I am proud of my classmates for standing up against our state, for opposing our governor, and for separating our University from the Confederate battle flag. I have been vocally supportive of their efforts from the beginning. Now that the same coalition is targeting the Confederate statue, I will vocally oppose their efforts until the end.
We have achieved two great victories in removing the flag from our campus. The first is that we have proven that the University of Mississippi is willing to accept progress. The second, and perhaps the most important in terms of policy, is that we are joining the increasing number of Mississippi counties who are pressuring the legislature to discontinue the flag by refusing to fly the current emblem within their jurisdictions.
Proponents of keeping the flag already feel that their culture and heritage is under siege. In the minds of every traditionalist that stands between us and a new state symbol is the fear that if we take away their flag, we will come back for more. “Give a liberal an inch, and he’ll take a mile.”
Announcing a campaign to remove the statue literally 24 hours after the flag came down confirms their suspicions. The flag debate at the state level is inevitable, and this new effort is building a bigger enemy than we previously calculated.
Before, they were fighting for the preservation of their flag. They are now fighting for the preservation of their history. This is counterintuitive to what we have been fighting for this entire semester. Let’s be strategic. Let’s know our limits.
Let’s defend ourselves from the slippery slope argument. The only prayer we have in removing the flag at the statewide is if we can prove that it is not the beginning of aggressive deculturization. We must do our best to separate these two.
Calling for the eradication of all Confederate symbolism not only unites our opposition, but also has the potential to invalidate our gesture in the eyes of lawmakers.
They are less likely to vote against the state flag if their constituents equate supporting the change to support for tearing down historical landmarks. As of now, there is a bipartisan effort in the Mississippi legislature for adopting a new symbol. We must sustain this union between the parties. We cannot act in a way that will drive away the unexpected support we have received from members of the Republican leadership like Speaker of the House Philip Gunn. Support from such lawmakers is absolutely crucial.
And I would argue that the statue is much less divisive than the flag. The statue specifically remembers fallen soldiers: “To Our Confederate Dead”. Even if we don’t agree with their cause, we can still empathize that over 600,000 Southern men died in the struggle.
Remembering our history is not the same thing as picking up where our forefathers left off. We can still tour Auschwitz in Poland because to destroy it would be a disservice to history. Maintaining it does not keep the Nazi dream alive. Maintaining it assists the present in understanding what shaped it.
A flag represents the present. Our current state flag does that poorly. A statue represents the past. And frankly the Confederate memorial does that pretty well. Changing our state symbol, which represents Mississippi to the rest of the world, does nothing to attack our history. Removing a historical landmark does explicitly that.
I am a dedicated Democrat, and I strongly oppose the removal of the statue. For our cause of adopting a new state flag to succeed, it is essential that we not cross the line between the present and the past. The movement to take down the statue will compromise our efforts, and will impede our progress.
If it continues, it will face a bipartisan pushback. I will shamelessly be in the ranks.
Reid Haynie is a senior history major from Jackson.
