>Could be. Nothing wrong with American flags-- they were the flags that
>ended slavery and liberated the concentration camps. No reason to cede
>their meaning to the rightwing. "Wash the flag, don't burn it" as Norman
>Thomas once said. Or as Frederick Douglass argued, never cede the meaning
>of the US Constitution to the reactionaries.
-Nathan, you offered an excellent platform for a non-war strategy last night, -but the cause of a rational response is not served through a continuing -defense of mindless flag-waving. The flag offers only a primitive inarticulate -appeal to the emotions -- reaching out to thoughtless individuals who are -stirred by bright colors and vivid designs.
First, the goal is MINDFUL flag-waving-- and it is ridiculous to argue that left rallies, with repetitive chants, sloganeering placards, and big pretty banners, aren't trying to appeal to emotions with "bright colors and vivid designs." If anything, we need more bright colors and vivid designs. The disdain for effective communication by many in the Left is silly.
So why cede the flag? If we can link those "primitive inarticulate" emotons to the antiwar cause, all the better. I'd love for people to see the flag and think - yeah, my primitive emotions make me want to go fight global poverty and injustice in the name of American ideals. Go Team.
The odd thing is that the Right has spent decades appropriating emotional appeals of the left- words like "empowerment", "equal opportunity", even Martin Luther King. They are shameless in trying to steal our supporters through stealing symbols, but the left seems incredibly reluctant in returning the favor.
Symbols are pieces of cloth and nice doodles. Their content is always contestable. And we should contest the meaning of such potent symbols as the flag.
Not as the be all of work, but not oppose doing so with the impulse people do.
Nathan Newman