The mayor of Columbia, S.C., the capitol of the state that led the rest of the Confederacy off the cliff of secession in December 1860, has a letter in the local paper in which he pleads with racist conservatives who still run the state to remove the Confederate battle flag from the statehouse grounds:
The presence of the Confederate flag in front of the State House … is an obstacle to economic development, and in particular to South Carolina’s and Columbia’s efforts to enter the knowledge economy. The flag creates an unnecessary, negative image of South Carolina to the world.
My experience is that outside of South Carolina, the flag creates a controversial and uncertain image of South Carolina that ties current state policy of flying the flag on the State House grounds to our history of racial segregation and intolerance. This negative image exists even though I readily accept the fact that most of the advocates for the flag do not intend to convey that message. Unfortunately, in today’s world of the Internet and national and international media, the Confederate flag, fairly or not, has become a symbol of intolerance.
The mayor, Bob Coble, is courageous for speaking out. He risks having a cross or two burned in his yard, at the very least. He could also be facing the end of his political career and, at worst, risking the safety of himself and his family.
He’s right about the battle flag. To the rest of the world, it has become a symbol of racial hatred on par with the Nazi swastika. As such, the flag at the South Carolina statehouse is one of the most lurid examples, since it was first raised in the Civil Rights era as a middle-finger salute to the United States Dept. of Justice, African-Americans, Yankees and anyone else who opposed Jim Crow.
There are still Southerners who cling to the delusion that the Confederate flag is symbol of the valiant cause of Southern independence. Whatever it once was, from the moment the North claimed victory, the Confederate flag became the symbol of a lost cause — and rightly so.
As long as the Confederate flag flies at its state house, South Carolina deserves its reputation as a backwater, with rankings in education, health care and productivity among the lowest in the country. And every multinational company that moves facilities there should be tarred with the same brush — especially including the German automaker BMW that saw no problem with a swastika, er, Confederate flag flying in the capitol when it opened a plant in Greenville.
As my colleague Trish often points out, stupidity about race is by no means a Southern trait. In Michigan, the Rapid City Businessmen’s Association flew a special KKK branded Confederate flag at its family picnic over the weekend:
The flag included a cross inside a circle, accompanied by the phrases “white power” and “Ku Klux Klan,” but its message didn’t bother everyone who attended.
“I didn’t care one way or another about the flag being up. It’s not a big deal,” said Tom Tucker, of Rapid City, a cookout volunteer…
Event organizer Stuart McKinnon, owner of Torch Plumbing in Rapid City, said the Klan flag was not meant to be there, but he knows who raised it. He refused to identify the owner.
“I’m not going to say because it doesn’t matter who did it,” McKinnon said… “He just wasn’t thinking,” he said. ‘People can fly what they want to.'”
Kalkaska County Commissioner Rob Crambell, of Rapid City, attended the event and saw the flag, but didn’t stop to read it. He thought it simply was a Confederate flag and didn’t mind because he “doesn’t have a problem with people voicing their opinions in this country,” he said.
“You see them everywhere, so no, I wasn’t (offended). I don’t think all those flags mean racism. If they did, you wouldn’t see them on NASCAR cars and all over the place. Do they question it when they see it on NASCAR or anywhere else? This is America, after all, and people can fly what they want to. It’s unfortunate that it was more than just a Confederate flag,” Crambell said…
Organizers said if anyone had complained, they would have removed the flag…
Organizers [said] the event was neither a Klan rally, nor a recruiting effort and nobody there belongs to the KKK, they said.
“I’m Catholic, so how can I be a Ku Klux Klan member? They’d hang me,” McKinnon said…
The Klan flag won’t fly over the next Rapid City cookout, [organizers] said.
“The businesses and people who participate in putting these events together apologize for offending anyone,” [said one].
“But for anyone to assume we were having some kind of Klan meeting is absolutely ridiculous.”
Sorry, but when you fly a Klan flag over your event, that makes it a Klan meeting.
Finally, my family is 100 percent Southern on both sides, and I have ancestors who fought for the Confederacy.
The Reb flag is a racist flag and has no place in modern America except behind glass in a museum.
Too bad we didn’t hang all those traitors after the Civil War. Now their descendents are all redneck Repukes supporting the traitorous Chimpy regime.
