logo
MAGA Fans Are Enraged By The Black National Anthem — But They're Missing This Glaring Point

MAGA Fans Are Enraged By The Black National Anthem — But They're Missing This Glaring Point

Yahoo11-02-2025

Grammy award-winning singer Ledisi, a New Orleans native, delivered a powerful rendition of 'Lift Every Voice and Sing' — widely known as the Black national anthem — during the pregame ceremony at Super Bowl LIX in her hometown on Sunday.
And some right-wingers were outraged about the song — but their arguments missed the point.
Conservatives on social mediacharged this week that 'Lift Every Voice and Sing' is divisive and that the pregame performance, which also featured a choir of 125 high school students from the Greater New Orleans High School Chorale Collective, promoted the idea of 'segregation.'
Prominent right-wingers similarly complained about the popular hymn's inclusion in professional athletic events last year. The NFL began featuring performances of the historic song at Super Bowl pregame ceremonies in 2021.
Former Fox News personality Megyn Kelly griped about the Black national anthem being played at the 2024 Super Bowl, writing on X at the time: 'The so-called Black National Anthem does not belong at the Super Bowl. We already have a National Anthem and it includes EVERYONE.'
But 'Lift Every Voice and Sing' is not about division — it's about recognizing the suffering and hurdles Black people have faced in America as well as the hope for a better future.
'Black communities across the globe continue to be vulnerable in very unique and unsettling ways,' Shana Redmond, an author and professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, who studies music, race and politics, told NPR in 2018. 'To sing this song is to revive that past — but also to recognize, as the lyrics of the song reveal, that there is a hopeful future that might come of it.'
Redmond later added that the U.S. national anthem, 'The Star Spangled Banner,' was 'missing a radical history of inclusion, was missing an investment in radical visions of the future of equality, of parity.'
''Lift Every Voice and Sing' became a counterpoint to those types of absences and elisions,' she said. (The California NAACP called for a new anthem in 2017, calling certain lyrics of 'The Star-Spangled Banner' — written in 1814 long before the song became the national anthem — racist and anti-Black.)
Gerald Early, professor of African and African-American Studies and English at Washington University in St. Louis, told NBC News this week that the performance of 'Lift Every Voice and Sing' should be 'framed to the public not as a protest song but as a song of Black affirmation, perseverance and inspiration.'
'It is unfortunate that the song's performance has become a culture war issue,' he said.
The Black national anthem wasn't the only part of this year's Super Bowl to spur culture wars on social media. Right-wingers were similarly outraged by Kendrick Lamar's halftime show, which highlighted Black cultures and experiences and featured Black dancers and other Black stars, such as singer SZA, tennis legend Serena Williams and veteran actor Samuel L. Jackson.
Some naysayers labeled the show a 'DEI halftime show,' which many on X interpreted as a clear dog whistle for criticizing the show's celebration of Blackness.
Attacks on Black and other cultural celebrations and traditions have ramped up since Donald Trump took office last month. The Defense Department announced in a memo last month that it would no longer mark cultural awareness months such as Black History Month following Trump's string of executive actions attacking diversity, equity and inclusion practices.
'Efforts to divide the force – to put one group ahead of another – erode camaraderie and threaten mission execution,' the agency wrote in its memo.
But reflecting on Black history shouldn't be viewed as divisive; it's 'essential,' Erica Foldy, associate professor of public and nonprofit management at the Wagner Graduate School of Public Service at New York University, previously told HuffPost.
'For centuries, Black history was erased,' she said, later adding, 'Black History Month raised the visibility of Black history — about slavery and Jim Crow but also about the essential role of Black people in creating the U.S. we know today.'
'It is essential that these topics remain squarely on the agenda — otherwise, they will go back to being erased,' she added.
And with the Black national anthem in the news this week, it's important to remember how the inspirational song was born.
'Lift Every Voice and Sing' was written as a poem by James Weldon Johnson, a principal and lawyer, who was the first Black American to pass the bar in Florida. His brother, John Rosamond Johnson, composed the music for the song, which was first performed publicly by children at a school celebration in 1900, according to the Library of Congress.
'Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us / Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us,' a portion of the lyrics read.
'The dialectic of hope and agony presented so memorably in this song remains central to the African American experience today,' historian Burton W. Peretti wrote in a 2016 essay about the song featured on the Library of Congress website.
The NAACP adopted the hymn as the Black national anthem in 1919 — years before the 'Star Spangled Banner' became the official national anthem of the U.S. in 1931.
The song was 'prominently used as a rallying cry during the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s,' the NAACP's website states.
'Lift Every Voice and Sing' is often sung at churches, schools and historically Black colleges and universities, and it has had several landmark performances over the years. Beyoncé memorably belted out a rendition during her history-making 2018 performance at Coachella, in which she became the first Black woman to headline the festival.
She wrote in an essay for Vogue that year that performing the song was 'one of the most rewarding parts of the show.'
'I know that most of the young people on the stage and in the audience did not know the history of the Black national anthem before Coachella,' she wrote. 'But they understood the feeling it gave them.'
When asked about the controversy surrounding the song's place at the Super Bowl, Ledisi told CNN ahead of her performance that the song, and music overall, is a part of 'American culture.'
'Whether some believe it or not, it's part of our history,' she said, adding that she was honored to help 'remind us all why music is a beautiful language for us to come together.'
The Super Bowl Halftime Show Spurred Unoriginal 'DEI' Digs — But We Know What They're Really Saying
MAGA Thoroughly Flips Out Over 'Satanic' Kendrick Lamar's Super Bowl Show
Kendrick Lamar Used The Super Bowl To Rebuke The American Playbook

