Category: Anthem

The warmth of our culture invigorates my soul as I stand amongst strangers in the spirit of Ubuntu. We sing each verse of diversity with pride, and no prejudice. There are millions of voices, yet it is only heard as one. Although I am overwhelmed with pride, images of our challenging past stampede frenetically through my mind, reminding me of how far we have come.

Our national anthem was awarded best national anthem in 2017 by The Economist due to its inclusivity and ability to bring people together. This idea was highlighted through events last year that united the country with pride, such as the Springboks winning the Rugby World Cup as well as the Ndlovu Youth choir competing in America’s Got Talent. These events not only brought South Africans together, but showed the depth, diversity and unique multi-culture of South Africa. However, I think it is important to reflect on the true meaning and depth of our anthem.

‘Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrica’ were dangerous words to utter during Apartheid. These were once the lyrics of a hymn, written by Enoch Sontonga, which plead to God for a blessing over the land and its people. These same words of peace triggered the police to open fire on up to 10 000 students, pleading for their right to study in English and not in Afrikaans, in the Soweto Uprising of 16 June 1976. On the 16 June 2019, I marched the same route as many children my age did 43 years prior, with the youth from all over Gauteng. Together, as one unified voice, we filled the streets of Soweto with the words of ‘Nkosi Sikelel’ iAfrica’. This time, whilst singing the anthem, I was reminded of my rights, my privilege and predominantly of my role as being part of the youth of South Africa – I have the ability to evoke change.

Our anthem, which pieces together lyrics in Afrikaans‚ English‚ Xhosa‚ Zulu and Sesotho, combines the lyrics of Enoch Sontonga’s poem as well as lyrics from ‘Die Stem’, the anthem that arose from the Anglo Boer war in 1918. Whilst Enoch Sontonga’s poem includes the struggle of black South Africans during Apartheid, ‘Die Stem’ expresses the deep connection between Afrikaners and the South African land, with its beautiful mountains and waters.

By bringing these two anthems together, it encapsulates the spirit of Ubuntu. Ubuntu was a Zulu proverb that said: “I am a person through other people. My humanity is tied to yours”. This highlights the idea that man cannot exist in isolation. Through my experience of community service within South Africa, this idea resonates indefinitely with me. I understand that I could not prosper within this country if I did not raise my voice and do my part as a young Jewish South African woman. It is my duty to break this racial divide that continues to exist within our country. Racism almost ended the Jewish nation as a people. If I blindly stand by whilst racism occurs, I am a disgrace to my community as well as to my nation. The idea of Ubuntu solidifies the need for our nation to be unified and embrace our differences and diversity, just as our anthem embodies.

Thus, as I sing my national anthem, I think of my ancestors’ struggle to secure our land. I think of my anger towards my ancestors who imposed racist decrees unto my fellow South Africans. I remind myself of our unity despite our differences. I remind myself of our ability to embrace our combined culture. Ultimately , I remind myself that although discrimination in our land still exists, our anthem provides the hope that we can put an end to the judgement and prejudice, if we come together stand united as we live and strive for freedom in South Africa our land.

As time goes on, the Star Spangled Banner continues to define the United States and encourage the nation as a whole, as it depicts the power and capabilities of the country. In a tribute to Louisiana and Hurricane Katrina survivors, Aretha Franklin shares the verses of the anthem with Aaron Neville, while his fellow New Orleans native, Dr. John, creates a jazz piano rhythm to the song during the 2006 Super Bowl XL. Through a jazz and gospel tune and repetition of phrases in the anthem, the artists pay tribute to the people lost and survivors of the disaster and symbolize the United States as a nation that can recover from anything if they work together.

Throughout the anthem, the instruments and choir present create a significant jazz and gospel tune to the performance, making it unlike any other national anthem performance and specifically targeting New Orleans, the birthplace of jazz. In the performance, the piano, cello, and drums create an evident jazz rhythm; Aaron Neville and Dr. John add to the rhythm, as they are both natives of New Orleans. This music genre targets the audience, as jazz is immensely popular in Louisiana. Moreover, the gospel choir that joins Aretha Franklin in the last three lines of the anthem display the nation coming together as a whole in order to recover from Hurricane Katrina. The jazz and gospel tunes in the performance produce a comforting and familiar rhythm to the audience after the natural disaster and portrays how the nation can unite and overcome any barrier.

In addition, towards the end of the performance, Aretha Franklin repeats parts of the anthem which emphasize the strength of the United States. Specifically, the soul artist repeats the words “still there” when describing the flag and “the brave” in the anthem. When emphasizing that the flag is “still there,” Aretha Franklin exhibits the United States as a strong nation, as they continue to persevere in the face of any obstacle. Furthermore, the repetition of “the brave” at the end of the performance continues to strengthen the audience and makes the claim that the United States is a nation of brave individuals who can recover from anything if they work together. Overall, the repetition evident at the end of the performance displays the nation as powerful and able to persist in difficult times.

In conclusion, with jazz and gospel tunes and repetition of phrases in the performance, the musicians pay tribute to the disaster victims and enhance the United States as a country that can come together as “the land of the free and the home of the brave”.

