Thursday, January 09, 2003
Copyright © Las Vegas Mercury

Letters

Having Confederate flag isn't necessarily racist

I am a Southerner from Virginia and I take issue with a recent article in your paper about our junior senator, George Allen [Backstory, "Content with Their Lack of Character," Jan. 2]. I, too, have a Confederate flag in my bedroom. It has absolutely nothing to do with slavery or any desire on my part to support racism or return to segregation. It has everything to do with my ancestors who fought hard to protect their homes and land from invasion. Less than 10 percent of white Southerners owned slaves. So over 90 percent did not fight to support or defend slavery.

My people were valiant. They were courageous. They were honorable. Many of my relatives were actively against slavery. But they fought for their state and their homes. Your revisionist history is not correct. In fact, this kind of journalism has a name. And I think you know what it is. Try and do your best to be fair and honest. I am beginning to think most journalists have about the same amount of integrity as lawyers. You should be ashamed. But somehow, I don't think so. Well, at least I can thank you for taking the time to read my letter.

--J.L. Davis

U.S. flag just as racist as Confederate

In Backstory, by Michael Green, Green talks about George Allen having a flag that decorates his living room "in honor of a cause dedicated to the proposition that owning human beings mattered more than loyalty to one's country." Is he not talking about the U.S. flag? It really seems to me that slavery was legal under U.S. law from the design of the U.S. stars and stripes in 1777 until the passage of the 13th Amendment in December 1865. From my studies of history, it was the U.S. flag that flew over legalized slavery 20 times longer than any of the many Confederate flags did. Does Green want us to ban the U.S. flag? I'm confused.

--Edwin L. Kennedy Jr.,

Lieutenant colonel (retired),

U.S. Army

Michael Green replies:

I appreciate hearing from readers. As to the ancestors of J.L. Davis, I am sure they were entirely honorable, but just because one of my grandfathers fought for the Austro-Hungarian army in World War I, that doesn't mean I think his cause was more just than those of the Allies. As to Davis, I am curious as to who invaded his homeland, since Southerners fired the first shot. His ancestors were Americans who refused to accept the lawful result of a lawful election and claimed to secede from the Union in defense of the right of states; at no time had Abraham Lincoln threatened the right of a state to do what it had done before, but he was known to dislike slavery. When he notes that most Southerners didn't own slaves and therefore didn't fight to defend slavery, does that mean that they opposed slavery? If so, why had it continued for so long? As to Lt. Col. Kennedy, his confusion confuses me. My sentence referred to "loyalty to one's country." I presumed that was the United States. Eleven Southern states tried to withdraw from the U.S. That strikes me not as loyal, but as treason. Also, no law took effect from the creation of the flag in 1777. Perhaps he is thinking of the Continental Congress, the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution.