Confederate Flag: Racism or Heritage?

[Corey]

With the Charleston church shooting, the confederate flag, flag representing the Confederate Army in the U.S. Civil War, has been quite the hot topic. A confederate flag flies high at the South Carolina Capitol Building (Charleston is in SC, for those who didn't know), and after the shooting, where nine people, all African-American, were killed by Dylann Roof (who is a racist, as evident by his manifesto) at a "black church" in Charleston, the flag has come into question. Many want the flag removed, as they feel it symbolizes racism and oppression. Others state that the flag symbolizes southern heritage and the bravery of confederate soldiers, and is not a symbol of racism and, therefore, shouldn't be removed.

What do you think? Is the flag a symbol of white supremacy and racism, or does it represent southern heritage and the bravery of confederate soldiers? Do you think it should be taken down from government and public property?

I'll post my opinion a bit later, I'd rather see what people say before they read what I have to say!

[HKim]

As some people know here, I'm a huge history buff. I love reading about what happened before and how it all led up to today in that bizarre combination we like to call the past. American History, in particular, has been a great interest to me and the Civil War era has always been an amazing time period to study.

After all, never before in the history of the United State, has the dedication of country's moral foundation been tested to that extreme. More Americans have died in the Civil War than in any other war and perhaps, thus, might be considered the costliest war we ever fought in terms of human lives. If you add in the fact that the conflict took place on American soil, you can add in the physical, psychological, and emotional damages this conflict inflicted on the American people.

This war was a turning point in American history. Not only did it mark the end of slavery in the United States, but also established the dominance of federal power over state power, the importance of industry, the introduction of trench warfare and other "modern" tactics, the advancement of medicine, and the precedence of presidential assassination. It is the dominating event of the mid 1800s and has been so critical to American history, that the general population probably doesn't know much of what happened in the decades afterwards until the next century (save for maybe the assassination of President James Garfield).

This is why this event, like the Revolutionary War and World War II, resonates so strongly with the American people. Of all the wars, these three were the ones that would determine the future of the nation and its very survival. And it's the only war to pit Americans against each other. That legacy alone would have repercussions to this very day, as stated in the opening post.

So what does the Confederate flag mean in all of this. Well to put things in context, the standard flag generally reproduced today (commonly known as the Southern Cross), is actually not the official flag of the Confederate States of America. This version was the battle flag used by the Army of Northern Virginia led by General Robert E. Lee. I think the fact that this was Lee's flag was the reason why this flag became popular.

Let me elaborate. General Lee is considered one of the greatest generals in American history and perhaps the greatest general during the Civil War. He was a superb tactician and often outmaneuvered his opponents, oftentimes with fewer troops and supplies. It is for this reason why Lee's Army of Northern Virginia often managed to defeat the Union Army of the Potomac several times and prevent the successful invasion of Richmond, the Confederacy capitol. This is of critical note because the distance between Washington D.C. and Richmond is only 100 miles.

Many Confederate soldiers and generals, especially those under his command (which were many), admired Lee. He was considered a gentleman, mentor, devoted Christian, and brilliant leader. He served as a military engineer, and later, fought in the American-Mexican War, and became superintendent of West Point, the premier military academy for officers prior to the Civil War. He was beloved by students and, during his career, met many of the generals and officers he would later serve with or fight during that very war. He came from the Lee family of Virginia, which had highly distinguished itself during the Revolutionary War. His father, Henry "Light Horse" Harry Lee, a noted cavalry and infantry leader, had even served with Washington. Robert E. Lee even married the great granddaughter of George Washington and was often considered his heir.

He was such an admired figure by the time the Civil War rolled around, that President Lincoln offered him command of the Union Army. The aging General Winfield Scott, the hero of the Mexican-American war who led US troops to victory there, strongly supported Lee's promotion to this position. Ultimately, Lee declined the offer, unwilling to take arms against his home state of Virginia. You have to remember at the time that, prior to the Civil War, states had more power and meaning to people. What state you were from was a very important aspect of your identity. Lee's father was born during a time when there was no United States and people identified themselves by the colony they were a part of. If he accepted Lincoln's offer, he would be fighting against many of his friends and neighbors. (Ultimately, he did have to fight such people as is the cost of a civil war).

