pier review

Abdulla Almohammed

Sabrena Turner

AFRS 100

3/4/2019

African Americans’ Refusal to Defer to the US National Anthem: Article Analysis

Both the “Colin Kaepernick is Righter than You Know” and the “African-Americans and the Strains of the National Anthem” articles by Schwarz and Staples respectively discuss the refusal of African Americans to stand whenever the US national anthem is being played. Specifically; in response to the public backlash that followed Kaepernick’s refusal to defer to the national anthem during a baseball match in 2016, Schwarz’s article argues that African Americans should not be expected to respect this song. This is because; considering the history and motivation of Francis Scott Key, the composer, the national anthem cheers the slaughter of emancipated African American fighters during the War of 1812 C.E. Accordingly, America needs to develop a fresh national anthem (Schwarz 1-3). Schwarz advances these claims to inform the American public that African Americans have valid reasons for not deferring to the national anthem. This way, America would address these grievances, thus bringing about increased interracial harmony. Schwarz’s article was published on 28 August 2016 on The Intercept website. This choice of publisher highlights that the article is targeted at the general public. The article addresses the exigency that African Americans should receive the same treatment as Caucasian Americans. Resources that exist for Schwarz include the following hyperlinked documents: an article outlining Kaepernick’s reasons for refusing to revere the national anthem; content covering the responses of twitter users to such explanation; a reproduction of the words of the national anthem; an article describing events happening during the Battle of Fort McHenry in 1814; an article explaining that some African Americans who fought alongside the British in the War of 1812 settled in Trinidad; and an article explaining that, by 1833, Washington police were meting oppression on African Americans. Constraints that exist for Schwarz include failure to effectively align the body of the article with the text of the title. In this regard, within the title, the author declares that Kaepernick was justified to decline to revere the national anthem. In the body text, Schwarz is however rather ambiguous concerning his stance as he invites readers to evaluate the acceptability of Kaepernick’s gesture (Schwarz Para. 18). Such failure to make a definite assertion would distract the reader, thus hindering his/her grasp of the author’s central message.

Similarly, Staples’s article contends that African Americans usually struggle with feelings of ‘double consciousness since the US political and civic system was designed to refuse them comprehensive citizenship. Thanks to the ensuing insider-outsider status, African Americans decline to defer to the national anthem (Staples). Using these claims, Staples intends to inspire the American society to amend the factors that cause African Americans to feel that they are treated unequally. Such measures would cause African Americans to have a sense of belonging, thereby facilitating increased interracial cohesion. Staples’s article was published on 9 June 2018 on the New York Times website. Considering this choice of publisher, the article is meant for the general American public. This article addresses the exigency that, in view of the Declaration of Independence document, the rights of both Caucasian Americans and African Americans must be respected. The resources that exist for Staples include the following hyperlinked documents: Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have A Dream” speech, W.E.B. Du Bois’s “Double Consciousness” treatise, a cleveland.com article by Marc Ferris, a nytimes.com article by Brent Staples, a harpers.org article by Andrew Cockburn, and the pbs.org “Lift Every Voice and Sing” article. Conversely, the constraints that exist for Staples include identifying himself as an African American who does not revere the national anthem (Para. 1). This confession is a limitation as it may dissuade readers from accepting the author’s arguments; audiences would consider the writer biased and thus untrustworthy. Moreover, the author is limited in that he does not provide documentary proof to show that the national anthem was particularly popular during the period when African Americans were routinely lynched in the South (Para.7).

Comparative rhetorical analyses of the aforementioned articles illustrate that “African-Americans and the Strains of the National Anthem” is superior to Colin Kaepernick is Righter than You Know” because Staples’s article surpasses Schwarz’s piece in terms of logical, ethical, and emotional appeals.

With regard to logical appeals, both articles satisfy readers by demonstrating that certain parts of the national anthem view African Americans as inferior beings who deserve to die. To this end, Schwarz’s article notes that the third stanza of the national anthem declares that “No refuge could save the hireling and slave / From the … gloom of the grave / And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave” (Schwarz 2). This section underlines that, after American soldiers decimated African American soldiers during the War of 1812, the American flag gestured victoriously. Significantly, the section underscores that the murdered African Americans were mere slaves, thereby elevating the status of American soldiers over the victims. Based on this explanation, readers would agree that African Americans need to disrespect the national anthem as it alleges that the blacks are inferior and merit to die. Equally, “African-Americans and the Strains of the National Anthem” satisfies readers by stating that stanza three of the national anthem announces that “No refuge could save the hireling and slave / From … the gloom of the grave” (Staples). This statement alleges that, given that they were slaves, African Americans suffered justifiable death during the War of 1812. In view of the racial bias communicated in the phrase, readers would concur that African Americans should refuse to revere the national anthem.

Regarding ethical appeals, Staples’s article nevertheless satisfies readers better than Schwarz’s piece because Staples identifies himself as an African American who has experienced certain injustices experienced by fellow Blacks. This author reports that he bore witness when; in the 1960s, Dr. King was murdered for advocating nonviolent resistance in the South (Staples Para. 2). Considering that this occurrence highlighted the biased treatment of African Americans, readers would see Staples as a credible author. Consequently, audiences would agree with the author’s argument that African Americans should not revere the national anthem. Conversely, Schwarz’s article does not offer sufficient ethical appeals. This is because the author establishes his credibility by merely assuming a neutral stance suitable for scholars; Schwarz invites readers to make an independent determination about the justifiability of African Americans’ refusal to revere the national anthem (Schwarz Para. 18). This scenario would cause readers to conclude that the author is trustworthy in that he does not attempt to force his opinion onto audiences. Readers would thus accept the writer’s viewpoint that African Americans must refuse to revere the national anthem.

Concerning emotional appeals, Staples’s article however satisfies readers better than Schwarz’s piece; Staples’s article cites a specific factor about the national anthem that would arouse readers’ emotions. Specifically, the article notes that the anthem was popular during baseball matches at a point when African Americans were prohibited from participating in Whites-only games (Staples Para. 7). This scenario would cause readers to experience various negative emotions, thus concurring with Staple’s argument that African Americans should not revere the national anthem. Conversely, Schwarz’s article only provides an emotional appeal highlighting that the national anthem disregards other people who were courageously fighting for freedom during the War of 1812 and instead transforms the murderers of these African Americans into brave freedom fighters (Para. 12). Although this explanation would provoke readers’ emotions, such arousal would not be significant because audiences would not understand that only African Americans are disregarded by the national anthem.

Overall, Staples’s article satisfies readers better than Schwarz’s piece by making superior use of logical, ethical, and emotional appeals. This exercise has underscored that, besides providing valid evidence, a writer needs to effectively establish his/her credibility and stir readers’ emotions.

Works Cited

Schwarz, Jon. “Colin Kaepernick is Righter than You Know: The National Anthem is a Celebration of Slavery.” The Intercept, 28. Aug. 2016. Print.

Staples, Brent. “African-Americans and the Strains of the National Anthem.” The New York Times, 9 June 2018. Web. 5 Mar. 2019.