The Confederate flag issue rekindled

[Greenville]

I think many people's frustration lies with the NAACP's handling of the situation, not "black people" in general. Only the most ignorant (and probably racist) people equate the two.

When the flag was brought down in the first place, it was largely because the NAACP made it into a huge issue. The media was involved, politicians were involved, etc. Although it brought a lot of negative press on our state, it was also good in that it caused our state to realize how silly the flag was and it resulted in the flag being removed. What bothers many people is the fact that the two "sides" - the government and the NAACP - agreed that removing the flag from the dome and putting it in a memorial on the state house grounds was satisfactory. Not long after that, the new placement was deemed offensive and the NAACP felt that a boycott was still necessary. As a result, our state has been robbed of hosting NCAA postseason tournaments, and who knows how many other economic development opportunities, because our state looks racist and insensitive.

I do not blame the NAACP for the problem entirely, but I am trying to explain why some people seem to dislike this situation so much. I personally do not care one bit about the flag. I don't want it on the dome, I don't want where it is now, and I don't even want it to be visible anywhere on the grounds. It means nothing to me. But if the NAACP truly wants the flag brought down, it should rethink its stance. At this point, it has left many SC residents frustrated and confused as to how the original agreement is still not "acceptable."

[waccamatt]

I think that's because is a bigger deal to people in other states than it is here. Outside of this UP thread, I very rarely hear anyone talk about the Confederate Battle flag because its a non-issue. It may represent different things to different people, but the reality is that taking that flag down won't change anything except perhaps to pacify the media.

[krazeeboi]

I think many people's frustration lies with the NAACP's handling of the situation, not "black people" in general. Only the most ignorant (and probably racist) people equate the two.

When the flag was brought down in the first place, it was largely because the NAACP made it into a huge issue. The media was involved, politicians were involved, etc. Although it brought a lot of negative press on our state, it was also good in that it caused our state to realize how silly the flag was and it resulted in the flag being removed. What bothers many people is the fact that the two "sides" - the government and the NAACP - agreed that removing the flag from the dome and putting it in a memorial on the state house grounds was satisfactory. Not long after that, the new placement was deemed offensive and the NAACP felt that a boycott was still necessary. As a result, our state has been robbed of hosting NCAA postseason tournaments, and who knows how many other economic development opportunities, because our state looks racist and insensitive.

I do not blame the NAACP for the problem entirely, but I am trying to explain why some people seem to dislike this situation so much. I personally do not care one bit about the flag. I don't want it on the dome, I don't want where it is now, and I don't even want it to be visible anywhere on the grounds. It means nothing to me. But if the NAACP truly wants the flag brought down, it should rethink its stance. At this point, it has left many SC residents frustrated and confused as to how the original agreement is still not "acceptable."

[Spartan]

It may not be a big deal where you are right now, Spartan, but I do believe it's a big deal here in Columbia because the vast majority of the people here want it gone. We have to deal with the repurcussions of the flag more than anyone else in the state even though we don't want it there. The city even tried to sue the state for its removal a few years ago. I feel very strongly that it should be on display in the state museum as a relic of our state's past - not on display at the State House as a symbol of the present.

[pricemiller]

I think the flag should be in a museum. I have an idea for what would be a beautiful museum, a landmard for Columbia and hopefully honoring the whole confederate heritage thing without slapping Americians of African descent in the face. It would costs millions and have to be privately funded. Many of us believe that flag should be in a museum . . . how many of us have thought about what that museum would be like and how it could be so eloquently designed and built to accomplish these great objectives: not insult the good people who now are insulted by that flag flying where it is, give appropriate homeage to those who want to 'remember their heritage' and give Columbia a landmark a great city can be proud of.