Dang! It’s HOT down here!!
As a Canadian, maybe someone can clear something up for me (I think you’re an excellent person to ask Jon since, as you say, both sides of your family have roots in the Confederacy). My wife is from Missouri, so she and I have had this discussion many, many times. My wife was always kinda like the “black sheep” of her family, i.e., she’s very liberal in her thinking, believes in equality for all, kindness and respect to her fellow human beings without regard to race, creed or colour and would bring the apocalypse down onto any of our kids if she so much as got wind they used anything resembling a racial epithet. Having said all that, she explained to me that that during the Civil War, the Confederacy had, in fact, several flags, and that the most well-known one that’s pictured here, is in fact a “battle flag”, which was its intent. She went on to say that the this is precisely what Hitler did with the swastika; he took a 2000-year-old-old symbol used by the Romans, the Hindus (usually meant as a symbol to ward off evil spirits), and adopted it as his own. As such, because of what they did under that symbol, it has been forever perverted in peoples’ eyes. In this case, the “Confederate Flag”, underwent the same thing. She went on to explain, that the when the Civil War was raging, this conlict was not about the issue of slavery (although as the war progressed, it evolved to that). Rather, it was about the rights of individual states, and how they felt that the federal governmemnt was impugning on them, and stripping them away. She explained that the slavery issue was the spin eventually introduced by Lincoln when support for the war was starting to falter. Now, having said all of that (whew!), my questions Jon, are thus: WAS this, in fact, one of several flags hoisted by the South (i.e. a “battle flag”)? And IS there still that much of a stigma (for want of a better word) still attached to this flag? Heck, my wife even has a sweatshirt with that flag on the front of it, that says “Heritage—Not Hate”.
Anyways, I’d be very interested in hearing your take on these issues.
Sincerly,
Your Canadian Neighbour
It is disturbing to see the Southern culture of ignorance, prejudice and baseless pride rear its ugly head. As far as I can tell, Southerners are incredibly proud of… well, of being Southerners, apparently. They spit on education and “book learnin'”, they celebrate blind faith and authoritarian obedience and they think they’re better than “them city folk” because they hate gay and black people.
If America ever fully collapses into ruin, it will be because of some Confederate flag-flying redneck POS.
Interesting comments, John.
But as an example, wasn’t Sgt. Alvin York (WWI hero) a Southerner? You know..”th’ BOOK is agin’ killin’..so AHM agin’ killin'”. And for that matter, Elvis? Johnny Cash? Buddy Holly? Jimmy Carter (Nobel Prize winner)? John Edwards? See what I mean?
That’s a pretty BIG brush you’re usin’ thar, Hoss.
(Yeah, I’m being a bit of a smart-ass, it’s in my nature; no disrespect intended)
Have a GREAT day.
Sincerly,
Your Always Wise-Cracking Neighbour To The North (and I do mean WAAAAAAYYYYY North)
Canuck1963, obviously not every single Southerner is uniform in his personality or drive (although there’s plenty of evidence that Elvis *was* an ignorant hillbilly). My point is that the Southern culture — the set of values and priorities and vices that inform its ‘people’ — has certain negative qualities that are, in my opinion, a net loss for America.
Funny you mention Jimmy Carter. He’s an example of how cityfolk don’t mind voting for countryfolk, whereas countryfolk will only vote for cityfolk if told to BY their local leaders. In other words, when Reagan ran against Carter, Carter was depicted as a hick who didn’t belong in DC. But when Bush ran, suddenly being a hayseed was a GOOD thing. (Actually, I’ve gone off on a tangent: this is an illustration of the authoritarian slavishness and hypocrisy of the Republican party.)
The Republican southern culture has an antipathy towards education and intellectualism that is frankly suicidal, given how many corporations are importing mathematicians and engineers and scientists from India and China.
Hey John Clavis, thanks for explaining to me to myself. I just wish I had access to your vast wisdom before I spent all that time and money obtaining a post-graduate degree from a Southern university. Come to think of it, in light of your description, I wonder why we have those? And Christmas cards will sure be a breeze this year, since according to you, I can mark off all my gay and/or black friends. It won’t leave many people so that’s a big help. Thanks, John!
