Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Trump's Desecration of the Flag

Opinion

Trump's Desecration of the Flag
us a flag on pole

Since Trump and his followers make such a show of honoring the flag, how can I say that he desecrates the flag? The answer comes from the Pledge of Allegiance itself, which clearly states the meaning of the flag. Republicans recite the pledge at every gathering, and many Trump supporters fly the flag outside their homes; indeed, that is how they show everyone that they support Trump as President. But they clearly have no understanding of its meaning, and Trump actively dishonors it.

We all know the words of the Pledge: "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."


To understand why I say that Trump desecrates the flag, look at the words.

Let's start from the end: "with liberty and justice for all." The meaning of the phrase "for all" is unambiguous in its commitment to equality in liberty and justice. Equality is thus one of the three aspects that the Pledge says are essential to the nature of America; the other two are being "under God" and being "indivisible."

But for the 33% of our fellow Americans who are either poor or people of color, liberty and justice have always been limited. "How so?" you may ask. "Aren't we all free to do what we want?" Not really.

"Liberty" means having the opportunity to pursue life, to pursue your dreams. But for this segment of our citizens, there is little opportunity, starting with the fact that they are not given truly equal educational opportunity, and without that, the way forward is blocked.

"Justice" means that people are treated fairly and equally in both the courts of law and by society. While courts treat the poor and people of color fairly, they experience little social justice. Yes, there are government and other programs that help the poor and people of color with money and in other ways. But on balance, they suffer discrimination, not just from people but often at the hands of government, starting with the education they are offered.

But the desecration doesn't come from this reality; that's a fact of life. It comes from Trump actively working to lessen equality, to subvert efforts to increase equality for this segment of our citizens. He has prohibited all Federal agencies, as well as all public or private institutions that receive Federal funds, from having programs that promote diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI). These programs have the purpose of providing disadvantaged Americans with greater educational and employment opportunities—the two areas that most affect their ability to exercise the right to pursue happiness promised by the Declaration of Independence.

The next important concept is "indivisible." The pledge was written in 1892, with the Civil War still fresh enough in the country's memory that pledging our country's indivisibility was of great importance.

For most of the 160 years since that war, regardless of regional, racial, class, or political differences, people felt we were all Americans, and all came together in moments of crisis. We were able to agree to disagree.

Today, that is no longer the case. The two almost equally divided halves of this country do not agree to disagree. Each side feels the other is a danger to the country's future.

Why has this extreme polarization happened? It happened because Trump has done two things. First, he engaged in vitriol and hatred when he categorized many immigrant Americans—particularly Muslim and Hispanics—in extremely negative terms, especially during his 2016 campaign, creating distrust and suspicion towards those groups among White supporters of Trump. And he routinely refers to Democrats in Congress as the enemy and evil. Second, he has labeled all those who disagree with him—whether Republican or Democrat—as an enemy, and he has routinely sought retribution against them, whether by having them investigated by the DOJ or promoting primary challenges against them.

Both of these actions foster an extreme us-versus-them dynamic. This dynamic has always been present in the United States, and indeed in most countries or communities, but the extreme nature of it is unheard of, with the one exception of times of war. For example, during WWI, all German-Americans were viewed with suspicion; during WWII, Japanese-Americas were actually interned in camps to keep them from aiding the enemy in any way.

And what is the meaning of "one nation under God?" It does not mean that we are all of the same religion, that there is a state religion. But it does mean that we follow God's teachings: an essential one, which is the cornerstone of all the great religions as well as humanism and the Declaration of Independence, is the Golden Rule, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." It is essential to the practice of equality,

Do you see much of that present today? While 74% of Americans report believing in God, what does that mean? Even in the "born again" Evangelical heyday, when kids wore wristbands that asked, "What would Jesus do?", believers did not act as Jesus would have. It was sad. It would, unfortunately, be more accurate to say that, in reality, we are mostly a God-less nation; that money and greed rule, not God.

When Trump vilifies members of the LGBTQ community and seeks to stop or reverse the progress they have made in acquiring the rights that are due them under the Declaration; when he attacks the rights of transgender individuals to receive the treatment and support they need in order to pursue their right to happiness—those are not examples of following the Golden Rule or treating these groups as God's children. He is not treating these American citizens as being part of "one nation under God."

Finally, the Pledge is a statement of allegiance to the United States and its flag. But the pledge doesn't stop there; it states that the allegiance is to the principles that are the essence of the republic: "liberty and justice for all." The same principles that are found in the Declaration of Independence.

By acting so aggressively against the very essence of this republic as created by the Founding Fathers and as confirmed in the Pledge, Trump is desecrating the flag—more than the flag, he is desecrating America.

But unfortunately, Trump supporters apparently don't understand the meaning of the flag or the Pledge. If they did, they wouldn't be Trump supporters.

Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths. Read more of his writing at www.PreservingAmericanValues.com


Read More

Capitol building
white concrete building during daytime

Congress Broke the Constitutional Order — And Now They Want Voters to Forget

How can leaders who broke the constitutional order, ignored their oath, weakened rights, and harmed the people now ask Americans to forget — and reward them with reelection? The question is not abstract — it goes to the heart of what the Constitution demands from those who swear an oath to uphold it.

The constitutional order is the framework that protects the Republic: three branches, checks and balances, oversight, limits on executive power, and the oath every member of Congress swears — to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. Yet in recent years, Congress has allowed that order to erode. Oversight collapsed. Guardrails bent. Silence replaced accountability. Loyalty to a president replaced loyalty to the Constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
 U.S. President Donald Trump speaks from the Cross Hall of the White House on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC.

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks from the Cross Hall of the White House on April 1, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Pool/Getty Images

How Presidential Primetime Addresses Shape Public Trust in Democratic Institutions

A question still being studied is the effects on public trust when the head of the Executive casts doubt on the institutions that run elections, enforce laws, and decide legal disputes. The President of the United States is arguably the most powerful man in the world. He is the commander in chief of a nation #1 in nominal gross domestic product as well as #1 in military power, budget, and spending as of 2026. The actions he takes spew ripple effects across the world and follow many generations. A way you can measure the executive's power can also be measured in how much influence his speeches have on the markets, opinions of the masses, news outlets, lawmakers, social media reactions, etc. His framing of an issue can shape the next day’s political conversation.

These conversations become extremely dangerous/consequential when discussing a principle as embedded in our country as Democracy. In his July primetime speech, Trump continued to pedal the claims about election security and argued for stricter voting rules. He continued to portray the country as facing a moment of corruption and uncertainty, followed by presenting himself as the one prepared to restore order. The address continued with repeated claims about his loss in the 2020 election that have not been supported by the evidence compiled over years of investigation by many parties. Professional reviews, audits, and courts have yet to find significant evidence of foul play substantial enough to influence the outcome of that election.

Keep ReadingShow less
unrecognizable businessman giving speech to professional audience

Brain science explains why voters reward charisma over results — and why the leaders who "fix" the most get credit for the least. A behavioral look at elections.

alvaro gonzalez/Getty Images

The Résumé Should Outvote the Smile

There's an old joke about a couple who finally solved years of arguing over decisions. "Since you're the man of the house," the wife said, "you handle the big things -- our stance on foreign wars, who we send to the Senate. I'll take care of the small stuff: groceries, the mortgage, where we live, what we eat." The husband agreed happily, certain he had won the better half of the deal. A few years later he realized the trade had gone entirely the other way. He held forth on geopolitics at dinner parties while his wife quietly ran every detail that actually touched his life: what he ate, where he lived, how his money was spent. What looked like ultimate authority was, in practice, near-total abdication over the things that shaped his days.

Voters make the same trade, and pay for it the same way. We keep hiring leaders for the qualities we would want in a spouse -- warmth, charm, a commanding voice, the sense that they see us -- instead of the qualities we would want in a mechanic: someone who can find what is broken and fix it before the whole system fails. We evaluate candidates the way we choose intimate partners, not the way we hire people to run complex, high-stakes systems.

Keep ReadingShow less
US soldier with American flag patch on his arm.
a group of soldiers in uniform
Photo by Oleg Ivanov on Unsplash

Moral Leadership Can Protect Service Members' Psychological Well-Being

It has recently been reported that President Trump and Secretary of War Hegseth disparaged the mental health concerns, including suicide attempts, expressed by the sailors serving aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln during the carrier’s record deployment. Their comments brought back the disquiet I felt several months ago while attending a performance of the US Naval Academy Glee Club at the Church of St. Ignatius Loyola in Manhattan. Usually, when I attend choral concerts in the church’s imposing Baroque sanctuary, my mind quiets, and I find myself immersed in the music. But not on that occasion. Instead, as I enjoyed the exuberant singing, my mind filled with resentment. The Glee Club, handsome midshipmen in formal dress, is a multiethnic group of men and women. The harmonious singing of a chorus composed of individuals of widely varied backgrounds seemed a metaphor for how our country and its military should work.

My upset originated with the realization that during their time at the Naval Academy, these midshipmen had witnessed the firing of the Black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General C. Q. Brown, Jr., as part of an apparent purge of those supporting diversity in the military. Even uglier was the implication that Brown, a highly decorated officer, had been elevated to his position as a ‘DEI’ hire. They also had seen the firing of trailblazing women leaders in the military, including Admiral Linda Fagan, the first woman Coast Guard Commandant, and Admiral Yvette Davids, the first woman Superintendent of the Naval Academy at Annapolis, the very institution they were attending. I was offended and angered by the message these firings conveyed to the men and women of the Academy’s Glee Club, especially the women and minority midshipmen, who had volunteered to serve their nation and, ultimately, to place themselves in harm’s way for it.

Keep ReadingShow less