Boooorring!

[walk in the woods]

But the argument you hear most people making is that the flag (Navy Jack/Battle Flag) hearkens back to a period of our history which is abhorrent to many. Funny thing is, they are not talking about the 1950s/60s and the segregationist movement, but rather the whole Civil War era. I could almost buy the argument, "We are against the flag because racists used it as a banner during the 1950s" but that's not the sole argument. When those opposing the flag cite the whole Civil War era as a reason for wanting to bar the flag, you open the door to eliminating ANY of the flags flown by the Confederacy because of what they may represent to blacks. That would mean the Citadel flag, the SC state flag, stars and bars and many other flags would then come under similar scrutiny.

I suspect the left opposes the battle flag/navy jack for the same reason as their distaste for the Gadsden flag. Namely, those banners are used by those with a rebel/revolutionary streak who won't walk in lock step with the government or the current zeitgeist.

[NJCubScouter]

Ah, it's all about the moderators.

I will point out that the comment of mine that you are referring to had a little smiley face next to it. That meant I wasn't serious. Anybody can discuss any issue they want in this forum as long as it is done in a reasonably Scout-like manner. I will acknowledge that some of the moderators, to varying degrees, go on at least "yellow alert" when we see a new thread in Issues and Politics, because the chances are greater that we will have to take some action, either formally or informally, than for posts in other areas. But even having said that, very little "moderating" actually takes place in these forums. Compared to other forums on the Internet, the "moderation" in this place is virtually invisible. About 90 percent of what we do is probably removing unauthorized advertising.

 

You and Pack have been resisting discussions of the big changes...

I don't think I have done that, and I don't think Packsaddle has done that. Speaking for myself, when there has been a discussion of membership changes over the past couple years, I have usually participated in it. My record before that (back to 2002) is a bit more checkered because for long periods of time it didn't seem worth saying the same thing for the 100th time. In fact I remember a time in this forum (before 2013) when, every time a new thread was started about "membership issues", some people OPPOSED to the change would loudly complain, Oh NO, not THIS again, why are you bringing this up again, beating a dead horse, howling at the moon, etc. (I'm not sure where the howling at the moon thing came from; a certain former poster with the initials BW used to say that's what I was doing, and I don't mean BadWolf.) Now I'm supposedly resisting discussions about it? Talk about it. Talk about it all you want. (As far as this moderator is concerned, anyway.) But please keep in mind that any other member has the right not to talk about it. And if you see me "resisting" a discussion in my capacity as a moderator, please let me know.

[packsaddle]

I can write with some authority on this 'flag' thing. In SC 'the flag' has not flown on the top of the statehouse building since 2000. It was placed on the top of that building in 1962 as a blatant symbol of opposition to desegregation. In 2000 a political compromise was reached in which it was taken down and flown on a mast near the Civil War memorial out in front of the statehouse. The NAACP called for a boycott of conventions and sports championships which began in 2000 and took a serious bite out of revenues for cities like Charleston. The mayor of Charleston sued to have the flag taken down but by then the legislature had passed legislation giving them the exclusive ability to make decisions about all such 'memorial' things like 'the flag'. The Supreme Court of SC threw out the lawsuit on that basis. The boycott is still in effect, even after the compromise in 2000. On a personal note, I have turned down invitations to make presentations at professional conferences in SC in observance of the boycott. When I inform the organizing committees of my decision they have been surprised to learn about the boycott. I am fairly certain that I have, single-handed, caused at least three such conferences to eliminate any consideration of SC as a venue. 

 

This morning, as is common in these parts, I saw three pickups driving through a college town with 'the flag' flown from poles mounted behind the cabs. This is so common around here that I hardly notice anymore. I can go less than 10 miles from where I write this and find 'the flag' flown on the same mast as  - and ABOVE - the flag of the United States of America. This kind of display seems confined to towns where, in the 1970s, there were still signs at the town limits announcing their 'sunset' laws in words that read, "N*****, don't let the sun set on you in >>>>>>, SC". Most of the people who were 'behind' those signs are still alive. They're just quieter these days.

