California NAACP pushes for removal of ‘Star Spangled Banner’ as U.S. national anthem

The California chapter of the NAACP is distributing a resolution to California lawmakers that calls for the removal of the “Star Spangled Banner” as the official national anthem of the United States.
The resolution, which was passed at their October conference, urges Congress to do away with “one of the most racist, pro-slavery, anti-black songs in the American lexicon,” referencing the anthem.
“We owe a lot of it to [Colin] Kaepernick,” California NAACP President Alice Huffman reportedly said. “I think all this controversy about the knee will go away once the song is removed.”
The group argues that some of the lyrics of the 1812 song celebrate the death of black American slaves who fought with the British in the War of 1812 to obtain freedom.
Specifically, it’s the third stanza of the song that’s coming into focus:
“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 washed out their foul footsteps’ 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.”
“This song is wrong,” chapter president Alice Huffman told CBS station KOVR-TV. “It should never have been there, and just like we didn’t have it until 1931, it won’t kill us if it goes away.”
The Star-Spangled Banner has been America’s anthem since 1931.
Immediately, the proposal garnered a strong reaction.
“Our flag and national anthem unite us as Americans,” Assemblyman Travis Allen, R-Huntington Beach, who is running for governor, said in a statement. “Protesting our flag and national anthem sows division and disrespects the diverse Americans who have proudly fought and died for our country. Real social change can only happen if we work together as Americans first.”
Another resolution passed by the group urges Congress to censure President Trump for calling on owners to fire NFL players who kneel while the anthem is being played before games.
Trump said back in September at rally in Alabama that fans should “leave the stadium” as soon as players begin kneeling, in addition to using the phrase “son of a bitch” to describe players who don’t stand.
“For a week, [that owner would] be the most popular person in this country because that’s a total disrespect of our heritage,” the president argued. “That’s a total disrespect for everything we stand for.”
Kaepernick, 30, became the face of the anthem protests last season when he began sitting for the playing of the Star Spangled Banner to protest perceived racial injustices and police brutality. Later, he transitioned to kneeling.
The quarterback, who said in 2016 that he was “not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” is currently a free agent, but has said if signed, he will again stand.
While the anthem protests have had a polarizing effect on the league throughout this season, the NFL maintains that it’s crafting a solution to address the concerns of the players while not alienating the fan base. However, the league has not been specific on what measures will be taken.
As for what the NAACP wants as a replacement, the group says it must not be “another song that disenfranchises part of the American population.”


Write a comment
  1. T T T Ted
    T T T Ted 8 November, 2017, 15:19

    The Doomera wants and even more racist tune I guess?

    Reply this comment
  2. Spurwing Plover
    Spurwing Plover 8 November, 2017, 16:19

    Screw the California NAACP I suppose they want to replaced with some liberal song like KAMBYA yeah listen to these idiots and frankly they need their stupid resoltion shoved into a paper shredder SCREW THE National Association of Anaracists & Communists,Politicians

    Reply this comment
    • Josh
      Josh 8 November, 2017, 21:16

      The article clearly states that when asked what it should be replaced with their answer was that it not “be another song that disenfranchises part of the American People”……let’s just stick to the facts and not get belligerent here.

      Reply this comment
      • Danno
        Danno 13 November, 2017, 08:47

        The slaves referred to in the stanza were not American people. They were freed by the British and fighting against the Rebels. Let’s not ignore history, Josh.

        Reply this comment
  3. PeaceKeeper
    PeaceKeeper 8 November, 2017, 18:11

    The NAACP using Colin Kaepernick as there poster child on this issue is laughable. Kaepernick probably didn’t know the meaning of the first stanza of our National Anthem, and I’m pretty sure he didn’t even know the were four stanza’s. If you are searching for racists, you can start with the NAACP.

    Reply this comment
  4. Honorable
    Honorable 8 November, 2017, 18:40

    Oh for pete’s sake. Give it up you, morons. Just throw out the third verse. No one ever sings it. Pathetic waste of time.

    Reply this comment
  5. Honorable
    Honorable 8 November, 2017, 18:41

    Oh for pete’s sake. Give it up you morons. Just throw out the third verse. No one ever sings it. Pathetic waste of time.

    Reply this comment
    • Pam
      Pam 9 November, 2017, 07:36

      Works for me, but I also would check into the actual intent of the words and what they meant at the time before blithly removing it…but like you though I think we shouldn’t worry about a verse we never sing.

      Reply this comment
  6. Dude
    Dude 8 November, 2017, 20:49

    “I think all this controversy about the knee will go away once the song is removed.”

