Conference smurf::civil_war

    
    	Moderator,
    
    
    	Sorry, I meant to put this in the Rat Hole...  mental lapse?
    
    
    	r�

If it's all right with you, R^2, I'll leave it where it is.  This is a
topic in itself, not a digression from something else.

-dick

    Atlanta Journal--Friday, May 29th
    
    
    Current state flag dates to '56 battle over desegregation
    
    by Steve Harvey
    
    	When state Rep. Frank redding (D-Decatur) first suggested that
    Confederate symbols had no place in a modern Georgia flag, other
    legislators scoffed.  Then Gov.  Joe Frank Harris and his successor,
    Zell Miller, declared it a non-issue.
    	Mr. Redding, who is black, proposed legislation changing the flag
    in 1987, after Georgia made national news when white supremacists
    attacked civil rights marchers in Fortsythe County.
    	In a speech on the House floor that year, Mr. redding invoked the
    image of the marchers and the jeering counterdemonstrators who pelted
    with rocks while waving Confederate flags.  He wondered how Robert E.
    Lee and Jefferson Davis would have felt at the sight of "one of those
    crazies" waving their emblem.
    	Mr. Redding suggested replacing the current flag with the one that
    existed before 1956.
    
    			MILLER SEES ADVANCEMENT
    
    	On Thursday, with the glare of the publicity from the 1996 Olympics
    approaching, Mr. redding and other supporters picked up their most
    powerful ally when Mr. Miller joined the cause.
    	"We've made alot of advancement in the last several years," Mr.
    Miller said.  "This is the final step Georgia must take to really
    become a member of the new South."
    	Mr. Redding was ecstatic "Georgia is going to move into the 21st
    Century, and we're going to do it in a way that's going to show respect
    for all Georgians," he said.
    	Until recently, most Georgians probably didn't know that today's
    flag has been around only since 1956.
    	Adopted under the administration of former Governor Marvin Griffin,
    it was seen as a symbol of defiance of the Supreme Court-ordered school
    desegregation.
    	Three other Southern states.  South Carolina and Alabama fly the
    Confederate flags over over their capitol buildings, while Georgia and
    Mississippi have incorporated it into the design of their state flags.
    	Supporters of the current state flag contend that it was an attempt
    to honor Georgia's heritage.  But in 1956, Rep. Denmark Groover
    (D-Macon) decalred, "This will show that we in Georgia intend to uphold
    what we stood for."
    	Before that, the flaf had displayed three diffeent designs during
    the previous 150 years.
    	The first state flag in 1799 was a simple blue field with the state
    seal in the center.  In 1879, state lawmakers - many of whom served in
    the Civil War - modified the flag to include three horizontal red and
    white panels to the right of the plain blue field.  In 1905, the added
    the state seal.
    	In 1988, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
    People mounted an extensive lobbying effort, gaining 16,000 signatures
    on petitions urging that the flag be changed.  Before this year,
    support for restoring the flag to the 1956 design gained little
    momentum.  In March, a 90-member group called the Georgia Civil Rights
    Network launched a campaign to change the flag.  The coalition includes
    the American Civil Liberties Union, Common Cause, the King Center, the
    NAACP and the National Organization for Women.
    	The group began lining up corporate allies and circulated petitions
    to present to the Legislature next year.
    	More recently, Attorney General Michael J. Bowers announced in a
    newspaper his support for changing the flag, saying it was hateful to
    the state's black residents.
    	U.S. Rep. John Lewis, Georgia's only black congressman, was
    recently quoted as saying he does not display the state flag outside
    his Washingtom office because he finds it offensive.
    	Mr. Miller said he consulted Mr. Lewis along with other political,
    business, and religious leaders before deciding to support changing the
    flag.
    	Racial tensions following the Rodney King verdict in Los Angeles
    also were a factor, as were concerns that the state's image would
    suffer as Georgia prepares to host the 1994 Super Bowl and the 1996
    Olympic.
    	"More and more, I see this as an issue that has the potential to
    tarnish the image of the state, both nationally, and internationally,"
    he said.
    	Addressing the issue now, he said, would allow the state to move on
    towards more pressing concerns, such as teen pregnancy, infant
    mortality, and high school dropout rate.
    
    			ARE THE MOVES POLITICAL?
    
