Testing the Limits
by tgirschAugust 13th, 2008
They say your commitment to rights and freedoms is best demonstrated by your willingness to stick up for the rights of people whose actions you despise. As such, I’m forced to reiterate that freedom of speech applies even to piece of shit dumb-ass bastards. In a perfect world, you wouldn’t have to ban the symbol, because nobody would willingly associate with anybody backward and ignorant enough to “proudly” display it.
Categories: Legal Issues |
You’re right. And this is why the ACLU routinely defends cases like this, and involving even worse assholes.
This one is slightly complicated by the fact that it was a high school student violating a dress code at his school. If it were an adult in a public setting, it would be an open-and-shut case. Students in the school setting have been held to have lesser Constitutional protections (though what Constitutional protections anyone has today is another good question). He may have a point that the flag hadn’t caused disruption (if that’s true), but school officials also have a point that they have an obligation to prevent disruption before it occurs.
In general, I’m against any such bans, and have no faith in the ability or willingness of school officials to use their authority fairly or wisely. But I’m also in favor of smacking obnoxious dipshits like this punk upside the head. What to do . . . what to do . . .?
Seems like a great opportunity for the HS history teacher to explain the history of the symbol, using credible primary sources.
If enough of his classmates think he’s a dipshit, too, either he’ll stop wearing it, or others around him will be immunized against its effect. Good enough either way.
I am of course assuming that the majority of other students would repudiate the Confederacy if they actually thought it was racist. I’m hopeful like that.
Nice comment Dan. I like it.
What I don’t get is why isn’t the current flag seen as being just as racist? During the North South war, which from all I have read had more to do with economics and keeping the union together than ending slavery, slavery was alive and well in both northern and southern states.
“I have no purpose, directly, or indirectly, to interfere with slavery in the states where it exists,” said Lincoln early in the conflict. The Union Congress overwhelmingly endorsed this position in July 1861, some three months after the war began in April.
It is interesting the U.S. Gen. Grant didn’t free his own slaves until after the war was over. Gen. Lee himself didn’t believe in slavey and had already freed his slaves. Another interesting fact is that only 6 percent of Southerners owned slaves, and among this 6 percent were 13,000 free blacks who owned slaves themselves.
So why is the Confederate flag seen as the racist symbol???
Big U, I have a question for you? Why do you always form your positions as questions? Why not just grow a set and come out and say what you mean and mean what you say? I’m only asking…
Largely, the Confederacy claimed that slavery was one of the big reasons they were into the war. There were some underlying economic and social ones, and overlying political ones (the war itself was probably immediately triggered over reactions to Lincoln’s win of a very messy election), but the central issue was slavery’s long-term future.
Lincoln’s goal was to keep the United States together by any (habeus corpus raping) means necessary. The South, on the other hand, actually started things, and the main concern for the Southern states was that, with the fracture in the Democratic party at the time, that slavery would not expand into the new territories, virtually ensuring that there would eventually and quickly be enough votes against the subject to take slavery out of the big picture.
“Big U, I have a question for you? Why do you always form your positions as questions? Why not just grow a set and come out and say what you mean and mean what you say?”
He questions the person who he criticizes for asking questions.
BTW, your first sentence is not a question.
Most pictures I have seen of KKK or white supremacy rallies have had the American flag prominently displayed. The practice of slavery was tolerated under the US flag for many more years than under the Confederate flag.
gattsuru > thanks for the info.
Ted > I tend to lead with questions or seeking of information when I do not have the specific answer, a hardened opinion, or simply when the commenter’s position seems obtuse or self-contradictory. Unlike some people (apparently yourself included) I don’t see the sense in shoving my opinion down someone’s throat unless I am confident in my facts.
Also, asking questions to get clarification often helps me understand where someone is coming from so that I can make intelligent assessments of why they think the way they do. Also it can help me to try to understand clear inconsistencies or contradictions in someone else’s opinion (though that was not the case here).
I find I have learned a lot on these boards by asking questions. What is most frustrating is that many times people (such as yourself) assume underlying motives when questions are asked.