    This clueless statement proves how much they are at odds with the vast majority of Americans.

    Reply this comment
  7. Spurwing Plover
    Spurwing Plover 8 November, 2017, 23:37

    I realy wish Kaepernick would move to another country and take Spike Lee the NBPP and BLM with him if those african folks to stand those idiotic behavior

    Reply this comment
  8. Keith
    Keith 9 November, 2017, 04:46

    I’ve got a better idea. Let’s get rid of the NAACP. They’ve always been the most racist organization in America.

    Reply this comment
  9. Sandi
    Sandi 9 November, 2017, 05:34

    The NAACP is an Organization not any branch of the US Government. This is not an Organization decision, but a “We the People” decision.
    It cannot be a one Organization group of people that removes something every American holds a percentage of ownership. Each American has their “Rights” to their percentage and unless we all are in agreement or it’s passed by a National Government Vote by the people then it cannot be removed!.
    All Americans should get to vote it’s called the “National Anthem”! The song and our Flag does not belong to any one race Organization. Both belong to all American people and the “Right” to remove or replace belongs to every American not one group.
    I will not give up my ownership percentage of what is mine. The NAACP does not own the song or the Flag they only own a percentage. No, they can’t have their way this time, it’s time for a National vote by all Americans! Unless we establish an Organization NAAAAP “National Association for the Advancement of All American People. I want to know why the White Americans along with other legally Nationality Americans are denied the same Civil Rights with the same vision statement. I feel my Civil Rights are violated because White Americans and legally Nationality Americans, cannot have an Organization the same as the NAACP or we would be called racist!
    I want the same “Rights” under an Organization Civil Rights or I’m personally being discriminated against. Why are the Americans that came to America legally not have a voice? If Government is going to allow an Organization of one race to remove what they do not own then their has to be another Organization established for all other Americans to have the same voice under Civil Rights or it’s unlawful! The new established Organization will be known as the Triple A for representing All American People. The NAACP cannot remove what they do not own. I want a attorney to review my post as I’m not giving up my percentage of ownership to the “National Anthem” or the “US Flag” to an Organization that has no Government Branch in which gives that Organization authority to remove what belongs to all Americans!

    Reply this comment
  10. Tinamd
    Tinamd 9 November, 2017, 08:42

    I guess California has nothing better to worry about.

    Reply this comment
  11. Standing Fast
    Standing Fast 9 November, 2017, 11:50

    Ahem. Listen up, class!

    The National Anthem does NOT celebrate the death of black men who fought for the British in the War of 1812.

    The terms “hireling” and “slaves” referred to ALL men who fought as mercenaries for the British in the War for Independence and the War of 1812, most of whom were neither black nor enslaved.

    It is not widely-known anymore, but the words “slave” and “slavery” are not limited to the institution of slavery as practiced in the old South. There is another definition, one that was known to the Founding generation, which included the generation that defeated the British at the Battle of New Orleans.

    It goes like this:

    In ancient times societies where Liberty was held in high regard (Sumer, Israel, Greece, Rome, and others), if you were a citizen you did not pay taxes. The people who were required to pay taxes were considered “tax-slaves” and were called “slaves” for short. A tax-slave was free in other ways, but not equal in status to a citizen. Any citizen who gave up their rights in exchange for work was also called a “slave”. In this view, a mercenary who fights for enemies of Liberty can be considered a slave.

    Race had nothing to do with either of these definitions. It had to do with the ancient concept of Liberty as being the freedom from external control coupled with Independence, meaning a right to self-control, self-government, and/or self-reliance & self-restraint.

    That is why John Adams defined Liberty as a “power to do as we would be done by.”

    Frances Scott Key was an abolitionist. That means he shared that definition. But not all Americans did.

    Anti-federalists and pro-slavers, who were often followers of Edmund Genet (the French Republican who came to America advocating the assassination of George Washington, overthrow of the Federal government, and establishing Democratic-Republican societies), subscribed to the definition that is popular now:

    That Liberty is Freedom from any kind of control. Well, that means there are no limits on individuals or government. Which, of course, leads to a self-cancelling equation of Anarchy and Tyranny. It may come as a shock to you, but the State’s rights movement adheres to this definition–no self-restraint in individuals, no restraints on government power. The Fourteenth Amendment is not a violation of Liberty, it is a fundamental principle of government that derives from it.

    So, when Key wrote the words to the National Anthem, he was thinking of America as a land where true Liberty is the ideal. He was thinking of what the Declaration of Independence tells us, that the fundamental purpose of all just government is to protect the liberty of the people.

