Friends, I felt so outraged by the insanity of the efforts to ban the Massachusetts state flag that I had to write an article about it. Here it is, in all its glory -- not to be confused with Old Glory, of course, which no leftist would use to blow his nose. But I digress!
The Flag of Massachusetts is
“Racist” — Who Knew?
A new front has
opened up in America's culture wars, and specifically in the Left's
ongoing effort to stigmatize even the most innocuous elements of our
country's heritage. Their latest bugaboo is the official flag of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
The Massachusetts
flag, as well as the state seal, feature an image of a Native
American warrior with a bow and arrow. The Indian is by no means
depicted in an unflattering light. His arrow is pointed downward, an
allusion to the peace achieved between Pilgrims and Indians at the
first Thanksgiving.
In addition, the
flag and seal feature a common heraldic device: a muscular arm
wielding a sword. Given the state motto, “By the Sword We Seek
Peace, But Peace Only Under Liberty,” the arm and sword are clearly
symbolic of Massachusetts' role in the American Revolution. The sword
is said to be based on one owned by Myles Standish, a complex figure
from Massachusetts' Pilgrim days who did indeed make war against some
Indians — but who also befriended and fought alongside others.
It is evident that
the designers of the state flag and seal did not by any stretch of
the imagination intend to celebrate the oppression of Native
Americans, but that is how the snowflakes on the Left are choosing to
take it today. 30 communities in the Bay State, including Cambridge,
the home of ultra-liberal Harvard University, have voiced their
support for a bill that would terminate the use of the present flag
and state seal in favor of entirely new designs.
One can easily
imagine the team of politically correct all-stars who these liberals
would assemble to create a new flag for Taxachusetts, and the sort of
monstrosity this left-wing brain trust would produce.
A nod to all the
Left's favored groups, defined by their race, ethnicity, religion,
gender (not to be confused with biological sex), sexual orientation,
disability, etc., would be obligatory. Indeed, it is inconceivable
that a single group would be left out.
The class
struggle, so beloved of Massachusetts luminaries like Elizabeth
Warren, would have to be featured prominently in the new flag.
Perhaps a hammer and sickle, or a heroic profile of Lenin?
The
present flag's white field — evocative surely of white supremacy —
would have to be supplanted by a new rainbow color scheme. Meanwhile,
the old motto, “By the Sword We Seek Peace, But Peace Only Under
Liberty,” is obviously passé. Something more
“progressive” would be better: “In Political Correctness We
Trust,” or “Massachusetts: The Wokest State in the Union.”
The sheer
silliness of this effort to sanitize the history and heritage of
Massachusetts, and to cleanse the flag and seal of any symbolism that
makes liberals uneasy, should not obscure the high stakes involved.
Whereas the Left may begin by chipping away at the commemoration of
marginal historical figures, and by obliterating seemingly
insignificant cultural symbols, its long-range agenda is far more
ambitious.
The banning of
Robert E. Lee has led, in short order, to the disparagement of
Founding Fathers like Washington and Jefferson. Likewise, the
proposed permanent furling of the flag of Massachusetts is small
potatoes to most liberals, while the denigration of the Stars and
Stripes itself — the most powerful symbol of America — is their
ultimate symbolic goal.
Make no mistake:
many leftists equate America's flag with America's sins, including
racism, sexism, and homophobia, which they believe define us as a
nation and as a people. Certainly they view our national history as
more shameful than glorious. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo spoke for
many of his fellow liberals when he insolently declared that America
“was never that great.” One can easily imagine how people who
think like this could dismiss patriotism and flag-waving as fascistic
indulgences, and the American flag itself as tainted.
The
good people of Massachusetts, therefore, would be wise to frisk aside
this latest assault on their heritage with contempt. They should
realize that their flag is not,
in fact, a threat or an affront to anyone.
To give in to the politically correct mob that seeks to eradicate the
Massachusetts flag would thus be a grave error. It would only
embolden the PC crowd to even greater flights of fancy, and even
bolder outrages against our culture and our values.
Dr.
Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred
and blogs at www.waddyisright.com.
He appears weekly on the Newsmaker Show on WLEA 1480.
Here it is at Townhall:
https://townhall.com/columnists/nicholaswaddy/2019/05/25/the-flag-of-massachusetts-is-racist-who-knew-n2546866
And while you're at it, this article is a must-read. The headline ought to be, "Democrats Are Bigots!", but luckily for the Dems all their prejudices are fashionable, so no harm, no foul. Ugh!
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/24/democrats-dont-want-to-nominate-another-white-man-for-president-226977
Here it is at Townhall:
https://townhall.com/columnists/nicholaswaddy/2019/05/25/the-flag-of-massachusetts-is-racist-who-knew-n2546866
And while you're at it, this article is a must-read. The headline ought to be, "Democrats Are Bigots!", but luckily for the Dems all their prejudices are fashionable, so no harm, no foul. Ugh!