As many of you know, Lee eventually went on to become a noted general of the Confederacy. His troops loved him and his generals respected him. That he was able to command a vast different of personalities in his army, including the aggressive "Stonewall" Jackson, and the defense-master James Longstreet, and put them to great effect has been long noted by historians. It seemed to many, that Lee's Army of Northern Virginia (which is where the "popular" Confederate flag originated) could do no wrong. He was a beloved general, both by his men, and those throughout the South.

Eventually Lee did lose, notably in Gettysburg against General George Meade, and later completely against the famous General Ulysses S. Grant. While some have considered Grant to not have been as great a tactician as Lee (he often liked to push straight forward with his troops), he has also been considered to be a superior strategist, using numbers and the power of Union industry to wear down and defeat his foe. The legacy of these two generals were cemented in American history by their respective victories and defeats. Ultimately, when Lee surrendered to Grant in 1865, some historians attribute Lee's desire to act as a gentleman as key to ending the war. He could have, for example, instructed his army to disperse into the wilderness and engage in guerrilla warfare, a move that might have prolonged the war and resulted in the death of a large number of people. Instead, he accepted formal surrender, and his troops and generals, who loved him, followed his example.

For this reason, Lee is well-remembered by both Northerners and Southerners. Many of his foes admired him, especially those who knew him personally, either from the Mexican-American War or those he supervised at West Point. If you add in the fact that many historians today view him as anti-slavery, and you have a leader who many still admire to this day. In a letter to his wife prior to the Civil War, Lee called slavery a "moral and political evil in any country". While a general in the Confederacy, he pushed the government to free and enlist slaves in the army. To him, he wasn't fighting for slavery, but for his home and, perhaps, the importance of states rights.

In 1874, Benjamin Harvey Hill said this about Lee:

He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a soldier without cruelty; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring. He was a public officer without vices; a private citizen without wrong; a neighbour without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guile. He was a Caesar, without his ambition; Frederick, without his tyranny; Napoleon, without his selfishness, and Washington, without his reward.

I think that's why the "current" popular flag of the Confederacy, Lee's flag, became so popular. Because the man himself was such an upstanding figure during that period. That if there is one good person in the Confederacy, it was this man (though I'd argue there were many others as well. After all, how guilty was the common farm boy who didn't own slaves?) In time, the United States as a whole came to honor Lee. Monuments were dedicated to him, he appeared on stamps, and a university was named after him. The United States Army even named a tank after him, the "M3 Lee", which saw action during World War II.

It is sad that the battle flag of this brilliant gentleman and general has been tarnished by a minority of people. That, to some, it has become linked to racism and hate. The truth is, the flag never really stood for that message. It was simply the representation of one good man and his army that was fighting for the wrong reasons. Do we condemn him and all he stood for because of that? Do we condemn those who served under him? After all, they were Americans and many people today are descended from those very soldiers.

Lincoln himself advocated a kind plan of reconstruction and amnesty following the end of the Civil War. Ending slavery was important, but so was reintegrating the rebelling states back into the Union. That it was now time for the brothers to put down their arms and embrace again. The War was over.

Do we ban a piece of our history? Do we strive to destroy every element of the past because it has started to become associated with hatred? At what point are we eliminating or correcting history to fit what it means to be politically correct or polite? Is it worse to destroy history than to offend another? Have we gone too far?

Perhaps Lincoln said it best:

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

[Noblejanobii]

The shooting in Charleston hit me so hard. Not just because I live in South Carolina, not because I am a South Carolinian, but because you know where I was when that shooting happened? I want you to guess where I was when some man decided to enter the sacred body of God and kill people, solely because he was racist. DO YOU KNOW WHERE I WAS? I was at my beach house, relaxing, an hour's drive from where bullets were being fired. I was texting a close friend of mine when the BBC alert popped up on my phone. I nearly threw up when I saw the words "Charleston Church Shooting." I texted my friend back at 12:01 in the morning and didn't sleep at all that night. I couldn't. Because that church was only an hour away from me, and those people had died while I had been relaxing.

