A while back, I wrote a post about the value of symbols. It appears they are in the news again, this time politically.
We all know that the Conservative pundits pick interesting topics to (for lack of a better term) attack, especially when those attacks have the goal of showing a purported lack of patriotism or devotion to conservative values (neverminding the fact that conservatives don’t always live up to those values themselves). For a while, it looked like the target d’jour was going to be Obama’s Lapel Flag Pin (or lack thereof) — and that still may prove to be a problem (although I have no idea why). But today’s target, according to the Los Angeles Times is Google.
Specifically, the problem is Google’s logo. Those who use Google know that Google changes their logo on a regular basis to commemorate this, that, and the other thing. Their most recent logo change was last week, when the second “g” in Google was replaced with a drawing of the Soviet satellite, in order to commemorate the 50th launch of Sputnik. I’m sure you saw that story: it was everywhere: Time, Newsweek, etc.
Apparently, a conservative blogger is irked because Google will commemorate a Soviet event with a logo, but won’t do a special logo for something American like Memorial Day or Veterans Day (i.e., military remembrance days). But they are irked at Google anyway. According to the Times:
Conservatives have found plenty of reasons to complain about Google, which they see as a liberal enclave because of the corporate causes it champions and the political candidates its employees support.
The company, started in 1998 by two Stanford University graduate students, prides itself on progressive thinking. Google set up a $90-million foundation in 2005 to fund causes widely seen as liberal, including climate change and global public health.
What’s more, the company’s employees contribute overwhelmingly to Democratic candidates. While the company’s new political action committee has given nearly half of its $22,100 in contributions this year to Republicans, 93% of the $141,000 donated by individual employees went to Democrats, according to Federal Election Commission data provided by CQ Moneyline.
My feeling: Go Google! One doesn’t show patriotism by wearing in on your sleeve. It is not a lapel pin, a memorial day logo, flying the flag at your home, or putting an “America: Love It or Leave It” decal on your car that expresses your love for this country. It is fighting for what this country stands for: allowing all people to have a voice, to fight for freedom of expression, for the freedom to have a variety of ideas and contributions that serve to strengthen the political discourse. It is supporting those who fight to preserve those values through action and deed, not symbolism.
P.S.: I wonder if this blogger read the article on Sputnik in Newsweek that pointed out that America could have put a satellite in space first… but specifically chose not to. Allowing the Russkies to do it first furthered one of Eisenhower’s goals: a policy that would allow any nation to undertake aerial reconnaissance of any other. Eisenhower welcomed the launch because the Soviets could hardly deny the right to launch satellites over the territory of other countries if they did it first. This also gave us the competition to create the space program quickly (which we now know wasn’t good in the long run).
