Dixiecrat

Dixiecrat (pronounced dik-see-krat)

(1) In US political history, a member of a faction of southern Democrats stressing states' rights and opposed to the civil rights programs of the Democratic Party, especially a southern Democrat who left the party in 1948 to support candidates of the States' Rights Democratic Party.

(2) In historic US use, a member of the US Democratic Party from the southern states (especially one of the former territories of the Confederacy), holding socially conservative views, supporting racial segregation and the continued entrenchment of a white hegemony.

1948: A portmanteau word of US origin, the construct being Dixie + (Demo)crat.  Wholly unrelated to other meanings, Dixie (also as Dixieland) in this context is a reference to the southern states of the United States, especially those formerly part of the Confederacy.  The origin is contested, the most supported theory being it’s derived from the Mason-Dixon Line, a historic (if not entirely accurate) delineation between the "free" North and "slave-owning" South.  Another idea is it was picked up from any of several songs with this name, especially the minstrel song Dixie (1859) by (northerner) Daniel Decatur Emmett (1815-1904), popular as a Confederate war song although most etymologists hold this confuses cause and effect, the word long pre-dating any of the known compositions.  There’s also a suggested link to the nineteenth-century nickname of New Orleans, from the dixie, a Confederate-era ten-dollar bill on which was printed the French dix (ten) but again, it came later.  The –crat suffix was from the Ancient Greek κράτος (krátos) (power, might), as used in words of Ancient Greek origin such as democrat and aristocrat; the ultimate root was the primitive Indo-European kret (hard).  Dixiecrat is a noun and Dixiecratic is an adjective; the noun plural is Dixiecrats.  The noun Dixiecratocracy (also as dixieocracy) was a humorous coining speculating about the nature of a Dixiecrat-run government; it was built on the model of kleptocracy, plutocracy, meritocracy, gerontocracy etc.

The night old Dixie died.

Former Dixiecrat, Senator Strom Thurmond (1902-2003; senator (Republican) for South Carolina 1954-2003) lies in state, Columbia, South Carolina, June 2003.

Universally called Dixiecrats, the States' Rights Democratic Party was formed in 1948 as a dissident breakaway from the Democratic Party.  Its core platform was permanently to secure the rights of states to legislate and enforce racial segregation and exclude the federal government from intervening in these matters.  Politically and culturally, it was a continuation of the disputes and compromises which emerged in the aftermath of the US Civil War almost a century earlier.  The Dixiecrats took control of the party machine in several southern states and contested the elections of 1948 with South Carolina governor Strom Thurmond as their presidential nominee but enjoyed little support outside the deep South and by 1952 most had returned to the Democratic Party.  However, in the following decades, they achieved a much greater influence as a southern faction than ever was achieved as a separatist party.  The shift in the south towards support for the Republican Party dates from this time and by the 1980s, the Democratic Party's control of presidential elections in the South had faded and many of the Dixiecrats had joined the Republicans.

US Electoral College map, 1948.

In the 1948 presidential election, the Dixiecrats didn’t enjoy the success polls had predicted (although that was the year of the infamous “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline and the polls got much wrong), carrying only four states, all south of the Mason-Dixon line and not even the antics of one “faithless elector” (one selected as an elector for the Democratic ticket who instead cast his vote for Dixiecrats) was sufficient to add Tennessee to the four (South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana) won.  Nor did they in other states gain sufficient support to act as “spoilers” as Ross Perot (1930–2019) in 1992 & 1996 and Ralph Nadar (b 1934) in 2000 achieved, the “narrowing of margins” in specific instances being of no immediate electoral consequence in the US system.  With that, the Dixiecrats (in the sense of the structure of the States' Rights Democratic Party) in a sense vanished but as an idea they remained for decades a potent force within the Democratic Party and their history is an illustration of why the often-quoted dictum by historian Professor Richard Hofstadter (1916–1970): “The role of third parties is to sting like a bee, then die” needs a little nuance.  What the Dixiecrats did after 1948 was not die but instead undergo a kind of “resurrection without crucifixion”, emerging to “march through the institutions” of the Democratic Party, existing as its southern faction.

That role was for generations politically significant and example of why the “third party” experience in the US historically wasn’t directly comparable with political behaviour elsewhere in the English-speaking world where “party discipline” tended to be “tight” with votes on the floors of parliaments almost always following party lines.  Until recent years (and this is something the “Trump phenomenon” radically has at least temporarily almost institutionalized), there was often only loose party discipline applied within the duopoly, Democrats and Republicans sometimes voting together on certain issues because the politicians were practical people who wished to be re-elected and understood what Tip O'Neill (1912–1994; (Democrat) speaker of the US Representatives 1977-1987) meant when he said “All politics is local”.  Structurally, that meant “third parties” can operate in the US and achieve stuff (for good or evil) as the Dixiecrats and later the Republican’s Tea Party Movement proved; it just that they do it as factions within the duopoly and that’s not unique, the Australian National Party (a re-branding of the old Country Party) really a regional pressure group of political horse traders disguised as a political party.

US Electoral College map, 1924.

The 1924 Electoral College results were a harbinger of the later Dixiecrat movement and a graphical representation of terms such as "solid South" or "south of the Mason-Dixon Line".  At the time of the 1924 election, slavery in the South was still in living memory.

In recent years, what has changed in the US is the Republicans and Democrats have become the captive organizations of a tiny number of dedicated political operatives pursuing either their own ideological agendas or (more typically), those providing the funding.  The practical implication of that is the elections which now most matter are the primaries (where candidates for the election proper are selected) and because primary contests are voted on by a relative handful, outcomes are easier to influence and control that in general elections where there are millions to nudge.  Party discipline has thus become tighter than can often be seen on the floor of the House of Commons in the UK, not because the ideological commitments of politicians within parties have coalesced but because they’re now terrified of being “primaried” if they vote against the party line.  Re-election is a powerful inducement because the money politicians make during their careers is many, many times what might be expected given their notional earnings from their salary and entitlements.  There are few easier ways to get rich, thus the incentive to “toe the party line”.  This behavioural change, mapped onto something which structurally remains unchanged, is one of the many factors which have produced a country now apparently as polarized as ever it has been.  The nature of that polarization is sometimes misunderstood because of the proliferation of “red state, blue state” maps of the US which make the contrast between the “corrupting coastlines” and “flyover states” seem so stark but each state is of course a shade of purple (some darker, some lighter) but because of the way the two parties now operate, politics as it is practiced tends to represent the extreme, radical elements which now control the machines.  So while in the last twenty-odd years there’s been much spoken about “the 1%” in the sense of the tiny number of people who own or control so much, it’s political scientists and historians who much fret over the less conspicuous “1%” able to maintain effective control of the two parties, something of even greater significance because the state has put in place some structural impediments to challenging the two-party political duopoly.

In the US, the state does not (in a strict legal or constitutional sense of the word) “own” the Republican or Democratic Parties because they are “private” organizations protected by the constitution’s First Amendment (freedom of association).  However, over the years, something biologists would recognize as “symbiosis” has evolved as the state and the parties (willingly and sometimes enthusiastically) have become entangled to the extent a structural analysis would recognize the parties as quasi-public although not quite at the status familiar elsewhere as quangos (quasi autonomous non-government organizations).  Despite being “private concerns”, the parties routinely conduct state-regulated primaries to select candidates and in many cases these are funded by tax revenue and administered by state electoral instrumentalities.  Beyond that, it needs to be remembered that to speak of a “US national election” (as one might of a “UK general election”) is misleading because as a legal construct such events are really 50 elections run by each state with electoral laws not wholly aligned (thus the famous (or dreaded, depending on one’s position) Iowa caucuses) and in many states, it’s state law which regulates who can voted in party primaries, some permitting “open” primaries in which any lawfully enrolled voter is allowed to cast a ballot while others run “closed” events, restricting participation to registered members of the relevant party.  What that means is in some places a citizen can vote in each party’s primary.  That done, those who prevail in a primary further are advantaged because many states have laws setting parameters governing who may appear on a ballot paper and most of them provide an easier path for the Republican and Democratic Party candidates by virtue of having granted both “major party” status.  As objects, the two parties, uniquely, are embedded in the electoral apparatus and the interaction of ballot access laws, debate rules and campaign finance rules mean the two function as state-sponsored actors; while not quite structurally duopolistic, they operate in a protected environment with the electoral equivalent of “high tariff barriers”.

Elon Musk (left) and Donald Trump (right), with Tesla Cybertruck (AWD Foundation Series), the White House, March, 2025.  It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Given all that, Elon Musk’s (b 1971) recent announcement he was planning to launch a “third party” (actually the US has many political parties, the “third party” tag used as a synecdoche for “not one of the majors”) might seem “courageous” and surprised many who thought the experience of his recent foray into political life might have persuaded him pursuits like EVs (electric vehicles), digging tunnels (he deserves praise for naming that SpaceX spin-off: “The Boring Company”) and travelling to Mars were more fulfilling.  However, Mr Musk believes the core of the country’s problems lie in the way its public finances are now run on the basis of the “Dick Cheney (born 1941; US vice president 2001-2009) doctrine: “Deficits don’t matter” and having concluded neither of the major parties are prepared to change the paradigm which he believes is leading the US to a fiscal implosion, a third party is the only obvious vehicle.  In Western politics, ever since shades of “socialism” and “capitalism” defined the democratic narrative, the idea of a “third way” has been a lure for theorists and practitioners with many interpretations of what is meant but all have in common what Mr Musk seems to be suggesting: finding the middle ground and offering it to those currently voting for one or other of the majors only because “your extremists are worse than our extremists”.  Between extremes there’s much scope for positioning (which will be variable between “social” & “economic” issues) and, given his libertarian instincts, it seems predicable Mr Musk’s economic vision will be “centre-right” rather than “centre-left” but presumably he’ll flesh out the details as his venture evolves.