The Confederate flag was one of the most discussed topics in my AP US history class this past year. Being in a majority African America school, mentioning the Civil War outside of the classroom is seen as a right to execution. So many people take offense to it, and why shouldn't they? But, if you had asked me five years ago, what I thought of the confederate flag, my opinion would be very different than it is now. I would have said that places like Amazon and Walmart shouldn't be selling them in the first place (that actually still shocked me when I found out but that's another topic for another day) and that they should all be burned due to the fact that it is a racist stigma. And while the fact that it is a racist stigma has not changed in my opinion, what should be done with it has changed. Ever since the seventh grade, I have gone down to Columbia, to the statehouse, from Wednesday to Sunday, to learn about the legislative process and participate in it. And every year, without fail, I pay my respects to that flag. Why? Well, I believe the reason that South Carolina does still fly that flag is not as a racist stigma. It is not meant to offend people. No. It's meant to be a reminder. If you all will recall, South Carolina left the Union far earlier than any other state. It's a running joke amongst many South Carolinians that we will one day secede once again and win. But the fact of that matter is, we screwed up. Granted, the North wasn't be very helpful at the time but that still does not excuse us from what happened. Growing up, all my closest friends were African Americans. Do you know how hard it is, being white, to learn about what my ancestors did to the ancestors of the people in the room with me? It hurts and you will never know how hard it is to face your closest friends, your best friends, are learning that my ancestors treated them like animals, like they were dirt. To make matters worse, I know all of my great grandparents owned slaves. Six out of the eight great grandparents that I had owned large plantations. Only one pair didn't, and they owned a small farm that ended up getting burned down by the KKK because that family was nice to their slaves. That information hurts, makes me want to cry, and I want to pretend that it never happened. But that's just it, it did happen.

That's why the flag has to stay. It is meant as a reminder to everyone that we freaking screwed up and we treated humans like animals. It is meant to be our stigma, our shame. Just as the Jews were forced to wear their Star of David during the Holocaust, we all must forever bear the symbol of the Confederacy. That flag is meant to remind us to never do something like that again. That is why it must stay. That is why it must remain a racial stigma. And that is why I always pay my respects to that flag! Because while people may hate that flag with every molecule of their being, I remember the lives that were lost because of that flag, the lives that were sacrificed to protect that flag, and the lives that were destroyed by that flag.

[Kentucky Fried Torchic]

My official position is best represented by this quote from the classic South Park episode "Chef Goes Nanners" where the townspeople get together to decide whether or not to change an offensive flag:

Reporter: Earlier, the South Park townspeople voiced their opinion.
Man 4: [angry] Well, I think the flag is racist! [turns pensive] Huh, but then again, it is part of our history.
Man 5: Well, I guess the flag is part of history, …but I can see how it is racist.

Unofficially, I have some more thoughts:

Spoiler:

Despite being from the northernmost state of the continental forty-eight, I find myself more than a little sympathetic to arguments against removing the Stars and Bars from public and denouncing it as a symbol of ugly bygone racism.

I think that the battle cry of changing the flag taken up in recent days is especially troubling for a few reasons. One is that the issue that the same places that have strong cultural ties to the flag are the same places that have historically disliked being told what to do by outsiders. In 2005 or 2006 I believe, there was a Mississippi referendum on whether or not the change the state flag. It failed, but this shocked a lot of people because that couldn't have happened without a sizable percentage of African-Americans in the state voting to keep it the same. Whenever issues cross cultural borders, people are more likely to line up against the outside influence that they see as trying to tell them how to live their lives.

As I put it in a debate earlier today, "I think that the "ban the flag" movement is risking turning into just another one of those 'northerners know best' movements". Now that some things are happening in South Carolina, the media seems to be all too keen to jump back onto the old narrative of the racist south and the enlightened north that they similarly engaged in during the 1950s and 1960s. Ignoring that in the past months the news cycles have featured violence against African-Americans exclusively in states north of the Mason-Dixon line, it now seems like the trend is to paint the states of the former Confederacy with a broad brush as racists. This happened during the Civil Rights era as well, with many northerners backing Dr. Martin Luther King, SNCC, and other groups when they protested against segregation in the south and faced off with Bull Connors and the like. But this support evaporated once the focus turned on the insidious forms of housing discrimination and other racist practices that the north enjoyed a near-monopoly on, to the point whAere during the time period and afterwards the Ku Klux Klan have primary drawn their membership by states in the merican midwest rather than from the south. I have a hypothesis that this hindered efforts by the north to put its own racial house in order, whereas the south, enjoying the scrutiny of the entire world had no choice but to work to try and solve its racial tensions, and now this flag debate is another chance for us white northerners to sweep our own racial problems under the rug while we all pat ourselves on the back for not being racists like those hicks down