The original national anthem, forged through the perilous moments of the War of 1812, has a lasting impact on the patriotism and core beliefs of U.S. citizens. Today, the Star-Spangled Banner represents more than achieved independence, but additionally constitutes a national symbol for the country. The Houston Symphony Orchestra 2014 performance of the Star-Spangled Banner employs a variety of fermatas, crescendos, instrumentation, and supplementary alterations in music style in order to convey their central message of America’s strength, pride, unity, and patriotism.

The orchestra sets the motion of the Star-Spangled Banner with a subtle snare-drum roll which mainly serves to evoke awareness in the audience. After the snare-drum roll, low instruments in a staccato, sharply detached style, enter confidently with a steady tempo to symbolize America’s stability. The unique instrumentation of low instruments at the beginning serves to establish a powerful melodic idea for the audience. The accented style and instrumentation assist in creating a prideful tone because the band includes distinct intervals to display shifts for fear, relief, bravery, and confidence during the War. These intervals move up and down allowing the audience to aurally experience the American flag billowing in the breeze. After the first four lines, woodwind and orchestra instruments graciously enter during a transition representing America’s relief. The soft dynamic signifies the minimal uncertainty of America which recovers from the low instruments including the trumpet, trombone, and bass drums. The band conveys the unity of America by collectively playing as an ensemble during the words “flag was still there”. Houston Symphony Orchestra portrays the strength of America by joining all of its members together for the last two lines.

At the end of the anthem, the band incorporates crescendos, gradual increases in volume, in order to render a feeling of pride in the audience. In this instance, increases in volume serve to emphasize certain phrases and spark passion. The band also includes fermatas on certain words like “free” and “brave”. Likewise, the fermatas create an effect that highlight the significant meaning behind the freedom and bravery of America. The audience becomes aware of the true meaning behind being an American, but most importantly the resilience of their own country.

In conclusion, the band effectively conveys their symbolism of America through the Star-Spangled Banner. The effects of instrumentation vividly express America’s unity, pride, power, and persistence. The Houston Symphony Orchestra elicits sensational sentiment for its audience through musical strategies that provide insight into the soul of America.

In the beginning, many individuals wanted songs that were uplifting and powerful. NPR created a staff panel of musicians who would bring in songs and had an audience who contributed to making suggestions of songs. The panel gives most of the material in the NPR series. NPR started off in a period of 3 months of series of anthems. NPR Music’s American Anthem series focuses its attention on the songs that have become planted in American culture. They also show how they were written and embraced through millions of perople. The goal from NPR is to make us wonder what is, or what we consider an anthem. An anthem is an inspiring fight song, which revolves around the daily struggles where individuals argue with their personal objectives and strive to find hope. They flow into the audience’s emotional mind and find a connection to relate to. It’s not just about the words themselves, but for the role they play with our society. There are hundreds of different genres of anthems in this world, and today I’ll be discussing the two kinds of anthems out of many that there are.

In 1999, one of the most famous songs of the time, ‘No Scrubs’, became a number one hit. ‘No Scrubs’ was sung by the American girl group, TLC, calling out men with no purpose. Kandi Burruss found closure in writing this song as she was speaking with her close friend, in her car, about her current boyfriend and ended up singing freely. She took it upon herself to send it to TLC which was then published by them. After releasing the song to the public, it instantly became an anthem for all women. ‘No Scrubs’ was an anthem uniting confident, individualistic and daring women. It was and still is an electrical and powerful song that girls can link the struggle about guys who are not worth their time, and are declaring “no” to men. It is something that girls go through daily, where the guys holler at them from the “passenger seat” and are not always a gentleman about it. This song really made women speak up to their supposed ‘lovers’ and out of those 3-4 minutes in which the song plays, everyone is together and makes them wonder, “Am I scrubs?” or “Do I have a scrub?”. This song spread like wildfire because it wasn’t based off of one genre of music, but many. They decided to cater to all genres such as R&B, Pop and even Rock. It inspired many covers from popular singers such as, British singer Georgia Smith, who was an R&B singer, Country singer Casey Musgraves, and the rock band Weaser. Twenty years later it is still considered one of the most looked upon female anthems of all time and continues its legacy.

Twelve years later, a multicultural pop sensation song by the pop queen herself, Lady Gaga, released an all time hit called, ‘Born This Way’. This song was directed towards anyone who felt different or insecure. It was lyrics to live by. ‘Born This Way’ is an LGBT anthem and was for anyone struggling to come to terms with their sexual orientation. Although this was just a song sung in her California music studio, thousands of miles ways, the words and tone impact us and makes us feel that someone is guarding and protecting us throughout everything. Lady Gaga found inspiration in writing this song from Carl Bean, who also wrote his own original song called ‘I Was Born This Way’. Carl Bean was a struggling gay man who found words to put into song who he was as a person and how he shouldn’t be judged. Once Lady Gaga heard this song, she was instantaneously captivated and had to show the rest of the world what she felt. She herself, was different growing up and felt suicidal, depressed and didn’t know who she was. Not only did she write this song with the help of Carl Bean, but she wrote it from her heart, which affected many individuals and made them feel safe when they had nobody. This song saves hundreds of people every day, even the haters. Furthermore, even though she received backlash from supposedly copying Madonna’s, ‘Express Yourself’ and being accused of exploiting gay fan base, she has never shown a sign of weakness and has proved a point of never giving up. She made sure that everyone listened when she said that you are born this way and you should be proud of that. Not many people took this topic seriously until she gained courage to sing about it. Which is why she is an icon and is the LGBT anthem.

