|
|
The Maryland Sons of Confederate Veterans received special vehicle license plates bearing a tiny Confederate flag. A protest promptly ensued and the plates were replaced. New York's governor described the Georgia state flag as a "symbol of hatred" and had the flag removed from New York's state capitol. Two Georgia state senators retaliated by "yanking" down the New York state flag in the Georgia capitol. That last action defines the Georgians as "yankers" and the New Yorkers as "yankees." These events, among others, illustrate that the symbol in question is widely misunderstood. Let's review. Viewing the Confederate flag as a symbol of oppression and hatred can only be based on an incomplete historical perspective. Slavery was most common in the Confederate states, but let's not forget that slavery existed under the U.S. flag long before 1861 and continued exempt from the Emancipation Proclamation until the 13th amendment to the Constitution was ratified in 1865. The ugly deeds (slavery and others) perpetrated under each flag don't annul the ideals each flag represents. Those ideals and the honorable men who've defended them with their lives deserve our respect. If not for their courage and sacrifice, Martin Luther King, Jr. could never have challenged Americans to more completely live up to those ideals. More recently, some hate groups have misused and despoiled the Confederate banner by causing some to associate it with racial supremacy and hatred. The War Between the States is often mischaracterized as a war over slavery. The U.S. Army used the emotional slavery issue in its recruitment efforts, yet Lincoln had stated his willingness to allow continued slavery in order to preserve the union. Remembering the war and its veterans doesn't celebrate slavery. We can all agree that slavery was wrong and is wrong. Abolition was an important issue, but it wasn't the issue for which most participants fought or died. The larger issue of the Civil War was states' rights and secession. Disputes on policy (such as slavery) and federal authority over states induced the Confederate states to secede. Such a test of the secession principle was inevitable. States originally joined the union with the explicit understanding that they could leave it at will or when it threatened their sovereignty. The war settled that issue; states cannot secede. Government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed, or failing that, forces "unity" at the point of a gun. Henceforth, Washington has seized more and more states' rights with 70,000 federal regulations and mandates. And as the states lose rights, so have the people. Given this historical perspective, I view the Confederate flag as a symbol of resistance to tyranny and federal authority beyond its constitutional limits, not a symbol of hatred. That view begets my internal contradiction. I pledge, as did Thomas Jefferson, eternal hostility to any form of tyranny. But I've also pledged allegiance to the flag representing one indivisible nation. The current questions: Should the Confederate flag be offensive to anyone? And if it is, should it defiantly fly over state capitols alone or as part of a state flag? Those who are offended seem to think their interpretation alone should settle the issue. Not in our republic. Even government's proper functions and scope---a debate as old as Plato's Republic---remains hotly debated today. Consensus on the flag's symbolic meaning may be as elusive as consensus on government's proper boundaries. Perhaps we should express our state sovereignty differently in order to achieve the paramount mission: the united resolve to restore and preserve our constitutional rights. But before changing Georgia's flag, we should expressly declare that resisting errant federal authority isn't wrong. In fact, we owe our descendents a government more like that which is articulated in the Constitution. Only continued resistance to the relentless federal encroachment will assure that, as Abraham Lincoln said, "government of the people, by the people and for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Copyright Ó1997 Steve Scroggins - All rights reserved. Author's note : I've received more e-mail (mostly positive) about this topic than any other. That's proof that the symbol evokes strong emotions. I continue to grow and adapt my opinion on it and I have friends who disagree. Many of the writings of the time (see the CSV link below) confirm that continuing slavery was an important issue for many of the so-called "leaders" inducing the secession. But overriding that concern was the belief that the central government should not supercede the state's right to address that issue and many others such as tariffs and taxes. Furthermore, it's clear that the paramount issue for Lincoln and Grant was preservation of the Union at all costs (see below). Any assertion that the war was solely over slavery is clearly misinformed. Read all you can and decide for yourself armed with facts."If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission, and offer my sword to the other side." --Ulysses S. Grant Note: U.S. Grant owned slaves and did not free them until the passage of the 13th Amendment. http://www.confederate.org/ || http://www.georgiascv.com/ || Confederate Home Page | History Curriculum Project | GA Flag Facts | Confederate State Flag Facts "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."--Abraham Lincoln. March 4, 1861
