Every nation has a ruling hierarchy, and it's important for those at the bottom to swear fealty to those at the top.
this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2025
42 points (93.8% liked)
Ask Lemmy
34855 readers
8 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes it's a reasonable request, but it's also pretty meaningless.
It's performative. Like if you break this pledge nothing happens.
However, it's performative in the same way that a marriage is really. I mean you can go to the court house and register your marriage without having a ceremony, but that's very uncommon and in the vast majority of cases you have a ceremony and do all the things.
Achieving citizenship is an important moment in anyone's life. If your own case for example your Mother's citizenship ceremony marked the point at which the work to change the trajectory of her life and all of her descendants had achieved the objective.
A little pomp and ceremony doesn't hurt.
Citizenship is different than residency. A citizen has roles and responsibilities beyond that of a resident. I don't think it is that unreasonable to ask a naturalized citizen to be loyal to their new country.
Then should it no longer be automatic for people who were just born there, or to citizen parents, as the case may be?
In the US, children are made to participate in the pledge of allegiance daily at school. To answer your question more broadly, in many cases, if a citizen commits certain crimes against a country, then it is considered treason. Maybe it's considered that a citizen born in the country understands that, but someone naturalising must acknowledge it.
Espionage also carries heavy sentences, and everyone knows you can be prosecuted for plotting a coup or whatever.
In the US, children are made to participate in the pledge of allegiance daily at school.
By OP's logic, then, that's good, and if they refuse they should become a non-citizen.
A spoken oath is a pretty ineffective enforcement mechanism, for what it's worth.
Tbf, the school pledges are voluntary under the first amendment. The naturalization oath is manadatory, you aren't officially a citizen until you take the oath.
If only someone had told that to my schools in the 70s and 80s. I spent so much time in trouble for refusing to participate. It wasn’t even that I was raised that way, it just seemed really creepy and antithetical to everything the US is/was supposed to stand for.
Voluntary does not mean there isn't a heavy amount of pressure to conform, from what I've heard and read.
Unless fascism wasn't part of the deal perhaps.
If one wants to become citicen of a fascist country, there are bigger problems
Sometimes a country isn't fascist until it is though.
But the signs are very obviouse. Even with the OG nazis and facsist the signs were there and people knew whats coming. Just like with USA rn or britain
Wonder what you consider "the signs" to be?
I mean unless their original country was fascism x2, then, reducing fascism by half doesn't seem that bad anymore.
Seriously tho, you think you find a bad enough country, then you look deeper, there's a country even worse. Then just as you think you found the worst country, there's still an even worse country, like there are more thsn 200 of them (including unrecognized ones) and you can almost certaintly keep finding worse and worse countries, you never know where someone is from.
Immigration is always a scale of balance: How much does the situation becomes less shitty vs how much xenophobia you'll face. Sometimes, if the xenophobia isn't that strong at the time of you deciding to move, so you can still have more to gain from the country being less shitty than your previous one, despite having to deal with racism.
There are not really many "good" countries, mostly it's just: shitty countries vs less shitty countries.
Edit: And if its a bad country vs worse country sceanrio, I think people would just "take the oath" symbolically, but never actually intended to fullfill the actual obligation to the dictator or whatever.
Edit 2: Or you could be in a Snowden-tyoe situation. I mean... the US was after him... Snowden then became a citizen of russia, but I doubt he actually cares about loyalty to putin.
Yeah, but then they are in the same boat as other citizens.
I think the idea of national states is utterly silly and should be abolished. Just look at the maps and how many straight lines they have, there is nothing natural or normal about those artificial lines of most countries.
On top of it nationalists use national states, which contain highly diverse groups of people, to make them to go to war against their neighbors by telling them lies about how they all are some special group.
As an example, is there anything a Bavarian has more in common with a person from Schleswig-Holstein compared to his neighbor from Austria? It's not culture, nor language, not even blood. It's only artificial things like the football national team, laws, taxes, etc.
Just look at the maps and how many straight lines they have, there is nothing natural or normal about those artificial lines of most countries.
You'd need more war to solve that. In Europe, borders usually run along a natural defensible lines, like rivers and mountains.
Or battle lines: Belgium netherlands
I think the idea of national states is utterly silly and should be abolished.
Perhaps...
But like it or not, states are the current reality, because being stateless is really a bad idea. 🤷♂️
I keep thinking that, but then I think in a much more universal sense. Different countries allows different types of policies to be battle tested and we can find out which ones actually best.
I keep flipping between "conflict is fucking stupid we should be better than this by now" and "we need constant war with ourselves to keep improving for survival incase aliens."
You'd still need some sort of local government that reflects local values. The same set of laws applied to the whole world would cause instant war
Meh. I don’t think it’s a big ask to gain citizenship someplace. Obviously I’m getting something out of it, that’s why I’m applying
You said most countries but then only mention the USA. May I surmise you're from the USA aka the world? :P
So I got curious, but it's also 7am and I need to sleep. I looked it up for my own country: we don't exactly have this
The Netherlands basically requires you to acknowledge that its laws apply to you (they do when you set foot here anyway) and that you'll fulfill the duties that come with citizenship.
When opening the included FAQ item "what duties?" it says two things: you abide by the laws (duh) and that you should consider that you're part of this society and that "you'll do what is needed to really be part of this society." Handwavey and not about choosing a side in a war or something, just focused on integration and community. Seems okay to me and distinct from blind allegiance. There's some more details but the FAQs all circle back to respecting the other citizens (no discrimination) and the like
Why does the netherlands do so many things well and seem completly bored talking about lol
That seems like a great implentation to me. Basically an explicit acknowledgement of the sociol contract
Why does the netherlands do so many things well
I'm really curious about this also! What makes some nations be, ehm, in a "sensible" state (in my eyes) and others not, given similar situations and options? We're by no means as cool as Iceland or Finland for example, eyeing metrics like happiness index and development index, but why not?
