Sunday, April 09, 2006

Perception vs Reality

Today's Buffalo News had a small article Ithaca high school bans Confederate flag insignia
"We have found that the display of the flag in such forms has caused and continues to cause feelings of ill will," Principal Joseph Wilson wrote. "Such feelings in turn have led to disruptions to our operations and educational process."

Okay so what your saying is there’s a lack of discipline in your school, and the only way you can control it is by banning the Confederate flag. Now do you have the same policy for ANY other item some student might find offensive? After all when I went to school we found Disco to be offensive.
She said the insignia, which appeared most often on belt buckles or T-shirts, has led to arguments and fights.

This might be going out on a limb but this seems like the perfect opportunity to TEACH history and instruct them in civil discussion. But then in a country where the "Right not to be offended" trumps Freedom of Speech.
The insignia from the Civil War-era flag is regarded by some as symbol of slavery and segregation, while others view it is a symbol of Southern heritage or rural pride.

That’s what you get with watered down history. Never mind that it was "Old Glory" that flew on the slave ships, owned by Northern Companies.

Maybe the faculty should draw up a lesson plan and teach a "history lesson" about the Bars and Stars. In it they could ask some of the following questions to their students;

1. Why did the Emancipation Proclamation exclude most of West Virginia and certain counties in Louisiana? Could it because they didn't secede?

2. How could General Grant, the Head of Union Forces keep his slaves until after the war was over?

3. Why did slaves and free black men fight for the south?

4. What is the 10th Amendment in the Constitution, and how could it apply to the above questions?

Walter Williams, an Economics Professor at George Mason University has written several articles about this and related issues.

The flap over the Confederate flag is not quite as simple as the nation's race experts make it. They want us to believe the flag is a symbol of racism. Yes, racists have used the Confederate flag, but racists have also used the Bible and the U.S. flag. Should we get rid of the Bible and lower the U.S. flag? Black civil rights activists and their white liberal supporters who're attacking the Confederate flag have committed a deep, despicable dishonor to our patriotic black ancestors who marched, fought and died to protect their homeland from what they saw as Northern aggression. More

And since I can't get enough of this guy (who with one CSPAN spot, turned me from complacent Republican to a stark raving Libertarian) here's some more of his writings.

The Real Lincoln
Secession or Nullification
Why The Civil War


Ray said...

This fascination with flags as patriotic symbols of this or that is a bit out of hand.
I think it just shows the lack of intelligence that has sweep through many parts of society.
No one takes an oath to the flag in the military or government office, but they do take an oath to uphold the constitution, for the constitution is the rule of law and not a colorful decoration.
Where is the outrage among the boob-oisie when the politician or judge defiles the constitution?

George said...

Though I didn't make the point or did poorly in the original post. I think my fascination with the flag is not patriotic but why it came about and how it stands as a protest and a direct result of the violation of the constitution. This might explain why it’s starting to be flown more often now, to some extent anyway.

The banning of it just irritates me because it's so "PC", the touchy feely opinion that that the "North" was a righteous liberator and only did it to end slavery. Anyone that questions it is shouted down and accused of being a racist. That this some how justifies and whitewashes the fact that the Constitution was defiled then, and in some minds (mine included) was the start of the “overreaching” Federal Government and sent it down the slippery slope of the “Living Document” mentality”.

Ray said...

Like they say, in war the victors write the history.
And they indoctrinate the young from an early age that Lincoln’s war was about freeing the slaves, which it wasn’t. Lincoln could never have gotten popular support for the war if the people thought it was about freeing the slaves.
It had to be something with a more flag waving patriotic fervor, like “saving the union” by defeating the rebels.
Of course, it was really economics, the Northern industries were raping the South with high protectionist tariffs and Lincoln couldn't afford to lose the tax money from the South’s agrarian economy.

You’re right, Lincoln broke new ground in the expanse of government power and corruption. He knew that and even regretted it before he died.