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

'Bold vision': Johnson tapped as FAMU president after 'overwhelmingly negative' feedback
'Bold vision': Johnson tapped as FAMU president after 'overwhelmingly negative' feedback

Yahoo

time28 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

'Bold vision': Johnson tapped as FAMU president after 'overwhelmingly negative' feedback

Several months of vehement opposition and some powerful support at Florida A&M University have resulted in one of four presidential finalists being named FAMU's new Rattler-in-chief: Marva Johnson. FAMU's Board of Trustees met virtually and in person May 16 in the Grand Ballroom on campus, selecting Johnson to serve as the university's 13th president following an 8-4 vote. The meeting came just days after she visited the "Highest of Seven Hills" and stood in the firing line of concerned community members who strongly opposed her candidacy as the contentious presidential search neared its end. 'Florida A&M University has long stood as a beacon of excellence and empowerment," Johnson said in a statement released by the university hours after the vote. "To be considered for the opportunity to lead this storied institution is the honor of a lifetime. I will approach this role with bold vision − focused on student success, innovation, and national prominence − while building strong bridges with the FAMU community and honoring the legacy that makes this university so special." The conclusion was no surprise to some in the FAMU community, including board member Belvin Perry, who believed the fix was in for the woman who has been a close ally to Governors Rick Scott and Ron DeSantis. "It is a foregone conclusion as to the result of this vote today," Perry said. "That's the truth." Many view Johnson's ascension as the latest example of DeSantis reshaping the higher education landscape in his political mold – this time at the nation's No. 1 public HBCU (historically Black college or university). How the vote went down: Recap: Florida A&M University picks Marva Johnson as new president amid 'MAGA' drama While Johnson currently serves as group vice president of the internet and cable TV company Charter Communications, she is now the second woman in university history to be named president of FAMU. The other is the university's 11th President, Elmira Mangum, who served 2014–16. The selection of Johnson to serve as FAMU's new leader comes after former President Larry Robinson stepped down last year in the aftermath of a major donation debacle, which led to interim President Timothy Beard stepping in to serve in the role since August for a one-year term. As the winning presidential candidate, Johnson was the board's pick over University of Maryland Eastern Shore Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Rondall Allen, University of Central Florida Senior Vice President for Administration and Finance Gerald Hector and FAMU's Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Donald Palm. Palm was lauded by many in the FAMU community and even confidently declared himself the university's "next president" in a May 15 campus interview with trustees. Board Chair Kristin Harper, as well as Perry, Craig Reed and FAMU Student Body President Zayla Bryant made up the minority of trustees who voted for Palm instead of Johnson; Allen and Hector got no votes. 'The students have spoken, the alumni have spoken, faculty and staff have spoken,' Bryant said. 'History has its eyes on us, and I would be remiss if I were to take my position in vain and not vote to be the voice (for students) ....' As frustrations have run high in the past few weeks leading up to the board's decision, Johnson – a Winter Garden native – endured a heated presidential candidacy. She was heavily criticized by some vocal opponents as "MAGA Marva." Many alumni said her Republican political ties would put the university in danger and maintain she lacks experience due to her background outside of academia. 'I believe in the values of this institution – accountability, transparency, integrity and inclusion,' Harper said ahead of her vote against Johnson. 'Your voice matters, and leaders can't lead if there's no one who is following.' At the top of the board's meeting, about 20 people – including FAMU students and alumni – spoke against Johnson during the meeting, both virtually and in person. Having run out the 15 minutes for public comment, Harper extended by another 25 minutes, given the gravity of the decision. 