Doug Hagin
The NAACP, NCAA, hypocrisy, and South Carolina
By Doug Hagin
Political correctness attack many things in America. Free speech, Conservatism, individualism, traditions, and especially history and heritages have been viciously attacked by the PC brigades. Southern history and heritage have been on the receiving end of political correctors perhaps more than any other heritage.
I have written many, many columns exposing the bigotry of many who use the symbols of Southern heritage as political footballs to divide people, and gain, for themselves, power and influence. Of course, the biggest target of these attacks has always been the Confederate Battle flag. Misused by racists like the Klueless Klutz Klanners and cowardly skinhead groups, smeared by biased media reports, and vilified by race pimps who have proclaimed themselves as leaders for all Black Americans, the flag has been at the center of the fight for Southern heritage for decades now.
Sadly, many have come to despise this beautiful flag as a symbol of hatred and bigotry. AS someone who has studied the War Between the States for 31 years, I can think of no more historically incorrect characterization of that banner. The Battle flag was created for, and carried by thousands of Southern troops defending their land from 1861-65. These soldiers, who included Jewish, Black, Hispanic, Catholic, Chinese, and American Indians fought bravely and honorably against very long odds. The principles they struggled for were not racist or bigoted. They fought solely because they were invaded after secession.
Yet the race baiters have spun history for their own vile purposes. They have tried their best to cover up any history of Confederates of color; they have tried to paint the Confederate soldiers as fighting only for the perpetuation of slavery. Sadly, they have been very successful in their efforts. Sadly, today the banner defined by the blood and sacrifices of thousands of Southerners of all races and religions, has become, to many, a hateful symbol that deserves no place in public view.
Just recently, this old fight was once more renewed in South Carolina. There the Battle flag flies at the Confederate monument on the South Carolina Statehouse grounds. Now the flag, a replica of a flag carried by South Carolina troops, displayed in a historically correct manner. It represents not only the gallantry of those troops that carried it, but that South Carolina was, at one time, a State in the Confederacy. History, of course, is not immune to the PC brigades of intolerance.
The NCAA has been considering whether to extend its ban on championship events in South Carolina because of the flag. The ban could be widened to barring postseason games being hosted by South Carolina teams, all because the flag and history apparently, offends a few ignorant busy bodies.
Robert Vowels Jr., head of the NCAA's Minority Opportunities and Interest Committee, said his group received a request from the Black Coaches Association about widening the ban. I guess these coaches have nothing more pressing on their agendas than erasing history. "I think it's something worth looking at," said Vowels, commissioner of the Southwestern Athletic Conference. Really now? What is the worth in attempting to hide history? Is THIS part of education, which is supposed to be the focal point of college?
Are they willing to teach their players that they should remove parts of history if they cause them offense? How will that broaden these kids' minds I wonder? What else might we, in the interest of "sensitivity" erase from history?
Let us see here. The Alamo might offend some Mexican people, so let us close it immediately! How about Confederate cemeteries? Those surely upset some; so, bring in the PC sensitivity police to bulldoze them. War is offensive to some, so how about al the war memorials? I guess they ought to go away too. I mean if the goal is to never, ever offend anyone why stop at the flag in South Carolina?
Now, in reality, this is not about sensitivity or protecting people from offense at all. The NAACP has led the fight to hurt South Carolina economically until the flag is removed. However, what are their boycott efforts really doing? Every time a sporting event is not held in South Carolina the people, including Black people are hurt economically. Is this what the NAACP should be spending their energies on?
Do these boycotts help reduce Black on Black crime? Do they help reduce illegitimate birth rates, which are high among Black Americans? Do they help in job training? Do they do anything to stop gangs from ravaging Black neighborhoods? The answer to every one of those questions, of course, is a resounding no! So if the NAACP really cares about helping Blacks, why waste time on something that will never help Blacks?
The answer is, of course, the leadership of the NAACP, is not really interested in anything but insuring the continued donations and support that "racism" brings to their coffers. If that means they have to create racism themselves to divide races, they are only too happy to do it. Job security is their real goal!
One more question in regards to the NAACP. The group is called the National Association for the Advancement for COLORED People. Now, isn't the word colored, when used towards Black people considered racist by the NAACP? So, if they really want to boycott something racist, why not boycott themselves until they get a more sensitive name?