Mr Musk can’t be accused of creating a “third party” because he wants to become POTUS (president of the US).  As a naturalized US citizen, Mr Musk is ineligible because Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the constitution restricts the office to those who are a “natural born Citizen” (Article II, Section 1, Clause 5).  Because the US Supreme Court (USSC) has never handed down a definitive ruling on the matter it’s not absolutely certain what that phrase means but the consensus among legal scholars is it refers to someone who was at birth a US citizen.  That need not necessitate being born on the soil of the US or its territories because US citizens often are born in other countries (especially to those on military or diplomatic duty) and even in international waters; indeed, there would appear no constitutional impediment to someone born in outer space (or, under current constitutional interpretation, on Mars) becoming POTUS provided they were at the time of birth a US citizen.  Nor does it seem an interpretation of the word “natural” could be used to exclude a US citizen conceived through the use of some sort of “technology” such as IVF (In Vitro Fertilization).

Lindsay Lohan, potential third party POTUS.

As a naturalized US citizen, Elon Musk can’t become POTUS so his new party (tentatively called the “America” Party) will have to nominate someone else and the constitution stipulates (Article II, Section 1, Clause 5): “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States”.  The age requirement is unambiguous and in his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1833), Justice Joseph Story (1779–1845; associate justice of the Supreme Court of the USSC 1812-1845) explained the residence requirement was “…not an absolute inhabitancy within the United States during the whole period; but such an inhabitancy as includes a permanent domicil in the United States.”  That means Mr Musk can consider nominating Lindsay Lohan for president.  She’d apparently flirted with the idea of running in 2020 but at that point would have been a few months too young; on all grounds she’ll be eligible for selection in 2028 and many would be attracted to the idea of Lindsay Lohan having her own nuclear weapons.

Whether or not it’s “courageous” (or even “heroic”), to build a new third party in the US time will tell but certainly it’s ambitious but Mr Musk is also a realist and may not be planning to have a presidential candidate on the ballot in all 50 states or even contest every seat both houses of Congress.  As he’ll have observed in a number of countries, “third parties” need neither parliamentary majorities nor executive office to achieve decisive influence over policy, some with comparatively little electoral support able to achieve “balance of power” status in legislatures provided those votes are clustered in the right places.  Additionally, because the polarized electorate has delivered such close results in the House & Senate, the math suggests a balance of power may be attainable with fewer seats than historically would have been demanded and under the US system of fixed terms, an administration cannot simply declare such a congress “unworkable” and all another election (a common tactic in the Westminster system); it must, for at least two years, work with what the people have elected, even if that includes an obstreperous third party. Still, the challenges will be onerous, even before the “dirty tricks” departments of the major parties start searching for skeletons in the closets of third party candidates (in a rare example of bipartisanship the Republicans and Democrats will probably do a bit of intelligence-sharing on that project) and the history is not encouraging.

It was the Republican party which in the 1850s was the last “third party” to make the transition to become a “major” and not since 1996 has such a candidate in a presidential contest secured more than 5% of the national vote.  In the Electoral College, not since 1968 has a third-party candidate carried any states and 1912 was the last time a third-party nominee finished second (and 1912 was a bit of a “special case” in which the circumstances were unusually propitious for challenges to the majors).  Still, with (1) the polls recording a general disillusionment with the major parties and institutions of state and (2) Mr Musk’s wealth able to buy much advertising and “other forms” of influence, prospects for a third party may be untypically bright in 2028 elections and 2030 mid-terms.  There are no more elections for Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since 2025) and it seems underestimated even now just what an aberration he is in the political cycle.  While his use of techniques and tactics from other fields truly has since 2016 been disruptive, what he has done is unlikely to be revolutionary because it is all so dependent on his presence and hands on the levers of power.  When he leaves office, without the “dread and awe” the implied threat of his displeasure evokes, business may return to something closer what we still imagine “normal” to be.

Intertwingle

Intertwingle (pronounced in-tur-wing-guhl)

(1) To confuse or entangle together; to enmesh, to muddle.

(2) As intertwingularity, in computing and systems analysis & organization (of documents, data etc), to interconnect or interrelate in a complex way which appears to a user simple and lineal.

Late 1800s: Thought to be a portmanteau word, the construct being a blend of intertw(ine) + (interm)ingle and of interest to students of linguistics because it appears independently to have been coined at different times in different places.  The prefix inter- was from the Latin inter- (between, amid), a form of the prepositional inter (between).  Twine was from the Middle English twyn, twine & twin, from the Old English twīn (double thread, twist, twine, linen-thread, linen), from the Proto-West Germanic twiʀn (thread, twine), from the primitive Indo-European dwisnós (double), from dwóh (two).  The construct of mingle ming (from the From Middle English mingen & mengen, from the Old English mengan (to mix, combine, unite, associate with, consort, cohabit with, disturb, converse), from the Proto-West Germanic mangijan (“to mix, knead”), from the primitive Indo-European menk- (to rumple, knead)). It was cognate with the Dutch mengen (to mix, blend, mingle), the German mengen (to mix), the Danish mænge (to rub), the Old English ġemang (mixture, union, troop, crowd, multitude, congregation, assembly, business, cohabitation)) +‎ -le (a frequentative suffix of verbs, indicating repetition or continuousness).  It was cognate with the Dutch mengen (to mingle, mix) and the German mengen (to mingle, mix).  Interwingle is a noun & verb, intertwingling & intertwingularity are nouns and intertwingled is an adjective; the noun plural is intertwingularities.  By implication, the nouns intertwinglism & intertwinglist should exist but seem not to have been used.

Lindsay Lohan, who has led an intertwingled life.  The publicity shot for Just My Luck (2006) was wholly serendipitous and did not come from a session.

Intertwingle was used by Manmatha Nath Dutt (1855–1912) in The Dharma Sastra (Volume 1, 1896), one of his collections of translations into English of ancient Sanskrit & Hindu texts; under the Raj, he was a prolific translator and author and his use appears to the first known coining.  As a comic device, it was used by Montgomery Gordon Rice of Bradley Polytechnic Institute in a performance of Esmeralda (a fictional character in Victor Hugo's (1802–1885) novel Notre-Dame de Paris. 1482 (The Hunchback of Notre-Dame, 1831)) conducted during the April 1901 graduation ceremony and many instances of use have been jocular.  As a noun, the author Henry James (1843–1916) applied it as a nickname for a group of his Emmet female cousins (all of who were painters) and the use in that sense was in the vein of the way Admiral Lord Charles Beresford (1846-1919) would use “the souls” of some female acquaintances he thought discussed their feelings entirely too much.  For the US portraitist John Singer Sargent (1856–1925) it was his nickname for his early twentieth century genre paintings of his nieces, the Ormond sisters.  Sargent’s reference was to “element interchangeability”: his use of shawls as a motif and the easy substitution of one model for another, their artistic presence defined less by individual identity than the convoluted poses.  Coincidentally, as well as being one of Henry James’ “intertwingles”, the US artist Jane Emmet de Glehn (1873–1961) was one of Sargent’s muses. )

As the twentieth century progressed and in a number of fields there emerged a new literature exploring the concept of “everything being connected to everything else” and Tracy Baldwin Augur (1896-1974) found it handy (apparently as an eye-catching linguistic novelty) in a 1954 paper discussing urban planning, a discipline where truly there is much intertwingling.  Between 1933-1948 Augur had been principal planner for the TVA (Tennessee Valley Authority) and by the 1950s he was working for the URA (Urban Renewal Administration) and HHFA (Housing and Home Finance Agency), the proliferation of the alphabet soup of acronyms which had begun under the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR, 1882–1945, US president 1933-1945) not slowing in the post-war years.  In the discipline of town-planning the phrase “inextricably intertwined” was used in many contexts so perhaps the appearance of intertwingle was inevitable.

The use in IT and the analysis & organization of documents, data and such was in 1974 described as “intertwingularity” and defined as the deep and complex interconnection or interrelation of digital objects of any kind, and in a teleological sense the purpose was to make the connections permanently stable and accessible to users in a way which would seem seamless and lineal.  The noun intertwingularity was coined by US sociologist Dr Theodor Holm "Ted" Nelson (b 1937) and it appeared first in his book Computer Lib/Dream Machines (1974) which discussed the complexity of interrelations in human knowledge.  Dr Nelson’s most enduring legacy is Project Xanadu which, remarkably, has been in development since 1960, the objective (which evolved eventually) being a kind of macro-network, unifying all data, accessible through a simple, intuitive user interface.  Conceptually, that does of course sound like the vision imagined when the www (world wide web) was bolted onto to the internet but Dr Nelson’s critique of that sprawling, ubiquitous thing is that its “web page” approach is inherently flawed because, as IRL (in real life) when pages can be thrown away, deleting a page means a dozen or a billion hyperlinks once active around the planet are rendered instantly “broken”; what’s lacking is global content management to keep track of it all.  The project’s roots in 1960 envisages what would later be understood as hypertext but acceptance of Dr Nelson’s ideas took some time because he was speculating about hardware and software which did not then exist and would not for decades attain critical mass and the landmark Computer Lib/Dream Machines, while fleshing out the details, did so in a discursive manner better suited to modernist experimental fiction.

Conceptual illustration of intertwingling from Computer Lib/Dream Machines (1974).