I saw a Discovery Channel production on Sherman's March through the South. It showed how Sherman really hated South Carolina and particularly wanted to get to Columbia, the place where the great rebellion began. . . . we all know what happened . . . "Columbia was left a wasteland" . . . [as Sherman continued his march north]. To me, this production, and just about anything written or produced about war, shows how terrible war is. That war left unbelievably deep wounds and scars on the land, the infrastructure and the people and culture of the South and Columbia. The only really good thing about that war is that the abomination of slavery was ended. The point I want to get to is that this film showed how in war, basically good people end up doing terrible things. I am NOT defending Sherman, btw. There were thousands of Southerners who fought bravely in what they believed in, even though we all now agree that slavery was horrible. In the end, they were fighting for their lives, for their land, just for their very existence. The burning of Columbia, to me, is a great metaphor for the profound psychic and cultural wounds that all people suffered in that war. I am strongly opposed to the Confederate Flag being flown where it is right now. I do, however, understand that their are many people in the Southern Heritage movement (some of my own family memebers included) that want the flag flown 'proudly'. I say TAKE IT DOWN . . . but I am thinking, how do you honor the deep wounds that the South suffered, how do you allow for some kind of tribute to Confederates and not offend so many of us who are deeply offended by that flag. A museum? A museum so eloquently designed and built that it shows the pain of war, the glory of freedom and still honors those who "fell fighting for their homeland (in their experience?) [excuse my rambling, I am just trying to put out my thoughts and get to my maiin idea which is how to build a museum for that flad]. It would take ga-millions of dollars, but I would live with a museum that had that flag flying . . . flying inside a building, undere a dome, perhaps a beautiful open air dome with an opening above like the Pantheon in Rome (one of my favorite buildings ever). It would be a large dome, relatively low on the horizon, with the flag flying on a pole under it, perhaps a sculpture of a saddened Confederate soldiere with his gun down facing the flag on one side and a sculpture of a freed slave on the other side facing away from the flag . . . facing freedom and the future. These, of course are just ideas, but what do others think. Is there really any museum that could satisfy both sides of this issue? If there is, then I think it is important to build it for the healing it would represent.

[krazeeboi]

I think the flag should be in a museum. I have an idea for what would be a beautiful museum, a landmard for Columbia and hopefully honoring the whole confederate heritage thing without slapping Americians of African descent in the face. It would costs millions and have to be privately funded. Many of us believe that flag should be in a museum . . . how many of us have thought about what that museum would be like and how it could be so eloquently designed and built to accomplish these great objectives: not insult the good people who now are insulted by that flag flying where it is, give appropriate homeage to those who want to 'remember their heritage' and give Columbia a landmark a great city can be proud of.

[GvilleSC]

While I agree that the flag coming down won't solve the state's problems at all, I do think it could be a nice step toward turning a lot of things in this state around. It would have to be more of a symbolic change, because it really won't change ALL that much. The state house will still have its problems whether the rag hangs outside or not. But that's just what it will be. When change comes to the STate House, the state will change, including the position on the Confederate flag, and the ceremony to bring the flag down will represent that change. How likely this is and When... well, that depends on SC voters-- not the NAACP.

Personally I think they need to go ahead and move the monument all together before someone comes along, finds offense, and we deal with this sort of division again.

[Infinite1]

I think many people's frustration lies with the NAACP's handling of the situation, not "black people" in general. Only the most ignorant (and probably racist) people equate the two.

When the flag was brought down in the first place, it was largely because the NAACP made it into a huge issue. The media was involved, politicians were involved, etc. Although it brought a lot of negative press on our state, it was also good in that it caused our state to realize how silly the flag was and it resulted in the flag being removed. What bothers many people is the fact that the two "sides" - the government and the NAACP - agreed that removing the flag from the dome and putting it in a memorial on the state house grounds was satisfactory. Not long after that, the new placement was deemed offensive and the NAACP felt that a boycott was still necessary. As a result, our state has been robbed of hosting NCAA postseason tournaments, and who knows how many other economic development opportunities, because our state looks racist and insensitive.

I do not blame the NAACP for the problem entirely, but I am trying to explain why some people seem to dislike this situation so much. I personally do not care one bit about the flag. I don't want it on the dome, I don't want where it is now, and I don't even want it to be visible anywhere on the grounds. It means nothing to me. But if the NAACP truly wants the flag brought down, it should rethink its stance. At this point, it has left many SC residents frustrated and confused as to how the original agreement is still not "acceptable."

[krazeeboi]

Another thing that irks me with all of this talk about the "compromise" is that this is not something that the people of SC agreed to. For instance, Glenn McConnell said in his editorial about the new debate over the flag: "For all fair-minded people, the issue of the Confederate battle flag has been resolved." How so? The "fair-minded" people he speaks of had no voice in the debates. If that guy had his way, he'd bury the Hunley right behind the Confederate memorial as well. I really can't wait until this guy gets out of the way of progress in this state. He's a "good ol' boy" all around.

[Spartan]

I can sort of see what McConnell is saying, but I think he's off base. The Confederate naval jack was put on the state house by the General Assembly to start with. Nobody in the state got a say in it then, so IMO there's no reason to ask for it now. Its up to the General Assembly to resolve the issue.

