California NAACP Calling National Anthem Lyrics Racist, Anti-Black - Sensationalist Headlines

[quote]“This song is wrong; it shouldn’t have been there, we didn’t have it ’til 1931, so it won’t kill us if it goes away,” said the organization’s president Alice Huffman. Colin Kaepernick started the NFL protests, which quickly spread to bring attention to systemic racial injustice in the country. But Huffman says Kaepernick’s message was lost when it turned into a debate about the flag. “The message got distorted, the real intentions got overlooked, it became something that’s dividing us, and I’m looking for something to bring us back together,” she said. Huffman adds that the protests did lead her to look at the lyrics of the “Star Spangled Banner” especially the parts of the anthem we don’t typically sing. “It’s racist; it doesn’t represent our community, it’s anti-black,” she said. Huffman is referring to the third stanza which includes the lyric “no refuge could save the hireling and slave from the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave.” She says some interpretations conclude that the lyrics celebrate the deaths of black American slaves fighting for freedom, and the song should be replaced with something that supports all of our values. “That’s an extreme way of doing things,” said Kenneth Lu, a veteran living in Davis. The opinions varied at the VFW in West Sacramento. “I believe it’s a slap across the face, whether there’s a flaw in the context, I don’t see it that way. I have to stick with our traditions and our values and what we represent,” said Sydney Lugo. “It won’t solve any problem,” said veteran John Cox. Huffman says it may not solve anything, but it’s a step towards social justice that she says is long overdue. “This is not about the flag. We love the flag. This is about a song that should never have been the national anthem. This country is a country that has shared values, and the more we respect each other, the better off we’ll be as a country,” said Huffman.[/quote] [url]http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2017/11/07/naacp-national-anthem-racist/[/url] [url]http://www.newsweek.com/naacp-urges-congress-replace-racist-national-anthem-705207[/url] [url]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/national-anthem-lyrics-california-naacp-star-spangled-banner/[/url]

I didn't know those lyrics even existed.

yep. sounds fucked to me

How long did it take for this to be found? Finally we have a chance to get rid of that shitty song and replace it with something that doesn't sound like shit

[quote]And where is that band who so vauntingly swore, That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion A home and a Country should leave us no more? Their blood has wash’d out their foul footstep’s pollution. No refuge could save the hireling and slave From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave, And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.[/quote] Seems to be referring to British mercenaries and slave units. The [url=https://www.snopes.com/2016/08/29/star-spangled-banner-and-slavery/]Snopes article[/url] on this explains some ideas, including that one, of what the stanza could have been intended to mean: [quote]There are historians (notably Robin Blackburn, author of The Overthrow of Colonial Slavery, 1776-1848, and Alan Taylor, author of “American Blacks in the War of 1812”), who have indeed read the stanza as glorying in the Americans’ defeat of the Corps of Colonial Marines, one of two units of black slaves recruited between 1808 and 1816 to fight for the British on the promise of gaining their freedom. Like so many of his compatriots, Francis Scott Key, the wealthy American lawyer who wrote “The Star Spangled Banner” in the wake of the Battle of Fort McHenry on 14 September 1814, was a slaveholder who believed blacks to be “a distinct and inferior race of people, which all experience proves to be the greatest evil that afflicts a community.” It goes without saying that Key did not have the enslaved black population of America in mind when he penned the words “land of the free.” It would be logical to assume, as well, that he might have harbored a special resentment toward African Americans who fought against the United States on behalf of the King.[/quote] [quote]In fairness, it has also been argued that Key may have intended the phrase as a reference to the British Navy’s practice of impressment (kidnapping sailors and forcing them to fight in defense of the crown), or as a semi-metaphorical slap at the British invading force as a whole (which included a large number of mercenaries), though the latter line of thinking suggests an even stronger alternative theory — namely, that the word “hirelings” refers literally to mercenaries, and “slaves” refers literally to slaves. It doesn’t appear that Francis Scott Key ever specified what he did mean by the phrase, nor does its context point to a single, definitive interpretation.[/quote] Ultimately in my opinion this is an invented controversy, this stanza is literally never sung, regardless of what it actually means (which probably has nothing to do with US-held slaves or "glorifying" slavery) - going to war on the anthem for a forgotten stanza is a stupid and pointless action intended to create division and tension where there is absolutely no reason for it.

any literate person with a grasp on military history could tell you that that stanza is about the corps of colonial marines and is there to vilify the british. in fact, that's the reason we don't sing it anymore, we dropped it in world war 1 when the british became our allies.

[QUOTE=butre;52870604]any literate person with a grasp on military history could tell you that that stanza is about the corps of colonial marines and is there to vilify the british. in fact, that's the reason we don't sing it anymore, we dropped it in world war 1 when the british became our allies.[/QUOTE] How many people have a grasp on military history.

[QUOTE=SamPerson123;52870609]How many people have a grasp on military history.[/QUOTE] You don't need a grasp on military history and you barely need to be literate to understand the meaning of the stanza. Just because it uses the word slave doesn't mean it's glorifying slavery or written to oppress black people.

Also we don’t sing it anymore so like I’m failing to see the issue tbh

I was unaware that even existed.

[QUOTE=SamPerson123;52870609]How many people have a grasp on military history.[/QUOTE] anyone who passed their history classes in middle school has enough of a grasp on it to recognise what specifically it's about the grasp on military history part just gives you context, you only have to be literate to get the broader picture and know it's not about slavery

[QUOTE=AaronM202;52870680]I was unaware that even existed.[/QUOTE] So is basically everyone. It's not really worth getting upset over considering it's essentially been removed.

[QUOTE=Aredbomb;52870552]I didn't know those lyrics even existed.[/QUOTE] That's because the lyrics lost relevancy and were subsequently removed, which is good because it's not nice to talk shit about your allies in your National Anthem. I honestly can't believe a simple misinterpretation of old song lyrics [i]that aren't even used anymore[/i] is somehow worth our time and attention. I guess this is what happens when everyone is so desperate to be a professional victim, you have to selectively pick words that can be easily taken out of context for when they were written. It's not just one group of people doing it either, just look at all those snowflakes who picked up Tiki torches to protect their white pride a while ago. It's a mutual problem that needs to be addressed, and not given any more credence than it needs.

Seems like a nontroversy to me. Why even bring it up if it's effectively not even a part of the song anymore lol.

I'm down for just changing it all together. Our national anthem sucks.

Replace it with Amazing Grace.

Lmao, what a way to make an issue out of literally nothing. Nobody even knew this shit existed and it's never sung.

[QUOTE=TheGoodDoctorF;52870719]I'm down for just changing it all together. Our national anthem sucks.[/QUOTE] Just get JJ Abrams to reboot it.

This is literally looking for things to get offended about for the sake of getting offended.

This is how people get distracted from real issues. If the first stanza --the only portion ever sung or holds any significance today --is some how racist, then it would be worth consideration, but this is just looking for something to argue about. [QUOTE=Amakir;52870756]Replace it with Amazing Grace.[/QUOTE] The religious connotations would piss off atheists, secularists, and any non-Christians.

[QUOTE=-Ben_Wolfe-;52870941]The religious connotations would piss off atheists, secularists, and any non-Christians.[/QUOTE] Im an atheist, I just think its a nice song.

[QUOTE=Amakir;52870970]Im an atheist, I just think its a nice song.[/QUOTE] Well, glad that's settled. On to the the next 323.1 million other people in the United States.

Just rip that stanza out of it. Boom, problem solved.

Make it America the Beautiful.

How about leave it alone

Replace the national anthem with Big Booty Bitches

[QUOTE=CyclonatorZ;52870876]Just get JJ Abrams to reboot it.[/QUOTE] I still love the hidden gag that the theme is exactly the same as before. [editline]9th November 2017[/editline] But, in relation to this, we don't even sing the fucking part anymore, it's a non issue.

Going by what's been posted so far, there does seem to be a bit of a case for dropping it formally. Just not for any reason that has to do with racism. It doesn't seem like a very big deal either way though.

Bring back Hail to Columbia you cowards

Hymn of the Republic, if you were to change national anthem.