I stated why I was asking the question in my post and yet you were either too obtuse or too untrusting to actually bring yourself to answer the question. And if you actually look at my previous posts in other threads, you will find that I do clearly state my position oftentimes while also asking for clarification of others’ positions. And often, no one is willing to answer the questions asked which in itself is often telling of a close-minded elitist attitude which relies more often on rhetoric and internal belief than on truth.
I once saw a bumper sticker that asked, “If your grandfather were German, would you wear a swastika?”
Of course, one could argue that the swastika is a symbol of German pride. Hitler mainly just wanted to expand the country’s power and make Germany a great nation once again. That whole holocaust thing was just an extra. However, the swastika has become synonymous in our minds with the holocaust, and anyone who wants to wear a swastika is a nutjob. I have lived in Memphis my whole life, except for four years spent in Jackson, MS. I have never met anyone who sported the Confederate flag who was not a rude, racist redneck. Anybody who in this day and age insists on showing off the flag is basically just trying to give the middle finger to black people (and any other people with an ounce of sensitivity). Perhaps once the Confederate flag was a symbol of being Southern and proud (like Bo and Luke Duke), but the majority of people who have clung to the symbol do so because, to them, it also represents a longing to go back to a time when white people were in charge, black people “knew their place,” and no Yankee liberal elitists tried to tell them what to do.
“Of course, one could argue that the swastika is a symbol of German pride.”
How many Germans argue this? Your comparison is ludicrous.
Ted:
I’m feeling you, I really am, but I think you’ve jumped the gun here just a little bit. Yes, I feel like we’ve been through this with Big U before, but he’s still one of the good guys (among those who generally disagree with us), and in my opinion deserves just a wee bit more benefit of the doubt.
Big U and Fred:
The US flag has been used to symbolize many things, but it primarily represents the history of the United States in its totality, including all of the good and all of the bad. The Confederate Naval Jack (more commonly known as the “Confederate Flag,” although it wasn’t the official one) has primarily represented two things:
I hear about “heritage, not hate” and all that bullshit, but when you actually ask them to specifically identify what “heritage” you’re supposed to be honoring, and what’s good (not to mention uniquely Southern) about it, you’re lucky if you even get the vaguest of answers. To me, based on the totality of its history, the Confederate Naval Jack says “I hate the USA, and I don’t want to be a part of it any more.”
Of course, I don’t expect Fred to understand any of this. He lives in a state where they still proudly and prominently fly that putrid symbol from their capitol lawn, and was probably upset when they finally bowed to external pressure and moved it there; until about 2000 or so, it used to fly atop the capitol dome.
Fred:
How many Germans argue this?
Whether or not Germans actually argue this is irrelevant to whether or not the comparison is apt. In fact, the fact that virtually no Germans really argue that is exactly her point. The swastika, like the confederate flag, is a symbol of a time when a large cross-section of the population was systematically oppressed as a matter of official government policy. It’s a wonder that anyone would embrace such a symbol. The Germans don’t. So why do so many people here embrace a symbol like that?
The use of the confederate flag by racists in the 50’s is something I had not heard much of. Most times the comments I had heard related to the use of the flag by the south in a conflict that from what I have read was based on many more issues than just the ownership of slaves. (the north, whose generals and others owned slaves at the time would have had a horribly difficult time going to war with the premise of wanting slaves to be set free)
Thanks Tgirsch for the info.
I am of course assuming that the majority of other students would repudiate the Confederacy if they actually thought it was racist. I’m hopeful like that.
…and that the teacher is sufficiently competent and/or motivated to do the minor legwork and diversion from the prefabricated lesson plan necessary to do so. Or, that she even has the latitude.
“So why do so many people here embrace a symbol like that?”
Since your premise is wrong, there is no answer to your question.
“was probably upset when they finally bowed to external pressure and moved it there;”
There you go again. Your prejudice is astonding. In fact, I did not think it should be flown atop the capitol. It is not a flag of a present governmental entity. However, I think it is appropriate to fly it at a memorial.