An interesting article in The American Conservative magazine (which is far more centrist than its name would imply, I promise) went into the details of the role that ideology played not only in Roof's actions, but also in a few other incidents of mass violence that have occurred both in America and worldwide over the past few years. This case seems to be the outlier as, unlike the Fort Hood shooter or the Baruch Goldstein and Anders Breivik cases, there isn't any real well of support that he is drawing on. The latter two of those examples have found vindication in official political parties in the countries that their actions have taken place in, yet America, as a culture quickly denounced Roof's actions from left to right. No one attempted to argue, as some politicians had with Goldstein or Breivik, that the cause of the violence was something more grounded in socio-economic realities than in hate.

As HKim went deep into the historical aspects of what the flag means, I add: I don't think anyone really encourages the flag beyond the history aspect, aside from some fringe elements. But on the other side of the debate are the people who want to rename Washington and Lee university and tear down all statues of leaders and rename things (like the beloved Lake Calhoun of my quaint hometown of Minneapolis) in an effort to erase these historical symbols and reduce the War Between States to having been only about slavery and nothing more. In essence, both sides have their extremes and the key is to find a middle.

As for why people still see honor in the cause of the Confederacy? To me, as a guy from the first state to sign up to fight for the Union, I see that the soldiers, the politicians, and the civilians Confederacy fought for slavery in some degree, yes. But they were not fighting simply to twirl their collective mustaches and uphold evil for evil's sake. These men and women didn't just like slavery because it was sinister and monstrous, it was their socio-economic way of life, with emphasis on the economic. Don't get me wrong, I'm not apologizing for slavery, but Southerners saw a clear and present danger to their way of life and reacted against it. History, if anything, has justified the idea that ending slavery destroyed southern society to be rebuilt from scratch, for better or worse.

Look at what General William Tecumseh Sherman did. To this day, there are communities in that haven't recovered from his March to the Sea. There are bars, especially in Georgia, where if you claim relations to him you better be ready to fight. That was because the American Civil War saw the first usage of total warfare, waging war not just against opposing armies, but civilians and their way of life. That was why most Southerners fought. Most of them didn't even own slaves.

And their fears were well-founded. Once the South was defeated, their economy was devastated and the largest human migration in the United States occurred as Southerners who had no economic prospects fled west in desperation, serving to populate much of the states in the Great Plains and American Southwest regions. Jessie James was a former Confederate soldier looking to make ends meet after he found that he had nothing to go back to. A lot of the miners, the cowboys, the outlaws, had similar experiences. The North decimated the South's ability to provide for the people living there as the loss of the plantation system and the worldwide cotton industry's growth in India decimated the ability of people to make a living. That's exactly what people feared if slavery was ended. That's why so many fought to protect slavery: self-interest more than racism in most cases.

[SassySnivy]

People tend to use the symbol of the Confederate Flag as a symbol of the south rather than a symbol of racism, or so it seems around here.

I think it's silly that they want to take down a Civil War Confederate memorial here (someone even posted a sign by it that said "black lives matter" and I facepalmed), though. The Confederate symbol should be totally acceptable in relation to the Civil War. Outside of that, though? I can definitely understand why people would feel offended by it. Those were some dark, dark times; and to see that symbol used so lightly when there's such a dark history behind it is a little insulting.

So yeah. If it's in relation to the war, I find it acceptable. Out of that context, though? I don't see a need for it....

That's why the flag has to stay. It is meant as a reminder to everyone that we freaking screwed up and we treated humans like animals. It is meant to be our stigma, our shame. Just as the Jews were forced to wear their Star of David during the Holocaust, we all must forever bear the symbol of the Confederacy.

When you put it like that, Janobii, I can completely understand the point.

But I can't quite understand the point of wearing it on clothes, so to speak. And that's just speaking in general terms

[Noblejanobii]

When you put it like that, Janobii, I can completely understand the point.

But I can't quite understand the point of wearing it on clothes, so to speak. And that's just speaking in general terms

It's hypothetically speaking. We're not actually going to go around wearing it. That would be very weird. What I mean is, the Jews were forced to wear the Star of David to single them out as Jews so that they could be blamed and punished for Germany's problems. The Confederate flag is essentially the south's Star of David. It's meant to single us out and constantly remind us of what we did wrong. It's meant to be our punishment, that because we messed up, we have to be forever reminded that we were the first state to secede from the Union and caused the whole freaking war, so to remind us that we started the most devastating war in America history, our statehouse (the symbol of unity in the state) has been branded with the very flag that almost tore the nation in two.

