NAACP Flag Criticism Unwarranted

 

 

 

Being a Southern Heritage activist, I have been following the news stories about the return of the Confederate Flag in Missouri closely.

 

Notice that I choose my words carefully and deliberately, I refuse to refer to the subject of the Confederate flag as an “issue” and for good reason.

 

The Confederate Battle Flag flew at Higginsville Confederate Cemetery and the Second National Confederate Flag flew at the Fort Davidson State Historic Site for decades without incident or controversy ,  they were a non issue until Former Democratic Representative Dick Gephardt decided to make them an issue.

 

He did this while unofficially launching his Presidential Campaign in South Carolina. While doing so he stated that the Confederate flag should not be displayed anywhere, anytime and called the Confederate flag “hurtful” and “divisive”, not realizing that Missouri flew two Confederate Flags. This presented a problem for the Democratic presidential candidate hopeful.

 

Former Democratic Governor Bob Holden came up with a quick solution, and ordered the flags removed, thus creating an even bigger issue.

 

Perhaps the Governor didn’t realize by doing so that he was dishonoring two of Missouri’s most famous Black Confederate Veterans, John Nolan, a free black man that rode as scout and spy for William Quantrill and “Uncle Charlie” Baker who road with Captain Bill Anderson. At any rate the Governor chose to dishonor many of Missouri’s veterans in his pursuit of his  political ambitions.

 

Governor Matt Blunt’s recent decision to order the Confederate Battle Flag raised at the Higginsville Cemetery for one day was the first time in over two years that a Confederate Flag has flown on state property.

 

This decision has brought much criticism directed towards Governor Blunt by the NAACP.

 

The NAACP has been very vocal in its criticism regarding Governor Blunt’s decision to fly the flag at Higginsville during the Confederate Memorial Day service on June 5 of this year. Below are just a few of the statements of criticism offered by NAACP:

 

In an article entitled, “Confederate flag to fly Sunday in Missouri” (published in the Kansas City Star, Friday, June 3rd) Mary Ratliff, President of the Missouri Conference of the NAACP was quoted as saying, "It is just appalling to me that the governor would again raise a flag that is so humiliating and reminds us of the vestige of slavery that has divided our nation for all these years”

 

In a recent story that appeared in the Marshall (Mo)–Democrat entitled, “Confederate flag in Higginsville sparks controversy” (published June 9, 2005) the NAACP offers yet more criticism in the form of a press release: “For anyone to imply or even suggest that a symbol that was used to terrorize, threaten, intimidate, bully and frighten individuals can somehow retain any value in our society is absurd"

 

Are these statements examples of legitimate criticism? A review of the facts might prove otherwise.

 

On the subject of racism and slavery, why isn’t this same criticism directed toward the United States flag?

 

After all, slavery was considered legal and protected by the U.S. Constitution for decades prior to the formation of the Confederate States of America.  Northeastern shipping merchants became wealthy by participating in the slave trade and it should also be noted that no slave ship ever flew the Confederate Flag but many flew the Stars and Stripes.

 

And two of Missourians most noted slave-holders were staunch supporters of the Union. 

 

One was Sylvester Baker, a pro-Union legislator who did not believe in state’s rights but saw nothing wrong with slavery.  It was after a raid on Baker’s home that “Uncle Charlie” Baker, (Sylvester Baker’s slave) decided to ride with Confederate Captain Bill Anderson.

 

The other was General Ulysses S. Grant who once stated, "If I thought this war was about slavery, I would offer my sword to the other side"

 

As for the association of the Confederate Flag with racism and groups such as the KKK a quick search on the internet will provide plenty of photographic evidence that the Confederate flag is not the only flag flown by the KKK. The KKK has flown and still does fly the United States Flag.

 

As to the accusation that the Confederate flag is a symbol of terrorism and that any attempt to legitimize it is absurd, I must ask the question; is it absurd to suggest that the United States flag can somehow retain any value in our society?