Big U:
The flag’s apologists tend to argue that there are a lot of “other” things the flag supposedly stands for, but it seems pretty clear (to me, at least) that this is either revisionist history or disingenuous rationalization. You can find some good history on it here, and especially here.
“Treason: It was the symbol of a group of states that declared war against their own country for the primary purpose of protecting their future “right” to own slaves”
That is your opinion. Google “Constitution secession.” There are some interesting arguments against what you say. Of course, your closed prejudiced mind is not likely to even consider any other point of view.
“Interesting?” Maybe. “Valid?” No.
But even if you object to the term “treason,” it still amounts to “I don’t like the United States of America and I don’t want to be a part of it any more.” Conservatives like you have alleged treason at far less than this. (Being critical of the president in war time? Treason. Wanting to desert the country? A-OK, apparently…)
P.S. Am I the only one who interpreted Fred’s response as “I know you are, but what am I?”
Wait a minute, Big U. Was your first question largely rhetorical? Why isn’t the current U.S. flag seen as representative of slavery (simply because the North owned slaves too)?
To nitpick, I would say that current US flag isn’t identical to the one(s) used in the 1860s anyway. 50 stars as opposed to 33-37.
But more to the point, why would you pick one individual atrocity/sin against humanity committed in the name (or at least by the hands of) a country and argue that country’s current flag should explicitly or implicitly recognized as being a representative of that act above any other events/era of that country’s history? Should the Chilean flag represent, specifically, Pinochet?
The Confederate flag, OTOH, was a symbol created specifically to represent a diversion from (some of) the professed (if not practiced) values represented by the other flag. The American flag has been an accessory to plenty of immorality, but wasn’t conceived as an explicit representation of a celebration thereof.
“Conservatives like you have alleged treason at far less than this. (Being critical of the president in war time? Treason. Wanting to desert the country? A-OK, apparently…)”
There you go again. Do you ever tell the truth?
“50 stars as opposed to 33-37.”
That is a dumb argument. It was still the flag of the US.
Also, it’s now 57 stars if you are Barry Hussein Obama.
Yep, apparently I just imagined this book. I made it up completely. Just like I made up the fact that conservative web sites promoted and praised it. Just like I made up the fact that it sold half a million copies in just its first three weeks of release. Yeah, I’m lying, all right.
“Yeah, I’m lying, all right.”
Yes, you are lying about me. You have never read where I called anyone a traitor for criticizing the president. Your placing me in a group which has is a lie.
Part of the definition of a symbol is that it means whatever you want it to stand for. The fylfot or manji still means a hell of a lot of fairly reasonable things in other cultures — there are occasional import issues, especially between Japan and Europe, because of this — but that doesn’t make Hitler’s use of it in any way related to the Finnish Order of The White Rose or Bhuddist eternality.
I know that, at least for the African-American (and other black) soldiers of the Confederacy, it probably was not meant as an especially racist symbol. I’ve run into folk in the south and in Quebec (of all places) with Confederate flag bumper stickers or license plates that have no problem having a beer with an African-American, Mexican-American, or other minority. For them, it’s more about sticking it to anti-Southern ideas rather than the ideals of an ancient and economically efficient group of politicians.
digglahhh > My question was based on the fact that slavery thrived under the US flag for years. It was accepted and endorsed. When the south separated, they adopted a constitution that was virtually identical to that of the United States including the section that made it illegal to traffic in the international slave trade. I was just wondering why one flag had been so vilified while the other which practiced the same policies was not.
Not being from the US, I was always under the impression that slavery only existed to any extent in the south. It has been very educational for me to find that slavery not only existed in the north but also that it thrived at times.
This site has some interesting comments on it:http://www.slavenorth.com/
Tgirsch’s explanation regarding the race-related issues in the 50’s added a great deal of clarification.
“Not being from the US, I was always under the impression that slavery only existed to any extent in the south. It has been very educational for me to find that slavery not only existed in the north but also that it thrived at times.”
Our liberal led educational system has shortchanged our students in this area. They have their template on the War Between the States that cannot be deviated from just because of facts.
