IMG_20120418_180819

The 64th annual Shad Planking, hosted by the Wakefield Ruritan Club, remains an institution of Virginia Politics. Yesterday's event boasted approximately 2,000 attendees even though the historically bipartisan event had only Republican, Tea Party and Conservative candidates in attendance.

The event still possessed all the charm of years past with cigars smoke mingling with the wood smoke of the planks and shad fish, the beer flowing and folks of virtually every political stripe engaged in friendly banter.

There was one disappointing, if unsurprising, group of attendees carrying the Confederate Flag. That's not really news in and of itself but I found it fascinating one of their most proud and prominent members was a woman, and that all were staunch Ron Paul supporters.

Readers: what has been your experience with Ron Paul supporters, are they Confederacy-friendly? Was this an anomaly? Are the antiquated ideas representative of his anti-intervention, anti-war platform? or is it purely a domestic policy thing?

Comments:


flownover
Joined
Aug '10
flownover

The idea of the flags of the past being used as cudgels in the present seems provincially crude and chauvinistic. The English flag is not the Union Jack, but St George's Cross and it has caused dismay with the current crop of Eurocentric British. 

The Stars and Bars has been stigmatized by the NAACP, SCLC, and others  since the sixties as a proxy for everything southern. It acts as a broad brush to taint the entire region with the guilt of slavery, as if an economic construct involving 3-4% of the population is insufficient to present as an argument.

Everyone needs their symbols to project their feelings towards in our simplistic culture.  The problem is that it is simplistic and therefore uninformed, unfair, and ignorant of the history that creates such symbols. Like ignoring the economic aspects of the Civil War. Or the patriotism of the citizens in the South. 

Let's ask Louis Farrakhan what he thinks


Joined
Nov '11
Terry Mott

BlueAnt

There is a significant chunk of libertarian theory around the idea of state-level nullification as a check on oppressive centralized government, with convincing arguments that even the Founders held this view.  Tom Woods presents it as Thomas Jefferson's "bulwark against tyranny", enacted by a free people through the proxy of their state governments. (Summary here, longer interview at the bottom.)  South Carolina famously nullified federal power under Andrew Jackson over high tariffs.

Federalism and state's rights are a big aspect of this; secession becomes the ultimate veto against federal oppression--nullification writ large.  Arguably, without the right to secede, one can not have true liberty because that eliminates the right of free association at its most fundamental level. · 4 minutes ago

I spent some time back in the late '90s lurking on various libertarian-themed web sites, and remember seeing a lot of fondness for the Confederacy, not because of slavery, but strictly because seccession, for whatever reason, was considered a fundamental right.

BlueAnt
Joined
Aug '10
BlueAnt
Elizabeth Blackney: As a Georgia girl myself, I was raised around folks who had views that represented a broad spectrum of opinions toward the Confederate flag, secession, and "Southern" heritage.

Florida boy here, and at the risk of offending a neighbor, a quick history lesson on Southern heritage is in order.

There has been tension between the north and south in the USA ever since the Constitutional Conventions.  The debate is usually framed as Alexander Hamilton vs Thomas Jefferson; the advocate of strong central government against the advocate of liberty over state power.  The Constitution itself represents a grand compromise between these two schools of thought.

Pre-Civil War, this was openly acknowledged in public debate.  States' rights was the argument for 50+ years before secession actually happened.  Andrew Jackson predicted its trajectory after the Nullification Crisis over tariffs:

On May 1, 1833 Jackson wrote, "the tariff was only a pretext, and disunion and southern confederacy the real object. The next pretext will be the negro, or slavery question."

I recognize the Confederate flag invokes painful racial memories as well.  But its anti-federal symbolism is no revisionism, especially in a country that regularly reveres centuries-old ideals and symbols.

drlorentz
Joined
Sep '10
drlorentz

Leslie Watkins

...
But especially since the flag shown is not the stars and bars of the Confederacy but the Confederate battle flag. It should be in a museum, not used to elicit the emotions of an incoherent legacy. · 1 hour ago

Edited 33 minutes ago

Offensive or not, the battle flag seems to be a part of the current flag of Mississippi. The vexillologists seem to like it. [I learned a new word.]

Louie Mungaray (Squishy)
Joined
Aug '10
Squishy Blue RINO

Western Chauvinist: I can certainly see why black people find the Confederate flag offensive. And perhaps that's the point. Someone flying it may wish to express some solidarity with or romantic notions about historical Southern culture apart from slavery, but he also knows he's blocking himself off from civil relationships with people who don't share his mindset.

It begs the question, is the Gadsden flag performing the same function as a totem for the Tea Party? · 1 hour ago

I am glad you brought that up. I am just a smidge put off by the obtuseness or tone deafness of their adopting American Revolutionary symbolism. 

I am a American Mexican, my ancestors were vanquished in a war of conquest on my native soil. You don't hear me b--ching about it because what's done is done, and because I shudder to think what Confederates would have done with us had their ambitions for a slave republic extending to the Pacific Ocean been realized.

I will not ascribe untoward motives to those Tea Partyers who favor such symbols, I do appeal to them to remember that White Supremacy pervaded the entire populace then.

