foreign tongues.
4. The large radical sections of Russian and Polish Jews.
5. The "pink" radicals of older American stock among whom are many clergymen, club women, society people, and even men of wealth who are giving aid and comfort to the extremists.
6. The pacifists who are undermining national security.
7. The several "blocs" which are imposing their special aims upon political leaders of both parties.
Why do we know so much about what Francis Bellamy thought? The modern pledge and its spread into American schools was largely due to the promotion of a magazine where Bellamy wrote advertising copy, Youth's Companion. The magazine's subscription list was well into the millions, largely propelled by their new advertising invention of promoting free merchandise such as flags as an incentive to sell subscriptions to friends and relatives. Maybe its uniquely American that patriotism, xenophobia, advertising and profit were all mixed up together?
The pledge was conceived during a time of enormous social upheaval. While people look at the recent bombing in Boston as something unique, at this time the large numbers immigrants, having been forced to work 60 hour weeks in dangerous conditions started to agitate for a 40-hour work week. There were frequent demonstrations and strikes which could turn violent, including thrown bombs like in the Haymarket Affair. In such an environment many thought that the non-Arayn, non-Protestant immigrants would be more loyal to their county of origin than to their new country. While the adults were considered a lost cause, the flag ritual was dreamt up to indoctrinate children against the ideas of the radicals. When the pledge says "indivisible", Bellamy specifically was referring to class consciousness being promoted by labor unions and communists. Ironically, Bellamy himself was a Christian socialist, who left the ministry because of his congregation felt uncomfortable with his tendency to tie Jesus' teachings to socialism.
I hadn't remembered the militarist overtones of the ritual either: at the same time nostalgia for the civil war had reached its peak, with people looking back to a time when they perceived the country was united, a time before it had been overrun with immigrants. Bellamy and others were enamored of military culture and wanted children to mimic it, including standing at attention and saluting. The separation of salutes between former and current soldiers and the public was because of the large interest in the civil war and its veterans. It is not surprising that the the former southern states were the last to participate in the pledge given lingering bad feelings about the civil war.
The best known fact about the pledge is the late addition of "under God" sixty years after its creation. While Bellamy was strictly against changing the pledge for any reason, its likely he wouldn't have been too opposed to those specific words given that he was an ex-minister, and he intended the pledge to be a national prayer. Its interesting that neither Bellamy's version, nor the other competing flag pledges from that period mentioned God. Just like the original pledge was born out of a national fear of immigrants, this addition was born from a national fear of communists. At the time politicians were trying to combine patriotism and religion, and this change combines both posturing and frugality since it didn't cost anything.
Originally conceived for Columbus Day, by the time fascism was spreading in Europe in the 1930s, the push to make the daily flag ritual mandatory was spreading across the US. At the same time Germans were being arrested for refusing to give the Nazi salute, children in the US were being beaten for not saying the pledge, their parents arrested and fined, even though in most of the cases no laws made the pledge compulsory. In some cases parents even lost custody of their children. The ACLU was started about the same time, and some of its first cases were to defend parents over failure of their children to say the pledge in school.
Given this history its amazing the flag ritual is still done every day in schools. I can see keeping it around for special occasions, but its everyday occurrence is anachronistic at best.
November 20, 2019
The book is exhaustively researched and comprehensive. The author treats the sometimes contentious history of the Pledge evenly. A fascinating read.
June 17, 2021
Interesting history of the pledge of allegiance but a little dry. I didn't know that the author of the Pledge, Francis BEllamy, was the brother of the utopian author Edward Bellamy (Looking Backward). It was started at the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus's 'discovery' of America. The book spends a lot of time discussing the intent of the original pledge and opposition to participating in the pledge. It tells the story of the 'under god' phrase being put forward in the 1950s as a contrast to the Communist atheist ideology. The final part is how the pledge starting with REagan became a very partisan divide between Republicans and Democrats. I learned a great deal.
October 2, 2014
Richard Ellis writes provocatively about a common school staple: the Pledge of Allegiance. The provocation isn’t planted by the author, but is inherent in the material he has researched and revealed. The author presents many points of view, and expresses concern that we as readers and individuals distinguish between true patriotism and manipulation of the Pledge. The book will likely get you to thinking about what America stands for, and how patriotism is best learned and expressed.
“To The Flag” presents the inception of the Pledge of Allegiance by Francis Bellamy in 1892 as uncontroversial and genuine, despite Bellamy’s underlying racist attitudes. At this stage, the Pledge was merely an affinity to American capitalism. Seeing the need for unification following the Civil War, Bellamy and his colleagues at Youth’s Companion (a popular magazine of the time) wanted to “rekindle the patriotic flame” of the United States, and saw an opportunity in promoting the American flag in public spaces. They used the 400th anniversary of the discovery of America by Columbus (1892) to spearhead this project and, by 1889, a nationwide campaign began enforcing the presence of the flag in public schools as well as the recitation of Bellamy’s Pledge of Allegiance.