I have talked to people who defend the confederate flag. When you point out that it is offensive to people because of the history of slavery and the racist actions of many people who have waved or worn it, the flag supporters basically say “too bad; I don’t care.” I asked my freshman roommate why she would want to idealize a time that represents the oppression of others, and she straight out said that she thought it would be great if she lived in a big antebellum mansion with slaves to take care of her, just like her ancestors had. At least she was honest. She was also quite frank about her general dislike for black people.
Based on my experiences and conversations with confederate flag supporters, it’s less about heritage and more about defiantly declaring “f— you” to black people. I seriously doubt that high school kid gave a rip about his southern roots; the reason the school banned the wearing of the flag is obviously because the kind of kids who would want to wear it are just trying to stir up trouble. There are numerous other ways that one could show pride in ones region without using a symbol that has become synonymous with racism and oppression.
Big U,
There’s no use arguing, and I’m glad you gleaned some insight based on TG’s comments about the 50’s, and the subsequent use of the Confederate Flag, etc.
My point was basically that asking about the Northern Flag’s identity in relation to slavery as opposed to the Confederate Flag was kinda like the silly argument we (not you and I) had about fire extinguishers and guns. Somethings happen to be used for or associated with purposes outside their original intent that create harm, while others are other’s conception and/or primary use is to inflict said harm, per se.
Truth is, I’m actually more supportive of the rhetorical side of your argument than you might think - I just questioned the intent/spirit of the question. Rather not get into it right now though.
Fred,
So, I self-profess that point A is weak, and more of a nitpick, then go on to make a more substantial and widely applicable point B. And what do you do? Predictably, you make some smart ass comment about point A while not even addressing B. But, you didn’t want to debate so much as you were looking for a product placement opp - the product being a Barry O. smear.
You know what you should do, Fred. Ahh, “Nevermind”
“Based on my experiences and conversations with confederate flag supporters, it’s less about heritage and more about defiantly declaring “f— you” to black people.”
My experience has not been like yours. I have seen racists waving the US flag. I don’t assume that everyone who waves the US flag supports the slavery that was allowed in this country under that banner. Did the people who founded this country fight the Revolutionary War so they could have the right to have slaves?
I grew up in the south. We sang “Dixie” at our football games. You may not believe this, but not one time while I was singing “Dixie” did I think about black people and how I wished that we still had slaves. Not everything in life is about race.
I don’t long for the Old South. I’m glad we are one nation. Slavery is rephrehensible. Always has been. Always is.
“But, you didn’t want to debate so much as you were looking for a product placement opp - the product being a Barry O. smear.”
He gives too much ammunition to ignore.
“You know what you should do, Fred. Ahh, “Nevermind””
I hope you have a long life. You are a low class person.
gattsuru:
Regarding symbols meaning whatever you want them to mean, I simply don’t buy it. When a symbol becomes widely recognized, it means what people recognize it to mean, regardless of what a specific individual may or may not intend by it. This becomes even more true with high-profile and highly-politicized symbols like the confederate flag, the swastika, etc.
A whole lot of people are deeply offended (and some even threatened) by the confederate flag, and there’s a ton of history to indicate that they are completely justified in feeling that way. So from where I sit, that leaves us with two possibilities for the people who choose to continue displaying the flag: either they’re ignorant of all that history (certainly possible, although I’d argue not likely), or they’re fully aware of it and simply don’t care. In my experience, people who proudly display the confederate flag overwhelmingly fall into the latter category.
If I burn a cross, it’s foolish to think that this won’t be offensive to anyone, even if I try to justify doing so by saying that I have a strong preference for asterisks to indicate footnotes, and I’m protesting against the use of the dagger. So again, I just don’t buy the logic that says “the symbol means whatever I want it to mean.”
Big U:
When the south separated, they adopted a constitution that was virtually identical to that of the United States including the section that made it illegal to traffic in the international slave trade.
I don’t think that’s a true statement at all. The US Constitution doesn’t explicitly mention slavery at all until the 13th Amendment, which abolished it nationwide. There’s an implicit reference to slaves in Article I, Section 2, where “free persons” are contrasted against “other persons” for purposes of counting population (the awful three-fifths compromise).
