A New National Anthem

The Star Spangled Banner has brought me to tears on more than one occasion.  It describes one of the proudest moments in our country’s history, yet the event it describes was a relatively insignificant pinpoint in the overall nation-building process.  You cannot say that the revolutionary war was won by military warring any more than you can say that the new town hall gets built by the mayor because he is the first to stick in the ceremonial shovel.  Perhaps it’s our national fixation on culmination that compels us to perceive the event described in our national anthem as a culminating event.  We LOVE the last shot.  Fantasizing kids at the gym dribble and count down, “Three….Two…One” then launch a shot that is expected to elevate them to instant stardom.  We LOVE Jack Bower, the culmination of manliness.  We LOVE the World Series.  We LOVE the Super Bowl.  Culmination is satisfying.  Though, admittedly, it is a topic for a different time, perhaps one of the reasons that marriages are in such trouble is that there is no real, identifiable culmination.  Marriage is about process; divorce is about culmination.

The revolutionary war really began with the first colonist’s discontent with mother England.  The war was fought and won with words and ideas at least as much as by sweat and steel.  Colyer Meriwether wrote, in Our Colonial Curriculum,

The contest with England hinged upon the construing of language, the meaning of statutes, the essence of practice and customs. It was a great debate as to the rights of each side in which ultimate decision rested upon the deep foundation stones of human conduct. The two Adamses, Madison, Jefferson, and their brethren were at home in this field They knew how to thrust, to parry, to ward, to defend, to attack with the pen, because they had been at that form of warfare all of their days. They knew how to build an argument, to construct a logical fortress; that had been their pastime since youth.  –Our Colonial Curriculum, Pg 285.

It was precisely the generally uncelebrated pen attacks that won the war.  Probably due to the inability to quantify the effect of rhetoric in conflict, little is ever said of it’s role in war.  Consider the following rhetorical analysis for the Civil War:

The Civil War

How did the North win the civil war?  The question itself is misguided (Loaded Question Fallacy) and presupposes that the war was really about Northern versus Southern interests.  Nevertheless, the standard answers are that,

• A Northern population of 22 million versus a Southern population of nine million
• 80% of the nations factories and 93% of the iron production occurred in the Northern factories
• The North conducted several successful blockades
• The South eventually suffered attrition
• The North had superior supply transportation

But what of the Gettysburg Address?  And what of Lincoln’s other writings and speeches?  What was the role of the PEN in the war?

In ultimate irony, Lincoln said in the Address, “The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.” Rep Charles Sumner noted of the speech, “Lincoln was mistaken that “the world will little note, nor long remember what we say here.” The world noted at once what he said, and will never cease to remember it. The battle itself was less important than the speech.”  “The last full measure of devotion,” and “We here highly resolve,” are rhetorical super weapons with immediate and long lasting effects.  For a moment, imagine that you are General Lee and you are given the choice between forever stopping the Gettysburg Address or receiving 1,000,000 more soldiers.  Which do you choose?

Churchill

Now consider Churchill’s rhetorical contribution to the WWII war effort.

Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.

Ignoring for a moment, Hitler’s madness, put yourself in his shoes and ask yourself what you would have given to silence Churchill.

Obama’s Chance

Not since Reagan have we seen a communicator as capable as Obama.  Given the Bush years, his defeat of John McCain is understandable.  What is more difficult to fathom is his defeat of Mrs. Clinton.  Think of what he had to overcome.  There is far greater latent racism against blacks than women.  She is the wife of a democrat rock star.  His political experience pales compared to hers.  Yet he demolished her in side-by-side oratory comparisons.  It is precisely his ability as a communicator that could make him Reaganesque, give him a second term and improve deteriorating conditions.  Only time will tell if there is enough of a man behind the message as there was with Lincoln and Churchill.

Conclusion

I am not recommending a new anthem.  I love the one we have.  I only suggest that proper weight, recognition and credit be given to pen warring and that we all get better at it.  As always, freedom will be won or lost with ink, paper and speech as much as with military might.  We are great at military matters.  It’s time to return to colonial communication greatness.