I find it interesting how some people… and organizations… like to take on issues that are centered on the Confederate flag as a symbol and automatically call it a matter of “heritage defense.” Now, as the Confederate flag is concerned, I understand completely how it has come to represent different groups for different reasons. I’ve already written about the Confederate flag as a symbol with layers. Yet, when using the Confederate veteran as a foundation for “heritage defense,” just how many issues, exactly, are really in the best interest of the memory of the Confederate veterans?
A Confederate flag on a lunchbox, a bumpersticker, a dress… all are perceived by some as representative of “Southern heritage,” but are these instances really a reflection of “Southern heritage” as a whole? Bouncing back to my post on “Perspectives,” I would argue that it is not necessarily so. Even more importantly, are such things representative of the Confederate veteran, considering the context in which the symbol is used? How often will certain groups, organized in the name of Confederate veterans, cry out against “heritage violations” in the name of the Confederate veteran when the person who sports the sticker or symbol on the shirt isn’t even aware of the connection to Confederate veterans and sees the symbol strictly (and incorrectly, of course) as a symbol of either the South (as a whole) or “rebellion against the man?” Is it with purposeful intent that the sayings “heritage defense” or “heritage violations” are broadly defined by those who use these phrases just to rally more support behind their “heritage battle?” Sounds to me like a dangerous and/or careless practice considering the many meanings behind the flag, and especially the living memory of the flag as a painful symbol from the era of segregation.