    	Some critics question Mr. Miller's motives.
    	"This is part of a broad based attack, accross the country, to
    erase all such symbols," said Charles Lunsford, spokesman for the
    15,000 member Sons of Confederate Veterans. "I think it's unfortunate
    that he would take an action against a huge majorityjust to placate a
    small group of people.  He ought to put it on a statewide ballot if he
    thinks it should be changed."
    	Some wonder if he was swayed by politics concerns, possibly in an
    attempt to be named keynote speaker at the Democratic National
    Convention in July.
    	But others acknowledged that the move could only enhance Mr.
    Millers national reputation.
    	"I think back at the progressive speech he made in Charlotte and
    how that caught people's attention.  To me, this is a higher note,"
    said Rep. Calvin Smyer (D-Columbus), a member of the Democratic
    National Committee.  "For a Southern Governor to do this, it has to
    catch the attention of national Democrats."
    
    

    So.... from reading .3, I take it that the people who want to
    change it, want to change it back to the 1905 design?  Which,
    the article says, is a flag with a large red, white, and red
    stripe, with a blue canton (which has the state seal).
    
    Isn't that, though, *very* similar to the Confederate "Stars
    and Bars"?  (I've also seen a sculpture with the Georgia
    flag as it was in the Civil War - it was like a Stars and Bars,
    but with a different design in the canton than thirteen stars).
    
    If they don't like the current Georgia flag (which has the
    Confederate battle flag as about half of it, I think), why
    would they be any less offended with the 1905 one?  It seems
    they both have about the same amount of Confederate heritage.
    
    Maybe it's that the 3-striped stars-and-bars style isn't
    something that a lot of the current flag's opponents recognize,
    so they're not bothered by it?
    
    All of which makes the latest change proposal look, to me,
    like so much political grandstanding.
    
       Jay

    
    	A living death is being buried in a Hahhvahd dorm wiv a bunch of pc
    	nerdniks who won't let you hang yer reb flag out the window.
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    re: -.2
    
    
    	You are correct.  It looks exactly like a "Stars & Bars" with the
    	State Seal in the blue field.  However, if you go back further than
    	that, you have a solid blue flag with a state seal in the center.
    
    	That was the original state flag from the late 1700's.  Problem is,
    	it has an uncanny resemblance to FINAL flag of the Confederacy, the
    	"Bonnie-Blue", with a single star in the center.  In Georgia, the
    	"Bonnie-Blue" would be more recognizable than the "Stars & Bars",
    	I think...  It got prominent footage in GWTW ;)
    
          
    	r�
    
    
    

	DON'T FURL THAT FLAG!

		A 'SOUTHERN PARTISAN MAGAZINE' reader recently sent us a
	most remarkable newspaper clipping, A COLUMN WRITTEN OVER A DOZEN
	YEARS AGO BY A MAN NAMED W. EARL DOUGLAS. Even then, a movement
	was underway to ban the use of the Confederate Battle Flag in the
	South because it reminded blacks of slavery days. DOUGLAS, A BLACK
	JOURNALIST, was writing in reaction to that logic. With permission
	from THE CHARLESTON NEWS AND COURIER, here are selections from the
	column of APRIL 27, 1979 by W. EARL DOUGLAS.

		"The suggestion that the Confederate Battle Flag should be
	removed has caused heartburn among unreconstructed descendants of
	Confederate soldiers. Alas, it has also brought heartburn to this 
	black writer, who cannot buy the socialist philosophy of the 
	Garrisons and Sumners of yesterday or today. And would rather wave a
	symbol of striving for independence than a food stamp or welfare check,
	which symbolize the hell of defeat more pronounced than that received
	in any war."

		"I CANNOT BE CONVINCED THAT SOUTHERN INDEPENDENCE MEANT ONLY
	THE PERPETUATION OF SLAVERY, BECAUSE HISTORY OF THE TRUTHFUL KIND
	TELLS ME OTHERWISE. The Constitution of the Provisional Government of
	the Confederacy forbade the importation of slaves. How then was
	slavery the motivating force behind the thrust for Southern 
	independence? How did black and white slave-owners exist side by side
	in this region, which was painted by abolitionists as one of black
	and white hostility? WHY WERE THERE ALWAYS MORE FREE NEGROES IN THE
	SLAVE SOUTH THAN IN THE SO-CALLED FREE NORTH OF THE ABOLITIONISTS?
	Such questions remain unanswered....WHITES AND BLACKS PARTNERS IN THE
	DESTINY OF THE SOUTH AND NOT (as the Uncle Tom's Cabin mentality of
	the abolitionists would have had us believe) ONLY AS MASTER AND SLAVE."