Does Heritage equal "Hate" and "Slavery"? - All the Confederate heritage groups and historical societies with which I'm familiar condemn slavery and racism and merely want to honor their ancestors and preserve history as it actually was. However, perhaps they don't denounce racism prominently and loudly enough. See the links and epilogue below. Confederate Ancestry and motivations - In my roots search so far, I've found four ancestors who were Confederate veterans. Henry Theus and Mary Windham Theus had nine children. Their family sent seven sons to the war and only three returned (see my Genealogy index). They didn't own slaves. I didn't know them, but I don't believe they fought merely to preserve slavery. Supreme Court rulings had already declared slavery constitutionally legal. The south already had slavery and, as long as southern states remained in the union, northern and southern slaveholding states could probably have blocked any Constitutional amendment (requiring 2/3 ratification) to abolish slavery. I think it had more to do with resisting the arrogance and threats of a distant central government, to protest unfair taxation and tariffs levied to benefit the north at the expense of the south, and to stand for a government that more closely resembled the ideals (states' preeminent authority) of the original U.S. Constitution. To put it in the vernacular, they didn't want a bunch of yankees, or anyone for that matter, "bossing" them around. The column above was to express continuing resistance to oppressive federal encroachment----with words in the arena of ideas. The biggest threat our freedom faces today is from within----creeping socialism and growing government. Specialty Tags & Bumper Stickers - The Maryland Sons of Confederate Veterans, and the SCV for various other states including Virginia and Georgia, have overcome protests and cleared the way to issue specialty plates for members. The plates have the SCV emblem which consists of the St. Andrew's Cross (Confederate battle flag) surrounded by the text "Sons Of Confederate Veterans" and the inception year of 1896. Even if I were an SCV member (I do qualify but have not yet joined), I doubt that I would get the tag for several reasons. First, I have a number of friends and acquaintances who happen to be black. Given that so many people misunderstand this symbol, some might get the wrong idea about the message I'm sending (especially those who don't know me well). Second, there are a significant number of angry and violent people out there who will lash out at this symbol (hate crimes if you will). I don't want to make a target of my vehicle nor endanger those who ride in the vehicle with me. Dealing with the "R" word - I understand that one local civics teacher (who does not know me personally) is telling his high school students that I'm a racist based on the content of the above column. Rather than rebutting my opinion with his own logic and opinion, he retreats behind the "R" word. That speaks volumes about his scholarship and abilities as a government teacher. Today's children don't get an adequate education in U.S. history or government and this fellow and myopic partisans like him are part of the problem. Epilogue - I think those who vandalize Confederate memorials and symbols---or assault the people who display them---are as guilty of "hate crimes" as anyone else who assaults or vandalizes another due to skin color, nationality, or whatever. Some people think this symbol is offensive enough that it "authorizes" them or justifies criminal actions in response to it. Wrong! Until the heritage groups and flag supporters come out and expressly, loudly denounce racism and racial supremacy, many who are offended will take "heritage" as a code word for segregation and racial supremacy. There has to be a compromise, but that's for another column. Stay tuned. --Steve Scroggins See my April 12, 2000 column on state flag compromise. See my April 14, 2000 letter about Confederate heritage ignorance. A little flag humor by R.L.Day of The Macon Telegraph (RL stands for Raging Liberal): South Carolina rises again 5/04/00 and Fly Flag - but I won't salute 1/20/00 Last updated 05.04.2000 http://www.confederate.org/ || http://www.georgiascv.com/ || Confederate Home Page || History Curriculum Project || Heritage Preservation Assoc. | GA Flag Facts | Confederate State Flag Facts
|
