VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Paul Finkelman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:21:00 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (99 lines)
I am willing to bet that lots of people who have the Con Flag on their
car or truck would love to see Jim Crow come back; I never saw the truck
of the two men who dragged a black man to death in Texas a few years
ago, but I would not be totally surprised to see the Confederate Flag on
the back of that truck.

The KKK is still around, and it still carries the Confederate Flag, last
time I knew.  I have rarely seen blacks with the confederate flag on
their cars.  The confederacy stood for something:  a white supremacist,
proslavery regime.  I would not insult the intelligence of those who fly
the flag by saying they don't know what it stood for and what it stands
for.  As you wrote: "Even the most ardent southern "red neck" today, at
least in public, will say that equal rights for all American citizens is
a good thing."  So, if that is what they are saying in public, what
doyou think they believe in private?

I wonder if you would make the same argument about the Nazi flag:  There
is not one who would argue for genocide; that people just like the flag
and have notolgia for the "nifty" Nazi uniforms and boots.

Paul Finkelman

[log in to unmask] wrote:
> It seems quite clear that the "Confederate" flag under
> discussion originated (or at least saw strong revival and
> redefinition) as a political symbol in the 1950s.
>
> That said, political symbols evolve with time, and it seems
> unlikely that the flag now conveys or connotes, to those who
> display it, quite the same meaning as it did in 1954.  In
> 1954 there was a vibrant and angry public political movement
> to sustain and preserve Jim Crow.  No such movement exists
> today--indeed, in our public life today there is pretty much
> uniform consensus that Jim Crow was morally wrong.  Even the
> most ardent southern "red neck" today, at least in public,
> will say that equal rights for all American citizens is a
> good thing.  So the Confederate heritage movement today does
> not seem to connote, to those who support it, a
> straightforward politics of nostalgia for segregation.
> Whatever else the flag means to those who display it today,
> it does not mean the same thing as it did 50 years ago.
>
> I don't mean to argue here that the popular movement in
> support of the Confederate flag (and Confederate heritage
> generally) today is not regressive, or contentious, or
> reprehensible, or laudable, or desirable, or admirable.  I am
> not writing here either to support or to denigrate it.  What
> I DO mean to argue is that the "movement" exists in a
> different public and political context, and takes its meaning
> as much from that as it does from events 50 years ago.  And
> of course, that political context has evolved out of the
> politics of 50 years ago, and has an interesting and complex
> relationship to it that deserves our attention.
>
> It seems to me that a good place to start would be with the
> public statements of those various groups organized to
> support display of this symbol.  My guess is that the symbol
> means rather different things to those who support it than it
> does to those who condemn it.  If we are to be fair to those
> with whom we disagree, we need to begin with the assumption
> that they mean what they say--so we should take a look at
> what they say.
>
> Of course, in today's political culture, the assumption is
> wide-spread that public statements mask deeper agendas.
> Perhaps so--indeed, likely so.  But even so, it is easier to
> assert that than to demonstrate it.  This is such a
> contentious public issue today, it is far too easy, even for
> decent and reflective and thoughtful observers, for the very
> best of us in other words, to resort to broader
> generalizations.
>
> Do let us know what you find.
>
> Best,
> Kevin
> Kevin R. Hardwick, Ph.D.
> Department of History
> James Madison University
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html


--
Paul Finkelman
Chapman Distinguished Professor
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, Oklahoma  74104-2499

918-631-3706 (office)
918-631-2194 (fax)

[log in to unmask]

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US