Although ‘Born This Way’ and ‘No Scrubs’ are a jam that everyone can listen and relate to, they both have a sincere significance towards certain individual groups. Both songs unify distinct audiences. ‘No Scrubs’ is positioned for women seeking men who are disrespectful and telling them to check themselves. Whereas ‘Born This Way’ is placed for those diverse and peculiar, hint the name she gave her fans, Little Monsters. On the contrary, they both were written based off of the inspiration of others, which impacted them and many. They both have the same meaning where they defend the audience in some way. Together they take part in being a significant anthem to many and continue to fight against everyday struggles.

In conclusion, a song can mean so much to one person. Each song tells a story that brings out the emotional perspective in them, especially if they are considered an anthem, such as the songs stated above. The way the songs are perceived is what captures the ear to many and urges people to listen to what they are speaking. A song is worth so much more than what people consider and not only is it uplifting, but courageous, and valiant. This is why I strongly believe these two songs are perceptibly different daring anthems and continue to change the way the music world is understood.

Any sovereign state has its own official symbols. This is the flag, the motto and the anthem. This article is devoted to the state symbols of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Its meaning is described and interpreted as meaning, as well as interesting historical facts related to it. Attention is also paid to the legislative framework that regulates the procedures for adopting and using national symbols.

The national flag of the Republic of Kazakhstan is a rectangular piece of cloth. Its background is blue. In the center there is an image of a radiating sun, and below it is an eagle (also of golden color) hovering. Flag width indicates its length from one to two. A plate traditionally attached to a shaft. The latter has a vertical bar. It is a national decoration of golden hue.

From time immemorial in the nomadic peoples inhabiting the lands of modern Kazakhstan, the azure color was associated with freedom, without which they could not imagine their life, as well as with insincerity and honesty. If you analyze the word ‘blue’, then the Kazakh language has many one root, connected with the concepts of ‘happiness’, ‘being’, ‘regeneration’. One cannot forget the ancient Turks, who worshiped the sky, considering him to be their creator. Their logo was also blue for this very reason.

Thus, the color of the flag as the state symbol of the Republic of Kazakhstan says that the citizens who live in this Central Asian country, most of them value freedom, peace and a happy life. Even monochrome wallpaper has its own meaning. It symbolizes unity in the state and equality before the law.

The Sun has always been associated with people with a life of energy. The rays are depicted on the flag of Kazakhstan in the form of pills. It is a symbol of prosperity and prosperity. There is one more important element – the eagle (specifically the golden eagle). It is a terrible bird from the steppe. When portrayed in situations that testify to predatory intent, associations with authority and power arise. But on the flag of Kazakhstan the eagle is proudly located, widely spreading its wings. He is on the trip. This means freedom, and the aspirations of the citizens of a young country for higher goals and a better life. Among the nomads, the golden eagle aroused admiration and reverence. And they considered this bird to be courageous, loyal and free.

The third state symbol of the Republic of Kazakhstan is the national anthem. It was first approved in 1992 with the coat of arms and the flag. But from the very beginning the lyrics of the song chosen for the hymn to most of the Kazakhs seemed too difficult to imagine. And the melody didn’t match well when listening. Therefore, in 2006 it was decided to change the national anthem. The folk song has become a new symbol, well known to the Kazakhs from the 50s of the last century. The composer of the music is Shad Kaldyakov, and the words written by Zh. Nazhimidenov. The text was completed at the beginning of the 21st century by Nursultan Nazarbayev. The song is imbued with patriotism. Again it features golden ears and a blue sky. The lyrical hero compares himself to a flower that grew on fertile Kazakh land and loves its homeland.

Introduction

Anthem is not just a song but a powerful representation of a nation’s collective spirit, history, and identity. Each country possesses a unique anthem that echoes the values and aspirations of its people. The diverse tapestry of humanity across the globe gives rise to a multitude of anthems, each celebrating its own heritage. In this essay, we delve into the significance of anthems, exploring how they foster unity, promote cultural appreciation, and inspire citizens to work together for a better future.

Body

Anthems serve as a potent tool to unite citizens regardless of their differences. These songs act as a binding force, instilling a sense of pride and belonging to a shared nation. They remind us of our common struggles and achievements, transcending barriers of language, religion, and ethnicity. When the anthem resonates through the hearts of citizens, a strong sense of solidarity emerges, promoting social cohesion and mutual understanding.

Moreover, anthems celebrate the rich cultural diversity within a nation. They often incorporate elements of traditional music, reflecting the unique heritage of different regions and communities. By embracing this diversity, anthems encourage cultural appreciation and foster respect for various customs and traditions. This, in turn, reinforces a sense of inclusivity and promotes an environment where individuals can freely express their identities without fear of discrimination.