		"Today, over a century since that much heralded emancipation,
	it is here in the land of the unfurled Confederate battle flag where
	Negro progress stands above that achieved in any other region of the
	country. For it is here, in the heartland of the old Confederacy,
	where over 70 percent of all black owned housing is to be found and
	where this nation's only viable black economic middle class exists -
	the Southern black farmer."

		"The real tragedy of the Confederate battle flag is that 
	Southerners, white and black, have permitted it to be driven between
	them like a wedge, separating them from a common goal. The racism so
	evident in this controversy is not the flying of the flag but that
	we've permitted it to be designated as pro-white and anti-black.
	I am reminded that it was my grandfather and grandmother who kept the
	home fires burning while the Confederacy waged its war. Which is why
	I cannot view loyalty to the South or the desire for independence as
	being monopolized by either race."

		"If hate had been the prevailing emotion between the races,
	then it is a safe bet that the Confederacy nver would have been born.
	Fortunately there was love, understanding and compassion. AND THE
	TWO GREATEST LIES EVER PERPETRATED BY HISTORY [are] THAT THE SOUTH
	INSTIGATED THE WAR AND THAT IT WAS FOUGHT BY THE NORTH FOR THE
	PURPOSE OF FREEING SLAVES. The Negro was merely used as the excuse
	for that war, while the real reason for it is reflected in every area
	of our lives, when the tentacles of government form the bars of a 
	new slavery."

		"NO DON'T FURL THAT CONFEDERATE BATTLE FLAG. LET IT WAVE ALL
	ACROSS THE SOUTH TO REMIND AMMERICANS THAT THERE EXISTS HERE A 
	LIBERTY, FREEDOM AND INDEPENDENCE THAT WILL NOT BE DENIED. LET IT FLY
	AS A TESTIMONIAL TO REAL MEN AND REAL WOMEN WHO WOULD RATHER WORK
	AND FIGHT THAN SHED TEARS AND BEG FOR GOVERNMENT CHARITY. Finally,
	let it act as a cohesive force, drawing all Southerners together in
	the cause of freedom."

		Less than two months after he wrote these words, W. Earl
	Douglas died. His stirring exhortation, still valid, lives on.

					Article by Richard Quinn
				Southern Partisan Magazine, Second Quarter 1991

			Reprinted without permission
	
		The Alabama Slammer  

                                                   
    
    	It seems that the "pro-flaggers" and "anti-flaggers" get really
    emotional over the Battle Flag issue.  It helps to remove yourself,
    personally, from the issue in order to make sense out of it.  
    
    	I see two basic assumptions.  Those who embrace the flag seem to
    have feelings founded in their Southern heritage.  The flag represents
    a human struggle that brought out the best in many men and women.  It
    also represents a regional/cultural "distinctness" with which Southerners 
    enjoy identifying.  The only time they get into trouble is when, as in
    the Southern Partisan article, they clumsily try to suggest that things
    were bad in the old days but our's was a "nice, consentual, sort of
    caste/slavery social order" and we can always find a place in the world
    where people's rights are in worse shape.
    
    	The other component, those who oppose the flag, seem to be more
    mindful of more recent history.  The assumption here is that the flag
    is an attack on civil rights.  In fact, the Georgia flag added the
    "battle portion" in order to thumb their noses at the Supreme Court
    for decisions to integrate public schools--the separate is not
    equal controversy.  Sometimes these folks run into trouble when they
    show a lack of interest in the historical facts.  There is a hysteria
    surrounding the ten klansmen marching down the street with a Battle
    Flag, surrounded by three score state troopers.
    
    	True Southerners, who have no fear of the 21st century, would
    _probably_ condemn the Georgia General Assembly for prostituting
    the battle flag as they did, if they themselves knew the facts.
    It is a matter of smoothly incorporating the pride and self-
    reliance of the Old South with the opportunity and inclusion of
    a New South.
    
    	It leaves us with a problem.  Can we, in Georgia, now say that
    the flag was altered for one reason, but we're going to leave it
    as it is in the hopes that we can reclaim the original symbolic
    significance of the flag?  
    
    	   

    
    	I agree with your assumptions. You are always going to have two
    view points of any issue. It's human nature.
    
    	The reason I wrote the article into the conversation, was to
    present one man's opinion of the battle flag of the ANV. I personally
    do not believe of a man's right of owning another man. It would seem a
    strange statement coming from someone who defends, so to speak, the 
    Southern viewpoint. But I am not going to deny the fact that slavery
    existed. And I will not say it was a "nice, consentual, sort of 
    caste/slavery social order" to hold a man in bondage.....I might
    portray a Confederate soldier from Alabama, but, that does not mean
    I would support slavery in any shape, way or form..
    