Dr Nelson seems always to have liked the word “everything” (although he does allow that for some things, “most” is better”) and the most intriguing speculation, built on the notion of “everything being intertwingled”, was tied up with quantum entanglement which suggests connectivity need not be based on proximity or visible connection.  In this theory, what is now described as “dark energy” (the thus far undetectable stuff in the universe which the math of what has been detected suggests must exist) is thought potentially to be “time” itself, the universe’s most fundamental framework where it’s not so much that everything is “entangled” but that everything is (on a grand scale) a singularity and everything is happening at the same time with only the operation of (distance-based) relativity creating an observer’s perception of difference.

Applied Intertwingling: In fields like political science or organizational behaviour, the intertwingling of objects is often illustrated in ways which depict not only the existence but also the nature of a relationship.

Intoxicatingly simple in concept, the practical implications of the Xanadu resulted in something which became more complex as layers were implemented because each made obvious that more layers still were needed.  Lacking resources, Dr Nelson, cognizant of developments in computer networking, announced Xanadu should be thought a mechanism for handing information (regardless of physical location) as if existed in a unified repository.  While he didn’t use the phrase “virtual library” that seems to be how it would now be understood and in an interesting harbinger of how Facebook would in the twenty-first century describe its curated macro-space, he described Xanadu as a “docuverse”.  That was an interesting vision but development required cubic money and it wasn’t until the early 1980s when the adoption by business of the original IBM PC (1981) as a kind of corporate standard that funding was found, building on a file addressing system based on “tumblers” which were an implementation of transfinite numbers.  Transfinite numbers exist in the branch of set theory, a fundamental area of mathematical logic that studies collections of objects; set theory is the formal framework onto which infinity can be mapped.  For Xanadu to be scalable to an infinite number of documents, the numbers in use needed to be infinite but because one layer of the process was indexing, those numbers needed to be distinct in size and order, thus the utility of the transfinite.  Except in some vague conceptual sense, it’s really only (some) mathematicians who understand all this.

Xanadu’s original 17 rules

(1) Every Xanadu server is uniquely and securely identified.

(2) Every Xanadu server can be operated independently or in a network.

(3) Every user is uniquely and securely identified.

(4) Every user can search, retrieve, create and store documents.

(5) Every document can consist of any number of parts each of which may be of any data type.

(6) Every document can contain links of any type including virtual copies (“transclusions”) to any other document in the system accessible to its owner.

(7) Links are visible and can be followed from all endpoints.

(8) Permission to link to a document is explicitly granted by the act of publication.

(9) Every document can contain a royalty mechanism at any desired degree of granularity to ensure payment on any portion accessed, including virtual copies (“transclusions”) of all or part of the document.

(10) Every document is uniquely and securely identified.

(11) Every document can have secure access controls.

(12) Every document can be rapidly searched, stored and retrieved without user knowledge of where it is physically stored.

(13) Every document is automatically moved to physical storage appropriate to its frequency of access from any given location.

(14) Every document is automatically stored redundantly to maintain availability even in case of a disaster.

(15) Every Xanadu service provider can charge their users at any rate they choose for the storage, retrieval and publishing of documents.

(16) Every transaction is secure and auditable only by the parties to that transaction.

(17) The Xanadu client-server communication protocol is an openly published standard. Third-party software development and integration is encouraged.

By the early 1990s it was clear Xanadu “worked”, at least at the scale existing hardware made possible but the emergence of the www (World Wide Web) diverted the industry’s attention and by 1995 when it was clear the Web had gained critical mass, the view seemed to be Xanadu might be a slightly better or slightly worse mousetrap and soon comparisons were being with the “OS (operating system) war” between Microsoft’s Windows NT and IBM’s OS/2.  Dr Nelson however was not deterred and successive releases of implementations of parts of the Project Xanadu model were in the twenty-first century released until OpenXanadu was in 2014 made available on the Web.  Explaining how it differed from hypertext as it was done on the Web, Dr Nelson claimed HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) was inherently flawed because, the metaphor being one of bound pages, it was so prone to broken links as one page was torn off, that meaning collectively an array of dozens (or millions, trillions etc) of dead links to other dead pages.  What tumblers did was provide an address able to maintain linkages to not merely a single object (which HTTP envisages as a “piece of paper”) but an infinite set of links, achieved because transfinite numbers can handle what can be visualized as a cascade of information, the linkages between which are unlimited; this was the inheritance of the “docuverse”.  Those impressed by both the potential and drawbacks of the Blockchain will be struck by the overlaps.

Knowledge Nation, which at the time seemed a good idea but wasn’t suited to the banality of modern politics.

For the 2001 federal election in Australia, a part of the opposition Australian Labor Party’s (ALP) platform was “Knowledge Nation”, a summary of its education policy, developed by polymath and former minister for science Barry Jones (b 1932).  During the campaign, what was substantive in Knowledge Nation was little discussed because the government immediately attacked the illustrative chart which was a representation of the many components connected within the education system.  Derided as “Noodle Nation”, it was an example of why it’s no longer wise for politicians to offer anything much beyond a TWS (three word slogan).  The reaction today to a political party circulating something like The Federalist (a collection of 85 articles and essays (1787-1788) advocating the ratification of the Constitution of the United States) would be something like the “noodle nation moment”.  These days, intertwingling is best neither seen nor heard.

Effectuate

Effectuate (pronounced ih-fek-choo-yet)

To bring about; give effect to; cause to happen; accomplish; carry out (a wish, order, plan etc).

1570–1580: From the Medieval Latin effectuatus (brought to pass), the past participle of the Renaissance Latin effectuare, the construct being effectu- (stem of effectus (effect) + -atus.  It’s assumed the Medieval Latin was influenced by the Middle French effectuer.  The Latin suffix -ātus was from the Proto-Italic -ātos, from the primitive Indo-European -ehtos.  It’s regarded as a "pseudo-participle" and perhaps related to –tus although though similar formations in other Indo-European languages indicate it was distinct from it already in early Indo-European times.  It was cognate with the Proto-Slavic –atъ and the Proto-Germanic -ōdaz (the English form being -ed (having).  The feminine form was –āta, the neuter –ātum and it was used to form adjectives from nouns indicating the possession of a thing or a quality.  In biology, the noun effector (plural effectors) describes (1) any muscle, organ etc. that can respond to a stimulus from a nerve, (2) the part of a nerve that carries a stimulus to a muscle etc or (3) any small molecule that effects the function of an enzyme by binding to an allosteric site (all some sort of actuator).  Effectuate & effectuating are verbs, effectuator is a noun, effectuation is a noun and effectuated is a verb & adjective; the noun plural is effectuators.

In his A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (1926), Henry Fowler (1858–1933) summed up the cluster of “effect” words with his usual efficiency: Historically, effective, effectual, efficacious & efficient all meant “having an effect, but use varied with both different applications and some often disregarded shades of meaning.  Effective means “having a definite or desired effect, existing in fact rather than theoretically, coming into operation”.  Efficacious should be applied only to things and has long been popular in medicine (treatments, drug regimes etc) and means “certain to have or usually having the desired effect”.  Efficient applies to agents or their actions or to instruments etc, meaning “capable of producing the desired effect, not incompetent or unequal to a task.  Effectual applies to actions apart from the agent and means not falling short of the complete effect aimed at while effective applies to the thing done (or its doer as such) and means having a high degree of effect. 

Something is effectual if the intended result is produced and there’re are degrees of effectiveness, the comparative being “more effectual”, the superlative “most effectual”, and as early as the early sixteenth century the most formal (and still popular) way of expressing that was to suggest something has been efficacious (the comparative “more efficacious”, the superlative “most efficacious”).  Historically, efficacious was a synonym of effective but the latter has been co-opted for many purposes so efficacious gained a career as a “decorative word” of the “dinner party” type.  The act referenced is one of “effectuation” (the act of effectuating) and the antonym is inefficacious.  One who effects the effectuation is an effectuator.  So, effectuate means “to cause something to happen" or “to bring about an effect” and it entered English in the early 1600s with a formal or legal tone, something retained to this day; the legal connection is the distinction between “facilitate” (make it possible for something to be effectuated) and effectuate (do something which has earlier been facilitated).  It’s a useful distinction for lawyers to draw and something like the way cosmologists differentiate between a “point in time” and a “point in space”, something which apparently becomes of increasing significance the further one travels (in theory) from Earth.  To most of us that’s the difference between “when” and “where” but cosmologists understand there’s some overlap between the two.

Google ngram: Effectuate's pattern of use, 1800-2022.  Never a word in common use, it has never gone away and has apparently low been a favorite in essays by students of law and political science.

Because of the way Google harvests data for their ngrams, they’re not literally a tracking of the use of a word in society but can be usefully indicative of certain trends, (although one is never quite sure which trend(s)), especially over decades.  As a record of actual aggregate use, ngrams are not wholly reliable because: (1) the sub-set of texts Google uses is slanted towards the scientific & academic and (2) the technical limitations imposed by the use of OCR (optical character recognition) when handling older texts of sometime dubious legibility (a process AI should improve).  Where numbers bounce around, this may reflect either: (1) peaks and troughs in use for some reason or (2) some quirk in the data harvested.

Karoline Leavitt, the White House, 2025.

Definitely on planet Earth (though sometimes accused of existing in a parallel reality of “alternative facts”), the White House recently introduced many to the word “effectuate”, Karoline Leavitt (b 1997; White House press secretary since 2025) explaining that while the USSC (US Supreme Court) had ruled it was the administration's responsibility to “facilitate the return” of a migrant mistakenly sent to a prison in El Salvador, but “not to effectuate the return.”  That is a reasonable interpretation of the practicalities and not mere legal sophistry because while the court’s unanimous ruling means is the administration has to “make possible” the return of the party. It seems not to impose an obligation actually to make the travel arrangements.