Anthems also inspire citizens to work collectively towards a brighter future. The lyrics often carry powerful messages of hope, resilience, and progress, motivating people to overcome challenges and strive for a better society. When faced with adversities, the anthem serves as a reminder of our shared values and aspirations, pushing us to stand together and face obstacles head-on.

Furthermore, anthems play a crucial role in forging a collective national identity. They encapsulate the historical milestones and struggles of a nation, encapsulating its essence into a few verses and melodies. As citizens sing the anthem on various occasions, a sense of belonging to a larger entity takes root, transcending individual differences and fostering a strong national identity that unites people across diverse backgrounds.

Conclusion

In conclusion, anthems are much more than mere musical compositions. They are powerful symbols of unity, diversity, and collective identity. Embracing the anthem of a nation is a way of embracing its people, their histories, and their dreams. By understanding and cherishing the significance of anthems, we can nurture an inclusive society that thrives on unity and celebrates its cultural mosaic. As we raise our voices together in harmony with our national anthem, we can forge a shared future that embraces the strengths of our diversity and fosters a spirit of cooperation and mutual respect.

In this essay, ’Flower of Scotland’, ‘Land of Hope and Glory’, ‘A Soldier’s Song’ and ‘Land of my Fathers’ anthems will be object of comparison and analysis. After a deep reflection, will be decided which anthem is more adequate to be a national anthem.

‘Flower of Scotland’ was written by Roy Williamson in honor of the Bannockburn Battle in 1314. This battle occurred in the first stage of the Wars of Scottish Independence, during the 13th and 14th centuries. Against all the odds, Scotland won this battle and changed the entire course of the Wars, winning its independence.

The title of this anthem is an allusion to the Battle of Largs in 1263, where the Vikings planned to attack the Scottish during the night, so that they were not expecting the Vikings and were unable to defend themselves. This plan failed miserably due to the ‘Flower of Scotland’ , the Thistle. The Vikings took off their shoes and socks to avoid making noise and advanced in bare foot. One of them stood on a thistle and his screams woke up the scottish army. The Scottish defeated the Vikings and this victory was so importante that the Thistle became the symbol of Scotland.

The lyrics of ‘Flower of Scotland’, however, recall the reality during the Bannockburn Battle, mentioned before. At the time, Scotland and England were in constant conflicts for Scotland’s Independence. The conflicts started when the heir of Scotland’s throne, Margaret the Maid of Norway, died. There were thirteen contenders for the throne but the two leaders for this succession were John Balliol and Robert Bruce. Edward I, King of England, was requested to select the new king in order to prevent a civil war but he wanted to have power over Scotland so he was recognised as Lord Paramount after threatening Scotland. John Balliol was crowned King of Scotland and Edward I and him were in good terms. Without Edwards’ I knowledge, Auld Alliance, which consisted in mutual support between Scotland and France, was signed. England had the disire to expand its territory, including the conquer of France. When Edward I knew about the Auld Alliance he invaded Scotland and in 1296 the Battle of Dunbar marked the begining of the Wars of Scottish Independence.

In every stanza of this anthem, the last four verses are equals and there is a reason for it, By repeating ‘And stood against him/ Proud Edward’s Army/ And sent him homeward/ Tae think again.’ , the courage and persistence of the Scottish is reminded. Besides that, the pride that the Scottish Army brought to the nation is also mentioned.

After ‘Flower of Scotland’, there is ‘Land of Hope and Glory’, an unofficial anthem of England that was written by Edward Elgar in 1902.

This anthem is the finale of the Coronation Ode, that was prepared to the King’s coronation. In 1902 King Edward VII was crowned and the Ode, that includes the anthem, was played. During this event, the almost blind Archbishop of Canterbury misplaced the crown on the King’s head.

‘Land of Hope and Glory’ is a symbol of patriotism and pride. Over the time, new meanings were given to this anthem. It started as a reminder of England’s greatness and its History and later gave hope to the soldiers, to the nation and to everyone during both World Wars and many other occasions. It is sung in important occasions and out loud. Everyone who sings this anthem is proud of it, is proud of the country’s History and of every person who contributed for it. Besides that, the anthem as also a religious part, where aid and guidance are requested to a superior identity in order to lead the nation into greater glory.

As previously referred, several connotations were given to this anthem including the name of a patriotic show. Neil Sands, a well-known theatrical producer, organised this show. In this year (2020), the show was supposed to be performed on the 8th of May, celebrating the Victory in Europe Day (VE Day[footnoteRef:1]) but had to be prostponed. This production is a compilation of several memorable songs and has the intention to recall the days of glory of the nation. [1: On this day , Nazy Germany surrended to Allies, ceassing the World War II.]

In addition to the new meaning as a show, in 1987 it was produced a movie called ‘Hope and Glory’ , a veracious experience of growing up during the Blitz[footnoteRef:2], so as explained, the anthem inspired people in various occasions and gave them strength to overcome obstacles. [2: Bombing raids against Great Britain between 1940 and 1944.]