I certainly do.

Larry Koler
Joined
Jun '10
Larry Koler

Fricosis Guy: 

...

  1. How was the War anything but a disaster for Virginia? It  became a main battleground and was dismembered during a war it reluctantly -- and foolishly -- was sucked into after Fort Sumter.

Yes, why didn't they just quietly recall their congressmen and senators, secede and start their own country. What could Lincoln have done if they had been non-violent? I have always wondered about this.  Should this be a new post? Sorry to digress, Elizabeth.

Western Chauvinist
Joined
Dec '10
Western Chauvinist

Squishy Blue RINO

Western Chauvinist: 

It begs the question, is the Gadsden flag performing the same function as a totem for the Tea Party? · 1 hour ago

I am glad you brought that up. I am just a smidge put off by the obtuseness or tone deafness of their adopting American Revolutionary symbolism. 

...

I will not ascribe untoward motives to those Tea Partyers who favor such symbols, I do appeal to them to remember that White Supremacy pervaded the entire populace then.

I certainly do. · 1 hour ago

I'm glad it's just a smidge, Squishy. I think you're correct that Tea Partyers who fly the Gadsden flag may be a little tone-deaf, but not because it references white supremacy, imo. It's that the intent is to divide -- to set oneself apart from other Americans.

I'm a true believer in "e pluribus unum." It's why I don't put bumper stickers on my car and why, although I'm very sympathetic to Tea Party sentiments, the only flag I fly is the American flag. I don't think we'll reach the persuadables by ostentatious shows of our affiliations. 

Western Chauvinist
Joined
Dec '10
Western Chauvinist

Oh, and I'm more than a little put-off by the Obama bumper stickers on the one or two cars in the parking lot of my Catholic parish.  I have to restrain myself from chasing them down and lecturing them on Church teaching. "Jesus, take the wheel!"

Fricosis Guy
Joined
Jun '11
Fricosis Guy

Or what if Virginia (and Tennessee and North Carolina) had done nothing after Fort Sumter? 

Larry Koler: Yes, why didn't they just quietly recall their congressmen and senators, secede and start their own country. What could Lincoln have done if they had been non-violent? I have always wondered about this.  Should this be a new post? Sorry to digress, Elizabeth. · 36 minutes ago
Bob Cotten
Joined
Feb '12
Bob Cotten

Two of my great grandfathers were infantry officers in the Confederate Army, both saw the horror of war up close and each, needless to say,  respected the Confederacy and its stunningly beautiful flag.  I grew up with that same respect.  But the flag is ours no more.  It belongs to the skinheads, the nazis and the tatoo parlors of an incredibly sad,  downward evolution in the culture.  We are fortunate today to be Americans  living under the Star Spangled Banner, cultural rot notwithstanding.   The American flag stands for a singularity in human events and is today the only flag which lays claim to the affection of all Americans, manifestly including  Southerners, despite the siren call of a  Confederate past and the lovely standard its soldiers carried into war.

Leslie Watkins
Joined
Sep '10
Leslie Watkins

You made the argument much much better than I did, Bob. Thanks.

Bob Cotten: Two of my great grandfathers were infantry officers in the Confederate Army, both saw the horror of war up close and each, needless to say,  respected the Confederacy and its stunningly beautiful flag.  I grew up with that same respect.  But the flag is ours no more.  It belongs to the skinheads, the nazis and the tatoo parlors of an incredibly sad,  downward evolution in the culture.  We are fortunate today to be Americans  living under the Star Spangled Banner, cultural rot notwithstanding.   The American flag stands for a singularity in human events and is today the only flag which lays claim to the affection of all Americans, manifestly including  Southerners, despite the siren call of a  Confederate past and the lovely standard its soldiers carried into war. · 30 minutes ago
Blame The Innocent
Joined
Jun '11
Blame The Innocent

They're saying "leave us alone."

etoiledunord: I know one thing that ticks off Bible-Belt Southerners is the War on Christianity. That's one of the only old-time traditions they have left to brag about. They can't even brag about their food anymore. It's "unhealthy." They're saying "leave us something!!!" · 5 hours ago
CoolHand
Joined
Dec '10
CoolHand

You know why I keep a Confederate flag around?

'Cause it's pretty.  lol

I like the way it looks and like it or not, it's a part of our history.

We can look at it and remember the good and the bad that it represented while still admiring the striking visual.

Nothing more sinister than that.

Perhaps if the "diversity" folks weren't so bigoted themselves, they might find that those fellows flying that battle flag are civil war re-enactors, or history buffs, or just a bunch of guys who like the way the flag looks.

They might be a-holes too, but you'll never know for sure unless you go talk to them (and not in a "stomp-over-there-and-start-calling-them-racists" kind of fashion).

It's funny how freedom of speech is always great until somebody hears or sees something they don't like.

KarlUB
Joined
Dec '10
KarlUB

CoolHand:

Perhaps if the "diversity" folks weren't so bigoted themselves, they might find that those fellows flying that battle flag are civil war re-enactors, or history buffs, or just a bunch of guys who like the way the flag looks.

Precisely. There are a lot of reasons different people fly the rebel flag.