 

'The Flag' IS a symbol of racism to racists and to those of us who know those racists. I will never, ever, forget its prominent display at the last time I saw the KKK burning a cross in a field next to the highway where they were stopping vehicles (including the one I was in) looking for n*****s. I was in a corporate vehicle at the time and a black employee was in the car with my work crew. Fright is hardly the word to describe his fear. It was visceral and I felt it too! We refused to lower our window when they stopped us and the driver, thankfully, gunned the engine as if he was willing to run over the robed figures standing in our way, They stood aside.

 

I saw terrible things while in high school. I experienced the result of the ruling by Judge McMillan regarding forced busing. The treatment that teachers gave the black students was disgraceful. My black friends and I knew never to openly display anything that betrayed friendship while at school. Black athletes were revered for their physical prowess but reviled off the fields (sound vaguely familiar?).

I attended a 40th class reunion (for reasons I won't go into) and even though about 30% of the graduating class was black, there was not a single black person at the reunion. During one evening at the reunion a cadre of my former classmates stopped the dancing and played some inspirational music while they paraded through the reunion with 'the flag' held high before them. I noted objection to this to the organizers and I was met with indignation.

 

There were black scout troops but mostly there were white troops. No mixing. I remember one Scout Exposition where one black troop showed up, created their display and tried to join in on the festivities. They were universally shunned. Other than me and a couple of my friends visiting them mostly out of curiosity, they stood alone. White adult leaders complained with district people about why those 'n*****s' had been allowed into the Exposition. It was the norm back then in the early '60s.

 

I knew classmates who had absolutely no personal reason to harbor their intense hatred other than the fact that they were taught to feel that way by adults. They were open about it and at times engaged in acts of terrible cruelty and disregard for the pain of others. I don't like to even think about some of the things I heard about and I find them credible because of the things I actually saw. All the while, their rooms and in some cases, their homes, were decorated with either photos or 'the flag' itself. It was clearly the symbol of their hatred.

 

My father had a small business and there was one particular black client who was a good friend. I will never forget one thoughtful conversation between them that I overheard. They were discussing what they'd do differently if they had it to do over. Mr. A (I'll just leave it at that) and my father traded thoughts of regret and some of triumph. Mr. A was very well to do. He was a brick mason and his business was very successful. He always drove new cars and his children were well-dressed and behaved, better than I was. Mr. A confided to my father near the end of that conversation that one thing...if he had it to do over, he'd rather not have to do it as a black man. I will never, ever, forget those words. They echoed years later when at a terrible car wreck, a black woman, obviously dead, laid exposed in the middle of the road and the crowd that gathered included some of those people I know so well. They were cracking jokes about her anatomy and I noticed off to the side, two little black boys...her children. They were cut and bruised and one had his front teeth knocked out and they were in shock, staring at their dead mother while rednecks laughed about it. I gathered them into my arms and carried them out of range of that sight and sound and waited until the ambulance crews and police arrived. I thought about those words that Mr. A had uttered. Those boys didn't have much of a chance.

 

These feelings are still alive and well in the South and I have learned during my travels that they are not confined to this region...although we may have honed them to perfection.

 

Taking down 'the flag' will be a symbolic gesture but it will not change any hearts. Those that have been hardened long ago probably can't be hardened any more than they are already. What I think will be necessary is for old age and death to finally remove those persons. Unfortunately, as with my classmates, there is a form or inheritance that is social in nature and can be passed to young persons quite easily if they are, for any reason, susceptible to those ideas. As the recent shooting demonstrated.

 

Anyway, I share these things because I sense something in this thread...I can't quite put my finger on it...maybe it's just me but I've sensed it before. Was it the...reunion.....?

Edited July 8, 2015 by packsaddle

[Gone]

These feelings are still alive and well in the South and I have learned during my travels that they are not confined to this region...although we may have honed them to perfection.

 

Born and raised in the south. Wife is "of color". While I have seen/experienced some of the things you noted, I will say that over the last 35 years they are FAR less obvious than they were in the past. Back then I couldn't walk with my wife in New Orleans without turning heads or getting beaten up. Now? Much different.