However, this exchange between the two “co-equal” branches of government is merely emblematic of a fundamental dispute in which the Trump administration does not wish to acknowledge the courts may intervene in its efforts to effectuate, on a truly grand scale, mass deportation.  At this stage the White House seems to have decided not to engage in outright defiance and pursue instead strategy of “paralysis by analysis”.  The Supreme Court upheld an order from the US District requiring the DoJ (Department of Justice) to submit plans “to facilitate and effectuate” the return but the DoJ asked the hearing be delayed so it might “evaluate” the USSC’s ruling.  After further extensions of the deadline were granted, the DoJ asserted the court had set an “impractical” deadline and had provided “insufficient” time for plans to be drawn up, adding the department didn’t fully understand the order, given the court had not clarified what it means to “facilitate” or “effectuate” the return.  The USSC refrained from suggesting the DoJ’s lawyers consult a dictionary and instructed the District Court to issue a clarification of “the intended scope of the term ‘effectuate’” but did confirm the order to “facilitate” the return was valid.

There is nothing new in tensions between an administration wanting to do things (often stuff claimed to enjoy an electoral mandate) and courts which insist things, however popular, must be effectuated in accord with the constitution and as long ago as 2019 Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since 2025) had discussed Article II (The Executive) of the constitution, claiming it meant “…I have the right to do whatever I want as president.”  Ominous as that may sound, especially in the light of the USSC’s extraordinary 2024 ruling in the matter of presidential immunity from prosecution, it seems still not quite at the point either of that asserted by Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974 and a trained lawyer) who held “if the president does it, it can’t be illegal” or the state of law in the Third Reich (1933-1945) which by 1943 (at the latest) had degenerated to the point where law had become “what the Führer says it is”.

In democratic societies, respect for the rule of law and constitutions are important and there have been many states in which orders from courts habitually are defied or simply ignored.  The respect is vital because in terms of enforcement of will the difference between the executive and judicial institutions truly is striking; one side with police forces, an army, navy & air force and the other with word processors and shelves of books containing statutes and precedents.  In terms of raw power therefore, all the courts have is moral authority and the expectation others will respect the law while, if so minded, an executive can be of the “…and how many divisions has he got?” school.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

That school of thought has often been ascribed to Andrew Jackson (1767–1845; US president 1829-1837) who is reputed to have said of a judgment by the chief justice (John Marshall (1755–1835; chief justice of the US 1801-1835) with which he disagreed: “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”  The “quotation” was not revealed until some two decades after Jackson’s death when it appeared in Horace Greeley’s (1811–1872) The American Conflict: A History of the Great Rebellion in the United States of America, 1860–1864 (in two volumes, 1864 & 1866) and most think it apocryphal.  Greeley was usually informative and often entertaining and while that exact sentence may never has passed the president’s lips, historians generally agree it was an accurate paraphrase of the sentiments he at the time expressed to many and, had the court requested the assistance of the executive in enforcing the order, it’s not certain Jackson would have followed constitutional precedent and complied.  As things turned out, no request was ever issued so there never was a “constitutional crisis” but the matter does emphasize how vital it is for the executive (which alone possesses the means of force) to respect the role of the courts which have only a moral authority.

Swastika

Swastika (pronounced swos-ti-kuh (Germanic) or swas-ti-kuh (English-speaking world)).

(1) A figure used as a symbol or an ornament in the Old World and in America since prehistoric times, consisting of a cross with arms of equal length, each arm having a continuation at right angles.

(2) The official emblem of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (The NSDAP, the National Socialist German Workers' Party better known as the Nazi Party (1920-1945)) and (after 1935) the German state (Third Reich).

1850–1855: From the Sanskrit स्वस्तिक (svastika), from svasti (prosperity), the construct being सु- (su-) (good, well (cognate with Greek eu-) + अस्ति (asti) (that being as- (be) + -ti- (the abstract noun suffix)) + क (ka) (the diminutive suffix), hence "little thing associated with well-being", best understood in modern use as “a lucky charm".  It was first attested in English in 1871, a Sanskritism which replaced the Grecian gammadion.  After adoption in the early 1920s by the German National Socialist Workers’ Party (the Nazis), swastika was increasingly used to refer to the visually similar hooked cross which in German was the Hakenkreuz (literally "hook-cross"), English use first noted in 1932.  The su- element is from the primitive Indo-European (e)su- (good), a suffixed form of the root es- ("to be”); the asti element is from the same root.  It was known in Byzantium as the gammadion and in medieval heraldry as the cross cramponnee, Thor's hammer, and (although this is contested), the fylfot, a similar shape though most usually rendered in mirror image to the swastika.  Swastika is a noun (the rare adjective swastikaed is non-standard); the noun plural is swastikas.

Crate label advertising, Swastika brand fruit, L.V.W. Brown Estate, Riverside, California, 1930s.

For thousands of years, the swastika was used by almost every culture as a symbol of good fortune before, in the Western world, becoming synonymous the Nazis and thus a byword for racism and barbarism.  Translated literally as "well-being" in the ancient Indian language of Sanskrit and for millennia shared between Hindus, Buddhists and Jains, it was the positive connotations associated with the shape, as well as its pleasing, adaptive geometry which inspired the early Western travelers visiting Asia to bring it home, examples found in the archaeological record of the Ancient Greeks, Celts, and Anglo-Saxons, some of the oldest examples in eastern Europe, stretching from the Baltic to the Balkans.  In the 1800s it became a popular shape among jewelry designers and by the turn of the twentieth century there was quite a fad for it among graphic designers who applied it from everything from tiled floors, fabrics, architectural motifs and advertising.  Carlsberg and Coca-Cola both used it on their bottles and Swastika was the title of the magazine of the Girls' Club of America, the young ladies being awarded swastika badges to wear as a prize for selling copies.  In one especially interesting example of timing and placement, some war planes of both the Aeronautical Division of the US Signal Corps (predecessor of USSAF & USAF) and the UK’s Royal Air Force (RAF) were adorned with swastikas, beginning in the 1920s.  Use declined, obviously, during the 1930s but there’s evidence the symbol was used as late as 1939.  The Finnish Air Force adopted it in 1918, discretely painting over the last examples in 1945 but the symbol continues to be used by some squadrons and on decorations.

Dirty laundry: Darty Laundry electric delivery van, rendered by Raidió Teilifís Éireann, (RTE, Radio & Television of Ireland, the Irish public service broadcaster) in “Swastika Laundry” livery for the television series Caught in a Free State (1983) a four-part drama about German spies in neutral Ireland during World War II (1939-1945), an event known in Ireland as “The Emergency”.  As late as the 1970s there were at least 600 electric delivery vehicles on the streets of Dublin alone, their numbers declining as private ownership of cars, washing machines, refrigerators and such increased.  In the UK, when milk was still every day delivered to houses, some 85% of deliveries were made by electric vehicles.

Anwar Sadat (1918–1981; president of Egypt 1970-1981, left) and Israeli foreign minister (and former IDF (Israeli Defence Force) general) Moshe Dayan (1915-1981, right), King David Hotel, Jerusalem, 19 November 1977.

It was the first visit to Israel by an Egyptian president and although the visit was successful, the “swastika” tie he on one occasion wore attracted comment.  During the visit he also chose neckwear in stripes and polka-dots so there were mixed messages but in Washington DC, on 26 March 1979, some 16 months after the visit and following the 1978 Camp David Accords, the Egypt–Israel treaty was signed, providing for mutual recognition and a cessation of the state of war that had existed since the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.  Maybe, sometimes a tie is just a tie.

Playing cards, New, York, 1920s.

The Nazi’s use of the swastika is another example of the quasi-scientific links they claimed existed between Germans and ancient civilizations.  Nineteenth century German scholars translating old Indian texts had notice the structural similarities between their language and Sanskrit; their conclusions were equivocal but the some among the Nazis concluded this was proof of a shared ancestry with a race of white warriors they called Aryans.  Even at the time, the linguists and anthropologists were appalled at the misappropriation of their work; their findings had been about the structure of language and nothing more.  The Nazis however grasped at straws wherever they fell.  Single swastikas began to appear in the Neolithic Vinca culture across south-eastern Europe around some 7,000 years ago and during the Bronze Age were widespread across the continent but, when clay pots embossed with swastikas dating from circa 2000 BC were looted after the occupation of Kiev in WWII and were exhibited in Berlin as evidence of a shared Aryan ancestry.  Displays of the swastika have been banned in Germany since the end of the war but attempts to extend the ban EU-wide have never succeeded.

A K-R-I-T bus in New York City, taking a jury to luncheon, October 1912.  The matter on which the jury sat was a police corruption trial, the murder of Herman Rosenthal (1874–1912) who ran several small casinos which were subject to raids by the police who, in exchange for “protection money” (claimed to be 20% of the day’s take) allowed them illegally to operate, the money spread among police, Tammany Hall (headquarters of the Democratic Party machine) and some corrupt politicians (in NYC at the time, something of a tautology),  New York Police Department (NYPD) Lieutenant Charles Becker (1870–1915) and four members of the Lenox Avenue Gang ultimately were convicted of murder and “got the chair”, the executions carried out in 1915 in Sing Sing Prison’s death chamber.

US Army Air Corps Boeing P12 (F4B) (1929-1942), circa 1964 (left) and the flying jacket of a US Army observer, 45th Infantry Division, circa 1939 (right).  Obviously the swastika livery didn't endure but it wasn't the end of the symbol appearing on US and British warplanes, small versions of the symbol often stencilled onto the fuselage to indicate the count of a pilot's "kills".

Finnish Air Force Morane-Saulnier M.S.406 fighters, Latva Airfield, East Karelia, 9 September, 1943.

