Great, so I have to change my historical symbol because it was misapporpriated and people are too dumb to understand that.
Kind of like people who avoid saying the words niggling or niggardly becasue people are too dumb to know its not a racist word- oh but it could be- you could be using the word to insult someone on the sly, or you could just be using it because its the right word in the context. Same with the flag.
Now in today’s society, I’m not even advocating flying a Nazi or rebel flag, I’m just saying it sucks for those who would like to for non racist reasons but can’t because soceity can’t understand the difference.
It’s not because people are dumb. It’s because the communicative significance of the symbol has changed. It happens all the time.
Sometimes it might seem kind of unfair, but it’s a symbol. When it starts symbolizing something else to a good proportion of the people around you, it’s just silliness to insist “No, it means what I think it means, not what you think it means!”
Words change their meanings too. And some words become obsolete. Yes, I know what “niggardly” means, but, you know what, we’re talking about a communicative tool. Communication is a two-way street: Both the understandings of the speaker and the listener are important. When a word or a symbol no longer communicates what you intend it to, then it’s time to pick another tool.
Is it dumb or stupid that most English speakers understand “purchase” to mean “to obtain in exchange for money” instead of “to take by force”? A word is merely a symbol too, and when its meaning changes, it changes. It’s not dumb or stupid. It’s simply how things are.
[By the way, Wee Bairn, that “get a fucking clue” wasn’t directed at you. I wrote it before I saw your post.]
Is it really misappropriated though? It is a flag that symbolizes the rebellion of a large chunk of the nation over the issue of slavery (and before anyone gets going on that statement I acknowledge there was more then one reason but in spite of some interesting arguments to the contrary slavery does still seem to be the main issue the war began over) and was later adopted as a symbol of racism and violence. It has no proud history before the Civil War (well as far as I’m aware I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m ignorant of it’s origins).
My objection in that thread was that it was in GQ-- a forum where we are supposed to be discussing factual answers to questions. There is no way to factually verify some of the statements people were making about the political and/or racial leanings of all people who fly that flag. That is all.
I understand that the flag is often a symbol of hatred and bigotry, but let’s keep to the facts in GQ, as the moderator of that forum requested.
This would be a completely different debate if people were given a chance to explain their side of it.
Do people seriously not believe that someone could display that flag for something other than support of slavery?
I’m talking about knowing what it feels like to have people hate/fear you.
If they are racist, why are they hiding it at all? What would be the point of a racist person displaying a sign that says “I hate black people, but no I actually don’t.” If anything, that should offend the racists who don’t want their symbol tainted.
I am drawing a comparison because I don’t think it’s fair to assume a negative context about something.
I remember an interview with Chris Rock on Inside the Actor’s Studio where he was confronted with the question of why it’s okay to use the n-word. His answer was really profound, he explained that (I’m paraphrasing) “When they gave us scraps, we turned it into soul food. When they give us this dirty, horrible, awful word, we turn it into poetry.” That’s how I see the flag and it’s representation on the General Lee, that of taking something that has a negative connotation to a lot of people and focusing on the positive interpretation. It is an attempt to disarm the negativity.
I suspect that wearing a John Deere hat, torn flannel and jeans with a skoal ring while driving around in a rusty, lifted pickup truck with big tires also makes people assume a person is racist. And that’s an inappropriate assumption, no different from other inappropriate assumptions about people based on appearance.
I think I’ve said this before but here (and in the UK too I think) that flag is generally used to represent beef burgers on packaging and in ads, or other Southern-style foods.
I really have no axe to grind about the flag of the CSA. Matter of fact I think it’s quite attractive.
To me it’s just a flag that represented a cause that was fought for and failed…almost 150 years ago!
As a Briton I just cannot see why you guys still see your collective arses over that banner, it really puzzles me.
OK We had problems with the flag of St.George being associated with the NF and British Natiional party but that soon died the death, it sure didn’t take long either.