 

Her take on the flag? It's just a flag. Racists will be racists, flag or not.

[packsaddle]

I can see her point if 'the flag' is flown on someone's front yard. It's different if that symbol is embraced by a government. In our case, this is even more troubling when considering the reason for the original embrace. As you say, there have been real changes for the good. So why cling to symbols of the bad?

[Gone]

I can see her point if 'the flag' is flown on someone's front yard. It's different if that symbol is embraced by a government. In our case, this is even more troubling when considering the reason for the original embrace. As you say, there have been real changes for the good. So why cling to symbols of the bad?

But most see that flag as merely part of our past. It's the racists that see it as white supremacy or racists in nature.

 

What happens when native Americans ask for the U.S. Flag to be changed because it has been a long standing symbol of racism and oppression to them? They'd have a good point too.

 

Slippery slope when you start infringing on freedoms.

[packsaddle]

OK, removing 'the flag' from in front of the statehouse infringes on what freedom? Its presence is symbolic of that 1962 desire to continue to infringe on the freedom of black people so I'm guessing.... its removal would be infringing on the freedom to infringe on black people's freedom? And that's a bad thing?

[Stosh]

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/flags/usa/confed.htm

 

What about the other Confederate flags?    

 

At least if one is going to get bent out of shape on the subject, at least pick an official flag to whine about instead of a battlefield marker flag.

 

I'm kinda partial to the Bonnie Blue flag, that's the flag flying over the first Confederate forces that fired on Ft. Sumter.  All the rest are Johnnie-come-latelys.  (pun intended.)  

 

Second choice is the Stars and Bars, the OFFICIAL Flag of the Confederacy.  I love the "in your face" gesture of the Georgian legislature when everyone made them change from the non-official battle flag reference and they went with the Official CSA flag instead.  It shows the lack of knowledge people really have on the subject.

[Gone]

OK, removing 'the flag' from in front of the statehouse infringes on what freedom? Its presence is symbolic of that 1962 desire to continue to infringe on the freedom of black people so I'm guessing.... its removal would be infringing on the freedom to infringe on black people's freedom? And that's a bad thing?

How about put it to referendum? The state house belongs to the people, as does government. Rather than cave to one group or the other, let the people decide. Register to vote, prove you're a citizen and vote. Majority decides what happens. Don't like the vote, exercise your freedom and move.

 

That's what makes America great...or used to. Now we pander to the group de jour.

Edited July 8, 2015 by Bad Wolf

[Stosh]

We used to be a society that celebrated tolerance as a virtue.  Now we have accepted intolerance as the norm.  The majority no longer determines the course we take.  Any special interest group that wishes to push their agenda gets their way regardless of the polarization it produces along the way.  We are destined to soon find out what the needle that broke the camel's back is going to be for us. 

[HICO_Eagle]

Part of the problem Stosh is that many of the folks who preached tolerance really meant that everyone needed to accept THEIR point of view (and really beyond accept, EMBRACE).  They have no tolerance for dissenting points of view once they get into positions of power or control.

[packsaddle]

Referendum? That's easy. It's against the law. The legislature wrote strict legislation giving themselves the ONLY authority to change 'historical' or other symbols displayed in the state. That also applies to the names of buildings, etc. A referendum is forbidden by law. Here's the irony. The legislature passed that legislation IN ORDER TO PREVENT any such referendums and to completely control the disposition of such symbols. Don't like that? Tell it to them.

 

As for majority? Keep in mind that the vast majority of the state senate just voted to remove 'the flag' - no substitutes. The house is now deliberating. Also keep in mind that this state is completely dominated by conservatives. Both US Senators, most Congressmen, the governor, the vast majority of both houses of the legislature, as well as the vast majority of local government officials are all Republican. The Democratic Party in this state is as moribund as any can be without disappearing completely. They have not fielded a serious candidate for significant elected offices for decades. So take your complaints to the conservatives. They're in complete control.

[Gone]

@@packsaddle so vote out your representative. That's easy enough. Buts it's much easier for those with minority opposing views to play the race card and harangue the majority into submission.

