Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
Dismantling America (contd.): Guess What Flag's Not Coming To Dinner
Just over
a year ago, in a column about the Confederate Flag
controversy in South Carolina, I wrote the following
sentences: "... the blunt truth is that racial
slavery existed for a far longer time under the
American flag than under the brief four years of the
Confederacy. If the NAACP denounces the
Confederate flag today for its symbolization of
slavery, it can far more easily denounce Old Glory
tomorrow for the same reason. Don't bet your
battle flag they won't do it either, or that the
political and business elites that cave in to them on
the Confederate banner will stand firm on the American
flag."
A year afterward, I wish to inform you that if you did
bet your battle flag against my prediction, you just
lost it. Just in time for the first observance
of Independence Day in the new century, a black
legislator in Tennessee is refusing to recite the
pledge of allegiance to the American flag. Her
reason: "This flag represents the former colonies
that enslaved our ancestors."
The legislator is Rep. Henri Brooks of Memphis, and
while her position is so far rather unique, even among
black radicals, she is the former chairman of the
NAACP's Political Action Committee. The NAACP
itself, though it has not yet endorsed her position,
"did not respond to requests for comments"
on it, as The Washington Times reported last week.
Let that digest a while: The major black
"civil rights" organization in the country
refuses to tell us whether it does or does not approve
denouncing the American flag as a symbol of slavery.
One who does tell us is columnist Julianne Malveaux,
well known for her outspoken black racial radicalism
and anti-white sentiments.
Miss Malveaux says that it's "ridiculous"
for blacks to recite the Pledge of Allegiance because
its words are "nothing but a lie, just a
lie." Not quite on board with the anti-American
crowd is
District of Columbia "civil rights activist"
Lawrence Guyot, who told the Times that Miss Brooks
"could not have taken a better point to make that
argument, even though I do not agree with her
conclusion." Mr. Guyot is of the view that
"I am historically aware of how ingrained slavery
was in America. There's just no question about
the nexus between the development of America and
slavery." If he doesn't agree entirely with
Miss Brooks, he's well on the path to concurrence.
The Times assures us that "other black leaders
are more emphatic in their disagreement with Miss
Brooks," though the only one they cite is the
relatively obscure Niger Innis, the rightish-leaning
son of rightish-leaning "civil rights
activist" Roy Innis and currently the spokesman
for the Congress on Racial Equality.
Mr. Innis says Miss Brooks' views are "terribly
unpatriotic."
And so they are, but they do substantiate one
important point that I have tried to make time and
time again: The attacks on the Confederate flag and
similar Confederate symbols are not aimed at the
Confederacy or even at slavery and its legacy but at
America itself and even more broadly at the white
race. Since the attacks on the Confederacy
began, we have also seen similar attacks on the
Declaration of Independence (it didn't "include
blacks") and Abraham Lincoln (a
"racist" whose efforts for emancipation were
too
little too late), as well as others. The view of
America that incites such attacks is precisely that
voiced by Mr. Guyot: that slavery is
"ingrained" in American history, and since
slavery is a dog that cannot be allowed to sleep
undisturbed, any and every symbol of America must be
stripped away.
Given the characteristic supineness of most whites and
especially most white political, cultural, and
business leadership today before the concerted racial
onslaught against their race, nation, and heritage,
it's only a matter of time before we have business
groups renouncing the American flag and demanding that
it be removed as a national symbol. But before
we get to that, there is yet one more point that the
new war against Old Glory confirms.
Increasingly, black Americans or at least their
leaders reject the symbols and icons of American
national identity. As racial consciousness among
blacks replaces national consciousness, that rejection
is undoubtedly logical and probably inevitable. In
short, more and more blacks are ceasing to think of
themselves as Americans or as part of the American
nation and beginning to think of themselves in purely
racial terms. And if that trend continues,
sooner or later, they, as well as an increasing number
of American whites, will have to ask themselves: If
blacks are not Americans and reject every symbol of
American national identity, why do they remain in this
country at all, and why should Americans who are not
black want them to remain?
COPYRIGHT 2001 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
July 02, 2001