Actually, you can get that article from that page.
You just need to sign up for a free Social Science Research Network account. I’ve had one for a while now, and it’s very useful. I was able to download a copy of the article without a problem; if anyone wants a copy, let me know.
Hard to see how anyone can be “denied pride in their heritage and culture,” since that’s a personal feeling that shouldn’t be tied to any particular display of it. But as to your hypothetical: It would be a great shame if these fictional Luxemburgers found their swastika flag had been misappropriated but: (a) if in fact it undeniably HAD been misappropriated and they knew it, and (b) displaying had become an act almost certain to be misunderstood and devisive, and they knew that as well – then I think you would have a strong argument that if the fictional Luxemburgers defiantly stood on their rights to fly their swastika flag, no matter how painful and offensive to others, then they were a bunch of assholes.
I’m from Montana but I now live in the South. Do I think people who fly the Confederate flag are a bunch of ignorant redneck knuckedraggers, insensitive and stupid if not actually racist? Yes, I do.
If you are a Hindu living in the United States or Europe, you have to be crazy to display a swastika outside your house. It’s just common sense, and all Hindus living in the West abide by it. I have items of Hindu significance inside my house that bear swastikas, but they are not displayed prominently and they certainly aren’t displayed in public.
If it’s only what’s in your mind that matters, then why are you using a communicative tool in public?
It was also used more recently to symbolize opposition to desegregation and for general racialism. We aren’t just remembering a 150-year-old event.
Is it really all that incomprehensible? How would people react if you flew a Nazi flag in front of your house or painted one on the roof of your car?
That’s kind of like how I have a swastika tattoo to demonstrate my support for the state of Isreal.
Man, I don’t think I’ve ever seen an analogy so fundamentally flawed as that one. The two situations aren’t comparable because the Confederate flag was never used as an insult to Southerners. In point of fact, it was used by a lot of Southerners as an insult to other people. A better example would be if you started calling black people “niggers,” but insisted that the word meant, “a fine, upstanding gentleman.” No matter how much you really, truly, honestly believe that to be what the word means, most people are going to walk away with a dramatically different interpretation. The Confederate flag was widely used, for a long time, with a specific, deliberatly offensive intent. You can’t expect people to simply forget all the other meanings attached to that symbol.
I’m sorry. I should have distinguished between racist asshole and ignorant ones. Oh wait, I did:
I maintain that if one flies that flag, one is either racist or ignorant, and very likely an asshole. I think a pretty good GQ case can be, or already has been, made.
Why would anyone be so proud of a lost cause? One that was horribly racist and ignorant?
The swastika has a long history within that religion, and was appropriated as a symbol for a madman’s lunacy. As acsenray points out, there is hope for its rehabilitation. There are no such historical roots or other meaning that can be used to rehabilitate the “Southern Cross” flag. Besides which, the Hindu svastika is different than the Nazi swastika, so it isn’t really an analogous situation.
And if you choose to use a symbol, others can only assume that you know what it means and that is why you are using it.
Are you missing the point that the negative associations of the Confederate flag did not end with Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Courthouse? As it has been pointed out, what we call the “Confederate flag” was never the official national flag of the Confederacy. Its cultural significance has to do with the rise of the K.K.K., Jim Crow, lynchings, legal segregation, and continuing general racism, all of which happened after the Civil War and have continued in some form or another since then (although significantly reduced since the school busing battles of the 1970s).
The association of the Confederate flag with racist views is not based on the Civil War, but on recent use of it as a symbol for racist causes.
This is a facile distinction and reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the Civil War and of the role of racism in American history.
(1) The Civil War was not merely a squabble among siblings. It was a war over fundamental notions of nationhood, humanity, justice, and freedom. A war in which the side that was wrong lost. Very analogous to the Nazis.
(2) Do I have to say it again? It’s not just about the Civil War. HELLO? McFly?