Also, there’s nothing in the US constitution barring the international slave trade. In fact, in the early days, slavery couldn’t have existed without it. The Confederate Constitution included a ban on the international slave trade not because of any opposition to slavery, but as a measure to protect the by-then thriving domestic slave trade against foreign competition. (Interestingly, the importation of slaves from the USA to the CSA, which would have technically been a foreign trade if secession had succeeded, was explicitly allowed, although there was a provision that allowed the Confederate Congress to ban that trade at a later date.)
Finally, while the Confederate Constitution is indeed loosely based on the US Constitution, a quick read belies the contention that slavery was not a primary motivator for the Confederacy’s secession. Protection of the institution of slavery and the rights of slave owners is a recurring theme throughout. See Article I, Section 9, Subitem 4; Article IV, Section 2, Subitems 1 and 3; and Article IV, Section 3, Subitem 3.
I was always under the impression that slavery only existed to any extent in the south.
Not true. However, slavery persisted (and even thrived)in the South well after it had been abolished in the North. If you look at the distribution of slaves in the United States from 1790 to 1860, slavery was virtually eliminated in Northern States by 1830 (with the notable exceptions of New Jersey and especially Maryland), even as slavery grew at impressive rates throughout the South. So while slavery was not by any means exclusive to the South throughout US history, by 1850, just over 97% of the slaves in the US were in Southern states. Most Northern states had abolished slavery by 1804, although in some cases existing slaves were “grandfathered in” for a period of time, which is why slavery persisted in small numbers in places like New Jersey.
One more thing: if you compare the numbers for Northern states against those of Southern states, I don’t think it’s fair to say that slavery “thrived” in the North, on anywhere near the scale that it did in the South. In 1790, at the peak of slavery in the North, there were 152,009 slaves in Northern states, which accounted for fewer than 22% of the slaves in the country. Slavery in the North declined steadily every decade thereafter, to the lows I mentioned above. For some perspective, recall that although Americans tend to celebrate 1776 as our “birthday,” the US Constitution was officially ratified in 1787, meaning that when the USA really and truly became a functioning nation, slavery was already an overwhelmingly Southern phenomenon, and on its way out in the North.
This isn’t to let the North off the hook, mind you. Even as they outlawed slavery in their own back yard, they were still complicit in the perpetuation of slavery in the South, directly and indirectly funding it for decades, especially in support of the textile industry, which was reliant upon Southern cotton (which, in turn, was dependent upon slave labor).
Wow, long comment, sorry. Now it’s your turn to give me a Canadian history lesson.
“I have seen racists waving the US flag.”
But how many non-racists have you recently seen waving the Confederate flag?
Elaine:
A better way to express this would be:
Of all the times you’ve seen the US flag being waved, what percentage of the time was it being done for explicitly racist purposes? Now compare that against the confederate flag…
One more point before carpool duty calls:
From an article in the Nashville Examiner concerning this trial:
“But racial tension had been a problem before at Anderson High, where the arrival of two black students a few years ago was met with racist graffiti and a Confederate flag-raising.”
Notice that it was not a US flag-raising.
Notice that it was not a US flag-raising.
And that underscores the point. With a US flag raising, people probably wouldn’t have understood or noticed any racial overtones. With a confederate flag raising, the racial intent was crystal clear. That tells us everything we need to know about the confederate flag as a symbol, and how it is widely perceived, even (and especially) by those who champion it.
“Of all the times you’ve seen the US flag being waved, what percentage of the time was it being done for explicitly racist purposes?”
Everytime a racist waved it at a racist rally. It was done to support their racist idea that whites are the true Americans.
Nice try, Fred, but that doesn’t answer my question, now does it. Of all the times you’ve seen people displaying the US flag, how many of these were racist rallies?
“But how many non-racists have you recently seen waving the Confederate flag?”
I certainly admit that the intimidation has worked. There’s no doubt about that.
No fucking way, Fred. You got the Nirvana pun, well I’ll be damned!
