Boy, this is confusing to a Midwesterner who did not meaningfully encounter anyone of a different race until he went to college. There, one black basketball player was the most popular guy on campus and the most sought after roommate for the dorms. I was included. Jackie was a fantastic person, an outstanding ball player, and a dedicated Christian. "What is the deal about race?" I wondered. He was even smarter than I.
Our most meaningful encounters with those off campus, besides the churches we attended, was "Townies." These were local youths, usually high school jocks, who objected to the college kids picking the cream of the female crop in town. Before I arrived, "Techies" as we were known then, and Townies literally fought pitched battles with bike chains and ball bats.
When I arrived in 1965 the fervor had cooled and was largely limited to verbal encounters and hostile stares. Since I had no car, my exposure was largely limited to the Gibson Discount Center across the street from campus. But the idea of race never entered any of our confrontations.
So imagine my surprise when race riots broke out several years later. And frankly, I am still "amused" at the fury of certain blocks of thought in our country. The current headlines cover articles proclaiming that Confederate monuments are monuments to white supremacy on one side and conversely beloved historical reminders of brave men and boys who fought for their homes.
Before going any farther, we all need to take a step back. First, the "losing" side did not lose their homes and families. This was an anomaly in warfare up to that time. Lincoln said it best in his second inaugural address.
"With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."
This noble sentiment may have never permeated our society, but it at least moderated the residual animosity from the struggle. Today it seems that we are farther from that than ever. Some denounce these symbols, as mentioned above, as symbols of white supremacy. Add to that the inclusion of swastikas in some rallies and an atmosphere of hatred is inferred.
Notice that I used, deliberately, "inferred." It may indeed be accurate, but they are merely symbols. Yes, symbols can resurrect unpleasant memories, particularly in those who are personally connected with them as Holocaust survivors and their families. The "Confederate battle flag" holds no such "personal" contact with anyone alive today. But both can be painful reminders of past abuses and atrocities.
Perspective is the critical word here. The Civil War was concluded with a total surrender of the Confederacy. Any residual reminders of that side of the war must certainly be coupled with the term, and I hope I do not alienate my local friends, "loser." The Union, The United States of America won the war. That is the flag that prevailed in eliminating slavery. It reunited the seceded states with the United States.
Has every vestige of the past been eradicated? No, of course not. But stirring up old animosities does not seem to be a productive way of combating the shortcomings. Whenever I see a Battle Flag flying, I wonder why that guy is celebrating the losing side. He might be like the pre-2016 Cubs fans, who continually supported the lovable losers at Wrigley. But the Cubs were not morally, socially, and ethically detestable. This flag waving crowd truly deserves H. Clinton's disapprobation of "basket of deplorables."
And the swastika is even more poignant as a symbol of absolute loss. Again, warfare, after WWI and WWII, was revolutionized with the losing side being rebuilt and rehabilitated by the winning philosophy. But Germany surrendered, unconditionally, to the Allies. Since England and France were decimated by the war, the recovery was pretty much fueled by Uncle Sam.
I do not see extremist groups running around waving the German or Japanese flags. All that is selected is the most extreme, and most highly offensive, defeated symbol, literally, in the world.
And not to be too personal here, but one cannot wonder if waving the defeated flags is not a self-pronouncement of "loser." Admittedly, my "dog in the hunt" won in both WWII and the Civil War. But I am not offended if the opposition wishes to remember and memorialize their losing heroes. But they lost.
And for the swastika, what more scorn can we heap on it? It is the symbol of a failed and defeated philosophy. Compared to the "atrocities" of the Nazis in Europe, the infractions associated with both sides in the Civil War pale into insignificance. So parading that odious symbol must indicate that either the parader is either ignorant of the history and significance, or stupid.
If merely ignorant of the reprehensible history, then he is capable of remediation. He can learn and profit from the lesson. If he knows about the flag and persists in flaunting it, the only summation appropriate is stupid. No rational, reasonable, responsible member of society can possibly march under this standard and its implications.
But, as our old friend Gomer Pyle said, "You can't roller skate in a buffalo herd." Implying that to try was less than intelligent. Plus you get your skates all messy.
Forest Gump reminds us that, "Stupid is as stupid does." Or to rephrase it, "You can't fix stupid."
Final observation. The "divisive" monuments have not sparked riots until one side decided to remove them. Many of them have existed for 100 years or more and all was peaceful. Some may be offended, but I am offended at White Castle restaurants. I think of slime sliding down my throat. So I avoid them. Not comparable, I know, but the concept is transferable.
The monuments hurt no one. The monuments help no one. Let's find a constructive way to communicate and see the world from someone else's perspective. We won't change history. But we can make new history.
Peace, brothers.
Addendum: Just for the record, I became aware of US Code 85-425 Section 40 5/23/1958. This law makes all Civil War veterans equivalent to US soldiers. Further Public Law 810 of 2/26/1929 declares that all headstones and grave sites of Confederate soldiers are US sites.
So the activists are attacking United States' veterans' memorials and monuments. Seems like our parents and grandparents were ready to "get over it." So the emphasis on reigniting this conflagration is an act of defiance to the United States. Where will it end?
Again, let them rest in peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment