Honk for Confederate Pride

[yorkshireman]

I am not a Southerner but I love the South and I find this whole debate sad more than anything.

It is as if the Confederacy not only lost the Civil War, which of course it catastrophically did, condemning subsequent generations to dreadful economic hardship and a bitterness which persists even to this day, as we see here. But it also lost the ideological conflict too. History may famously be written by the victors, but do the vanquished have to read their propaganda and agree with it also?

The Confederate Battle Flag is not just a symbol of slavery, surely? It was/is the symbol of an incipient Southern nationhood which was brutally crushed by force of arms.

THE most potent symbol of Southern culture and identity. The pictorial representation of a secession of equal legitimacy (or illegitimacy) as the American Revolution itself.

Both were armed rebellions asserting a right to independence from the then legally constituted Government. (And both had slavery as an integral part).

Successful secessionists are patriots and heroes. Unsuccessful ones are traitorous rebels and slave holding racists. George Washington ended up on the banknotes with the Capital City named in his honour. Jefferson Davis in chains in the dungeon of Fortress Monroe.

The battle flag is a symbol which includes a legacy of slavery, and also the bigotry of many racists who have subsequently flown it. You can't gainsay that unfortunate reality.

But it encompasses so much more than that. A whole nation and culture. The sacrifice of a generation of young men lost in a pointless war which decimated the Confederacy in a way unparalleled in the much more populous North. Above all it exemplifies that famous, estimable Southern pride which was the only thing the Yankees could not take away by force.

Everyone has a right to it not just the redneck bigots. All of you guys should be able to remember the fate of those ancestors of yours who fought and died under that flag. You SHOULD proudly display it on your car if you feel so inclined.

Sadly, as this debate shows, you just can't.

That is the tragedy of the South even today.

 

[InletBchDweller]

There are currently 108 license plates in Florida. I have not reviewed the list. Am I to believe that each of this non-profit organizations is a government sanctioned entity?

Virginia has over 200 !!

 

[seaside2]

This thread reinforces my belief that we can tolerate anything except tolerance.

 

[hnooe]

Virginia has over 200 !!

Because of this thread, I don't think variety is the spice of life anymore...

 

[TooFarTampa]

This thread reinforces my belief that we can tolerate anything except tolerance.

Because of this thread, I don't think variety is the spice of life anymore...

Really? I can't speak for everyone, obviously, but I have found this discussion to be absolutely fascinating. How will we learn from each other if we can't discuss our backgrounds and perspectives?

Not that it matters, but while I don't consider myself a Southerner (born south of Ocala ) I am a descendant of Stonewall Jackson. Since I was not raised on Southern pride I don't 'get it' -- the very act of saying raised not reared disqualifies me from being a Southerner -- but I love Southern writing and Southern people and sweet tea. Just don't care much for the flag that made its debut my ancestor's funeral, because of the way it has been used over time.

 

[Rita]

Okay, I may have been right that it is not a First Amendment issue, that it is political and highly subjective.

I found a Slate article from 2003 that delved into this issue, inspired by the controversy surrounding states' "Choose Life" plates. Here is one relevant passage:

Whether or not the tags are "controversial" or even "political" or "opposable" is irrelevant for First Amendment purposes, when the legislature is breezily permitting some to be created and others to be denied. The relevant question is whether state legislatures are taking it upon themselves to decide what "political" or "controversial" mean in the first place, and what standards they use to do so, because in doing so, they are by definition discriminating based on viewpoint. While different states have different mechanisms for approving the programs, most involve some advocacy group proving to the legislature that there is sufficient demand for the plates to generate income. That means that if an organization can get enough signatures pledging to buy the plates, the legislature will consider it. Which in turn means that only popular viewpoints can pass the initial threshold. And if Maynard taught us anything, it was that "the First Amendment protects the right of individuals to hold a point of view different from the majority." Permission to speak shouldn't be doled out by the state based on the popularity of the idea.

But that isn't the end of the unbridled discretion. Because once a bill is in the hands of the legislature, it seems to be a sort of political free-for-all as to whether they wish to approve or disapprove of any group's message. Arkansas refused to give the Knights of Columbus a specialty plate, for fear that the KKK would want one, too. The California legislature went berserk over whether the Boy Scouts should get plates, because some felt the group was discriminatory. So, state discretion doesn't stop with the promotion of only popular ideas. It becomes even more blatant as lawmakers decide whether they approve of the ideas, and apparently, they make these decisions without standards or rules either.

The entire opinion piece/analysis can be found at the link below. I found it fascinating.

http://www.slate.com/id/2078247/

Great research TFT! Interesting reading.


.

 

[kathydwells]

I've been waiting for this one Can you do one with the Miss Kitty tar in the middle????????

 

[Alicia Leonard]

We have a winner

 

[scooterbug44]

There are currently 108 license plates in Florida. I have not reviewed the list. Am I to believe that each of this non-profit organizations is a government sanctioned entity?

IMO:
A license plate is a government issued and publicly displayed form of identification.

If they issue a license plate that benefits a certain group, they give that group legitimacy and ARE approving of that cause.

If you can get a license plate for your cause it is now a group/cause recognized by the government and funds are collected by the government on behalf of that group.

I think the group who asked for this license plate has a good cause (funds go to maintain gravesites etc) and that they just need a different design that removes the racial overtones that the flag unfortunately represents. A graphic showing a veteran, a cannon, or a military figure w/ the tag line "honoring our confederate veterans" etc. would be much less controversial.

 

[Geo]

This thread reinforces my belief that we can tolerate anything except tolerance.

Love the words- especially the fact that they might have been used in a strategically ambiguous way to make both sides think they were for them... (no sarcasm intended here)

In getting past the ambiguity, may I ask (and would you answer)-

Do your words mean that you believe folks who don't like the flag should demonstrate tolerance for those who are proud of it by not protesting its usage on gov't issued license plates?

Or that you believe that folks who are proud of the flag should demonstrate tolerance for those who aren't proud of its racist associations/inflammatory nature by discontinuing support of its proposed usage on gov't issued license plates?

Or both?

Finally, do you not believe that by participating in this discussion without crossing the line toward personal attacks that folks on two different ends of the issue are demonstrating some tolerance?

Thanks...