'A decision to vote in favor of Marva Johnson reflects a reckless disregard for the stakeholders who have placed their trust in you,' said FAMU alumna Amy Wheeler, a 1995 graduate. FAMU's Student Body Vice President Kennedy Williams said the university needs a leader who recognizes that the school is 'more than just a business venture.' But despite the concerns, Johnson remained optimistic about securing the presidency during her May 14 campus visit, saying that she will make efforts to give FAMU 'a seat at the table.' 'I was not sent here to dismantle FAMU," said Johnson, who served as a co-chair on one of DeSantis' transition committees and was Board of Education chair for eight years under Scott. "I would love the opportunity to work with you and to grow FAMU." More: 'I am not a Trojan horse': FAMU community grills president finalist Marva Johnson While FAMU trustee Natlie Figgers did not attend the May 16 trustee meeting, the remaining eight trustees – including Raphael Vazquez, who was appointed to the board May 15 ahead of the presidential selection – cast their votes in support of Johnson. That came after Harper went over an analysis of feedback from campus stakeholders. The overall response to Johnson was "overwhelmingly negative," the summary showed, with many expressing "distrust and opposition." The consensus was Johnson was "not in alignment with the university's needs." Some even had "fundamental concerns about FAMU's institutional integrity" were she to become its leader. 'I respect the viewpoints expressed, but respectively – and it's proven by data – the skill sets and strategies that we have used to get here may not be the same strategies that we'll take to move us forward,' trustee Nicole Washington said, 'and I'm excited for new leadership who is going to be capable of navigating these complex challenges.' The presidential search results come after speculation that board vice chair Deveron Gibbons, who chaired FAMU's search committee, insisted on adding Johnson to what was initially a list of three final candidates. Gibbons has repeatedly denied such claims during previous meetings. Ahead of the trustees' vote, FAMU trustee and Faculty Senate President Jamal Brown, as well as other board members who voted for Johnson, said the university needs a leader who has 'access and political connections" to garner the kind of funding the university needs. Washington expressed how the landscape of higher education "is changing, and the role of a president is changing" with more university leaders focused on finance and fundraising than academics. Following three trustees who indirectly spoke in favor of Johnson back-to-back before voting, Gibbons touched on the need for FAMU stakeholders to focus on improving their fundraising efforts. 'We should do better in giving and fundraising – we, meaning us Rattlers,' Gibbons said. 'We should not be pointing fingers at other people about nonsense that doesn't matter and trying to attack people's integrity and impugn them.' During the meeting, trustees also approved a compensation range of $450,000 to $750,000, which Gibbons said was recommended by the university's presidential search committee. This comes after Johnson asked for a $750,000 salary in her application for the job, where she left out how much she currently makes in her position at Charter Communications. But what led to the board's implosion later in the May 16 meeting was FAMU trustee Michael White's proposal to delegate to Washington the authority to negotiate a contract with Johnson − a move that breaks the usual procedure of the board's chair handling the contract for a new president. "This is so interesting. This could be a Lifetime movie," Harper said, later adding more seriously, "I take personal offense at what is happening." In a 6-4 vote in which the board OK'd Washington dealing with the contract, Perry said 'it strikes me strange that a motion was made as if someone had discussed this beforehand, but it is very typical of what's been going on.' "It's quite apparent that lightning struck and hit here at FAMU," Perry said, backing Harper to negotiate the contract. "I find it horrible that in an institution that values love and charity, there is no love and there is no charity." Although the FAMU trustees voted for Johnson, her official naming as the new president is subject to an interview and confirmation by the Florida Board of Governors, which oversees the state's university system. "FAMU's culture and impact are unmatched, and I am committed to upholding and amplifying that legacy as we move forward together,' Johnson said in a statement. Tarah Jean, higher education reporter for the Tallahassee Democrat, can be reached at tjean@ Follow her on X: @tarahjean_. This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: New Florida A&M president Marva Johnson embraces 'honor' amid outcry