 

If the majority of the populace feel something is wrong it CAN be changed. Laws are changed every day. The Gov can change it by executive order. If the legislature does not like it we have a law suit. Or the legislature can change it themselves with the support of the people putting pressure on a few legislators to draft a bill changing the law.

 

Let's not hide behind the excuse "the system doesn't t work" or "that's how the system is" until you've tried to use the system the way it was intended.

 

EDIT: According to the Washington Post the state Senate voted 37-3 to take it down. The House votes next and has the 2/3 needed to override the law barring the flag removal. Seems the system works, though I'd rather have the people decide.

Edited July 8, 2015 by Bad Wolf

[Stosh]

Just because one is Republican or Democrat or Independent or whatever, it isn't anyone's "fault".  That is just playing into the polarizing blame game and accomplishes nothing in the long run except hard feelings and long forum threads.  Let's just all assume that no matter what happens in our country today it's always somebody else's fault.  Now that we have that out of our system and we have agreed on something, we can start from there to fix the problem.  

 

Oh, that's never going to happen?  Well, then learn to live with it because the only people that can make a difference is the people themselves.  They elected idiots, then live with the decisions idiots make.  Otherwise keep elect people who aren't idiots.  If the majority of people buy into political double-speak and lies, then they deserve to keep electing idiots.  The rest are going to have to learn to live in a country run by idiots.

 

Part of the problem Stosh is that many of the folks who preached tolerance really meant that everyone needed to accept THEIR point of view (and really beyond accept, EMBRACE).  They have no tolerance for dissenting points of view once they get into positions of power or control.

 

That process is the definition of Fascism.  I bet a lot of people didn't know that, but that's how tyrants are able to take control of a country. Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin are great examples of how this can happen in today's world.  All came about because of liberal social reforms that allowed the development of socialism/communism that collapsed into tyranny and dictatorial forms of government.  This is nothing new, it has happened before, it's a natural progression of events and if left unchecked with happen again.  

Edited July 8, 2015 by Stosh

[NJCubScouter]

I am not going to comment on what some others have said about the Confederate flag issue. I am just going to give my own comments.

 

I will first admit that I have not closely followed this issue over the years. I have never lived in the South. I am just a white guy from New Jersey, where we have our own issues, one of which is not what flag(s) should be flying at government buildings. I have learned a lot more about it recently than I knew previously.

 

My understanding is that South Carolina (and some other Southern states) adopted some version of a Confederate flag or banner, or at least the central design of it, in or around the early 1960's, as a symbol of the state's resistence to federally imposed desegregation and civil rights for black people. I don't think anyone really disputes that. At that time, the state and local governments in those states had as their policy, whether official or unofficial or a little of both, that black people were not to enjoy equal rights, that they were second-class citizens, and were to be kept in their own second-rate schools, at the back of the bus, and away from lunch counters and other places frequented by white folks. The "flag", regardless of whether it was square or rectangular or actually looked like any flag used by the actual Confederacy, was a symbol of that attitude - specifically, the state's position that it was appropriate to deny basic rights to black people. So the issue is not what a particular piece of cloth or design meant in the 1860's, or if it even existed then. The issue is what it meant in the 1960's, and since then.

 

Now, happily, things are different. Racism still exists to some degree, and the South is not alone in this. It still exists to a degree in New Jersey, and presumably everywhere else. The difference is that the official policy of every state is that people of all "races" are equal in the eyes of the law and cannot be denied the right to equality, at least not by the government. Perhaps this is accepted grudgingly in some places, but it is accepted. So we're all to be treated equally, right? Except, in South Carolina (at least for another few hours, I haven't seen the news today) and in some other Southern states, there is still a symbol on state grounds of the old attitude that black people are second-class citizens. So a black person is completely welcome to visit his or her state capital, and in some cases work in the state capital, be elected to serve their state and/or legislative district in the state capital, but... when they go there, they are still walking past a symbol of the attitude that the state can treat them as a second-class citizen. So they are no longer second-class citizens, but the symbol of their second-class status is there, on state property, staring them in the face.

 

That just seems wrong to me, and I don't think the issue is really any more complicated than that.