The Finnish Air Force introduced the blue swastika in 1918; it was known as the hakaristi, the construct being haka (hook) +‎ risti (cross).  The Morane-Saulnier M.S.406 was a French fighter, based on an airframe which first flew in 1935 and it was only marginally improved by 1938 when the pre-production models first flew.  Like some other aircraft in what was a transitional period, the construction was a mix of old and new, the rear steel-tube frame fabric-covered in the conventional manner but the remainder had a skin of plymax, (a plywood veneer bonded to light alloy).  Under-powered and lacking firepower, it was hardly state of the art but was valuable export for the French industry, two sent to Switzerland to be used as templates for local production and 30 to Turkey while 160 had been sold to Poland but the timing was unfortunate because they were in the process of delivery when the German invasion began in 1939.  Just before the fall of France, 30 had been dispatched to Finland and the Germans would later augment this with a further batch of 57 confiscated from the Armée de l-Air (the French Air Force), distributing others to Croatia and Italy.  As the combat record in the Battle of France suggests (400 losses for 175 kills), the M.S.406 was outclassed by more capable German designs and in the conflicts with the Soviet Union (1939-1940 & 1941-1944) Finnish pilots found then agile but under-powered as well as unreliable as a gun platform, instability noted when firing and the weapons of dubious reliability.  The solution for the lack of power was typical of the improvisations often adopted during war-time: re-fitting the sturdy airframe with the more powerful Soviet Klimov M-105 or M-103 engines, both in plentiful supply from crashed enemy aircraft and stocks captured by the Germans during the early successes in the invasion of Russia in 1941.  A typical Soviet rip-off, the Klimovs were improved versions of the Hispano-Suzia 12Y-31 V12 used in the M.S.406 and were thus able to be re-purposed with relatively little effort.  The change transformed the Finnish fighters, giving them a performance second only to the Messerschmitt BF-109s also in the fleet.

Years before there was a Nazi Party, the trademark of the short-lived (1909-1916), Detroit-based motor car company K-R-I-T (derived from Kenneth Crittenden (1889-1972) who provided financial backing and contributed to the design) was the swastika.  K-R-I-T (the name was simplified to Krit after 1912) was one of some 2000 concerns which entered the US motor industry during the first two decades of the twentieth century but the ancient symbol of good fortune, chosen “to ensure favor of auspicious gods” failed the export-dependent company and World War I (1914-1918) proved the final nail in the coffin.  That Mr Crittenden was born in the same year as Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) is one of history's many coincidences and he went on to a long career in the industry, in 1928 joining Chrysler where he remained until his retirement in the mid-1960s.

1912 K-R-I-T Model A Roadster.  From the automotive “brass era”, its fittings included a firewall mounted Solar acetylene spotlight, twin Solar acetylene headlight, E&J kerosene sidelights, tufted black leather upholstery, wood spoke wheels with 30 x 3½ inch tires and a cylindrical bolster fuel tank.

Krit’s business model was one which for more than a century has lured major manufacturers, independents and start-ups when came and went: “the modestly priced, full-featured automobile”.  Such a product obviously has huge market appeal and thus the possibility of achieving compelling economies of scale but it also attracts players so the sector tends to become crowded, accounting for a hundred-odd years of industrial churn.  Depending on the configuration, the K-R-I-T Model A was advertised between US$800-1000, just a little more expensive than Henry Ford’s (1863-1947) Model T (1908-1927) but offered more power from an engine almost identical in specification (177 cubic inch, L-head, in-line four-cylinder) and a three-speed sliding gear transmission, easier to use and affording greater flexibility than the Ford’s two-speed planetary gearbox.  Unfortunately for Krit, demand in its most receptive and lucrative domestic market fell precipitously after widespread crop-failure in the US west in 1913 and the outbreak of war in Europe some months later killed demand there; Europe had absorbed more than 80% of of the company’s export business.  Production ceased in 1915 and after for some month trying. And failing, to raise new capital, the concern was dissolved.

The K-R-I-T badge (1908, left) and The Nazi's Goldenes Parteiabzeichen (Golden Party Badge (1933, right).

That the detailing in some of Krit's swastika emblems was so similar to that adopted by the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (The NSDAP, the National Socialist German Workers' Party better known as the Nazi Party (1920-1945)) is not surprising because the color combinations and aspect ratios which most appeal to one graphic artist are likely to be judged as pleasing by another.  Adolf Hitler claimed he personally designed the escutcheon his movement would make infamous and while he told many lies and there are many myths about his role in the party’s early days, his claim is thought to be true and throughout his political career, even in the depths of war when thing were bad, he never ceased sketching and designing; he was a competent (if uninspired) artist (although the human form eluded him) and likely would have be a proficient architect.  Nor did Hitler claim his conceptual notions were original, admitting the combination of red, white and black was something he “stole” from the posters of his enemies, the German communists (whose propagandists seem to have settled on the scheme because it was used for the flag of the German Empire (the so-called “Second Reich” (1871-1918).  Especially among the right-wing, the symbol had been much used in the German Empire.

Grounds of the Mercedes-Benz factory decorated in honor of a visit to Stuttgart by Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945), the display visible from his aircraft (1936, top left), a Mercedes-Benz showroom in Munich, Lenbachplaz (1935, top right) and 1938 Mercedes-Benz W125 Rekordwagen (bottom).  Although, tucked away in a corner of the corporate website there is a single page which contains a rather perfunctory acknowledgement of company’s complicity in some of the crimes against humanity committed by the Nazi regime between 1933-1939 there’s little attempt to discuss the matter, an understandable reticence and quite a gap in the otherwise extensively documented history which dates back to 1886 with the debut of what is claimed to be the world’s “first automobile”.  Brand-management can be as much about what is left unsaid or hidden as what is projected. 

When used in events other straight-line speed record attempts (ie where corners needed to be negotiated) the streamlined version of the W125 Formel-Rennwagen (race car built in accord with defined rules) didn’t use the spats (fender-skirts) covering the wheels.  It was used thus on Berlin’s high-speed Avusrennen with its two, uniquely long straights and differed from the conventional W125 in that it was powered by V12 engine rather than the usual big-bore straight-eight, the lower hood (bonnet) line further reducing drag.  Fitted with the spats, W125 Rekordwagen (record car) was used in 1938 to achieve a speed of 432.7 km/h (269 mph) over the flying kilometre, then the fastest timed speed achieved on a public road and a record which stood until 2017.  It’s now on display in the Mercedes-Benz Museum in Stuttgart, although, the swastika with which it was once adorned has been removed from the aluminum skin (displays of the swastika banned in Germany except as authorized).

German U-boat (submarine) U-576 (left) flying the Kriegsmarine’s (German navy) War Ensign (1935-1945).

U-Boat U-576 was sunk on 15 July 1942, 30 miles (48 km) off Cape Hatteras, Hatteras Island, North Carolina.  The Kriegsmarine’s (German navy) War Ensign, flown from all combat vessels between 1935-1945, was raised when submarines were entering or leaving port but otherwise rarely displayed.  The swastika was never painted on the hulls, a point of some legal consequence in the first Nuremberg trial (1945-1946, heard before an IMT (International Military Tribunal) to try the surviving leading Nazis) when evidence was presented in the matter of the steam trawler Noreen Mary, sunk by gunfire from U-247 about 20 miles (32 km) west of Cape Wrath on the north Coast of Scotland.  The witness provided sworn testimony he saw a swastika painted on the submarine’s conning tower but it was proved no U-Boat had ever been so decorated and, combined with other evidence, this weakened the prosecution case against Großadmiral Karl Dönitz (1891–1980; Supreme Commander of the Kriegsmarine 1943-1945).

Hitler Youth & BDM members on camp together, circa 1937.

The Bund Deutscher Mädel (League of German Girls) was the girls' wing of the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth), the Nazi Party's youth movement (membership of which, like much in the Third Reich, was close to obligatory), intended to train boys to be ready to become good soldiers and prepare girls for their traditional role of motherhood; it was abbreviated as BDM.  Perhaps unfortunately, some mixed activities such as the girls and boys going on camps together resulted in much practical preparation for motherhood, revelations of this promiscuity leading Germans to conclude BDM might better be understood as the Bund Deutscher Matratzen (League of German Mattresses).

Bromide press print (circa 1911) of portrait by unknown photographer of Olave St Clair Baden-Powell (née Soames), Lady Baden-Powell (1889-1977), Leader of the world Girl Guide movement and wife of Lord Baden-Powell, founder of the Boy Scouts movement, National Portrait Gallery, London (left), the Edmonton Swastikas ice hockey team, 1916 (centre), and US actress Clara Bow (1905–1965) adorned in swastikas to ward off the bad luck of Friday the 13^th, photo-shoot for “Ancient Cross Defies Jinx Day” published on page 27 of the Los Angeles Times, 13 April 1928 (right).

Although in the West now most associated with the BDM, before the evilness of the Nazis tainted the association, girls had been wearing swastikas for centuries, sometimes because of the association with good fortune and sometimes because it was just another bolt shape, the distinctiveness of which made it adaptable to fashion.  As well as the Edmonton operation, there were two other Canadian ice hockey teams, the Fernie Swastikas out of Fernie, British Columbia and the Windsor Swastikas of Windsor, Nova Scotia.  In Nazi Germany, the Boy Scouts and Girl Guides movements associated with Lord & Lady Baden-Powell were absorbed respectively into the HJ & BDM and although many of the activities were carried over (tying knots, outdoor survival skills, pitching tents and all that), the political nature of the indoctrination was different.  Tellingly, although the Nazis had been marching under the swastika since 1920 and were already in Germany & Austria a byword for intolerance and violence, the LA Times in April 1928 made not one mention of events in Europe and it’s doubtful the movement, then still obscure in the US and well-known only to the few interested in international events, much registered in public consciousness.  Ms Bow seems never to have been interested in the politics of the right or left but she did in 1933 visit Germany on her honeymoon and film buff Hitler (like many, a Clara Bow fan) presented her a copy of his autobiographical manifesto Mein Kampf (My Struggle, 1925); it’s thought like most, Ms Bow probably didn’t trouble to read the work.  The swastika did not ward off her bad luck and she later went mad (suffering what would now be called “mental health issues”).