Letter: Democrats should be careful about hyping election wins
Letter: Democrats should be careful about hyping election wins

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Letter: Democrats should be careful about hyping election wins

The other day I saw several articles extolling the results of a special election for South Carolina's 50th House District in which a young Democratic candidate beat his Republican opponent by a 70% to 30% margin in heavily Republican South Carolina. Since this result appeared several times in my scrolling, I decided to find more information regarding this potential watershed event, perhaps heralding the beginning of a Democratic comeback from the wilderness. I found out that the 50th District has voted Democratic forever, and the previous holder of that seat ran unopposed on occasion. The last time he had a Republican opponent, he won by 20 percentage points. Furthermore, in the Democratic primary for this seat this year, the winning candidate won his place on the ballot by a mere seven votes in an election that required a recount to confirm his win. Winning candidate Keishan Scott, is a 24-year-old town council member and will be the youngest member of the South Carolina Legislature. He is Black, and his Republican opponent is white. The district population is about 90% Black and 10% white and Hispanic, so Scott's victory is not quite a watershed event. A whopping 14% of eligible voters took part in this special election, and Scott received 2,572 votes. The Democrats are desperate for good news, but hyping this 'victory' is more pathetic than uplifting. Robert Brems Wyomissing

A repeat of Rodney King? Local leaders say L.A.'s latest unrest is nothing like 1992
A repeat of Rodney King? Local leaders say L.A.'s latest unrest is nothing like 1992

Yahoo

time39 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

A repeat of Rodney King? Local leaders say L.A.'s latest unrest is nothing like 1992