Being a small population and/or region seems to be a part of the success mix (my theory is that this makes the government be closer to the people as well as forcing trade since you're clearly better off working together than trying to navigate international politics alone), but there's plenty of counter-examples so it's clearly either not the only requirement or flat-out wrong. I tried reading a book on the topic but then the book doesn't adequately explain it either ^^ It seems to be an unsolved problem as of yet
Either way, despite the current government I guess I'm proud of the place I'm from. You get to decide your own life (factors including: people are multilingual, relatively low inequality, euthanasia available (not that I'd currently want to, but self-determination just seems like a good principle that a crazy number of countries don't yet have)), though iirc the rich are getting richer and both rich and poor citizens are currently voting to widen that gap (as well as other short- and long-term issues, strawman problems.. the usual). We'll see where we stand in 100 years. Maybe I shouldn't be proud, since all that I'm proud of was built by my forebears (particularly before privatisation, which has its pros but maybe not for every aspect of society) and it's my generation that has yet to stand the test of time 😅
aanyway, I didn't get this part:
and seem completly bored talking about lol
Could you elaborate or rephrase?
Allegiance to a country is such a nonsensical concept anyway. What is inferred is an allegiance to a government. A government is delimited by time, so in theory you should need to reaffirm your allegiance each voting cycle. Furthermore, what does allegiance encompass? I do not know of a single government I would align myself so deeply with, that I would go to war for it for example. That doesn't mean I dont like my country.
It's a meaningless formality.
I said the words and didn't pay them any mind
I couldn't tell you what was said during my citizenship ceremony
I did mine naked from the waist down. (covid times, so it was Skype)
It all depends on the details. If I have to be loyal to a dictator, I would not pledge, and I would not move to such countries anyway.
I'm not Canadian, but I glanced over their oath, the official government explanation is that you're not pledging to King Charles, but rather, the personification of Canada.
In Canada, we profess our loyalty to a person who represents all Canadians and not to a document such as a constitution, a banner such as a flag, or a geopolitical entity such as a country. In our constitutional monarchy, these elements are encompassed by the Sovereign (Queen or King). It is a remarkably simple yet powerful principle: Canada is personified by the Sovereign just as the Sovereign is personified by Canada.
If you were an immigrant to Canada, would that've been okay with you?
Anyways, here in the US, the citizenship oath is a pledge to the constitution, which by the way, is distinct from the silly US school pledge to the "flag" lol.
I don't feel loyalty to any particular country, not even my own. We all live on this small planet called Earth.
That said, I wouldn't mind taking the pledge for immigration purposes, as long as I respect the country's values (democracy, laws, and so on). Canada seems cool.
I think there is nothing wrong when one decides to move abroad to be asked by the people welcoming them to not spit on what makes that country, well, a country where one wanted to move first.
Obviously, it all depends what the pledge is all about. If it means to respect, say, the Constitution, laws, and usage and maybe also show one has a basic knowledge of that new country too, that seems obvious to me. If it's being required to shut the fuck up (not criticize anything), not so much.
edit: typos
It's silly. The oath means nothing (particularly if it's to a British socialite like it is here) which is wrong for an oath.
Allegiance to countries should be earned by that country anyway, not demanded or unconditional.
unconditional
I mean it is conditional.
I see it as a "social contract". The state/society gives me a status and certain protections, in exchange for me promising not to be a terrorist, spy, etc... that's essentially what I see it as.
If the state/society start treating me like some foreigner, then I'd consider them violating their "end of the bargain", aka: it's them violating the social contract and I'd act accordingly.
If they pull the Japanese-American "Internment Camp" bullshit on me, don't expect me to have any "allegiance" lmao
As an example: PRC tried to "terminate" me for being the second-born, because they wanted to fullfill their fantasy of a "birth control" and forced sterilization policy, and also they tried to deny giving the legal papers proving I exist until their BS "fines" got paid (meaning, essentially: I didn't legally "exist" for the first few years of my life), not to mention, the various fucked up things regarding censorship, cant even playing a fucking online game, so yea I have zero "allegiance" with the PRC. In fact, I dispise PRC.
Yeah, in that situation it's more demanded than unconditional. You're right, there's a social contract, but pledges of fealty are passe in most relationships. Like, if it was an employer or something, it's generally accepted that they'll earn your loyalty by compensating you for your work and not abusing you, and maybe through the nature of their vision. There is a whole other layer of security clearance when something is very sensitive.
Unconditional patriotism is what natural-born Americans are expected to have. Loving your country and all the boo-rah, 4th of July shit is a form of virtue in and of itself. That even extends to blindly holding beliefs about things which should really be measured objectively. Canada has it's problems, but we've managed to avoid that one a bit more (so pardon the punching outwards).
Totally acceptable. Then again, if the world went the way of Starship Troopers, I would be one of the masses like Johnny's parents.
Do most countries require a pledge? Mine didn't when I got my citizenship.
It's a little tradition and a bit of a promise, even though vague and breakable if we're honest.
I wouldn't have done that personally, I would've had it required that immigrants sign a doctrine as to whether the immigrant is going to uphold the laws of the country they're migrating. Failing to do so would be automatic deportation.
I think about a majestic golden eagle who is in an erotic fight to the death with a mermaid.