Standing for the flag of our country displays pride and patriotism. For Colin Kaepernick, standing for the flag is unjust for a country that oppresses people of color. “…To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.” which Kaepernick stated. (Wyche) This statement leads to the beginning of a movement throughout the sports world, kneeling during the National Anthem. In a nation with a said, “strong sense of unity” it has been separated in a time of racial discrimination and violence. The National Anthem has been a large part of American culture for many years, but in today’s age, it symbolizes something new, in forms of celebrity influence, personal morals and values, and freedom of expression.

Football Coaches in the NFL and important figures in our government express that not standing for the national anthem is a counterproductive way to get their message across. Although you may be impactful based on your celebrity title, coaches believe that as a player, this action can be a distraction to your team and the overall sport. Dabo Swinney, a football coach for Clemson University made a valid point, which he stated at a press conference, being a distraction to your team is disruptive and it is unfair to use your team as a platform. (Felicien) Coaches and fans around the country have looked upon the protest as an inconvenience and take away to the fun and unity of sports. Sports are a large part of the United States from volleyball to football and lacrosse to swimming, millions of people watch sports to witness their favorite athletes play. Owners and authority figures that run the team could see the use of popularity and large names in America as a negative outlook for the team. Causing the possibility of star players getting fired because of the negative impact on the team and sport. An even greater influence on the people of our country, President Barak Obama stated that the message could have been approached in a better way and has proceeded to insult the men and women in uniform. “President Obama expressed concern that not standing for the national anthem can get in the way of the message: ‘As a general matter, when it comes to the flag the national anthem and the meaning that holds for our men and women in uniform and those who’ve fought for us — that is a tough thing for them to get past to then hear what his [Kaepernick’s] deeper concerns are.'(Jones and LoBianco) An abundant amount of Americans that serve our country are disgraced and in disbelief with the act of kneeling for our anthem and flag. Celebrities of the sports world are not using the correct platform to present their protest. When looked upon with a more open mind, seeing the impact that celebrity figures have makes you wonder, why did it take such a large power move for people to become aware address the issue of oppression in the US with such seriousness?

Immediately upon the world witnessing a national figure take an unexpected measure to raise awareness to an allegation; it shocks people into being aware and sparks conversation about the topic. Kaepernick’s action did just that, he became the headline of numerous news productions and caused a large uprising upon making his voice heard and well known… Roger Goodell, an NFL Commissioner disagreed with the actions that Colin Kaepernick took, in time he begins to praise the movement of protest into progress. He respected the player’s outlooks to speak out and make a turnover, expressing his confidence that these players should use their voice. (Pelissero) Alongside the combination of popularity and social media Kaepernick’s movement spread like fire around the world. Social media has given both sides of this movement a chance to support their opinions; including military members, some of which support Kaepernick’s’ view, spreading the support by using #VeternsForKaepernick. (Chan) Having the access to social media allowed the National Anthem Protest to gain so much attention, without it the cause wouldn’t have been as large of a concern to so many people.

The discussion of morals and values heavily relates to the national anthem protests, based on the respect for our flag and country. Men and women in uniform that protect our country were a large factor in this type of protest, kneeling for the national anthem. Francis Scott Keys (writer of the national anthem) great-great-great-granddaughter Carole Isham was astounded that somebody could dishonor our nation’s flag and anthem, while young men and women have died for our country. (Peter) In our country, there is no greater respect or honor than putting yourself in the upmost dangerous position to make sure that your country is safe. Fellow members of the NFL also agree that this isn’t the best way to approach the cause at hand. Drew Brees couldn’t agree more with the message Colin Kaepernick was addressing, even he knew that the delivery could have been handled better. To him, it doesn’t add up that you’re sitting down while depreciating the very flag that has enabled you the right to speak out. (Triplett) It genuinely understood why people look at taking a knee as disrespectful, but it is appropriate for American citizens to justify their views. In this situation opinions based on your values and morals makes up the argument asking, “Is it wrong or is it right?”

When a person believes the United States is not rising to its ideals of freedom, liberty, and justice for all, refusing to stand for the national anthem is an appropriate and justified action. Unfortunately, many people do not see it this way but upon closer consideration, it is completely ok. Once you can research and look into other’s points of view, along with gaining valid facts on this subject, you will find that no laws are labeling Kaepernicks’ actions as wrong. Brandon Marshall a linebacker for the Denver Broncos has personally participated in this movement, the message he and other members want to get across is the disagreement of social injustice, not against military members, police, or the United States. (Telegraph Sports) Taking the protests into account, you need to remember that a lot of the players aren’t against the military they just wanting people to address and be aware of oppression.