The clashes between National Guard troops, police and protesters in recent days have evoked memories for some Angelenos of the deadly riots that erupted after LAPD officers were acquitted of brutally assaulting Black motorist Rodney King in 1992. But leaders who were involved in dealing with the uprising more than three decades ago say what has unfolded with President Trump's deployment of soldiers to Los Angeles and surrounding communities bears no resemblance to the coordinated response that took place then. 'It's not even close,' said former LAPD chief and city councilman Bernard Parks, who was a deputy chief in the police department during the 1992 unrest. 'You get a sense that this is all theatrics, and it is really trying to show a bad light on Los Angeles, as though people are overwhelmed." The chaos of 1992 unfolded after four LAPD officers who were videotaped beating King the prior year were not convicted. It took place at a time of deep distrust and animosity between minority communities and the city's police department. Federal troops and California National Guard units joined forces with local law enforcement officers to quell the turmoil, but not without harrowing results. More than 60 people were killed, thousands were injured and arrested, and there was property damage that some estimate exceeded $1 billion. What has played out recently on the city's streets is significantly more limited in scope, Mayor Karen Bass said. 'There was massive civil unrest [then]. Nothing like that is happening here,' Bass said on CNN on Sunday. 'So there is no need for there to be federal troops on our ground right now.' As of Wednesday evening, several hundred people had been arrested or detained because of their alleged actions during the protests, or taken into custody by federal officials because of their immigration status. On Tuesday, after the 101 Freeway was blocked by protesters, buildings in downtown Los Angeles were vandalized and businesses ransacked, Bass imposed a curfew in the city's civic core from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. that is expected to last several days. Read more: Bass enacts curfew in downtown L.A. to stem chaotic protests Zev Yaroslavsky, who served on the City Council in 1992, recalled that year as "one of the most significant, tragic events in the city's history." He described the riots as "a massive citywide uprising," with "thousands of people who were on the streets in various parts of the city, some burning down buildings." Yaroslavsky, who was later on the county Board of Supervisors for two decades, said that while some actions protesters are currently taking are inappropriate, the swath of Los Angeles impacted is a small sliver of a sprawling city. "All you're seeing is what is happening at 2nd and Alameda," he said. "There's a whole other city, a whole other county that is going about its business." Another significant distinction from 1992, according to people who lived through it, was the bipartisan coordination among local, state and federal law enforcement agencies. Gov. Pete Wilson, a Republican, and Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley requested assistance from then-President George H.W. Bush. That's a stark contrast from what started unfolding last week, when Trump's administration sent ICE agents to Los Angeles and federalized the state's National Guard without request by the state's governor, which last happened in the United States in the 1960s. "The biggest difference is that the governor requested federal help rather than having it imposed over his objection," said Dan Schnur, a political professor and veteran strategist who served as Wilson's communication's director in 1992. "There were some political tensions between state and local elected officials. But both the governor and the mayor set those aside very quickly, given the urgency of the situation." Loren Kaye, Wilson's cabinet secretary at the time, noted times have changed since then. "What I'm worried about is that there aren't the same incentives for resolving the contention in this situation as there were in '92," he said. Then, "everyone had incentives to resolve the violence and the issues. It's just different. The context is different." Parks, a Democrat, argued that the lack of federal communication with California and Los Angeles officials inflamed the situation by creating a lag in local law enforcement response that made the situation worse. 'You have spontaneous multiple events, which is the Achilles heel of any operation,' he said. 'It's not that they're ill-equipped, and it's not that they're under-deployed,' Parks said. 'It takes a minute. You just don't have a large number of people idly sitting there saying, okay, we are waiting for the next event, and particularly if it's spontaneous.' Protests can start peacefully, but those who wish to create chaos can use the moment to seek attention, such as by burning cars, Park said. The end result is images viewed by people across the country who don't realize how localized the protests and how limited the damage was in recent days. 'The visuals they show on TV are exactly what the folks in Washington want to be seen,' Parks said. On Monday, the president deployed hundreds of Marines from Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms. State leaders have asked for a temporary restraining order blocking the military and state National Guard deployments, which is expected to be heard in federal court on Thursday. Read more: California asks court for restraining order to block Guard, U.S. Marine deployments in L.A. Trump, speaking to U.S. Army troops at Ft. Bragg in North Carolina on Tuesday, said that he deployed National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles 'to protect federal law enforcement from the attacks of a vicious and violent mob.' The president descried protesters as leftists pursuing a "foreign invasion" of the United States, bent on destroying the nation's sovereignty. 'If we didn't do it, there wouldn't be a Los Angeles," Trump said. "It would be burning today, just like their houses were burning a number of months ago." Newsom responded that the president was intentionally provoking protesters. 'Donald Trump's government isn't protecting our communities — they're traumatizing our communities,' Newsom said. 'And that seems to be the entire point.' Read more: Newsom, in California address, says Trump purposely 'fanned the flames' of L.A. protests Activists who witnessed the 1992 riots said the current turmoil, despite being much smaller and less violent, is viewed differently because of images and video seen around the world on social media as well as the plethora of cable outlets that didn't exist previously. "They keep looping the same damn video of a car burning. It gives the impression cars are burning everywhere, businesses are being looted everywhere," said Earl Ofari Hutchinson, president of the Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable. Hutchinson, an activist from South L.A. who raised money to rebuild businesses during the 1992 riots, said he was concerned about the city's reputation. "L.A. is getting a bad name," he said. Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store