Arguments Against Confederate
Symbols - And Why They Fail
Argument:
"What's the big deal? It's only a flag. Besides, you have all of
those monuments, memorials, markers, etc. to remind you of the Confederacy
- Can't we find a compromise?"
The
issue of whether to fly a Confederate battle flag is only the "tip
of the iceberg". We are now seeing children abused in schools for
wearing clothing with a portrait of Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson
or a likeness of a Confederate symbol, not only by roving gangs of black
students, but by the administrators as well. We have seen numerous efforts
by various groups to change street names, remove Confederate monuments,
censor the playing of Dixie (a song written by a Northerner) and otherwise
purge our society of an visible remembrances of Southern Heritage.
The tactic
employed by the NAACP on a national level went like this. In one state,
the NAACP would claim it was only the flag they wanted to remove. In
another state, they would claim it was only a monument, or this, or
that, trying to minimize the importance of their claim by contradicting
or ignoring what the other NAACP spokesperson had said. In other words,
they would use any means necessary to remove a Confederate symbol from
its place of honor. The Heritage Preservation Association was the first
"national" civil rights organization for Southern Heritage
and we exposed this ploy of the NAACP for what it was. This forced the
NAACP to go public with their true intentions in 1991 by stating it
was their goal to remove ALL Confederate symbols from public property.
No more lies. No more hidden agendas. It was now out in the open!
At the state
or local level, their tactic was to strike with the absurd and then
back off just enough to give the appearance of a "willingness to
compromise". This ploy usually starts with a "civil rights"
leader or group coming out with ridiculous proposals for censoring Southern
symbols, knowing and expecting that these proposals will meet with opposition.
The to show their "charity" and "flexibility", they
offer a "compromise" that amounts to something less, but still
hideous in the eyes of those who must give something up.
Civil rights
leaders in Georgia, for example, declared that the Georgia state flag
was not historic since it was only 35 or so years old. They wanted the
Georgia state flag removed, but as a "compromise" they would
allow it to be flown on special historic days. While this may sound
charitable and rational to those who dislike Confederate symbols, it
was unacceptable to everyone else. The HPA mirrored their efforts by
suggesting "in the spirit of compromise" that the black community
give up Martin Luther King Holiday, Black History Month in public schools
and Kwaanza. For those unfamiliar with Kwaanza, it is a pagan harvest
ritual, claiming to have African roots and celebrated during Christmas
by a few blacks. It was invented only a decade or so ago, so it really
has no historical importance, and is considered by many to be un-American.
These civil rights leaders became furious that we would suggest that
they give up anything. We were supposed to be grateful that they didn't
start another race riot like the one Atlanta witnessed during the Rodney
King fiasco. We flatly refused, and the media portrayed us, the victims,
as "unwilling to compromise".
In Danville
VA, a black city council woman complained that a Confederate flag was
flying in front of the "Last Capitol of the Confederacy Museum
and Memorial", so the city took it down. Apparently, Southerners
are not supposed to fly Confederate flags anymore, even at Confederate
museums. The flag had been flying approximately 250 days a year. A "compromise"
was to fly the flag 23 days out of the year and those days would not
be known. HPA and local residents were shocked and angry. A local HPA
chapter was formed and within a year, had worked to elect one of their
own to the city council. Knowing that HPA would replace them one-by-one,
the city council became frantic to find a solution that would meet with
HPA's approval. They did. There is now a Confederate monument where
none stood before, and we have our Confederate flag proudly flying,
not 23 days a year, or 250 days a year, but 365 days a year! Now that
is what HPA calls compromise.
In South Carolina,
we have another prime example of the dangers of compromise. Civil rights
leaders wanted the Confederate battle flag removed from the State House
dome in Columbia where if flies underneath the U.S. and state flags.
To counter this, numerous "pro-Southern" leaders in other
organizations introduced yet another compromise that would remove the
flag from the dome and place it next to a monument on the capitol grounds.
But the monument
had already been the target of the NAACP. In other words, these so-called
leaders were willing to reduce the visibility of a Confederate symbol,
give the civil rights leaders what they wanted by removing it from the
State House dome, and place it next to a monument targeted for removal
and in a location where it would surely be vandalized. The HPA exposed
this "compromise" as cowardly, unthinkable, and unacceptable.
Even after the flag was "compromised" and moved the the Confederate
monument on the statehouse grounds, the NAACP continues it actions of
economic terrorism agains the State of South Carolina.
We have learned
over the years, and through many attempts to negotiate a solution, that
those who attack Southern Heritage are themselves, unwilling to compromise.
They expect Southerners away their heritage, but they are not willing
to give them anything in return. If we start giving in on any issue,
then all symbols of the South will gradually disappear. Compromise has
become the gradual dismantling of Southern Heritage - one symbol at
a time.
A simple
test for the worthiness of any offer to compromise is to determine the
resulting visibility of the Confederate symbol being challenged. After
all, a true compromise is where both sides win something or both sides
lose something. If one side wins and the other loses, that, by definition,
is not a compromise but a defeat. Any solution that reduces the value,
validity or visibility of a Confederate symbol is not a compromise and
therefore unacceptable.