American Flag

My esteemed colleague, Somebody's Daughter, recently posted on her viscerally negative reaction to the American flag.

And there is a lot of sense in that reaction as well as emotion - the flag's represented a lot of pretty evil stuff over the years.

But it was funny because I read the post the day after I particpated in a Labor Day march for jobs and justice and was thinking to myself - why isn't there a single American flag? There should be tons . . . well, maybe not, I find that to be rather tacky - at least several and maybe one at the front would be tasteful. But, it gets complicated.

Here's take #1:

How the fuck can we let the Right (and/or specifically, the KKK) determine the definition of the American flag? If we want to engage in the (culture) war, if we want justice in America, then we need to be fighting about the definition of the flag, not conceding the definition. If we define the flag as representing the ideals of America, it's that much easier to call to account those who fail to meet those ideals. In reality, the stars and stripes are nothing more than stars and stripes, we create the meaning.

I wanted flags at the march because I wanted to challenge Glenn Beck's accusation that the only "true" Americans are WASP conservatives - I wanted to say that socialists and communists and unionists and Black nationalists and (do I have to say it?) liberals are Americans (I'd include anarchists, but I'm pretty sure by definition they aren't) and our values and beliefs are the real America.

Perhaps it's time I went out and bought me a flag . . . now if I could only buy one secure in the knowledge that my money wasn't going to the John Birch Society. (I say this in jest, not having looked into it yet, but with the experience of going to order pocket Constitutions for my students and discovering that all the reasonably priced ones were published by groups I cannot feel comfortable giving money to.)

Here's take #2:

One argument against the flag that I find to be somewhat persuasive is the argument that such symbols become a replacement for actual thinking, leading to the abuse of symbols in creating the quasi-religious veneration of the state (which is why I think the Supreme Court was right in Texas v. Johnson). It's a danger. It's why Katha Pollit is opposed to patriotism. (See my previous attempt at dismantling this argument.) But, on the other hand, the flag is certainly not the only symbol that invites this problem. Ultimately, it's humanity's propensity/need for belief that creates the problem, not the flag per se.

So, how do you deal with the fact that people tend to go a little nutters when it comes to beliefs? I've always thought that was the primary purpose of a good liberal arts education. You know - the kind of education that's gotten pushed aside for the more important stuff: test prep. The 3 Rs. Like education was in the good ol' days (see 1950s). That blissful American Eden where McCarthy was saving the country hunting Commies, Blacks knew their place, women were happy changing diapers and everybody was straight.

Which is all to say, let's take back the flag, but not go overboard. We don't need to wrap ourselves in it and we don't need to use it to replace thought. But we shouldn't let the Right use it against us, either. It doesn't have to be the focus of sycophantic veneration, but perhaps it can stand unostentatiously in the corner; present, but it's power tamed.