[SassySnivy]

That second thing I said was a general statement. Some people, even around here, tend to like to wear the symbol on caps and such.

[Suicune's Fire]

I put "Other" because I'm an ignorant Australian who knows very, very little about American history. xD I know the story behind it, but I didn't know what the name of the flag was in relation to. I see now, though.

[Corey]

Despite feelings about the confederate flag in general, the specific confederate flag I'm addressing is the one flown over the South Caroline capitol building. In this instance, the flag is racist, with no way around it. The flag arose in 1962 to protest desegregation in South Carolina. I waited to post this because once people learn that, they typically have seen that specific flag in a new light.

As for the confederate flag in general, it certainly has racist connotations. The confederate flag known as the "Stainless Banner," used by the army from 1863-1865, is a flag of white supremacy. Its designer William T. Thompson states, “As a people, we are fighting to maintain the heaven ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause.” He stated that the flag should “be hailed by the civilized world as the white man’s flag.” The Civil War, while not initially race-related, certainly evolved into a war of abolition. Similarly, in the book The Confederate Battle Flag: America's Most Embattled Emblem, Civil War veterans contradict those who state that the Civil War and Confederate flag are causes for state independence (which really means states' rights not to have their slaves taken away anyway), with one veteran, Colonel John S. Mosby, stating in 1894, “I’ve never heard of any other cause [for the war] than slavery.” And finally, numerous racist and/or hate groups use the confederate flag as a symbol, including the Ku Klux Klan (though it is not their official flag).

I also don't feel that the confederate flag belongs in a museum, but I'll let this article do the talking there.

With the flag offending so many, including the NAACP and NCAA, who attempt to boycott/boycott South Carolina (and Mississippi) respectively due to the confederate flag flown over the capitol, I believe it should be taken down. The flag has embodied the idea that black people are lesser for hundreds of years. The confederate army stood for slavery and betrayal to the Union, and I find it difficult to swallow that people fly that flag with pride. Is flying the confederate flag any different than flying a Nazi flag? Why is one okay when the other is chastised, while both, at core, stand for the same principle that one race is lesser? It is because Germany has accepted that it made an abominable mistake with the Holocaust, while America has yet to do the same with racism.

[Noblejanobii]

Yeah I knew that. They actually even referenced that in a Crash Course US History video which you can see here.

I still stand by my opinion that it shouldn't be taken down. I'm going to blunt when I say that America has issues and racism is one that will never be resolved. I wish it would be, but it won't be. The way our Constitution is formatted, our history, and everything about our country is just too much freedom and not enough to prevent eternal conflict. Obviously we've gotten over slavery but the fact of the matter is, racism will always be and there will always be racist people. A flag flying over the Capital building of a state is not going to change that. On top of this, the reason the Nazi flag is banned is because they did mass genocide and destroyed much of Europe. The South, on the other hand, barely touched the North, and while it was the bloodiest war America has ever been in, it was the South that got screwed over. We didn't destroy part of an entire continent. The North did. So, by that logic, the flag that the Union flew should be banned because, who had more casualties? *gasp* The South! And I know the argument is going to be that the South actually didn't suffer more casualties, but I want you to look at the population that served in the South vs the population that served in the North. while it might seem like more northerns died, in comparison population wise, the south lost way more people.

Plus, if we banned everything that offended someone there would literally be nothing. I mean same sex marriage just got legalized, cool, but I can guarantee you if we banned everything that offended someone it wouldn't have been passed.

Also, about it not being in a museum, it is kind of part of our history. We do need to remember it, so keep a Confederate flag that eternally reminds people that the South messed up in a place where people go to review our history seems like a perfectly good idea.

In addition, I would like to point out that the flag that flies over the state house isn't actually the Confederate flag at all. The actual confederate flag had that emblem, yes, but it was tiny in the upper left hand corner of the flag, and was white with red for the rest of the flag. Google "blood stained confederate flag" and that's the actual Confederacy flag. The flag that is over the state house is Lee's unit's flag, the one that he surrendered with. Just clarifying.