 

It was under the flag of the United States that General Ewing’s Order #11 was issued. This issue displaced thousands of Missourians, both Union and Confederate. It has been described by historian Albert Castel as, “the most drastic and repressive military measures directed against civilians by the Union Army during the Civil War. In fact...it stands as the harshest treatment ever imposed on United States citizens under the plea of military necessity in our Nations History."

 

Most people would find it absurd to suggest that the flag of our country is a symbol of terrorism.  Like most Southerners who fly the Confederate flag, many people fly the United States flag to honor good men who died for their country. It is this writer’s opinion that good men who died for their country should be honored by flying the flag of the country for which they fought at their grave sites. As a friend of mine once said, “If I had a Yankee buried on my property, I would honor him by flying the American flag over his grave”.

 

NAACP National Chairman of the Board, Julian Bond certainly hasn’t helped with misconceptions regarding the Confederate flag.

 

In an article entitled, “Blacks Have a Compassionate Friend in Bush” (L.A. Times, August 2, 2004)

Julian Bond is quoted as saying, “Republicans' "idea of equal rights is the American flag and Confederate swastika flying side by side

 

Julian Bond is an intelligent man, surely he realizes that the two flags look nothing alike, and symbolize two very different things.

 

The Swastika represents Hitler, who was an aggressor and sought world domination.

 

The Confederate Battle Flag represents the South, a nation that was invaded, and only sought to be left alone.

 

Doesn’t Julian Bond realize that the estimated number of Jews who fought for the Confederacy was a minimum of 2000 and high estimates rate that number at 10,000?

 

Why does Julian Bond use the phrase, “Confederate Swastika”?

 

Possible answers to this question are found in an article entitled, “Is the NAACP still relevant as it nears 100?(Published May 31’st 2004, St. Petersburg Times).  Information found in the article states that:

“As the NAACP moves toward its centennial, people inside and outside wonder whether its mission is still relevant.

Membership is down. In 1995, the organization had about 650,000 members. Today the number is about 500,000, according to the national office. And some lifetime members may never attend a local branch meeting.”

If the NAACP is attempting to use the Confederate flag as an issue to attract new members , rejuvenate current members, and encourage the public to increase its donations the information found in the St. Petersburg – Times article suggests that this strategy might be having the reverse effect on the organization.

With fewer members, and a smaller donation base the NAACP is limited in its ability to leverage its political clout.

The NAACP has “hinted” that a boycott of Missouri might be in the works.  Mary Ratliff, President of the Missouri Conference of the NAACP has been quoted as saying, “she would be "asking for drastic measures from our national office."  She also noted that, “the NAACP has led a 5-year-old boycott of South Carolina because of its display of the Confederate flag on the statehouse grounds”                                               

(“Confederate flag to fly Sunday in Missouri”, Kansas City Star published Friday June 3, 2005)

 

One has to question the effect that this threat would have if set in motion.   In an article published in the Chicago –Sun Times June 6, 2005 under the headline, “Boycott what boycott?” We learn that the NAACP/NCAA boycott is not having a negative impact on South Carolina’s economy. The article states that:

“I'll be honest with you, we no longer see any significant or measurable impact from that -- haven't since the flag came down,'' said Marion Edmonds, spokesman for the Parks, Recreation & Tourism Department.

The NAACP insists the boycott still has an effect. But numbers are hard to come by.

If there has been an effect, it is not reflected in tourism-related tax collections, Edmonds said. According to his agency, hotel tax receipts increased $3.5 million during the boycott.”

All of this proves that the NAACP’s criticism of the Governor and the Confederate flag are not only unwarranted but ineffective as well.

It should also be noted that Missouri’s Southerners do not criticize Missouri’s Black citizens for celebrating “Black History Month” or “Martin Luther King Day”.

As a proud Missouri Southerner, it would be nice to receive the same respect from the NAACP when it comes to my heritage.

Clint E. Lacy

Return to Show Me South! Homepage

 

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1