[whitehourseview]

I can sort of see what McConnell is saying, but I think he's off base. The Confederate naval jack was put on the state house by the General Assembly to start with. Nobody in the state got a say in it then, so IMO there's no reason to ask for it now. Its up to the General Assembly to resolve the issue.

[Spartan]

They absolutely do. But it sounds like McConnell wants to put it to a referrendum, which is not how the flag was placed on the state house or the memorial to start with.

[sonofaque86]

LMAO @ seeing this crap everyday living down here. I swear. I see the confederate flag more in SC than I get to see the American flag!

[ryanmckibben]

Isn't it funny that you never see a confederate flag bumper sticker on a Lexus or a BMW, always seems top be pickups. Wait...I wonder if education level has anything to do with that? Hmmm...

[krazeeboi]

Well....

[BryCola]

Isn't it funny that you never see a confederate flag bumper sticker on a Lexus or a BMW, always seems top be pickups. Wait...I wonder if education level has anything to do with that? Hmmm...

[912]

Or may those driving the Lexus' don't want to place a bumper sticker of any kind on their car?

I'd venture to say that many members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans are educated & have money.

[krazeeboi]

^Usually their vehicular placards will say something like "Sons of Confederate Veterans" or something like that. Still, it's not anything that I see often.

Here's a pretty good editorial from a writer with the Chicago Tribune, who has roots in Columbia, about how outsiders, particularly African Americans, may view the Confederate flag issue here in SC. I'd say it's a pretty balanced piece.

[Mr.Marc]

^It's amazing that the presence of the Confederate flag is so strong that the author went from wanting to move to the state to not wanting to even visit.

That is a good example of how the flag is really hurting SC's economy as well its ability to keep newcomers from moving here.

[Mr.Marc]

On the other hand, I wonder why Atlanta has seen so many transplants (of all races, but especially black) when their state flag (which practically was the confederate flag) was just recently removed from it's capital dome.

[krazeeboi]

^That would be due to the sheer size and economic influence of Atlanta. Plus the city itself is known as the Cradle of the Civil Rights movement. In many people's minds, there is Atlanta, and then there is Georgia, and they know that although Atlanta is the capital, the Statehouse represents a Georgia that is almost worlds removed from Atlanta.

[waccamatt]

^That would be due to the sheer size and economic influence of Atlanta. Plus the city itself is known as the Cradle of the Civil Rights movement. In many people's minds, there is Atlanta, and then there is Georgia, and they know that although Atlanta is the capital, the Statehouse represents a Georgia that is almost worlds removed from Atlanta.

[krazeeboi]

The South Carolina Declaration of Secesseion is even more telling. The only "right" explicitly mentioned is the right to own slaves.

Going back to the editorial piece from the Chicago Tribune, it shows how the flag affects Columbia the most. That article probably would have never been written if his roots were in Florence or Spartanburg.

[waccamatt]

The South Carolina Declaration of Secesseion is even more telling. The only "right" explicitly mentioned is the right to own slaves.

Going back to the editorial piece from the Chicago Tribune, it shows how the flag affects Columbia the most. That article probably would have never been written if his roots were in Florence or Spartanburg.

[Spartan]

I don't know anyone who says slavery wasnt a central issue- it just wasn't the ONLY issue.

I argue that people don't object to respecting the past if done in a more tasteful manner. Many people don't realize that Georgia's current flag is actually a variation on the first national flag of the Confederacy (there were 3 flags total). A lot of businesses refused to fly the old Georgia flag because it had the Confederate BATTLE flag within its design. Now, people and businesses are flying the new flag accross the whole state left and right. I also have seen the first national flag in Charleston, Savannah, St Augustine, and a number of other places to represent the confederate portion of their history. Its proof that people don't mind the hertiage aspect of the South's history if done correctly.

The naval jack and the battle flag, which we are all familiar with, flew on our state house and currently flies at the Confederate memorial are what is associated with racism/segregation that was promoted in the last century. This is what people don't like, and are "outraged" over. I think a comprpmise could be reached by changing the flag to the 1st national flag. Doing this would remove the divisive aspects of the battle flag, which ought to appease the "hate" crowd, and it should preserve the history, which should appease the "heritage" crowd.

I'm sure many of you will still disagree, because its still acknowledging the confederacy- however, you can't deny that people do not object to the 1st national flag like they do the battle flag and the naval jack.

1st national flag of the Confederacy