I have always had an affinity for it-- even before I knew I was a paleoconservative-- because I had a very American instinct to admire the underdog. Later I learned that a certain streak of Southern culture had much to recommend it that differentiated it from Northern culture. And I was a Yankee.

Later, I went to Washington and (Robert E.) Lee University, at least partly because my immigrant father admired the South.

So how is it that a Georgia girl who "[W]as raised around folks who had views that represented a broad spectrum of opinions toward the Confederate flag," couldn't muster the energy to go ask them? What is better about being smugly disappointed and moving on?

The whole point of this fish-fry, after all, is to mingle. Right?

KarlUB
Joined
Dec '10
KarlUB

As to the question: Lincoln was about as dictatorial a President as you will find, and hence is a natural nemesis to those with a Libertarian streak.

Also, an admiration for state's rights, Federalism, the ninth and tenth Amendment...all that jazz...dovetails very nicely with the Confederate ethos.

Louie Mungaray (Squishy)
Joined
Aug '10
Squishy Blue RINO

Western Chauvinist

I'm glad it's just a smidge, Squishy. I think you're correct that Tea Partyers who fly the Gadsden flag may be a little tone-deaf, but not because it references white supremacy, imo. It's that the intent is to divide -- to set oneself apart from other Americans.

I'm a true believer in "e pluribus unum." ...  I don't think we'll reach the persuadables by ostentatious shows of our affiliations.  · 3 hours ago

I see your point, I think it is  a good one.

I don't think the Tea Party employs revolutionary totems to reference white supremacy, far from it. I think they desire to return to first principles and an Edenic America. It is easy to disremember the less pristine institutions then extant.

I think those who are not racist are surprised and disappointed to find others put off by their hearkening back to an era wherein white supremacy was assumed and the very humanity of other races was denigrated and denied. 

If we all had a time machine, some of us would be more reluctant than others to hop in and set the dial to 1860 or 1776.

Edited on April 20, 2012 at 2:20am
Casey Taylor
Joined
Jun '10
Casey Taylor

What cracks me up is the level of ignorance on both sides of this issue.  Mainly on the side of the anti-'s, but reflexive Southern-heritage folks can be just as bad.  Take, for example, the Georgia flag debate that's been kicking for fifty years.  In short, Democrats changed the flag in 1956 from this

1955 Flag

to this

1956 Flag

.

Yes, it was in response to the rising civil rights movement.  It was also, however, a thumb in the eye to a pre-highway funding, hypocritical Federal government trying to dictate racial policy to the States while itself exemplifying openly institutionalized racism.  See the various Housing Acts, the GI Bill, Federal hiring policy, loan programs, et al.

Flash forward to 1996 when the Olympics came to town.  There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth about the flag's impact on the state's image (the anti-'s should have worried more about the impression made by MARTA and the city gov't), which culminated in a change to this

2001 flag

in 2001.  Ugly, uninspiring, derivative... yeah.  So now we have this

2004 Flag

which, for you history buffs out there, is essentially the national flag of the Confederacy.  Irony abounds.

Also, Sonny lied.

Edited on April 20, 2012 at 9:35pm
Douglas
Joined
Mar '11
Douglas
Elizabeth Blackney:  I'm genuinely interested in how others view it. ·  

Just fine with it. I'm not a native southerner, but I've been assimilated after living here one and off since age 12. I've got ancestors in both sides of the Civil War. My dad is in the Sons of Confederate Veterans, and I'm considering his invitation to join (surprise fact: Clint Eastwood is a longtime member). Reaction to the Confederate flag is a big test for me.  After years of observing the battle over it, I've come to the conclusion that the ones most intent on banning it or getting it "shamed out of existence" are precisely the kind of people that are quick to jump on the "hate speech isn't free speech" mantra. In other words, most of them are precisely the same kind of people with the "I may not like what you say..." t-shirts while doing their damnedest to suppress what you actually say under various leftist excuses.

Douglas
Joined
Mar '11
Douglas
Bob Cotten:  But the flag is ours no more.  It belongs to the skinheads, the nazis and the tatoo parlors of an incredibly sad,  downward evolution in the culture.

Then take it back.  When this happened, should we have just shrugged and went "Oh well, it belongs to them now"?

kkk_1925

The vast, vast majority of southerners that love that flag have no desire for secession again. It's a symbol of a southern culture within a larger American context. You'll find that many of those people volunteered for the US military, proudly. But the more effort is made to take that flag away from them, the more resentful they get.

Terry
Joined
Jun '11
Terry

Douglas

Bob Cotten:  But the flag is ours no more.  It belongs to the skinheads, the nazis and the tatoo parlors of an incredibly sad,  downward evolution in the culture.

Then take it back.  Whenthishappened, should we have just shrugged and went "Oh well, it belongs to them now"?

The vast, vast majority of southerners that love that flag have no desire for secession again. It's a symbol of a southern culture within a larger American context. You'll find that many of those people volunteered for the US military, proudly. But the more effort is made to take that flag away from them, the more resentful they get. · 12 hours ago

And, of course, the US flag flew over slavery for far more years than any of the various flags of the short-lived CSA.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In