This protest has a lot to do with the views on how far freedom of expression can be taken and what freedom of expression can fully be defined as. Refusing to stand for the national anthem is for some people not considered an option to do, for some this is not an appropriate way to utilize your freedom of expression. “Santa Clara police union hinted they would boycott providing security at games after Kaepernick revealed his reasons for protesting the national anthem and wore socks depicting pigs in police uniforms.”(CSN Philly) Did he take it too far has to openly disrespect police? Wearing the apparel that is offensive to police, did not uplift his protest, only causing more issues. People have been reacting to the kneeling in a way that is upfront and well known. Multiple fans of Kaepernick didn’t support his actions, leading to people burning his jersey, spreading on social media platforms through videos. One specifically captioned stating, “He says he’s oppressed making $126 million. Well, Colin, here’s my salute to you.'(Pelissero) The National Anthem Protests was not meant or entitled to be an expression of violence, although others have taken it to be so, it’s an expression to be civil, peaceful and non-violent.

Freedom of expression is the whole reason this protest is even possible to have in our country, our right to express our opinions and make them known. Not standing for the national anthem is a perfectly peaceful and legal way to protest, stated in the Constitution. Relating to American foundations, specifically freedom of expression, we recall the right of an individual to choose and participate, or not, in the recognition of the national anthem. (Boren) Veterans have spoken out saying they couldn’t be more proud of this action for it exercises American citizen’s constitutional rights. “A letter signed by 35 US veterans stated that ‘Far from disrespecting our troops, there is no finer form of appreciation for our sacrifice than for Americans to enthusiastically exercise their freedom of speech.’ (Wyche) Our American Constitution written many years ago has given Kaepernick and all other individuals who participated in the national anthem protests the overall complete right to kneel, sit, or stand for our national anthem. Whether they spoke out on the issue or silently took action they exercised their rights and that is ok, that is good, that should be respected by all Americans.

Although this issue is highly controversial, both cases are represented equally. With the proper evaluation of the protest’s actions, celebrities have not abused their power of influence, people’s morals and values can adapt to situations with proper knowledge. Whether they spoke out on the issue or silently took action they exercised their rights and that is ok, that is good, that should be respected by all Americans.

We are one and we are many. A famous Australian verse, sentence and lyric that Australians live by. The past couple of years Australia has been going through a tough time considering the national anthem. Many say the national anthem is racist and should be changed, and I for one agree with that statement. Hours upon hours of research I have finally come to the conclusion that the Australian national anthem is, well, racist.

Written in 1879, Australia’s national anthem hasn’t been changed to include the Aboriginal people. Should it be changed is the big questions? And what do the Aboriginal people think about changing it?

Here’s my reasons to why we should change the national anthem. At sporting events (for example, ALF, Rugby, ect.) when we as Australians sing the national anthem, we’re singing it to honor our country, but Aboriginals don’t want to sing it because their not included. Our national anthem is non-inclusive, indigenous AUstralians shouldnt have to sing it.

It is traditional at major events to being with singing the national anthem. At the sate of orgin rugby league clash between New South Wales and Queensland, however, at least four Indigenouse rugby players have vowed to remain silent while everyone else sings. A protest against an anthem they feel doesn’t represent them.

It’s the second such protest in recent months. Before a rugby league match between the indigenous All Stars and Maori All Stars in february, a number of Australian players chose to remain silent when the anthem was played. One of them, team captains Cody Walker, called for a wider discussion into the anthem’s appropriateness, a feeling echoed by many Aboriginal people.

To myself and the Indigenous people and a few people in Australia, the national anthem is, well, terrible. I know it, you know it and on the increasing rare occasions that our olympians win gold medals the rest of the world knows it too.

Our national anthem is bland, boring and the lyrics hardly make any sense. The national anthem is purpley rude towards the aboriginals. Try talking to someone in a ‘joyful strains’ in a conversation, and see if anyone understands what you mean.

Aboriginals were the first people in Australia before the british took over. The British treated the Aboriginals like they were the underdogs, they basically pushed them out of their own country. The British wrote the national anthem back in 1878. Advance Australian Fair was written and composed by Peter Dodds McCormick in 1878, this was proclaimed Australia’s national anthem on 19 April 1984. Peter didn’t think to include the Indigenous people in this anthem.

It’s been over 140 years old, but the national anthem ‘Advance Australian Fair’ has been rewritten by a group of seeking recognition of INdigenous people in the Australian constitution for the first time, the new lyrics were performed in front of a live audience on the opening night of the annual desert song festival.

Advance Australia Fair is an anthem that is racist at so many levels. The anthem that is racist a so may levels, written for a white Australia that is irrelevant, or should be. Apologies to the writer but it’s also poorly crafted lyrically, is largely meaningless sentimentality and is a substandard melody. It’s time for the whining faux patriotic grown-ups to grow up.

Advance Australia Fair is such a profoundly uninspiring song that heaps of Aussies haven’t even bothered to learn the words. In primary school and high school kids are expected to learn the words the the anthem. Most of the kids don’t even know the words, so instead of getting in trouble for not signing they lip sync. Personally I think it’s time we actually advanced Australia, and got ourselves a new anthem.

In schools, especially primary school we are taught to sing the national anthem because it shows that we are grateful and thankful to live in a beautiful country such as Australia.