Mr Ye and Ms Censori, annual Grammy Awards, Los Angeles, 2 February 2025.  Most intriguing has been the suggestion Ms Cansori is being paid by Mr Ye on a "per outfit" basis and is thus a kind of "walking installation".  That would make it a very "modern" marriage and one of which not all would approve but there have been relationships (artistic and otherwise) based on more dubious arrangements.

In recent years, the US rapper, singer, songwriter, record producer, hip hop identity & fashion designer Ye, formerly known as Kanye West (b 1977) has (in a sense) “re-created” Australian architect & model Bianca Censori (b 1995) as a series of installations (which probably isn’t quite the right word but on the model of the art business, it’s close); the two may (at least in some jurisdictions) be married, the reports are contradictory.  What Mr Ye has done is to create photo opportunities using Ms Censori as a lure by having her dress (again that may not be quite the right word) in a style likely to attract photographers, vloggers, magazine editors and other content aggregators.  As an installation there to be photographed, the well-qualified Ms Censori certainly draws the lens and has taken the “nude dress” trend of the last decade-odd almost to its logical conclusion and whether the concept can be taken further than her recent appearance at the 2025 Grammy Awards has been debated; it certainly wouldn’t demand much fabric.  Although the coverage (in the media, not of Ms Censori’s skin) has been extensive, whether Mr Ye is much benefiting isn’t clear because the focus is, predictably, very much on the installation rather than the artist and the only mention he seems to gain is being condemned as exploitative or worse.  All the attention devoted to Ms Censori may also have engendered in him what Gareth Evans (b 1944; Australian Labor Party (ALP) senator or MP 1978-1999, sometime attorney-general & foreign minister) called RDS (relevance deprivation syndrome) because his latest on-line project is selling “swastika T-shirts” at US$20; it's a niche market but, given recent events, he may regard it as a growing one and the reaction to his venture was certainly focused on him.  The product code for the T-shirts was "HH01" and those who recall his comment: “There’s a lot of things that I love about Hitler" in a December 2022 podcast with the since bankrupted host Alex Jones (1974) probably deconstructed the code to mean “Heil Hitler” although to remove any doubt he also tweeted: “I love Hitler” and “I'm a Nazi”.  Swastika T-shirts must have been too much for Shopify which took down the page, issuing a statement saying Mr Ye had "violated" the company's terms.  It was an example of the dangers inherent in having a site administered by AI (artificial intelligence) with humans checking the content only in reaction to complaints.  The AI will improve but whether Mr Ye has thought better of offering the range remains to be seen, yeezy.com now displaying only the stylized message YEEZY STORES COMING SOON♡.

The artist formerly known as Kanye West in shirt, Los Angeles, February 2025.  As a device to attract photographers and generate an ongoing presence in print and on-line, a well-placed swastika remains potent.

In architecture and design, the swastika has been used for thousands of years.  Top row: Lampposts, Glendale, California, USA 1924-1927 (left), the unexpected juxtaposition of a swastika atop a Jewish Star of David (centre) and Coronado Naval Base, San Diego, California (not the “Albert Speer Memorial Retirement Home” as it has been tagged on the internet), (right).  Bottom row: Skillman Branch Library (1931), Detroit, Michigan, USA (left), nineteenth century floor in Roman Catholic church, Tamaulipas, Mexico (centre) and a floor mosaic with geometrical designs and swastikas, laid in the second or third century AD, Tarraco (ancient name of the city of Tarragona, Catalonia, Spain), Archaeological Museum of Tarragon, Spain, (right).

The "Swasticar"

Elon Musk at the 2025 US Presidential Inauguration, Washington DC, January 2025.

So moved by the moment when on stage at the inauguration ceremony marking the beginning of Donald Trump’s (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since 2025) second coming (as the MAGA devotes seem to regard it) was tech titan Elon Musk FRS (b 1971) that to express to the adoring crowd “My heart goes to you”, spontaneously he gave a gesture which many noted was similar to the many “Sieg Heil!” (Hail Victory!) moments made infamous by Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) in Nazi Germany (1933-1945).  To reinforce his point, Mr Musk then turned to the crowd behind and repeated the gesture.  He did first place his right hand over his heart (as per the US Pledge of Allegiance's current protocol) but arm was raised ("palm-down" (as used by the Nazis)) rather than "palm-up" (the pre-1942 US protocol) although probably no intent should be inferred from this because the raised palm procedure hadn't be in use for almost two generations before Mr Musk was born. 

The reaction was swift and widespread.  Predictably, memes appeared but there was also direct action, Tesla dealerships picketed and the cars vandalized, sometimes by being daubed with swastikas, sometimes by being torched, a disturbing trend given they’re fitted with lithium-ion batteries which, when they burn, burn for hours.  The shift in the political association attached to the flagship of electric vehicles was remarkable.  Once it had been V8-powered pick-up owners south of Mason-Dixon Line who had despised the things, their suspicion being Teslas encapsulated much that was a threat to the American way of life: homosexuality, New York, California, trans-gender rights, environmentalism, Freemasonry and the Democratic Party; suddenly, it was the Tesla-driving (or aspiring) liberals embarrassed (or fearful) to be associated with the brand, some resorting to gluing on Honda or Hyundai badges to deter the attacks.

One of the most striking was an image by Portuguese graphic artist Ves Vaz (b 1986) which was based on the famous photograph of “Tank man” standing in front of PLA (People's Liberation Army) tanks sent in June 1989 by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) to “deal with” crowds of protesters gathered in Beijing's Tiananmen Square.  The photograph was taken by AP (associated Press) photographer Jeff Widener (b 1956) who initially was displeased at “tank Man” appearing in frame for what looked like a perfectly composed shot.  As things turned out, it became one of the best known images of the century and one often re-published when the Tiananmen Square Massacre (the “June Fourth Incident according to the CCP) is discussed.  For cartoonists and artists like Ves Vaz the Cybertruck is a gift because the shape is so distinctive instantly it’s recognizable as a Tesla, even by those unable to tell a Ferrari from a F-150.  Of course, that also means it’s pointless to stick on a Toyota badge which can make more anonymous looking Teslas “blend in”, to some degree protecting them from roving anti-MAGA vandals.

Soon, on London bus shelters there appeared posters dubbing Teslas “Swasticars” and urging people not to buy them, the political messaging including references to white supremacy, autocracy and allusions to the Third Reich.  Swastikas seem not to have appeared, presumable to avoid possible legal challenges although even without them, the meaning was lost on few.

Digital projection on Tesla Gigafactory, Berlin, Germany.

Other forms of direct action included the Tesla’s Gigafactory in Berlin having a depiction of Mr Musk’s “My heart goes to you” moment projected onto the façade with a “Heil” prefixed to the illumined “Tesla” although no swastika was added, the symbol banned in Germany for all but a few special purposes.  Interestingly, Tesla was there already the subject of controversy on environmental and social grounds, having a year earlier suffered an arson attack but the opposition has swelled after Mr Musk association with the second Trump administration has fuelled a growing perception of an alignment with the far-right.  Although computers would have made the stunt easier, this would have taken much preparation and some physical testing.

Hailing cab with dog on leash: Gloria Walker (b 1937), PotM (Playmate of the Month), Playboy magazine, June 1956; photograph by Herman Leonard (1923-2010).  Whether waving to someone or hailing a cab, the raised arm is one of humanity's more common gestures, meaning jurisdictions banning the act must base prosecutions on context and intent rather than merely the act. 

2024 Tesla Cybertruck AWD Foundation Series (left) and the suspect cant rail.  The term “cant rail” came from architecture and railway engineering and referred to an angled or sloped surface.  Cant rails (also often seen in fence construction) are those parts which are tilted or positioned at an angle rather than being strictly vertical or horizontal.  In automobile design specifically, a cant rail is the (sometimes structural and sometimes cosmetic) section running along the top edge of the side windows, connecting the A-pillar to the B-  C- or D-pillar; visually, it defines the roofline and can contribute to strength.  The early automobiles picked up the name from the reinforced horizontal member supporting the upper structure on railway carriages & horse-drawn carriages because the early techniques of construction were essentially the same.

To add to Tesla’s woes, in March 2025 came the news the company’s Cybertruck was subject to a global recall, needed to rectify a fault in which large stainless steel body panels can unexpectedly detach and (if the vehicle is in motion) “fly off”.  The recall notice issued by the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) revealed the affected Cybertrucks were the 46,096 built between November 2023 & February 2025 and the issue was the adhesive used: “The Cybertruck is equipped with a cosmetic applique along the exterior of the vehicle, known as the cant rail, which is an assembly comprised of an electro-coated steel stamping joined to a stainless steel panel with structural adhesive. The cant rail assembly is affixed to the vehicle with fasteners. On affected vehicles, the cant rail stainless steel panel may delaminate at the adhesive joint, which may cause the panel to separate from the vehicle.”  According to a Tesla communiqué, the adhesive was “susceptible to environmental embrittlement” which pleased word nerds; although “embrittlement” is rare, it’s not a recent tech industry neologism and is seen most commonly as “hydrogen embrittlement” (HE), known also as “hydrogen-assisted cracking” (HAC) or “hydrogen-induced cracking: Hydrogen embrittlement (HE), also known as hydrogen-assisted cracking or hydrogen-induced cracking” (HIC), all of which describe the absorption of hydrogen into a metal, and subsequent weakening, as part of a pickling process.

1945 Heinkel He 162 Salamander (Volksjäger) National Air and Space Museum, Washington DC.

Recalls and “fix bulletins” from Tesla have not been uncommon but most have involved the need to patch software and these have been handled remotely.  The “flying panels” will however require a visit to a Tesla Service Center.  The company has thus far acknowledged 151 warranty claims related to the failed glue but said it was “not aware of any collisions, fatalities, or injuries.”  Coincidently, it was problems with an adhesive which afflicted the Heinkel He 162 Volksjäger (People's Fighter), a jet-powered fighter aircraft the Luftwaffe late in World War II (1939-1945) planned to be flown by aviators from the Hitlerjugend (HJ, the Hitler Youth) who had the benefit of a few hours training flying gliders.  For those intrepid youth, going from that to a jet-fighter was about as ill-advised as it sounds but by 1945 the Germany’s military position was dire and in many fields the bottom of the barrel was being scraped.  Heinkel used Salamander as the project name for the wing program and it’s that which military historians came to prefer despite the whole project being called Spatz (Sparrow), while the Air Ministry’s preferred Volksjäger never caught on.  With aviation-standard metals in short supply, the He 162 was built substantially from wood with only critical components such as the fuselage skin and wing edges made from aluminium.  This made it not only cheap to produce but also a genuinely “disposable” aircraft with damaged units intended to be discarded and replaced.  Remarkably, the first prototype flew in December 1944 only 38 days after the factory received the blueprints but while the early tests proved it was a capable (if sometimes tricky to handle because of the unusual layout) short-range interceptor, after only days structural failures in flight began to occur, leading to fatalities.  The issue was traced to environmental embrittlement, an acid in the adhesive used to bond the wood panels causing delamination of the layers, the subsequent fragmentation meaning vital parts would “fly off” compromising structural integrity.  Between February-May 1945, some 120 of the 1000-odd air-fames were delivered to Luftwaffe units but few ever saw combat and losses (most from accidents or structural failures) exceeded the small number of Allied aircraft it claimed.

With the anti-Tesla movement growing and sales declining by as much as half in some places, the company turned to what may seem an improbable but untapped market: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).  In invitations sent to prospective customers in the kingdom, recipients were requested to RSVP to a launch event at the Bujairi Terrace on 10 April 2025 where they could “Explore our global best-selling line-up and step into a world powered by solar energy, sustained by batteries, and driven by electric vehicles” and “Experience the future of autonomous driving with Cybercab, and meet Optimus, our humanoid robot, as we showcase what's next in AI and robotics.”  Assured real humans would be on hand to answer questions about “Tesla ownership, home charging and more”, the select few were urged: “RSVP now. Space is limited.”  Tesla’s previous neglect of Saudi Arabia was not related to the kingdom being one of the planet’s major producers of fossil fuels (and one which not long ago pledged to extract and sell “every last molecule”).  Instead, the estrangement dated from a 2018 rift between Mr Musk and Saudi Arabia’s PIF (Public Investment Fund the kingdom’s sovereign wealth fund) over the failure of a funding deal which would have enabled him to take the company private.  To add insult to injury, the PIF subsequently invested in EV (electric vehicle) start-up Lucid, taking a majority stake and later announcing an intention to purchase as many as 100,000 Lucid EVs over a decade, apparently as part of an effort to reduce the government’s dependence on oil.  All that may not sound encouraging for Tesla and EV sales in Saudi Arabia constitute not even 1% of total but elsewhere in the Gulf, EV penetration in the taxi and ride-hailing sector has been impressive so, coming off a low base, there clearly some scope for growth and even before Tesla’s recent troubles, relations between the parties did seem to be improving.  Apart from all else, Mr Musk is one of nature’s optimists.

Mr Musk is known for his optimism, recently suggesting it was feasible for a settlement on Mars to be established, able to sustain a permanent population of a million people.  That does show an engineer’s faith in technological advances (as well as fiscal provision) because (1) to transport even one person to Mars would take well over a year (thus far the longest duration of one ways trips to somewhere else is the three-odd days it took the twelve Apollo programme astronauts over six trips in 1969-1972), (2) on Mars there is no breathable atmosphere, no known food sources and the availability of usable water is uncertain and (3) the climate is mostly not hospitable for human life with only the equatorial regions ever sometimes rising to what on Earth would be thought temperate (highs between 20°C (68°F) - 35°C (95°F) recorded at noon during summer but typically the whole place is cold especially the poles (-153°C (–243° F) and it’s there water sources (as ice) may exist.  So it’s a challenging place for human habitation and the extent of the challenge is emphasised here on earth with simply a rise on the global average temperature by 3^oC threatening to render certain regions economically unviable for a permanent human presence to be maintained.  It was in an interview with Ted Cruz (b 1970; US senator (Republican-Texas) since 2013) in which Mr Musk speculated about a million folk living on Mars under “glass domes” and the senator is well-aware of the difficulties of coping with extreme cold, having once jetted out of an icy Texas during a cold snap to enjoy the warmth of a Mexico beach, somewhat to the chagrin of the shivering voters he deserted.  On Mars, there are no sun-drenched beaches and whatever Mr Musk’s million souls find when they get there, that’s their life.

The "fascist salute"

The fascist salute has become so associated with Hitler and Nazism that in recent years some jurisdictions have banned its use, emulating the prohibition which has existed in Germany (the sanction pre-dating unification in 1990) for decades.  Because the salute is the same gesture as that used for purposes ranging from waving to one's mother to hailing a taxi, prosecutions are expected to be initiated only in cases of blatant anti-Semitism or other offensive acts.  The "salute" is so widely used that photographs exist of just about every politician in the act and they're often published; usually it's just a cheap journalistic trick but if carefully juxtaposed with something, it can be effective.

Lindsay Lohan: Sometimes, a wave is just a wave.     

Benito Mussolini's (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime-minister of Italy 1922-1943) reverence for the Ancient Rome of popular imagination accounts at least in part for the Fascists' adoption of the so-called "Roman salute" although the Duce did also object to the shaking of hands on the basis it was “effete, un-Italian and un-hygienic” and as the reduced infection rates of just about everything during the “elbow-bumping” era of the COVID-19 social isolation illustrated, on that last point, he had a point.  Other fascist regimes and movements also adopted the salute, most infamously the Nazis although none were as devoted as Hitler who, quite plausibly, claimed to have spent hours a day for weeks using a spring-loaded “chest expander” he’d obtained by mail-order so he’d strengthen his shoulder muscles sufficiently to enable him to stand, sometimes for a hour or more with his right arm extended as parades of soldiers passed before him.

A much-published image of the Duce, raising his arm in the fascist salute next to the bronze statue of Nerva (Marcus Cocceius Nerva) (30–98; Roman emperor 96-98) in the Roman Forum.

However, historians maintain there’s simply no evidence anything like the fascist salute of the twentieth century was a part of the culture of Ancient Rome, either among the ruling class or any other part of the population.  Whether the adoption as a alleged emulation of Roman ways was an act of cynicism of self-delusion on the part of the Duce isn’t known although he may have been impressed by the presence of the gesture in neo-classical painting, something interesting because it wasn’t a motif in use prior to the eighteenth century.  This “manufacturing” of Antiquity wasn’t even then something new; the revival of interest in Greece and Rome during the Renaissance resulted in much of the material which in the last few hundred years has informed and defined in the popular imagination how the period looked and what life was like.  By the twentieth century, it was this art which was reflected in the props and sets used in the newly accessible medium of film and the salute, like the architecture, was part of the verisimilitude.  Mussolini enjoyed films and to be fair, there were in Italy a number of statutes from the epoch in which generals, emperors, senators and other worthies had a arm raised although historians can find no evidence which suggests the works were a representation of a cultural practice anything like a salute.  Indeed, an analysis of many statues revealed that rather than salutes, many of the raised arms were actually holding things and one of the best known was revealed to have been repaired after the spear once in the hand had been damaged.

Adolf Hitler showing the "long arm" & "short arm" variants of the fascist salute (left) and examples of the long arm & short arm penalty being awarded in rugby union (right).

In fascist use, what evolved was the “long-arm” salute used on formal occasions or for photo opportunities and a “short-arm” variation which was a gesture which referenced the formal salute which was little more than a bending of the elbow and involved the hand rising at a 45^o angle only to the level of the shoulder; in that the relationship of the short to the long can be thought symbiotic.  Amusingly and wholly unrelated to fascism, the concept was re-appropriated in the refereeing of rugby union where a “short-arm” penalty (officially a “free-kick”) is a penalty awarded for a minor infringement of the games many rules.  Whereas a “full-arm” penalty offers the team the choice of kicking for goal, kicking for touch or taking a tap to resume play, a “short-arm” penalty allows a kick at goal, a kick for touch or the option of setting a scrum instead of a lineout.  The referee signals a “short-arm” penalty by raising their arm at an angle of 45^o.

How it was done: Mussolini, Hitler and Victor Emmanuel III show their interpretations of the fascist salute, the technique varying according to their commitment to the cause.  The trio are reviewing an Italian military parade, Rome, May, 1938. 

Front row: Benito Mussolini (left), Adolf Hitler (centre) and Victor Emmanuel III (1869–1947; King of Italy 1900-1946) (right).

Second row: Joachim von Ribbentrop (1893–1946; Nazi foreign minister 1938-1945, far left), Count Galeazzo Ciano (1903–1944; Italian foreign minister 1936-1943, centre left), Dr Joseph Goebbels (1897-1975; Nazi propaganda minister 1933-1945, centre right) and Rudolf Hess (1894–1987; Nazi deputy Führer 1933-1941, far right).