You certainly prove one thing — bashing Southerners is the last refuge for people who need to feel superior to somebody, anybody.
And if, as you lament, “America ever fully collapses into ruin,” it will be because of some simple-minded moron who is so absolutely certain of his own prejudices that he can’t get his head surgically removed from out of his ass.
Well John, (my name’s Mike, btw)that’s a great example of the Internet having educational value, because I never would have been aware of the points you’ve raised about the whole Reagan-Carter-Bush issue, and how some people tend to vote.
Having said all of that, do you think that this whole flag issue is symbolic of a certain…ahhh…polarization that exists in the U.S.? That is to say, if it exists (and after having crossed the Mason-Dixon line many times myself, I have to admit it does), then how do you adress it? How do you mend it? Do you start banning flags and symbols (no matter what sensitive issue they represent)? And if you do THAT, wouldn’t that INCREASE this ‘cultural divide’?, as well as lead everyone down a slippery slope in general? Flags are a VERY touchy issue in the United States. As another example, listen to this: when my wife finally emmigrated up here 5 years ago from Missouri, I took it upon myself to put up two flags on proud display in front of our house–the Canadian and American flags, respectively; this was to show a sign of a family living here, who are both proud of the heritage and background they hail from. She was very touched and proud that I had done this. Recently, she made me take down the American flag, and replace it with the black POW/MIA flag; apparently, she had become so upset and disgusted of what was being done in that flags’ name by Bush & Co., that she couldn’t even look at it anymore, because she felt that all the noble and good things that this symbol once stood for had been severly tarnished and corrupted. Therefore (she felt), it was much more fitting to put up the black POW/MIA flag, to honor ACTUAL young American men, who not only answered the call, but were still unaccounted for.
So I’m very aware of how flags in the U.S. can symbolize different things to different folks, and as a result, passions can run deeply as a result.
Again…what do you do? How do you mend it? How do you encourage cultures to bridge that chasm?
Over to you, Sir……….
Oh, and Daisy?
Question to you, Ma’am:
If, as you say, you’ve obtained a post-graduate degree ( and I give you all the respect and credit you deserve for that), surely you can add valid points of view to this discussion without resorting to crude insults, yes? See, with all due respect, when you resort to that…well….you kinda slightly edge into the territory of of proving Johns point, y’know?
I think you have MORE than THAT, at your disposal, yes? I believe you do.
Have a GREAT day.
Neighbour –
There were several Confederate flags. Here’s a Wikipedia article. The flag known today as the Confederate flag was a battle flag.
The meaning of symbols can change over time. The swastika is a good example. It is a traditional Hindu good luck sign (although I’m not sure Hitler knew this — I always assumed he took a Christian cross and bent the ends, so to speak) but today even in India its use causes controversy.
Even well-meaning flyers (or sweatshirt-wearers) of the Confederate flag need to know that African Americans, among other groups, find it extremely offensive.
As a liberal expatriated Southerner, I’d say that even the heritage represented by the Confederate flag is suspect. It is a symbol of a war we lost, like it or not. Why we would want to preserve and celebrate being losers is lost on me.
During Reconstruction, while the North was industrializing — all the while with its boot on the neck of the South — our Southern forbears dug in their heels and refused to budge on racial equality. One of the few institutions the South created during that period that has lasted was the Ku Klux Klan.
You asked whether slavery was an issue in the war. It wasn’t at first. When the Civil War broke out, Southerners (only about 5 percent of whom owned slaves, if memory serves) were fighting for independence. In the North, the reason for war was to force “reunion” or re-unification onto the South.
But slavery was certainly the elephant in the room. The war was triggered by the election in Nov. 1860 of Lincoln, the candidate of a new liberal party, the Republican Party. Its extreme leftwing faction, the “Radical Republicans” were fervent abolitionists. (Lincoln won the election with only 40 percent of the vote, out of a field of four candidates, so neither he nor the cause of abolition came to office with a clear national mandate.)
To complete the upside-downness of politics then, the Democrats were the conservatives. Southern Democrats, who were certainly pro-slavery, were led in Congress by Sen. Jefferson Davis, a Mexican War hero from Mississippi. Davis was elected president of the Confederacy at about the same time the war began.
It is doubtful Lincoln could have rallied the North to war on the issue of emancipation alone. Slavery had been outlawed in the Northern states beginning in the 1780s but most Northerners, including Lincoln himself, still held what we today we would think of as racist views.
For the first few years of the war, the North appeared to be losing badly. Abolition became an issue when Lincoln saw intelligence that showed that slaves were playing a significant role in the Southern war effort, particularly by keeping the farms running while their masters were at the front.
Lincoln introduced emancipation as a wedge issue to give these slaves an incentive to stop working against their own best interests. (When he introduced the Emancipation Proclamation, it only freed slaves in Southern territories occupied by the Union.) Even so, freeing the slaves was not widely popular in the North. Many white Northerners feared that free slaves would flee to the North and take their jobs, doing the same work for less money.
Northerners, especially antiwar rightwingers known as “Copperheads,” grew increasingly angry with Lincoln over the course of the war because he had imposed conscription. The bad news from the front of tens of thousands of men dying in battles was relentless, and with each new round of conscription, riots and insurrections broke out across the North, especially in the Midwest.
Many recent European immigrants, especially the Germans and Irish, had been against the war from the beginning. The antiwar riot most often remembered was the Draft Riot in Manhattan in July 1863. It started as a violent protest by Irish immigrants against a new round of conscription, but it quickly devolved into attacks against black citizens, with rioters dragging them from their homes, injuring and killing them. They even set fire to an orphanage for black children and then stood in the way when the firefighters arrived.
In 1864, Lincoln’s reelection campaign, just like the war, was going very badly. Two other Republicans, including the explorer and war hero John C. Fremont, briefly entered the primaries to run against him. His advisers begged him to take the unpopular issue of full emancipation off the table but Lincoln refused, saying in so many words that he’d rather be right than president.
It’s hard to find moments of true political courage in our history, but that was one.
You may want to keep in mind that some Southerners are Democrats. It’s a well-known fact that you can’t win an election without some Southern votes. It’s also a well-known fact that Southerners are pissed off that Yankees think they can dictate what shall be the paramaters of Southern Culture. If you piss off the South too much, you risk a racist Republican POS president in 2008. Please keep that in mind – don’t screw this election up!!!!
Thank you, Jon.
As an outsider (i.e. a non-American who’s totally fascinated with American history), I’ll have to take a bit of time to process the information you’ve given here.
Hoever, I WILL have to respectfully disagree with you on ONE point; you stated that:
“Just about the only institution the South created during that period that has lasted was the Ku Klux Klan.”
I can PERSONALLY attest that at least TWO other noteworthy institutions have survived vis a vis “the South”:
their talent for singing (i.e. the aforementioned Elvis, Holly, Cash, that ol’ “Dixie” song, etc.), AND……their cooking. I’ve never had biscuits-and-gravy in my whole LIFE, until my wife made it for me (as well as cornbread, deep-fried chicken and the way they B-B-Q). I mean, all that stuff is GREAT!
It’s a shame that they have all those other issues in their history, ‘cuz as far as I’M concerned, they can at least sling a mean skillet, and belt out great tunes. You know how they can measure a trees age by the rings in its trunk? Well, after 5 years of my wifes’ southern-influenced cooking, you can do that with my gut. So many expanding rings. So sad. So depressing.
I’m gonna go eat now.
I’ll feel better.
“this conlict was not about the issue of slavery (although as the war progressed, it evolved to that). Rather, it was about the rights of individual states”
No offense, but that’s simply the current mantra of “lost cause” revisionists. Was the question of states rights an issue? By all means, yes. At question was the right of a state to allow the institution of slavery and to advance slavery into the territories. In the south, the early Republican Party was considered nothing more than a bunch of yankee abolitionists. Whether that was true or not was not of consequence in many southern minds. It was the southern perception of Republicans that held sway. Upon Lincoln’s ascendance to the White House, many in the south expected the expansion of slavery into the territories to be cut off and fugitive slave laws to be repealed or go uninforced in the north. Worse yet, they perceived that a full frontal assault upon the basis of the southern agrarian economy, black slavery, would not be far behind. Was early northern reasoning about the war based upon abolition of slavery? No, for the most part it revolved around preserving the Union. From a southern perspective, however, it had everything to do with the economics of slavery and the protection thereof. If that meant leaving the Union due to the perceived fear of the potential actions of a Republican administration, the south would and did leave. How ironic it is that neo-confederates to this day spout on about the war not being about slavery when it was their own ancestors who perceived a grave threat to slavery and seceded because of that perception.
As to your question about flags, the well known “stars and bars†was not the official flag of the confederate government. Virtually all of the official confederate flags bore significant resemblance to the US flag, causing much confusion on a 19th century battlefield. Thus, the confederates adopted a bastardized version of the St. Andrew’s cross as their official military flag.
Does it represent racism today? Take it from a South Carolinian. It does whether we want to believe it or not.
Anon in PA: Most Southern Democrats believe that the Confederate flag should hang in a museum, not above the South Carolina state house grounds.
No offence taken, Paleo. Thanks for the input.
As I’ve said already, I’m just an outsider listening to different point of view from my next-door neighbours, about a subject I’ve always sunk my teeth into (you know, I actually stood inside the preserved jail cell of Frank James, brother of Jesse? I mean, how cool was THAT??) And maybe along the way, come to a little more of an understanding about a…shall we say….’colourful’ period in American history.
(Jesus, I hope that didn’t sound like a rotten pun)
Dear Canuck, cut the crap. The civil war was all about slavery. The KKK-lite can call treason for the preservation of a crime against human dignity “heritage”, but the debate in the 1850’s was about slavery, and ‘states rights’ was solely invoked in defense of slavery, Jackson had ended serious debate 40 years before.
This codespeak can be seen in the modern era when Reagan opened his 1980 campaign in Philadelphia Mississippi, the subject of hsi speech? “states rights”, strange place to open a national campaign eh? If you’ve seen the film Mississippi Burning, you know why Philadelphia MS is a special town for the right of states to murder civil rights activists.
Oh and the “War of Norhtern Aggression”? Who fired first on Ft. Sumter? yes that would be the treasonous murderers of South Carolina.
You can say that the “battle flag” wasn’t the “slavery flag” and you could also say that aside from the Jewish thing the Nazi’s had some great ideas. In both cases you’d be wrong.
The really interesting thing is not only are the modern inhabitants of the south the great great grandchildren of a bunch of white losers in a racial caste system, that died in droves and ruined their country to preserve an inhuman monied slave owning elite. Thats bade enough but these shameless morons want to brag about descent from a people who fought to enslave their fellow man.
The people who voted for Jefferson Davis are the same who voted for W, just look at the election map. 5 generations is not enough to teach anything to homo americanus inferus.
As for ignorant fucks in Michigan, you don’t think it was only poor blacks that migrated north in the great internal migrations of the 20th century do you? e.g. Bakersfield CA.
“Anon in PA: Most Southern Democrats believe that the Confederate flag should hang in a museum, not above the South Carolina state house grounds.”
Amen, and Amen! Interesting, it’s the SC Repugs for the most part that support the flag. Wonder how they reconcile their flag deal with their annual “Lincoln Day” Dinners. Oh, I’m sorry. That would take far more intellectual ability than most South Cakalacky Republicans are capable of. Just give them some talking points and send them on their way.
Sorry, Annonymous, I think you kinda missed my whole point.
I put forth some personal examples and opinions, and in turn, asked for some input on them. That’s all. We here call that “a civilized exchange of ideas and thoughts”. For you to come back, and say “cut the crap” and “you’re wrong!” really kinda pisses ME off, y’know? Look, all I was saying was I’m fascinated by American history, and want to learn more about it. Period. And as a Canadian, I will emphasize that it’s YOUR history, okay? I wasn’t passing judgement on it either way. And if I’m wrong, then I’m wrong. So be it. But don’t get on here, and start shooting off your sewer gate in a MOST undignified fashion, and tell me to “cut the crap”.
I hope I’ve made myself clear on this, Mr. Annonymous.
There, you see?
Now I’m in a snit.
Thanks a million.
Hitler’s version of the swastika is more accurately called the hakenkreuz, or the broken cross; the swastika’s arms point in the opposite direction as the hakenkreuz’s, though most people won’t know or care about the difference. I believe Hitler took his version from Norse symbology.