It’s easy to dismiss the anthem incident of 2018 in Brisbane primary school as a storm in a teacup. A school kid finds it offensive to stand for an anthem that she says does not ring true. “When it says ‘we are young’ it completely disregard the indigenoud Australians who were here before is for over 50,000 years,” When it was originally written, Advance Australia Fair meant Advance the white people of Australia.

The thing is in primary school kids don’t really know of a thing called racism, but when you get to high school everything changes, you learn what racism is and it’s not good. Since I’ve found out what the national anthem really meant I have made the decision that I will not be singing the Australian national anthem anymore until it’s changed. I’m not for racism and I think it should be changed.

For Australia, for everyone, because we are one!

The Australian education system is still lacking in embedding Indigenous perspectives into the school curriculums. Despite various amendments to both the Australian curriculum standards and New South Wales Education Standards (NESA), there are still beliefs and perspectives to be reformed about Indigenous history. The current curriculum sets out a framework for schools and education providers, but recently many debates and controversies surrounding the perspectives of Aboriginals within the Australian culture. Most noteworthy was the Australian Day protests and petitions to change the national anthem, demonstrating the need to include Indigenous perspectives into the education system. In addition to exploring historical and contemporary events, this report will analyse the current impact of these events on the NSW education system and evaluate the importance of incorporating Indigenous perspectives into early year classrooms.

The current education system encompasses various aspects of history, human society and environment (HSIE) subjects to educate primary school students about Indigenous people. According to a 2012 NESA publication, the syllabus sets a framework for teachers to structure classroom activities around these areas of learning. In history classes, students will analyse the impact of British colonisation from an Indigenous perspective by comparing their lifestyle before and after first contact. Furthermore, students will be evaluating the interactions between the British colonists and local tribes as well as investigating the contributions of some prominent Indigenous people. The framework aims to deepen students’ knowledge and understanding of Australia’s shared history.

Australia/Invasion/Survival Day

First and foremost, the most important event in Australian history is January 26th, known as Australia Day or Invasion/Survival Day to the Indigenous community. This date signifies the anniversary of Captain Arthur Phillip’s First Fleet arrival in Sydney Cove, declaring the land as Terra Nullius, land belonging to no one which allowed the British to colonise Australia. For many decades, this date has been commemorated as the founding day of the country, but to the Indigenous community, January 26th marks a day to mourn. According to many Indigenous people, January 26th is the beginning of a forcible destruction of their culture, families and land.

Activism and protests have been held for many years around the country, but only in the last five years, the momentum started to increase through public protests and discussion became more frequent. In the most recent protest, about 50,000 Indigenous and non-Indigenous people marched alongside each other in the streets of Sydney to protest the date of Australia Day (Loomes, 2019). To many Indigenous Australians, this movement has been viewed as a sign of reconciliation and a path to recognition.

Before campaigns, lobby groups and protests, many Australians were brought up with the notion that Australia Day is one to be celebrated and to feel lucky to live in this great, welcoming country. This one-sided perspective is reminiscent of Australia’s White history, which ignores the mistreatment and darker events of 1788. Australia Day has been a tradition in most households as a day of celebration rather than a day of mourning. According to the Australia Institute’s 2017 survey, only about 49% of respondent supported a change of date overall, while only 21% strongly agreed that it should not be held on a date that is offensive to Indigenous Australians. This low percentage of supporters demonstrate the importance of educating primary school students and raise awareness about a date that divides the nation. By incorporating the history behind Australia Day into the school curriculum, students will learn about the perspectives and the impact on the Indigenous Australians. In NSW, students are taught about the history of Australia Day from an Indigenous perspective which allows students to participate in the ongoing discussion of whether Australia Day should be renamed as Invasion Day.

National Sorry Day

While the date of Australia Day is debated across the country, another date May 26th holds an important annual event known as the National Sorry Day. This date started in 1998 after the Bringing Them Home report was presented in the Parliament. Moreover, in 2008, former Australian prime minister (PM) Kevin Rudd became the first PM to deliver an apology to the nation, formally apologising to the children and families of the Stolen Generation. Australia Day consists of barbeques and celebrations, while conversely, Sorry Day commemorates and remembers the mistreatment of Indigenous Australians. In Torpey (2006), children of the Stolen Generation were described as those who were forcibly removed from their families and placed into institutions that attempted to assimilate them into White families. These children would be referred to as ‘half-caste’ or mixed race in a resocialisation program, which unsuccessfully tried to raise their social position. According to the Bringing Them Home report, an estimated number of 100,000 Aboriginal children were removed during 1905 to 1967 (Wilkie, 1997). Instead of improving their social position, these children were more likely to commit crimes and dropped out of school earlier, thereby lowering their social position than those without government intervention.