Schools in particular played a role in developing the Pledge because they were “the place for education in intelligent patriotism and citizenship (page 16).” Later, the General Army of the Republic and political leaders reinforced the Pledge as being an American staple. Various patriots, veteran groups, and political organizations, fearful of the influx of immigrants coming to America at the turn of the century demanded loyalty to America. This loyalty should be expressed, they felt, through verbal affirmations as well as acceptance of broader American traditions, values, and ideals. They wanted reassurance that the immigrants, once they became citizens, they would embrace capitalism, industrialization, the Lord, and American law.
Ellis presents the idea of a civic state: America’s "national identity is unlike national identity in most other counties. American national identity... is rooted in shared political ideas, whereas `for most peoples, national identity is the product of a long process of historical evolution involving common ancestors, common experiences, common ethnic background, common language, common culture, and usually common religion" (213).
While the pledge's authors were religious men, they had never intentioned for the pledge to incorporate religion. The pledge's transformation into incorporating the `under god' clause in 1954 therefore represents a significant turning point. While the pledge claims to be advocating a land based on liberty, it is simultaneously preaching an imposing point of view. One of the more familiar cases involving the Pledge of Allegiance was decided in the 1943 when Lillian Gobitas, one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, refused to say the pledge before school. Her choice led to a Supreme Court case as well as a period of violence inflicted upon Christian children whose loyalty belonged to God alone.
Ellis’ book is effective in that it explores the way society can be swayed or manipulated into believing or thinking a certain way. The purpose of the Pledge was “to dissolve social divisions, harmonize social classes, and neutralize radicals" (page 71), but its purpose was twisted; what really happened was that social classes were divided, liberties fractured, and freedom was put in jeopardy. All over a few words.
“To The Flag” presents the inception of the Pledge of Allegiance by Francis Bellamy in 1892 as uncontroversial and genuine, despite Bellamy’s underlying racist attitudes. At this stage, the Pledge was merely an affinity to American capitalism. Seeing the need for unification following the Civil War, Bellamy and his colleagues at Youth’s Companion (a popular magazine of the time) wanted to “rekindle the patriotic flame” of the United States, and saw an opportunity in promoting the American flag in public spaces. They used the 400th anniversary of the discovery of America by Columbus (1892) to spearhead this project and, by 1889, a nationwide campaign began enforcing the presence of the flag in public schools as well as the recitation of Bellamy’s Pledge of Allegiance.
Schools in particular played a role in developing the Pledge because they were “the place for education in intelligent patriotism and citizenship (page 16).” Later, the General Army of the Republic and political leaders reinforced the Pledge as being an American staple. Various patriots, veteran groups, and political organizations, fearful of the influx of immigrants coming to America at the turn of the century demanded loyalty to America. This loyalty should be expressed, they felt, through verbal affirmations as well as acceptance of broader American traditions, values, and ideals. They wanted reassurance that the immigrants, once they became citizens, they would embrace capitalism, industrialization, the Lord, and American law.
Ellis presents the idea of a civic state: America’s "national identity is unlike national identity in most other counties. American national identity... is rooted in shared political ideas, whereas `for most peoples, national identity is the product of a long process of historical evolution involving common ancestors, common experiences, common ethnic background, common language, common culture, and usually common religion" (213).
While the pledge's authors were religious men, they had never intentioned for the pledge to incorporate religion. The pledge's transformation into incorporating the `under god' clause in 1954 therefore represents a significant turning point. While the pledge claims to be advocating a land based on liberty, it is simultaneously preaching an imposing point of view. One of the more familiar cases involving the Pledge of Allegiance was decided in the 1943 when Lillian Gobitas, one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, refused to say the pledge before school. Her choice led to a Supreme Court case as well as a period of violence inflicted upon Christian children whose loyalty belonged to God alone.
Ellis’ book is effective in that it explores the way society can be swayed or manipulated into believing or thinking a certain way. The purpose of the Pledge was “to dissolve social divisions, harmonize social classes, and neutralize radicals" (page 71), but its purpose was twisted; what really happened was that social classes were divided, liberties fractured, and freedom was put in jeopardy. All over a few words.
September 15, 2015
Yes, America, your Pledge of Allegiance was written by someone who called himself a Christian socialist who was also an anti-immigrant racist, terrified of the waves of Poles, Irish, and Italians desecrating his soil. His efforts coupled with people who wanted to return to a pre-Civil War, less industrialized society and those wishing to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Columbus is "discovery" of America, birthed the widespread use of the Pledge.
This is a fascinating history and a very easy read. I wish I had known all of those years that we said the pledge in grammar school but the man who wrote it didn't want my grandparents spoiling his country.
This is a fascinating history and a very easy read. I wish I had known all of those years that we said the pledge in grammar school but the man who wrote it didn't want my grandparents spoiling his country.
Read
September 23, 2010To the Flag: The Unlikely History of the Pledge of Allegiance by Richard J. Ellis (2007)
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews