The Confederate battle flag:a racist symbol or proud history?

After reading Marcy Newman’s article "Symbols of Racism" (1/13/05) in The Arbiter, I had to wonder if Boise State is an institution of higher learning or just another of those campuses specializing in a type of politically correct indoctrination.

In her article where she mentioned "what the Confederate flag really means," Newman told of a student who, according to her description, violated her space by wearing a jacket displaying the Army of Northern Virginia (ANV) battle flag. She rambled on with her interpretation of what the Georgia legislature had in mind when it adopted the ANV battle flag into its state flag in 1956 — a means of intimidating Black men and women in Georgia.

However, some Georgia legislators and others living today who were instrumental in designing the ’56 Georgia flag deny that was the case. That flag more realistically represents Georgia and its Southern-Confederate history and heritage. Not only in the south today, but throughout the country, many Americans revere the ANV battle flag as an honorable, soldiers’ flag that their ancestors fought and died under. It represents an important part of tens of thousands of individuals’ ancestral history and heritage.

As to the ANV battle flag being flown when African-Americans are lynched, I will submit to Dr. Newman that as a historical researcher of some 35 plus years, I have seen many photos of lynchings. Virtually all of those were devoid of images of any flag except for the occasional United States flag. In a great many lynching photos, no reason existed to display a flag with a Southern-Confederate history, because the lynchings took place in northern states. And some of the worst spectacles of lynchings (lynching does not just mean hanging) that I have seen occurred in states such as Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, and as far west as California. Those spectacles included the severe whipping, hanging, and public burning of a body on a public street while a crowd of onlookers stood by. No Confederate flags are seen. In California, a long list of lynchings that took place from the late 19th century until the mid-20th century showed a few Blacks and Hispanics that were lynched, with the majority having been white. No need for a Confederate flag to intimidate there.

However, as she continued in her article, Dr. Newman was partially correct, although slightly skewed in her observations about the ANV battle flag in more modern times. She leans hard on the idea of "white, Christian supremacy woven into these flags…used historically by groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, and neo Nazi organizations…and it is waved when white supremacist Christian groups march in predominately Jewish communities such as Skokie, Ill."

To address the latter comments: recently the History Channel (cable TV) ran back-to-back showings of two productions, the History of the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party. These films did, indeed, show both groups, Klan and Nazi, displaying at least one ANV battle flag in public demonstrations, including the one by the Nazi’s in Skokie, Ill. Recall that the Nazi’s applied more than once for parade permits and were continually denied. Finally, of all groups, the ACLU stepped in and sued on the grounds that the Nazi’s First Amendment rights were being denied. But what Dr. Newman fails to mention in her diatribe about "white, Christian supremacy," is that another flag was also prominently featured in these marches, the flag of the United States. What in the world shall we do with that flag?

Since its modern revival in 1915, the KKK claimed as its own the U.S. flag and the Christian cross. Almost immediately, the flaming cross became the foremost symbol of hate and intimidation in this country, vividly portrayed in the History Channel production about the Klan. Does that mean crosses everywhere, at places of worship or hanging from necklaces, should be eliminated? And contrary to popular belief fed by "Hollywood history," the Klan was not resurrected to intimidate Blacks. Those of us of the Roman Catholic faith and select white politicians became the KKK’s first targets. Next came the Jews, and Black folk were an afterthought. It took decades before the Klan chose to desecrate the ANV battle flag.

Historically, the flag flying over every school and government building in the country — the U.S. flag — has its dark side, from flying over slave ships that plied their trade through New England seaports long before the Confederate States of America existed, to the brutal, genocidal war waged by the U.S. Army against Native Americans and in the Philippine, Islands during the Spanish American War.

In the spring of 1941, just months before Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, the Klan and American Nazi’s held a joint meeting at Camp Nordland, New Jersey, with an estimated 50,000 in attendance. Camp Nordland, one of five such camps in states such as Illinois and Pennsylvania, was not unlike our Boy Scout camps of today. The young German-American boys who visited in the summer wore uniforms with armbands that displayed the swastika. The boys weren’t there to learn scouting skills. They were being taught the doctrines of the Third Reich.

Photos of the Klan-Nazi meetings show robed Klansmen and Nazis in storm-trooper uniforms giving the well know stiff-arm salute. The Klan had done that salute for years, and some think the American Nazi’s may have borrowed it and exported it to Germany. While Klansmen and Nazi’s rubbed elbows and spouted hate speeches, the Nazi flag bearing the swastika and the U.S. Stars and Stripes flew boldly side-by-side. The Confederate battle flag had not yet been misappropriated by either group, nor would it be so for many years to come.

Those who insist on removing from view all symbols that act as reminders of hate, oppression, or intimidation could begin their historical house cleaning by changing the U.S. flag. Or, you could consider that each flag has two sides and two stories.

A more productive action would be to acknowledge that a growing number of students and adults revere the historic Confederate battle flag, not as a racist symbol, but as a strong emblem of history and heritage. And it’s not just white heritage; it belongs to Hispanics, Native Americans, and the descendents of Black Americans who fought as soldiers or otherwise served the Confederate Army. Or is the popular concept of diversity limited only to certain subjects and groups?

If students want to wear Confederate flag images to school, let them lead discussion groups to convey what the historic flags mean to them. Allow those students to share their heritage and discuss the history of their ancestors who fought in the War Between the States (erroneously called a Civil War). Our schools should be for learning, not for suppressing legitimate history.

Men of honor, valor, and courage followed the Confederate flag into battle only for the short span of a single war, fighting an oppressive Federal government for the freedom they believed in. And that is the only history by which their descendents prefer to see their banner remembered. The strength of a flag does not lie in its fabric or color, but with the spirit of those who died defending the beliefs for which it stood. To that end, the United States and Confederate battle flags share much common ground.

Is that how you rationalize it? Pursuing a scorched earth policy to force free people to remain Americans against their will was the best thing that ever happened to the south? Really? Are you just trying to bait me?

It's more rational than anything you've offered thus far. Given that the war occurred, it was a strategy to achieve its end, and that strategy succeeded. As others have pointed out, the Civil War was incredibly bloody and prolonging it might very well have cost far more than the loss incurred by Sherman's march.

And let's drop the pretense. The only reason the Confederates no longer wished to remain Americans was because doing so endangered their firm grip on their slaves' necks. It is absurd to even begin to compare it to the tyranny that led to the American Revolution. And yet, in both cases, it took war to decide whether it was acceptable to secede.

The funny thing about it is that Slavery only became an issue because of all the riots in New York. Most people really don't know that Linclon only used the slave issue because he was losing the war, both physically and politcally.

Which is why, of course, Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation a year before the New York Draft Riots. Damn, Lincoln must have been psychic, huh?

The idea was to conquer Georgia by starving everyone to death and by creating an environment for disease to do the rest.

So how many people starved to death, and how many more died in that environmental wasteland? Round figures will do so long as you have something to back them up. Oh, and if you have a figure on those shot, stabbed, raped to death, burned or boiled alive, hung, flayed to ribbons, or just plain killed you can toss them in too.

As others have pointed out, the Civil War was incredibly bloody and prolonging it might very well have cost far more than the loss incurred by Sherman's march.

I Lincoln had ordered his army to withdraw from Fort Sumter as he should have there would not have been a war.

And yet, in both cases, it took war to decide whether it was acceptable to secede.

Actually, it took a war to throw off the yoke of tyranny from Britain. The founding fathers asserted that it was the inalienable right of the governed to change their government. I agree with their sentiment.

Grant didn't honor the "hero." He considered him a blood thirsty b@$tard. Sherman was the only living Union general not invited to a banquet for the living Union generals by then President Grant.

Say what?

"Sherman is not only a great soldier, but a great man. He is one of the very great men in our country's history. He is an orator with few superiors. As a writer he is among he first. As a general I know of no man I would put above him. Above all - he has a fine character - so frank, so sincere, so outspoken, so genuine. There is not a false line in Sherman's character - nothing to regret." - Ulysses S. Grant, 1879

WTS never commanded a major victory against armed troops, but you guys hold a butcher in such high esteem. Frightening.

He managed to kick Johnston's and Hood's asses all the way back to and then into Atlanta before booting them out of the city altogether. Unless you don't consider the Army of Tennessee "armed troops".

I only wish that we had hung the little firebug when he got to Savannah!

Too busy retreating to do it, huh?

I Lincoln had ordered his army to withdraw from Fort Sumter as he should have there would not have been a war.

Yes, I saw this silly little argument of yours earlier. And it was adequately responded to.

I do too, only I submit that it applies to slaves as well.

ONLY ignorant,1/2-educated victims of the "pubic screwl edumakashun sistim" believe that our sacred,tattered,blood-smeared CSA battleflag is a racist symbol.

the battleflag is ONLY a symbol of dixie's continuing struggle for FREEDOM from the self-serving,arrogant,vengeful,ignorant,self-righteous damnyankees.

free dixie,sw

Sense he told them in advance he was going to try to starve them to death, that makes it OK. /sarcasm

No, because he needn't have told them in advance, and it still would have been acceptable. Just as it was acceptable to drop the bomb on Hiroshima.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.