The Confederate Flag
On January 1992 the NAACP put in affect a boycott on South Carolina to pressure the state to remove the Confederate flag off of its Statehouse in Columbia. The boycott is what initially brought life to this issue. The NAACP’s removal request is based on the fact that they, the anti-flag groups, claim that the meaning of the Confederate flag is one of hate and discrimination. On the other hand, there are other groups that believe differently whom are called the pro-flag groups. They claim that the Confederate flag is a sign of heritage and should stay on South Carolina’s Statehouse. Anti-flag articles are more likely to be found published in well-known Liberal magazines, when credible pro-flag articles were hard to find.
The main issue of the debate, which is a definition argument, includes one that argues the meaning of the Confederate flag and what it stands for, and from it many arguments stem that make up the intense debate about the Confederate flag. The Civil War being about slavery is one of the first things addressed in both types of articles. Within this argument, the pro-flag groups claim that many blacks fought for the Confederacy. Then the Confederate flag’s connection with racism is then argued. An anti-flag argument to prove that the Confederate flag is connected to slavery is that it was raised in response to the civil rights movement that was going on in 1961.
Another anti-flag argument is that the Confederate flag does not represent the State as a whole and for that reason should not be flown on South Carolina’s Statehouse. An even amount of pathos and logos is used among the opposing groups, but the anti-flag articles tend to have more ethical appeal and fewer flaws in their a...
... middle of paper ...
...ision by figuring out which side has the strongest one and therefore the more justified cause.
Work Cited
Eric Foner. “Rebel Yell.” The Nation. 270.6 (February 14, 2000): 4.
James F. Barker. “Clemson History Offers Perspective for Flag Debate.” The State. December 3, 2000.
Stuart Taylor Jr. “The Confederate Flag and the Cost of Pandering.” National Journal. 32.4 (January 22, 2000): 215.
Walter E. Williams. No: “Critics of the flag are Counting on a General Ignorance of History to Make Their Case.” Symposium. March 14, 2001. http://www.insightmag.com/archive/200002064.shtml
Quick, Steven. “Lynching Lee” The Opinions. 2/27/2001
Http://www.palmetto.org/noprint.htm
Amy. “Even more on the confederate Flag vs. the “Xian” usage debates.” Parentsplace.com. February 02,2000 wysiwyg://4http://boards2.parentsplace.com/messages/get/ppcurrentdebates63/26.html
Davis, W. (2002). Look away! A history of the Confederate States of America. New York:
Newman, Ralph G. "Gallant Symbol of the Confederacy." Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), Sep 15, 1957. 1, http://search.proquest.com/docview/180274550?accountid=12085.
In addition to a crumbling national identity, the necessities of war diminished morale among citizens of the Confederacy. Early on, the South believed that Europe would a...
Henry Steele Commager’s essay “The Defeat of the Confederacy: An Overview” is more summary than argument. Commager is more concerned with highlighting the complex causality of the war’s end rather than attempting to give a definitive answer. Commager briefly muses over both the South’s strengths
Several corporations have been trying to campaign for the switch to the new flag. According to Douglas Blackmon, in the Wall Street Journal, former Netscape executive and native Mississippian Jim Barksdale contributed almost 30% of the money for the new flag effort. Mr. Barksdale’s concern for the state’s economic and racial problems motivated him to help campaign for the new flag (Blackmon A22). Barksdale fears for Mississippi’s economic future if the change is not made to the new proposed flag, states Blackmon (A22). Blackmon says Barksdale’s message was “that the state should furl the rebel flag not out of shame for its past but so that Mississippi’s economic development won’t be hamstrung by unfair connotations with groups such as the Ku Klux Klan” (A22). In other words, people around the nation view the original 1894 flag as Mississippi’s way of clinging to the past. Consequently, businesses would be less likely to invest and expand their corporations in the state. Potential jobs would be lost. In U.S. News & World Report, Michael Schaffer says, “Business and civil rights leaders had argued that ditching a flag associated with white supremacy would attract potential investors now hesitant to set up shop in a state that still symbolically hails the Confederacy” (30). With this in mind, possible economic opportunities could be lost as result of not changing the flag.
The Texas government is a complex system whose ultimate purpose is to serve its citizens. Oftentimes, its complexity in certain aspects causes problems in its efficiency in serving. The way the Texas Constitution is written, how local governments run, the judicial, legislative, and executive branches’ efficiency, as well as Texas public policy and fiscal policy result in a government that is not set up to best serve its citizens.
Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview, 2006. Print. "Why Was the Confederacy Defeated?"