    	What makes my blood boil about this Flag issue is, the way that
    the battle flag is misrepresented. Nothing makes my blood boil more
    than to see that honorable symbol, that men fought and died nobly
    following, used and abused by the likes of KKK, Skinheads, etc. It
    casts an evil shadow over an once proud symbol of men's struggle for
    independence.
    
    	In my humble opinion, I believe it's too late for the noble
    standard. It has been abused to much by such hate groups that the
    battle flag will never regain the proud respect it once had and it's
    a damn shame.....It's not the symbol of the flag, but the people who
    missed used it. I believe the original symbolic significance of the 
    flag is lost to the ages.
    
    					The Alabama Slammer
    
     

    As a African American (and you people thought this was a white only
    conference) why not put the colors of the A.N.C. next to the Stars &
    Bars. That way the southerns could have their pride and the African
    Americans could have their pride. Its a shame that too many whites
    think that the only people you suffer in the war was the white person
    and that the war is only seen thru white eyes. You must remember that
    we (African Americans) have fought and die in every war that this
    country has been in. Why not seen it thru our eyes and then maybe you
    will understand us.
    
    phillip

    
    Phillip,
    
    
    I think that I understand the spirit in which you suggested putting
    the ANC flag in the same flag as the battle flag.  If it isn't al-
    ready apparent, I have a bias against battle flag, just as I would
    have one against the ANC flag.
    
    I have heard that the design of the battle flag goes back to the
    Scottish Cross of St. George, Patron Saint of Great Britain.  That
    is, unlike the British Union Jack which goes vertically and
    horizontally, instead of corner to corner.  
    
    I think the battle flag is great for human interest, education, and 
    nostalgia, but it has no place in America as a State symbol today.  
    I feel that way mostly because so much HAS changed.  The flag was 
    designed by an "Anglo-centric" society.  The demographics of the South 
    are nothing like the way they were 130 years ago.  
    
    It still bothers me that many Americans regard England as the "mother
    country".  Even as early as the ACW, many of the soldiers were Hiberno
    and southern European as well as Afro and Anglo.
    
    On a lighter note,  the Bonnie Blue Flag, solid blue with a large white
    star in the center was "borrowed" from a flag that the Mexicans had in
    the war with Mexico.  It is Iberian in its' origin.  
    
    r�
    
    P.S.-Phillip, I didn't see an intro note for you; I'd love to hear
         about your interest in the ACW.  I look forward to hearing your
    	 perspective on other issues!    

    
    The Scottish, "x-cross" is a St. Andrews, not St. George.
    
    The English, "+-cross" is a St. George.  
    
    The Union Jack is a combination of the two.

    
    From this safe distance, I would agree with .9.
    
    The value of the Confederate flag was lost as soon as it was 
    hijacked to serve as a symbol for opposition to desegregration.
    It should be removed from the Georgia flag, NOT because it was 
    the flag of secession but because as long as it remains it carries 
    the overtones of 1956, not 1861. 
    
    1956 means Bull Connor and George Wallace, 1861 means
    Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee, altogether a nobler breed.
    
    Toby 
    
    Toby

    The whole thing is that a symbol is whatever people believe it to be. 
    
    Its use by truckers and assorted hot-rodders notwithstanding, the ANV
    battle flag and its derivatives have, through the agency of the KKK and
    many other distasteful organizations and individuals, come to symbolize
    for most people hatred and racial bigotry.
    
    It's a damned shame, but this symbolism is so powerful that I don't
    think there is any way to eradicate it; the best course, IMHO, is to
    remove it in the interests of racial and social harmony.
    
    -dick

I've given some thought to this controversy over the past couple of years.
At first I was against removing the battle flag, it was a last remaining
symbol of a proud heritage. But when I found out the origins of the present
flag in 1956 I started changing my mind. I don't want Georgia represented
by an act that grew out of the prejudices of that time. If we go back to
the previous flag we are still honoring the Confederacy with the "stars and
bars" but without the baggage of prejudice and offence.


Randy

    
    
    Randy,
    
    
    FYI, the Atlanta Journal-Consitution illustrated a chronology of the
    State Flags over the years.  The Georgia "Bars" predates the
    Confederate "Bars".  I can only assume that they didn't want to use
    narrow bars (stripes) so that it wouldn't be confused with the
    early Federal (U.S.) Flags.
    
