Background - my mother was accepted as a member of the DAR but she’s twenty years dead but her lineage still stands. I could conceivably be a SAR member. I hold her application and acceptance to membership as documentation.
If I just tack on my relationship with my mum, and I can become a SAR.
BUT I’m Australian and I hold very liberal (extreme left) views. Do I want to join an organisation that is, potentially, jingoistic and extremely patriotic in the US sense?
Are SARS and DARS political? Do they advocate left or right?
I think it would be a shit and giggle to be a SAR as an Aussie. My mates would just shit themselves.
My perception is that the DAR/SAR is primarily focused on history and geneology. I’m not aware of them being politically active for either side, and I don’t think I’d describe the organization as jingoistic. Of course, by definition it is a patriotic group in that it is designed to honor the founders of our country. But I don’t think of them as right-wing, left-wing or any wing.
Basically, it’s a group of very WASPy older ladies and gentlemen. While such folks are often politically active, they don’t choose to engage in politics through the DAR/SAR.
I’ve been an SAR member for the past three years. NicePete is entirely correct, from what I’ve seen. If your mom was a DAR member, and you have access to the genealogical info she used to support her application, it’s very likely you could become an SAR member. I’d encourage it.
DAR runs the Surgeons’ Quarters and the Indian Agency House in Portage. They preserve historical stuff and erect markers for historical sites. I don’t think they are as active now as they were a hundred years ago. At least I don’t ever see new historical markers they put up.
A couple of generations ago they were considered very conservative politically. But times change and I’m reasonably certain that people with varying political philosophies belong. If not, it’s about time that new blood makes it more liberal! Go ahead and apply!
Thinking of DAR and it’s place in politics reminds me of 1939 and one of the defining moments of the Civil Rights Movement: *
perhaps none other has been as celebrated as the Easter Sunday 1939 concert by contralto Marian Anderson, who sang to 75,000 people gathered on the grounds. As an African American Anderson had previously been denied the right to perform at Constitution Hall, owned by the then all-white Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR). As a result First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, who resigned from the DAR because of the incident, worked in tandem with the Marian Anderson Citizens Committe (sic), the NAACP, and other artistic and civil rights organizations to arrange and publicized the Lincoln Memorial concert.*
Now is it entirely fair to judge them by an event that took place 70 years ago using today’s standard? Alot of (World) Institutions had different views of racial things in 1939. I guess, to me yes its fair to note this as long as we remember that the DAR apologized, let Anderson sing in Constitution Hall 1942 for War Relief & had changed it’s White’s only in Constitution Hall policy in 1952 which was kind of early for the (then Southern) U.S. and for a purely conservative women’s organization (it actually was a liberal not a conservative position in the early 50’s), and Anderson sang in Constitution Hall 6 or 7 times including her farewell tour 1964.
I’m a DAR and became so for an interesting reason: Collegiate scholarships.
I’m unaware of any political activity in the organization, but I DO know that claiming membership makes you qualified for a small scholarship every year you’re in school. If I remember correctly, it’s not a LOT, but it’s something extra to help out.
Kind of a strange reason to join an organization though.
I have SAR eligibility through a ancestor who did not fight in the war. He was a Maryland shopkeeper who signed an oath of allegiance to the cause. Poor guy was a little too old at the time to fight, but his signing the oath qualifies his lineage for membership