    Frederick Douglass, a former slave and one of the world’s great champions of Liberty, supported the Union during the Civil War because he knew if the Confederates won there was no chance slavery would be abolished in his lifetime. He opposed the State’s Rights movement because it holds to the principle that it is okay for states to violate the God-given rights of individuals. The State’s Rights movement is a violation of the Bill of Rights. The Tenth Amendment tells us that the People have the last word. Douglass supported Lincoln and they both held each other in high regard.

    Key’s song helped inspire the movement to abolish slavery in the United States because it reminded Americans of the high ideals of our founding documents. A pro-slaver would find the sentiments of the verses people are complaining about exceedingly uncomfortable.

    If you still are not convinced, read the things the Founders read: “Cato: A Tragedy and Other Works” by Joseph Addison (Liberty Fund, Inc.), “Cato’s Letters” by John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon ed. by Ronald Hamowy (Liberty Fund, Inc.), “The Republic and The Laws” by Marcus Tullius Cicero (Oxford University Press), “American Political Writing During the Founding Era” ed. by Hyneman & Lutz (Liberty Fund, Inc.), and “The Founders Constitution” Five Volumes (Liberty Fund, Inc.). Liberty Fund also has an extensive selection of original works by the Founders. You might also want to read “For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of History” by Charles Adams (Madison Books) and “The Founders at Home” by Myron Magnet (Norton).

    No one who loves Liberty need be ashamed of our National Anthem, either whole or in part. People who think it promotes slavery do not know their history.


    Reply this comment
    • Terry
      Terry 10 November, 2017, 10:20

      Thank you for the clarification. Interesting that the NAACP & Demorat party do everything to keep the black people on the plantation.

      Reply this comment
  12. Spurwing Plover
    Spurwing Plover 9 November, 2017, 16:13

    NAACP National Anarcists,Assasins,Communists Pests

    Reply this comment
  13. Spurwing Plover
    Spurwing Plover 17 November, 2017, 00:41

    Skreeet,skree,kraaw,squawk squawk,squark,squark,skreeek im no twerp just a angry shorebird

    Reply this comment
  14. Mike
    Mike 21 November, 2017, 12:05

    Ooooooooo Aaaaaaaaaaaaa
    Ooga Booga

    That would be better.

    Reply this comment
  15. The Ted Steele System
    The Ted Steele System 24 November, 2017, 17:15

    Kinda fun— Doomers elected the worst kook opf a President in world history! LMAO—- How’s all that winning going for ya Doomers??? lol

    Reply this comment
  16. Bogiewheel
    Bogiewheel 26 November, 2017, 11:06

    Which politician, will step forward and be the first to run his/her campaign, seeking election or re-election, on a platform of anti Flag and Anthem.

    Reply this comment
  17. Bogiewheel
    Bogiewheel 26 November, 2017, 11:11

    “I think all this controversy about the knee will go away once the song is removed.”

    I don’t think so !!

    People still remember the Olympic Games in Mexico City.

    Reply this comment
  18. Standing Fast
    Standing Fast 27 November, 2017, 11:00

    You know, the line containing the word “slave” could be changed to “hireling and knave”, it would still keep the meaning and rhyme with the word “brave”.

    This has been done before with other songs.

    However, the NAACP is mistaken about the National Anthem being pro-slavery or racist. It is meant to inspire Americans to fight for Liberty and Justice for all.

    I am for keeping the anthem. I am for boycotting all sports teams and entertainers who oppose showing respect during the National Anthem. Ask them if they would rather live in a country that really is racist and practices slavery.

    Read Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, and Heather MacDonald.

    Reply this comment
  19. Mike
    Mike 30 November, 2017, 08:12

    Oooga, boooga.

    Reply this comment
  20. Standing Fast
    Standing Fast 30 November, 2017, 14:36

    Always remember that the singing of the National Anthem in the early 19th Century brought no comfort to pro-slavers. The song actually shamed many people who were against slavery into becoming abolitionists.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Tags assigned to this article:
NFLTravis AllenNAACPDonald TrumpColin Kaepernick

Related Articles

Legislature takes up dueling water bonds

There’s no drought of water bonds in the California Legislature to deal with the record drought the state is suffering.

LAO: Teacher pension fund too risky and complex

Policy analysts are calling on state lawmakers to simplify the way the teachers’ pension fund gets funded — to improve oversight

Pension reformer files 3 state initiatives

JULY 13, 2011 Editor’s Note: The following is a statement from the California Center for Public Policy regarding three initiatives