A part of the Bringing Them Home report recommended an official apology of which did not occur until almost a decade later. Rudd’s apology had widespread positive feedback from Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians and initiated a renewed step towards reconciliation (Person, 2013). It is imperative to incorporate Rudd’s speech into primary school education as it marks the first step to reconciliation. Although the speech itself did not directly state any compensation for those affected, Rudd had raised greater awareness for action. Since 2008, there have still been no implementation of reparations to survivors of the Stolen Generations at a national level (Pearson, 2018). All states but Northern Territory, Queensland and Victoria have introduced reparations for the survivors, including increased educational and financial support. In NSW, the Department of Aboriginal Affairs started a reparations scheme (2017-2022) that enabled any living survivor of the Stolen Generation to claim an ex gratia once-off payment of $75,000 to apologise for the act of forcible removal. Nevertheless, survivors are still campaigning for greater justice, recognition and assurance from the federal government to ensure that it will never be repeated. By incorporating his speech and its effect in the classroom, both teachers and students can develop new perspectives and participate in reconciliation activities with their Indigenous peers.

Australia National Anthem / I am Australian song

In addition to educating students about the significance of National Sorry Day, the Australian national anthem plays a pivotal role in the identity of Australia. It was first performed in 1878 and later established as the official national anthem in 1977, Advance Australia Fair captures a predominately White perspective. By contrast, another song called ‘I am Australian’ sung by The Seekers (1987) is a popular alternative to the official national anthem. This song encapsulates many distinguished figures as well as cultural and historical references such as Albert Namatjira, Banjo Paterson’s Clancy of the Overflow and Ned Kelly. While also being considered a patriotic song, ‘I am Australian’ celebrates diversity, unity and symbolises the connection of people with history, culture and the landscape. It is a contemporary view of Australia’s national identity that adequately reflects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders who have still not been recognised in the national anthem.

However, there have been many petitions to reform the anthem to one which is inclusive of Australia’s multicultural and Indigenous community. In a recent article, at least four Indigenous sport players refused to participate in singing the Advanced Australia Fair at a major sporting event (Parry & Cleland, 2019). This caused public outcry and varied responses from the sporting organisers and the general public with supporters on both sides. Understanding perspectives held by both sides, will be pivotal in developing reconciliation action plans to ensure that Indigenous people are being fairly represented as well as being inclusive of all Australians. Similarly, the Australia Broadcasting Corporation released a music video on popular streaming website YouTube that reached 518,000 views and embeds Indigenous perspectives into primary school education (ABC, 2018). The video showcase students at the Broome Primary School singing to ‘I am Australian’ with Indigenous and English lyrics, which was met with positive response from the community.

Despite silent protests from sport players during major events and videos of primary school students participating in Indigenous focused activities, there have been slow progress on changing the national anthem. A subsequent poll by 7News (2019) indicated that only 28% of respondents agreed to a change to the national anthem (the sample size contained 68,400 votes). Most respondents did not wish to change the national anthem nor amend the current lyrics, demonstrating the need to reform perspectives. Even though the Australian government and various lobby groups have worked on increasing general awareness, it is practically easier to include the different perspectives into the primary school curriculum.

Examples in the classroom

In the classroom, education providers and teachers can utilise a diverse range of activities to keep students engaged about Indigenous perspectives. Some methods include showing students films such as Rabbit Proof Fence (2002), participating in Indigenous performances and school excursions to historical places. Noyce’s Rabbit Proof Fence (2002) is a dramatic film that loosely follows a trio of Aboriginal children, attempting to return home after being taken away from their families as part of the Stolen Generation. While the film is based on a true story, it caused controversy during its release from conservatives and some historians who criticised its historical accuracy which has since been refuted by the filmmakers. Primary school excursions and observing Aboriginal performances can also broaden student perspectives about the richness in Indigenous cultures. There are also government campaigns such as Closing the Gap, which aims to reduce the disparity of health and life expectancy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. This campaign predicts that equality will be achieved in 2031 (AHRC, 2019) and targets these main areas of the disparity: a needs-based, responsive health care system and implementation of good housing. Closing the Gap campaign marks one of the first campaigns that Indigenous people have been involved in the design stage, improving its probability of a successful implementation. Besides raising awareness and reducing the disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, the government must also promote unity and respect.

Conclusion and future directions

In primary schools and early year education settings, the embedding of Indigenous perspectives would ensure that young Australians are educated and be prepared to challenge current perspectives. By starting early in primary schools, students can broaden and deepen their understanding of Australian history and participate in reconciliation. Additional education campaigns are necessary to challenge perspectives of Australian adults as seen in an Institute of Public Affairs poll, most opposed to Australia Day reforms belong to the 55-64 and 65+ years age groups. These members would have finished their schooling prior to the release of ‘I am Australian’ (1987), Rabbit Proof Fence (2002) and former PM Rudd’s speech. The reason behind their opposition can be attributed to their educational environment which only supported a one-sided perspective of history with White Australian values, not reflective of contemporary Australia. In conjunction with future campaigns, current initiatives like Closing the Gap, requires greater approval from Parliament leaders and the Australia public to meet its objective by 2031 (Pearson, 2019).

In conclusion, the current Australian education system is still inadequate in embedding Indigenous perspectives and more needs to be done. Through exploration, the controversy and debate surrounding dates of significance, national identity and current actions are insufficient in the education system. Not only does the Australian government need to educate children, it also needs to focus on adults who have left school already. Only by concentrating on both children and adult perspectives, can equality and reconciliation be achieved for Indigenous Australians, who have been largely misrepresented and unrecognised.