The controversy of the confederate flag has been an issue for many years. Whether one believes in the historical importance of the flag or the negative symbolism of the flag, it is merely an opinion. However, even though there are many pros to the confederate flag, the cons seem to outweigh the
The dissenting opinion to the previous idea is that the government's legitimate interest in preserving the symbolic value of the flag is, however, essentially the same that may have motivated a particular act of flag burning. The flag uniquely symbolizes the ideas of liberty, equality, and tolerance -- ideas that Americans have passionately defended and debated throughout our history. The flag embodies the spirit of our national commitment to those ideals. To the world, the flag is our promise that we will continue to strive for these ideals. To us, the flag is a reminder both that the struggle for li...
Why be suppressed by a symbol deemed against African Americans when identity is purely subjective? Barkley was tired of having to constantly be reminded of a horrible time, so he took the symbol as his own and changed the meaning. He referred to the flag as representing black-power, which was the complete opposite of what society thought. This created a huge statement and made people stop and think about what an African American man was doing flaunting a confederate flag.
The novel, The Catcher In the Rye, should not be banned from inclusion in the literature courses taught at the high school level. Banning this novel contradicts an individual's inalienable rights as an United States citizen. It limits freedom of speech and as well as other forms of expression. Although controversial, profanity is not a reason to limit an individual's rights. America is founded on principles that are not fueled by exceptions. Profanity is not an exception to freedom of speech. The Catcher in the Rye should not be excluded from curriculums at the high school level.
The American Civil war is considered to be one of the most defining moments in American history. It is the war that shaped the social, political and economic structure with a broader prospect of unifying the states and hence leading to this ideal nation of unified states as it is today. In the book “Confederates in the Attic”, the author Tony Horwitz gives an account of his year long exploration through the places where the U.S. Civil War was fought. He took his childhood interest in the Civil War to a new level by traveling around the South in search of Civil War relics, battle fields, and most importantly stories. The title “Confederates in the Attic”: Dispatches from the Unfinished Civil War carries two meanings in Tony Horwitz’s thoughtful and entertaining exploration of the role of the American Civil War in the modern world of the South. The first meaning alludes to Horwitz’s personal interest in the war. As the grandson of a Russian Jew, Horwitz was raised in the North but early in his childhood developed a fascination with the South’s myth and history. He tells readers that as a child he wrote about the war and even constructed a mural of significant battles in the attic of his own home. The second meaning refers to regional memory, the importance or lack thereof yet attached to this momentous national event. As Horwitz visits the sites throughout the South, he encounters unreconstructed rebels who still hold to outdated beliefs. He also meets groups of “re-enactors,” devotees who attempt to relive the experience of the soldier’s life and death. One of his most disheartening and yet unsurprising realizations is that attitudes towards the war divide along racial lines. Too many whites wrap the memory in nostalgia, refusing...
Overall, Alexie clearly faced much difficulty adjusting to the white culture as a Native American growing up, and expresses this through Victor in his essay, “Indian Education.” He goes through all of the stages of his childhood in comparison with his white counterparts. Racism and bullying are both evident throughout the whole essay. The frustration Alexie got from this is clear through the negativity and humor presented in the experiences he had to face, both on and off of the American Indian reservation. It is evident that Alexie faces discrimination from white people, who he portrays as evil in every way, to show that his childhood was filled with anger, fear, and sorrow.
Imagine a historian, author of an award-winning dissertation and several books. He is an experienced lecturer and respected scholar; he is at the forefront of his field. His research methodology sets the bar for other academicians. He is so highly esteemed, in fact, that an article he has prepared is to be presented to and discussed by the United States’ oldest and largest society of professional historians. These are precisely the circumstances in which Ulrich B. Phillips wrote his 1928 essay, “The Central Theme of Southern History.” In this treatise he set forth a thesis which on its face is not revolutionary: that the cause behind which the South stood unified was not slavery, as such, but white supremacy. Over the course of fourteen elegantly written pages, Phillips advances his thesis with evidence from a variety of primary sources gleaned from his years of research. All of his reasoning and experience add weight to his distillation of Southern history into this one fairly simple idea, an idea so deceptively simple that it invites further study.
More confederates than unions were illiterate due to the fact that most held professional or white-collard jobs (36). To make the Union soldiers sample fair sense most blacks couldn’t read or write, 2 who could were included in the sample (36). The levels of patriotism differed from the upper and lower south given to the fact that the upper south were mainly cotton states. The confederates felt as if it was a “rich mans woar but the poor man has to do the fifting” (16). The confederates were mainly fighting for “independence, property and way of life” (27). Some characteristics the soldiers had in common were McPherson’s calculations for the Union. He came to seeing that out of 562 Union soldier’s letters read only 67 percent voice strong patriotic motives. This is the same as the two-thirds of Confederates. As a result from reading McPherson’s book, research showed that the Union and Confederate soldiers expressed about the same degree of patriotic and ideological convictions. Even though they both had different reasons for fighting the levels of sincerity and dedication in their notes were