Also, hell yes the civil war was about slavery. The right the Southern states were fighting for was the right to keep slaves. The articles of secession (or declaration, or whatever) for at least three of the Confederate states state this explicitly. Next time some sorry redneck makes the “states’ rights” argument, forcefeed him or her that little clue. It’s not like they were fighting for the right to party or something.
“It’s not like they were fighting for the right to party or something.”
LMFAO! Now THAT’S funny!
Thanks for the input, NoOne. I wasn’t aware of those points. Definitely food-for-thought.
So, what’s the bottom line here?
Is the whole “states rights” issue an apologist, excuse-making argument intended to mask the Souths defence/support of slavery (vis a vis the Civil War)?
For the record, NoOneYouKnow is correct. The Civil War was about slavery. Other news flashes: the Iraq War is about oil. Global warming is caused by people. And yes, NOYK, you DO gotta fight, for your right, to par-tee!
Trish is right. And the analogy from the Civil War holds today.
At the start of the Civil War, the 5 percent of Southerners who owned slaves could have never convinced the 95 percent who weren’t slave owners to die in order to preserve slavery, so the politicians spun the “Cause” as states’ rights.
Similarly, in the North, the pretext for war was re-unification, not emancipation, because 95 percent (maybe 99.9 percent) of mid-19th Century Northerners would have never been willing to die to free the Southerners’ slaves.
As with Iraq’s oil — for which few if any Americans would be willing to die today — the real cause of the Civil War was hidden in plain sight.
I haven’t seen in this discussion any mention of the notion that the Confederacy was the enemy of the United States, and thus, any Confederate flag qualifies as an enemy flag. Isn’t it just fundamentally wrong for a governmental entity (a state) to fly an enemy flag?
Or am I misunderstanding this concept?
Being a lifelong southerner, I can definitely agree that we have plenty of ignorant hicks in our neck of the woods. However, all would be well advised to remember that the south has no monopoly on these people: I have met just as many hardcore “rednecks” in rural Ohio, Montana, and Illinois. It’s easy to relegate backwardness to one part of the country instead of recognizing the national issues we should all be dealing with.
Time for some deep history gentlemen. The civil war was not about slavery, but it became so as support for the war began waining in the north. It was not about states rights, but became so as southern states and the upper classes of the south made a case for seperation and war. The root cause of conflict, the genesis of war was money. Lincon wished to create a tarrif system that would support industry in the north. By slapping a huge (70-200 percent) on manufactured goods imported to the United States. Lincon wanted southern cotton money to come to the north, instead of leaving the country for England and France. Southern culture looked to England, and the south would rather trade with London, where so much of the cotton went, than with New York. The tarrif was inacted, the south was ‘cut off’ from its favored trading partners, and war soon followed. (Side Note: Why did the New York City Council pass a ‘non-binding’ resolution proclaiming New York City a Empire City of the CSA?)
Slavery, States Rights, Independence, Union, Jeff Davis, The Rebel Battle Flag and the Stainless Banner, All of that was secondary, ancillery, to the fact that the rich and landed gentry of the south didn’t want to pay a tax aimed at them, and paid out to factory owners in the north. Money decided, the guns spoke, and we live with the aftermath. That, Gentlemen, is history.
I am not a scholar of US History but I do know this–once a symbol has been appropriated by a hate group or totaliatarian state it cannot be claimed/reclaimed by people of good will. The Battle Flag belongs to the Klan now. We allowed this. People of good will should make certain that the Klan and their fellow travelers do not do the same to the Christian cross.
The southern flag means “F–k your preconcieved opinion of me for being a (southerner, redneck, biker, trailer-trash, poor person…you add one).
Does anyone here find the Rapid City event and the protection given to the perp, at least a little troubling? This is not just a Confederate Flag, but a symbol of a hate group. I’m finding it very concerning that nobody in Rapid City is identitfying who flew this flag. If people are not thowing this guy, or gal, under the bus, they are only accepting themselves as white supremacists.
EdWood, that is my understanding as well.
However, having said that, my preconception about ignorant, mouthbreathers, rednecks, bikers, and trailer trash being a large social class within the Southern melieu is supported by years of thoughtful observation.
And it mildly pisses me off that adherents of a losing, illegal action against the United States are allowed to fly a symbol flaunting their lack of fidelity to their country and what it stands for.
Marge Schott was from Ohio.