There was a 'flagging' demonstration in Lexington, Kentucky, reported by Top Conservative News.
The people in the photograph there are displaying the besieged CSA battle flag, though as you can see, the 'Stars and Stripes' is being shown also.
Another story on that same blog reports on the critics of the battle flag are protesting it in Baltimore. It seems that the hyper-leftist Quakers are teaming up with the NAACP on that event.
As if it isn't enough that people who are not Southron or White are attacking our historic symbols and heritage and our First Amendment right to display those symbols, our own kin find fault as well. There is a growing number, apparently, of Whites, even those from the South, who tell us that we should stop displaying the battle flag or that we should display an alternate flag that is not so easily recognized by those who are sworn to have our symbols banned. The flag I display on my sidebar is the first CSA flag. It bears some resemblance to earlier American flags, but I have clearly labeled it as the CSA flag. There is no attempt to camouflage it or to have it be mistaken for another flag.
Some critic says that we ought to fly the Bonnie Blue flag -- for those who don't know, it's the White star on a dark blue field. As the song describes it ''the bonnie blue flag that bears a single star." That flag is dear to many of us, but the CSA battle flag is the one that holds the most patriotic associations for us, or for those of us that haven't jettisoned the past.
But if we fly a flag that is more obscure because we hope it will not be recognized by our antagonists, isn't that a kind of cowardice? Why fly a flag whose associations are not clear? Isn't a flag supposed to announce our allegiance to something or someone? It is to be flown openly. It shouldn't be meant to conceal, but to make clear who we are, what we support, what we stand for.
And if we try to devise new symbols in hopes of drawing less criticism or opposition, then we are afraid to identify ourselves and our loyalties; we are knowingly giving ambiguous signals.
"For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?" 1 Corinthians 14:8
And whatever new symbol we may choose to display, (hoping to avoid the 'baggage' of the battle flag, or hoping not to alienate or drive away potential allies) will in its turn be attacked as a symbol of "bigotry" and "hate". That's a certainty. And any potential allies or sympathizers who would have us compromise or try to pander to the critics would not be any help to our cause in any case. That's certain too.
As for the one critic on that blog discussion who attacks the men carrying the flags for their 'slovenly' appearance or their 'obesity', the latter counts as an ad hominem attack. Can only slim, trim, fit young people participate? I think there would be far fewer people out there if only those who pass the appearance standards are allowed to turn out. And is style of dress the primary criterion of the 'success' or failure of a demonstration? If so, the most successful protesters would be Louis Farrakhan and his footsoldiers, with their clean-cut appearance and ties. Or perhaps the Mormon missionaries, with their well-groomed youthful look, their clean white shirts, and their politeness. But I still make a wide berth around the Mormon missionaries, because their belief system is not mine, and never the twain shall meet. Looks aren't everything.
As long as someone is clean and presentable, what does it matter if they don't look like they stepped out of the pages of GQ?
Personally I wish everyone, men and women alike, would return to the age of elegance, with men being clean-cut and dapper, and women wearing dresses or feminine suits and accessories. If I were ruler I would outlaw athletic shoes except in a gym or on a playing field where they belong, and jeans would be fit only for working on a ranch or farm. But then I don't make the rules, and I won't condemn sincere people who dress casually, as long as they are well-groomed. After all, we live in an age in which people don't even dress up to attend church, or even for funerals, in many cases -- or to go to a concert or the opera. We live in a slovenly age, and why single out those flaggers for condemnation? To the contrary, we owe those people in Lexington thanks, for standing up for our heritage and for being willing to publicly display a symbol which is being attacked and brought into disrepute, needlessly. Let's focus on the things that matter, and unite around those things.