    I guess that historical fact would leave us with a situation in
    which everybody would be happy--probably not...
    
    
    r�

      Actually, R�,
    
      8. The three flags superimposed to form the Union Jack.
     	  --The English flag of St. George, the Scottish flag of 
     	    St. Andrew, the Irish flag of St. Patrick
    
    	From my "Things That Come in Threes" topic in TRIVIA.
    
    	Re: .9   I'd say, Phillip, that the majority of contributors
                 to this file have more than a passing knowledge of
                 "Black" as well as "White" people's roles, difficulties,
                 triumphs, and hardships during the Upris.. ah, the Late
                 Unpleasantness.  Admittedly, you probably have a better
                 feel for it. On the other hand, I've heard a story or
                 two handed down the years from ex-slaves to one generation 
                 before mine, a few of which made my hair stand on end.
    
    As for the base topic, I have to agree it is a hot non-topic, and
    hope they can resolve it quickly (I'd say remove it, as in this
    instance it is a detriment rather than a reminder of glories past)
    and move forward, rather than back.
    
    							Don

    Don,
    
    That's interesting, what does a St. Patrick's look like?  The only
    Irish colors I am familiar with are the ones in the same pattern
    as the French tri-color.  
    
    r2

    RE .18, .17:
    
    	St. Andrew's cross is a white diagonal "X" on a blue background.
    
    	St. Patrick's cross is a red diagonal "X" on (I think) a white
    background.
    
    	St. George's cross is a red horizontal "+" on a white background.
    
    
    	If you look carefully at a Union Jack, you can see all three
    crosses, with St. George's superimposed on St. Patrick's, and both
    superimposed on St. Andrew's.  (Does that make the Scots the
    "foundation" of the UK?  :^} )
    
    MikeR
    

    I don't think the Scots feel that.  A lot of them would just as soon 
    not be a part of the U.K.
    
    Better to look at it that St. George's cross is on top of the other two...
    
    							Don

    RE .20:
    
    I know of one moderately prominent Scot who _did_ feel that Andrew's
    cross was the "foundation" of the Union Jack.  But I'm sure there are
    many, as you say, who don't look at things that way.
    
    MikeR
    

    For those of you wondering how this turned out.  It never came
    to a vote in the General Assembly.  The only thing the Governor
    could get out of them was a willingness to put it to a referendum.
    A referendum to change the flag would certainly have failed so
    the Governor "tabled" the issue for another time.
    
    The main supporters were the Governor, Lt. Governor, and Attorney
    General.
    
    r�

    
     a little while ago some little tv spot had a few minutes on the 
    issues around the use of the confederate flag today. They showed diff
    points of views. They asked Shelby Foote, and in an emotional
    response, he blamed people like himself for the bastardizing of the
    Confederate flag. Basically he said that historians and war buffs
    should have stepped in the minute groups like the klan started using
    the confederate flag for their symbol and never let them become
    associated with it. He felt that now that great symbol has been
    misused and people are associating it with hate instead of honor.....
    
    Bob

    I think a good compromise that would take the Stars and Bars proudly
    into the next century would be to keep it and superimpose over it under
    the convergence of the cross a white arm and a black arm joining in a
    handshake. That'd fix the KKK from messin' wit ma battle flag!
    
    Bill M

    RE .24:
    
    While I think your idea is a good one, you are (I think) using
    incorrect terminology.  The "Stars and Bars" refers to the first (or
    close to the first) national ensign of the CSA, which had a blue canton
    with a circle of white stars in the corner (where the US flag has the
    stars) and three broad horizontal bars of red, white, and red.  This
    flag was carried by some units at First Manassas, but when draped close
    to the staff (like with no wind) it was hard to tell from the Stars and
    Stripes, leading to confusion over whether an approaching unit was "we"
    or "they".
    
    The familiar Confederate battle flag with the diagonal blue "X" on a
    red background, with stars on the "X", was _not_ called the "Stars and
    Bars"; it was an outgrowth of the confusion at Manassas.  It was never
    a national ensign of the CSA, though it did appear in the canton of the
    "Stainless Banner".
    
    Since it is the battle flag, and not any of the CSA national ensigns,
    which causes all the controversy today (most folks outside the
    historical/reenacting community wouldn't know a CSA flag if they saw
    it), I suspect you are talking about the battle flag, not the Stars and
    Bars.
    
    MikeR