© Doug Hagin
Political correctness attack many things in America. Free speech, Conservatism, individualism, traditions, and especially history and heritages have been viciously attacked by the PC brigades. Southern history and heritage have been on the receiving end of political correctors perhaps more than any other heritage.
I have written many, many columns exposing the bigotry of many who use the symbols of Southern heritage as political footballs to divide people, and gain, for themselves, power and influence. Of course, the biggest target of these attacks has always been the Confederate Battle flag. Misused by racists like the Klueless Klutz Klanners and cowardly skinhead groups, smeared by biased media reports, and vilified by race pimps who have proclaimed themselves as leaders for all Black Americans, the flag has been at the center of the fight for Southern heritage for decades now.
Sadly, many have come to despise this beautiful flag as a symbol of hatred and bigotry. AS someone who has studied the War Between the States for 31 years, I can think of no more historically incorrect characterization of that banner. The Battle flag was created for, and carried by thousands of Southern troops defending their land from 1861-65. These soldiers, who included Jewish, Black, Hispanic, Catholic, Chinese, and American Indians fought bravely and honorably against very long odds. The principles they struggled for were not racist or bigoted. They fought solely because they were invaded after secession.
Yet the race baiters have spun history for their own vile purposes. They have tried their best to cover up any history of Confederates of color; they have tried to paint the Confederate soldiers as fighting only for the perpetuation of slavery. Sadly, they have been very successful in their efforts. Sadly, today the banner defined by the blood and sacrifices of thousands of Southerners of all races and religions, has become, to many, a hateful symbol that deserves no place in public view.
Just recently, this old fight was once more renewed in South Carolina. There the Battle flag flies at the Confederate monument on the South Carolina Statehouse grounds. Now the flag, a replica of a flag carried by South Carolina troops, displayed in a historically correct manner. It represents not only the gallantry of those troops that carried it, but that South Carolina was, at one time, a State in the Confederacy. History, of course, is not immune to the PC brigades of intolerance.
The NCAA has been considering whether to extend its ban on championship events in South Carolina because of the flag. The ban could be widened to barring postseason games being hosted by South Carolina teams, all because the flag and history apparently, offends a few ignorant busy bodies.
Robert Vowels Jr., head of the NCAA's Minority Opportunities and Interest Committee, said his group received a request from the Black Coaches Association about widening the ban. I guess these coaches have nothing more pressing on their agendas than erasing history. "I think it's something worth looking at," said Vowels, commissioner of the Southwestern Athletic Conference. Really now? What is the worth in attempting to hide history? Is THIS part of education, which is supposed to be the focal point of college?
Are they willing to teach their players that they should remove parts of history if they cause them offense? How will that broaden these kids' minds I wonder? What else might we, in the interest of "sensitivity" erase from history?
Let us see here. The Alamo might offend some Mexican people, so let us close it immediately! How about Confederate cemeteries? Those surely upset some; so, bring in the PC sensitivity police to bulldoze them. War is offensive to some, so how about al the war memorials? I guess they ought to go away too. I mean if the goal is to never, ever offend anyone why stop at the flag in South Carolina?
Now, in reality, this is not about sensitivity or protecting people from offense at all. The NAACP has led the fight to hurt South Carolina economically until the flag is removed. However, what are their boycott efforts really doing? Every time a sporting event is not held in South Carolina the people, including Black people are hurt economically. Is this what the NAACP should be spending their energies on?
Do these boycotts help reduce Black on Black crime? Do they help reduce illegitimate birth rates, which are high among Black Americans? Do they help in job training? Do they do anything to stop gangs from ravaging Black neighborhoods? The answer to every one of those questions, of course, is a resounding no! So if the NAACP really cares about helping Blacks, why waste time on something that will never help Blacks?
The answer is, of course, the leadership of the NAACP, is not really interested in anything but insuring the continued donations and support that "racism" brings to their coffers. If that means they have to create racism themselves to divide races, they are only too happy to do it. Job security is their real goal!
One more question in regards to the NAACP. The group is called the National Association for the Advancement for COLORED People. Now, isn't the word colored, when used towards Black people considered racist by the NAACP? So, if they really want to boycott something racist, why not boycott themselves until they get a more sensitive name?
© Doug Hagin
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