“well I’ll be damned!”
That wouldn’t surprise me.
Nope, nothing at all hateful about that reply…
This is off-topic, but then what’s new… The two most memorable/powerful images of the US flag that pop into my mind are 1) Iwo Jima, and 2) the counter-protester grabbing a flag and using the flag pole to spear a protester in the 60’s. Talk about a spectrum of symbolism..
To me, it’s Iwo Jima, and the firefighters putting up the Ground Zero flag.
Are you familiar with the episode from the 60’s I was referring to? I tried to google because I have forgotten details. It’s as poignant, or even more so, than the news footage of the Birmingham police using fire hoses and dogs on the freedom marchers…
Flag on moon is up there too…
No, I’m not familiar with the 60’s incident. I was between -2 and -11 years old, depending on when in the 60’s it happened.
Kids… It is a pretty famous shot. I mean, you weren’t alive for Iwo Jima either dude…
I’ll dig around a bit more. If LarryE were reading along, he would know in a flash what I was referring to..
Nope, I haven’t been reading along. I’ve got some very serious personal crap going on now, so I’ve done little more than skim online stuff for about a week now.
However, having been “summoned” and you know who you are, I have to say that yes, I do remember that photo. What I remember most about it is the look of uncontrolled rage on the man’s face. He held the flagpole was horizontally, using it as a weapon. It was a very distrubing image of open hatred.
A couple of amendments, though, assuming we’re thinking of the same photo.
- It wasn’t in the ’60s, it was taken in 1976 in Boston.
- The attacker was an anti-busing demonstrator; his intended victim was a prominent black attorney. It was one of those incidents that proved, if proof was needed, that racism was not limited to the south.
The photo is here.
Oh, one other thing: According to the photographer, the man pictured was not trying to stab the black man with the flagpole; he was swinging to hit him with it. I’m unpersuaded that makes a difference, but for the record, there it is.
you weren’t alive for Iwo Jima either dude
But there’s not a statue of some racist trying to kick somebody’s ass with a flag in DC, either, now is there?
… and no beat up civil rights protester themed video games for Playstation either.
I knew LarryE would deliver. Sorry about the misleading date claim.
Based on stance and grip, sure looks like the guy is about to try and run the dude through with the flag pole. Very gripping shot in any event…
“Very gripping shot in any event…”
Yes, it is. It shows that anyone who carries an American flag is a racist.
It seems to show that Fred’s reasoning skills are below a third-grade level.
Just using the logic of liberals.
It’s your logic, not mine. You continue to insist on using the incredibly childish logic which dictates that because the flag YOU have a hard-on for has become a widely-recognized symbol of hate, therefore ALL flags must be recognized first, foremost, and only for their WORST associations. Nobody here but you has insisted that we apply that standard.
Flags and other symbols aren’t judged solely by their worst associations, any more than they’re judged solely by their BEST associations. They’re judged by the things they’ve been most often used to promote. The US flag has no doubt had some dark moments, not doubt, and has been misappropriated by some, but it has primarily used to symbolize freedom and justice for all. The same cannot be said for the confederate flag, which throughout its history has been used primarily as a symbol of defiance, discrimination, racism, and hate.
Of course, you could always dispute this (and have had the opportunity to do so since I said what I said way up there in comment #12) by telling us the supposedly good stuff that the Confederate Flag is supposed to stand for. I can list of dozens of widely-recognized proud moments for the US flag, which honor and advance freedom and the ideals America stands for. The fact that you can’t do the same for the confederate flag tells us everything we need to know.
I hang an American flag on July 4 and Memorial Day and Vet’s Day. The racist’s use of the flag as a weapon in ‘76 did not damage my perception of the US flag.
The image does serve as a metaphor (grammar police?) of how some people use “American values” to oppress others. I expect all readers other than Fred to understand this.
The racist’s use of the flag as a weapon does not damage my perception of a flag.
Nobody said the dumbass redneck couldn’t wear his precious war-loser flag; he simply can’t wear it to school. Dress code. End of story. Free speech has limits, even for grown-ups.