Back row: The WAGs.

Of the seven men in this image, only Victor Emmanuel would die from natural causes, in exile succumbing to pulmonary edema (fluid in the lungs) some 18 months after being compelled to abdicate.  While on the run, the deposed Mussolini would be executed by Italian partisans, Hitler & his new wife would commit suicide in the Berlin Führerbunker with Soviet troops only blocks away, von Ribbentrop would be hanged at Nuremberg after being found guilty of planning aggressive war, waging aggressive war, war crimes & crimes against humanity, Ciano would be executed on the orders of Mussolini (his father-in-law!), Goebbels & his wife would commit suicide (after murdering six of their seven children (aged 5-14)) shortly after the death of Hitler and Hess, sentenced to life imprisonment at Nuremberg for planning & waging aggressive war, committed suicide aged 93, after 46 years in captivity.

A most unfortunate conjunction of imagery: Adolf Hitler on Berlin's newly opened East-West Axis in his Mercedes-Benz 770 K Grosser Cabriolet F open tourer (W150; 1938-1943) in a parade marking his 50^th birthday, opposite the Technical High School, 20 April 1939 (left) and David Bowie in his Mercedes-Benz 600 (W100, 1963-1981) Pullman Landaulet, Victoria Station, London, 2 May 1976 (right).

Sometimes a wave is just an excuse.  The pop star David Bowie (1947-2016) understood he was an influential figure in music but on more than one occasion explained to interviewers: “I am not an original thinker”.  Trawling pop-culture for inspiration nevertheless served him well but he later came to regret dabbling with history slightly less recent.  Not impressed with the state of British society and its economy in the troubled mid-1970s, he was quoted variously as suggesting the country would benefit for “an ultra right-wing government” or “a fascist leader”.  Although he would later claim he was captivated more by the fashions (the long leather coats said to be a favorite) than the policies of the Third Reich, the most celebrated event of this period came in 1976 in what remains known as the "Victoria Station incident".  Mr Bowie staged a media event, arriving standing in an open Mercedes-Benz 600 Pullman Landaulet, recalling for many the way in which Hitler so often appeared in his 770 K.  Unfortunately, a photographer captured a shot in what the singer later claimed was “mid wave” and it certainly resembled a Nazi salute.  He later attributed all that happened during this stage of his career to too many hard drugs which had caused his interest in the aesthetics of inter-war Berlin to turn into an obsession with politics of the period.  All was however quickly forgiven and his audience awaited the next album which is an interesting contrast to the cancel culture created by the shark-feeding dynamic of the social media era.

Now, were a pop star to tell interviewers: “Britain could benefit from a fascist leader” and “I believe very strongly in fascism … Adolf Hitler was one of the first rock stars”, their future career prospects might be "nasty, solitary, brutish and short".  Despite that orthodoxy however, the multi-media personality Ye (the artist formerly known as Kanye West (b 1977)) has expressed what seem to be pro-Hitler sentiments and been photographed wearing a "swastika T-shirt", even (briefly) offering them for sale on the (now apparently in abeyance) Yeezy website.  Rather than having him cancelled, Mr Ye's comments and products seem to have had at least a financial upside because in a post on X (formerly known as Twitter) he stated: "...AND I MADE 40 MILLION THE NEXT DAY BETWEEN MY DIFFERENT BUSINESS. THERE'S I LOT OF JEWISH PEOPLE I KNOW AND LOVE AND STILL WORK WITH. THE POINT I MADE AND SHOWED IS THAT I AM NOT UNDER JEWISH CONTROL ANYMORE IN WAR YOU TAKE A COUPLE LOSES..."  That would seem to suggest that in the right circumstances, the Irish writer Oscar Wilde (1854–1900) and Dr Joseph Goebbels (1897-1975; Nazi propaganda minister 1933-1945) were right: "It doesn't matter what people are saying about you as long as they're saying something."

The US Pledge of Allegiance salute

Children in the US saluting the flag, circa 1892.  The non-saluting young chap in the centre of the photo is thought to have been distracted by the camera, rather than attempting to exercise his First Amendment rights.

In the US, the “Pledge of Allegiance” salute was visually similar to the fascist gesture but its adoption long predated the Italian and German dictatorships of the inter-war years.  Despite the name, the origin of the so-called “Bellamy salute” (1892) officially is credited to someone else and the true “inventor” (adaptor might be a better term) is contested, there being factions which attribute the honor variously to either (1) American Christian socialist Baptist preacher Francis Bellamy (1855–1931) or (2) confessed Freemason James Upham (1845-1905).  According to Bellamy's published instructions for the “National School Celebration of Columbus Day” (as the 400^th anniversary of the “discovery” of America), the salute was first demonstrated on 21 October, 1892.  It should also be added the text was a revision of the original Pledge of Allegiance, written in 1885 by Captain George Thatcher Balch (1828-1894), an officer in the Union Army during the US Civil War (1861-1865).

The Freemasons stake their claim to the pledge: Plaque at James Upham's grave.

The orthodox history long was the palm-out salute was created by Upham as the gesture to accompany the Pledge of Allegiance of the United States of America, a text written by Bellamy; known also as the “flag salute”, it gained the name by which it came to be known because it was Bellamy who most assiduously advocated its use.  Not until several years after Upham's death did his family found a copy of the pledge’s original draft, written in his hand, but by then there had already been a ruling attributing credit to Bellamy and a monument in his name erected.  Despite the documentary evidence, in 1939, a committee of the USFA (US Flag Association) ruled in favour of Bellamy and a review issued in 1957 by the Library of Congress in 1957 supported the committee’s findings.  The family never succeeded in gaining Upton official recognition but the Freemasons did have their revenge, “arranging for” the city of Malden to commission a plaque acknowledging his authorship, installing it at Upham’s gravesite in Forestdale cemetery.

The meme makers had much fun with Mr Musk's “My heart goes to you” moment and earlier, those editing fragments from the film Der Untergang (Downfall (2004), a dramatization of Hitler's last days in the Führerbunker) when making contributions to the Hitler Rants Parodies explored the comedic possibilities of the fascist salute. 

Little disquiet about the salute seem to have been expressed during the 1920s but fascism, then associated exclusively with Mussolini’s Italy, didn’t yet have the bad reputation it would gain when the nature of the Nazi regime became better understood (although not until after the end of World War II (1939-1945) were the horrors fully comprehended).  Interestingly, as late as June 1942, at the urging of the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Congress had passed Public Law 77-623, which codified the etiquette used to display and pledge allegiance to the flag including the raised arm.  However, now at war with the fascist Axis powers (Germany, Italy & Japan) the controversy increased and, as a consequence, the protocol was revised by replacing the raised arm with an instruction the right hand should be placed over the heart when reciting the pledge, Congress amending the Flag Code on 22 December 22, 1942.  Even that wasn’t without controversy because, after all, the Americans were first and both the USFA and the Daughters of the American Revolution (then still in its pre-DEI (diversity, equity & inclusion) phase) asserted it was inappropriate for the nation to have to change the traditional salute just because foreigners had later adopted a similar gesture.

Context is everything.

Top left: Crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) in Ralph Lauren pantsuit waving to her fans (it's believed, world-wide, there may be as many as a dozen), presidential inauguration ceremony, Washington DC, January 2017; Top right: A kitten, probably stretching but who knows, some cats seem really evil and these three could be an axis of evil; Bottom left: Australian sprinter Peter Norman (1942–2006, left) and US athletes Tommie Smith (b 1944, centre) & John Carlos (b 1945, right), on the podium after the 200 metres final, Summer Olympics Mexico City, 1968.  Smith and Carlos displayed the "Black Power" salute (with only one pair of gloves, Carlos used his left arm) while in solidarity, Norman wore the OPHR (Olympic Project for Human Rights) badge; Bottom right: Formula One champion Sir Lewis Hamilton (b 1985) who has adopted the Black Power salute to signify his support for BLM (the Black Lives Matter movement).

As well as the modification to the gesture, there have over the years been changes to the text and the most controversial by far proved to be the interpolation of “under God”, a change requested by Dwight Eisenhower (1890-1969; US president 1953-1961), concerned about the spread of Godless (though more to the point, un-Christian) communism during the high Cold War.  Because of the “freedom of religion” guaranteed by the US Constitution (primarily protected by the First Amendment (1791): “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”) challenges to that have reached the USSC (US Supreme Court) but as early as 1940 (in Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 310 U.S. 586 (1940)) the court ruled 8-1 students could be compelled to recite the pledge, Harlan Stone (1872–1946; associate justice US Supreme Court 1925-1941 & chief justice 1941-1946) issuing the only dissent: “The guarantees of civil liberty are but guarantees of freedom of the human mind and spirit and of reasonable freedom and opportunity to express them…The very essence of the liberty which they guarantee is the freedom of the individual from compulsion as to what he shall think and what he shall say.”

By implication, the ruling meant the state could demand at least an expression of obedience to the nation, even if it conflicted with the doctrine of one’s religion.  Justice Stone’s argument must have been persuasive because in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943), the court held the First Amendment guaranteed a right to non-participation in flag salutes although to solve several problems, that case was decided on the basis of protected “free speech” rather than “freedom of religion”.  In the twenty-first century, the cases (now usually based on the argument the phrase “under God” was an unconstitutional endorsement of monotheism have continued but none have succeeded and where possible, judges have found technical (such as a lack of standing) rather than substantive grounds to dismiss although in a lower court in 2015, it was ruled that because since 1943 participation has been “optional”, the pledge was thus a voluntary and patriotic exercise, not a religious one.