I’ll probably catch a lot of flack for this–especially from my boyfriend, Yankee that he is–but I can’t help feeling a little conflicted about the state flag issue going on in Mississippi. On the one hand, I understand how some folks feel the current flag is a symbol of racial inequity. And I’m sure the state’s surprising number of white liberals feel just as guilty as can be about having it fly over the capitol building nearly 150 years after the Civil War.
On the other hand, it’s a flag. And if a flag’s supposed to represent anything, it’s identity–national, regional, or statewide. I could see how a new flag would be important in the formation of a new state, but that’s not happening. (And no, I don’t buy the pr/marketing angle that the Mississippi of 2001 is a “new” Mississippi.) Flags are graphic symbols; a new flag should symbolize something newly important, something newly profound, something newly shared. The proposed new flag does none of those things. And there’s a good chance it would only enhance racial tensions throughout the state.
I also don’t buy the notion that a new flag is somehow going to encourage massive amounts of new business investments in the state (one of the major incentives pushed by the “new flag” side). It’s not the flag that’s a turn-off to Fortune 500 companies–it’s the poor quality of public education and the general lack of kick-ass corporate tax breaks. Trust me, I know: we’re having the same problems in New Orleans.
Of course, being the pomo homo that I am, I’m aware that my sentiments are influenced by the fact that (a) I’m a white male, (b) I no longer live in Mississippi and have little investment in the issue, and (c) I have a certain fondness for the rebel insignia due to the numerous Ole Miss games I attended as a wee lad. Not that any of that would keep me from opening my big fat mouth….
sturtle [dot] com 