Oh Say Can You See…That This Song is Offensive to Someone?
Any American knows the words to The Star-Spangled Banner: “O say can you see by the dawn’s early light…” It’s been the national anthem for over a century. We’ve sung it proudly at sports games, it plays over the loudspeakers of military bases, and it’s taught in classrooms.
However, it’s racist. Or at least the author is. Even though it’s been a part of our history for decades, the song has to go. Why? It’s offensive. At least to someone. And in today’s ‘cancel culture,’ that means that it has to go.
So, what’s going to replace the song? We have to have a national anthem, right? With Canada to the north having, “O Canada” and Mexico to the south having, “Himno Nacional Mexicano,” we can’t just have an anthem.
But, we, as Americans, can’t agree on anything anymore. If we’re not careful, we’re going to end up with the Oscar Mayer wiener song as our anthem because it’s not offensive…unless your name is Oscar.
Trey Gowdy suggested that we might end up humming the theme song to “The Young and the Restless.”
Meanwhile, Tulsa Athletic decided that they would play, “This Land is Your Land” before matches to provide a more inclusive environment. It doesn’t hurt that the author of that song was Oklahoma-born singer Woody Guthrie.
So, Francis Scott Key, the one who authored “The Star-Spangled Banner” was a known slaveholder, and Lyndsey Parker, the Yahoo Music Editor-in-Chief, has also said that he had a “history of derogatory comments about African Americans.”
Sure. But the song was still played everywhere for every purpose, all while knowing these things. As Trey Gowdy says, “Up until 24 hours ago, I never heard anyone offended by it.”
Parker has asked the question, “Is it time for this country to dispense with ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ and adopt a new anthem with less troubling history and a more inclusive message?”
And the answer, apparently, is yes. In the “cancel culture” that we’re living in, the question is whether there is an anthem that is capable of being more inclusive. It seems that everyone is offended by at least something, so there’s bound to be offense taken at any suggestion.
It doesn’t prevent people from offering up their own recommendations. Ben Domenech, the co-founder, and Publisher of The Federalist has thrown out the recommendation of “Imagine” by John Lennon.
What if we were to cancel the cancel culture? It could be done, with enough people choosing to take the stand of, “enough is enough.” Otherwise, how many other things are going to fall prey to people being offended? The flag should be safe because it was made by Betsy Ross, a Quaker who opposed slavery. Well, it should be safe unless someone decides they have something against a Quaker. Or, perhaps, they’ll find that the colors of red, white, and blue are not inclusive enough.
It seems as though we can’t keep anything pure anymore. If people were going to take offense with the national anthem being written by a known racist, shouldn’t it have been dealt with years ago? It was signed into being the national anthem in 1916 by President Woodrow Wilson. Slavery was abolished in 1865. That meant that people should have taken offense in 1916 when the president even suggested such a song. Or, at the very least, in 1964 when President Lyndon B. Johnson ended segregation.
There should be some kind of statute of limitations regarding being offended by something. In law, you have a statute of one, two, or five years to report a crime. Then, sorry, you should have reported the crime sooner.
The same applies with people taking offense. Sorry, you had your chance to be offended in 1916 and again in 1964. The statute of limitations is over, so the national anthem stays.
We can’t get rid of everything our country has created because of one or two groups being offended or we’ll have nothing left.