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/24/democrats-dont-want-to-nominate-another-white-man-for-president-226977
Dr. Waddy: If we were dealing with an opposition possessed of good faith, I'd be willing to concede that(for example) the exceedingly savage King Phillip's War in Mass. tended to counter advantages perceived in the Pilgrim's comity with Chief Massasoit.But to voluntarily allow any advantage to an American left proven determined to dissemble and sensitive, as is a predatory animal like subhuman, to any unwarily exposed loophole through which to drive its tanks(a historically celebrated weapon of "Soviets") is experientially condemned folly.
ReplyDeleteThe left which infests Mass. is no doubt slavering at this opportunity to express permanent disdain for the real America. But Mass. actually has empowered much compromised but still not thoroughly corrupted Republicans in its Governorship recently. May those who enabled this miracle stand up to those who would make of their state a node in a cancerous maze of destructive antiAmericanism, with its very nucleus in Cuomo's nearby NY.
I agree with you that a leftist attack on the American flag and the heritage of imperfect scions like Washington and Jefferson is CERTAIN. The Mass. situation should be closely observed, as a Spanish Civil War like predecessor of the ultimate, existential confrontation with the left in America.
Dr. Waddy: Why do many Dems hold their noses and favor tiresomely white and aged males like Bernie and Joe? Partly, I think, because they believe that those two can be shamed into choosing their far leftist avatars as running mates and heir apparents. They are of course risking the possibility that their darlings will repel 75% of the electorate on the campaign trail with their presumptuous righteousness but that is of no moment to them in this instant of decisive Trump inspired "resistance".God grant their confusion and destruction.
ReplyDeleteQuite right, Jack. No one cares much about the Massachusetts flag either way. The current campaign is but a trial balloon, but already the Left has been successful in suppressing many traditional symbols of American pride. Some already have Old Glory in their sights. Most are smart enough to defer that goal for another day.
ReplyDeleteThe popularity of Biden and Sanders in the current Democratic Party IS something of an irony, given the Party's disdain for white males, but I think the article is right that this is explained by their name recognition, experience, and stature, and comes DESPITE their odious gonads and melanin-deficiency, not because of them. All things being equal, the Dems would be happy to relegate white males to the dustbin of history.
Dr. Waddy: Sorry for my misuse of the word "scion". I was going to say I yearn for the day they attack our flag because it will finish them; yet perhaps not so. They burned it in the '60's and they are still a mortal threat to America. But. . . the real America of that time had not endured and learned from, 50 years of leftist provocation; perhaps that of this day would react to such an abomination with marked decisiveness.
ReplyDeleteIn considering the Democrat candidacy of white male oldsters I'm reminded of the thug who during Carter's time, took hostages and demanded that all white people leave the earth within 48 hours. Presumably he thought this technologically possible and perhaps thought Jimmy amenable. The criminal's futility is mirrored in the obvious intent of Dems from Hillary on to either persuade or force white males to accept a guilt ridden 3rd class status in our society. They are willing to ride on the backs of currently plausible oldsters of that condemned "class" but only because they will soon retire into "the blind cave of eternal darkness" and leave the world to the natally elect, " to bustle in!"
Sorry, you true children of the discredited "60's; white people and the approximately 50% of their offspring probably male are going to continue living in this world. They may even seek a say in public affairs.
Jack, I was unaware that white people were under orders to leave the planet! It's an elegant solution to the problem of white privilege. I imagine it would receive a sympathetic hearing at New Paltz, no? The sad truth, though, is that a considerable number of white Americans are already living in shame and ritualistically self-mortifying, at least in an ideological sense. One of the extraordinary things about leftism is its success in convincing people to adopt obviously self-destructive ideas. The human brain is an almost infinitely malleable organ, apparently.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to think the denigration of the American flag would cause near-universal revulsion, but as you say we've seen it all before, and the voters' tolerance for treachery seems high.
Dr. Waddy:Considering its recent very well misrepresented "forum" on the politically correct and pusillanimous renaming of some dorms, New Paltz would no doubt commission a study so prolix and disingenuously written up that few would notice its one sided methodology. It would then arrange an identical 3-2 approval by the College Council and say it was proof of a fair and adversarily creditable process. Consequently it would blithely assert its "conclusion" that short of leaving the earth, all white people exit the campus forthwith or accept "diversity protection denied" status.Its all very democratic of course, although the state taxpayer is denied a say. Well:"Their's to pay, not to say!" and a pox on their concerns. This is, after all, Cuomo York.
ReplyDeleteCuomo York. A chilling appellation. You make me wonder what the Duke of York, for whom our state was named, would make of the dystopian "social democracy" that our land has become... As a staunch Catholic I assume he'd be repulsed -- but, as an absolute monarchist, perhaps he'd see merit in the enterprise? Oy!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: I know very little about the Dukes of York after the Wars of the Roses. Its very interesting to speculate on how English history would have progressed had Richard III, of the House of York, triumphed at Bosworth Field. We can assume that Henry VIII and Elizabeth would never have reigned. Would Richard III and Anne of the House of Warwick or perhaps even Elizabeth of York have produced puissant heirs? Who can say but they would have been unlikely to have been as great as Henry and his unrecognized daughter, the greatest English monarch and the probable savior of Western civilization from the Inquisition.
ReplyDelete