EDITORrnThomas FlemingrnMANAGING EDITORrnTheodore PappasrnSENIOR EDITOR, BOOKSrnChilton Williamson, jr.rnASSISTANT EDITORrnMichael WashburnrnART DIRECTORrnAnna Mycek-WodeckirnCONTRIBUTING EDITORSrnHarold O.J. Brown, Katherine Dalton,rnSamuel Francis, George Garrett,rnPaul Gottfried, Christine Haynes,rnE. Christian Kopff, J.O. Tate,rnClyde WilsonrnCORRESPONDING EDITORSrnBill Kauffman, William Mills,rnJacob Neusner, John Shelton Reed,rnMomcilo SelicrnEDITORIAL SECRETARYrnLeann DobbsrnPUBLISHERrnAllan C. CarlsonrnPUBLICATION DIRECTORrnGuy C. ReffettrnPRODUCTION SECRETARYrnAnita CandyrnCIRCULATION MANAGERrnRochelle FrankrnA publication of The Rockford Institute,rnEditorial and Advertising Offices:rn934 North Mam Street. Rockford, IL 61103.rnEditorial Phone: (815)964-5054.rnAdvertising Phone: (815)964-5813.rnSubscription Department: P.O. Bo.x 800,rnMount .VIorns, IL 61054, Call 1-800-877-5459.rnU.S.A, Newsstand Distribution by Eastern NewsrnDistributors, Inc., One Media Way, 12406 Rt, 250rnMilan, Ohio 44848-9705rnCopyright © 1997 by The Rockford Institute.rnAH rights reserved.rnChronicles (ISSN 0887-5731) is publishedrnnronthly for $39,00 (foreign subscriptions add $12rnfor surface delivery, $48 for Air Mail) per year byrnThe Rockford Institute, 934 North Main Street’,rnRockford, IL 61103-7061. Preferred periodicalrnpostage paid at Rockford. IL and additional mailingrnoffices, POSTMASTER: Send address clianges tornChromdes, P,0, Box 800, Mount Moms, IL 61054,rnThe views expressed in Chronicles are thernauthors’ alone and do not necessarily reflectrnthe vie” s of The Rockford Institute or of itsrndirectors. Unsolicited manuscripts cannot bernreturned unless accompanied by a self-addressedrnstamped envelope.rnChroniclesrnVol. 21. No.7 July 1997rnPrinted ill tlie United States of AmericarnPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESrnOn the Confederate FlagrnI would like to respond to ProfessorrnClyde Wilson’s editorial (Cultural Revolutions)rnin your March issue, regardingrnour efforts toward compromise on thernConfederate battle flag that flies abovernour Statehouse. First and foremost, I respectrnand share the professor’s view thatrnthe battle flag of the Confederacy is arncherished emblem for many Southernersrnof the fierce independence and boundlessrncourage of thousands who gave theirrnblood in battle. As the direct descendantrnof Confederate soldiers, I will fight to thernend to honor their memory and sacrifice.rnIn fact, I have long supported the flag’srnpresence on the dome, with the understandingrnthat I would keep the doorrnopen to a reasonable compromise. Asrngovernor of this state and all its diversernpeople, I believe now is the time for suchrna compromise.rnContrary to the assertions of Mr. Wilson,rnsettling this issue through legislationrnwould do far more to protect the flagrnthan merely protecting the status quo.rnWith the Heritage Act, the flag would bernensured by law a position of prominencerndirectly in front of and behind the Capitol.rnWithout the Heritage Act, the flagrnremains forever vulnerable to the whimsrnof extremists who would like nothingrnbetter than to eradicate all memory of itsrnexistence. Mr. Wilson rightly states thatrn”there is hardly a monument or streetrnname in the state not imbued withrnSouthern history,” and the Heritage Actrnwould permanently protect those publicrnsquares bearing the names of our Confederaternleaders.rnWhile I have no argument with Mr.rnWilson’s obvious zeal on this issue, hisrncharacterizations of mv family life andrnreligious faith were patently offensivernand blatantly wrong. It was with greatrnprayer and discussion that I came to suchrna controversial decision, stemming fromrnthe deep conviction that I had a role tornplay in the healing of our state’s divisions.rnEven as Mr. Wilson again rightlyrnstates that this effort has led me to partnerrnwith those not of my own party (“betrayal”rnand “carrying water for opponents”rnare the words he chooses), I amrnproud that the path of peaceful compromisernhas led us to step over the arbitraryrnboundaries of party and race. Meetingrneach other halfway in a spirit of reconciliationrnis truly the nature of compromise.rnAnd working to promote peace andrnunity is anything but “a relentless pursuitrnof mediocrity and sameness,” nor is it arn”step on the road to the New Wodd Order.”rnRather it is a celebration of all thatrnmakes us different, based on the understandingrnthat we are not a homogeneousrnstate, but one of many colors, creeds, andrncultures. The one link that should alwaysrnbind us together is mutual respect.rnWe in South Carolina are a proudrnpeople who will continue to pay tributernto our heritage and all those who madernour freedoms possible. But my greaterrnhope is that South Carolina will leave arnlegacy for our children, not of divisionrnand hatred, but one of honor, integrity,rnand peace that extends to every SouthrnCarolinian.rn— David M. BeasleyrnGovernor of South CarolinarnColumbia, SCrnDr. Wilson Replies:rnGovernor Beasley’s statement does notrnunconvince me of one of the mainrnpoints I made in my editorial—the Republicanrnhierarchy always betray theirrnsupporters. However, I offer a “compromise”rnof my own. If the governor willrnmake public the names and dollarrnamounts of the big business interestsrnwho lavishly funded his now failed PRrncampaign against the flag, I will try tornpersuade my side to reconsider its position.rnThe governor and I must live in differentrnstates. He finds South Carolina to berna state “of many colors, creeds, and cultures.”rnLast time I looked we maink hadrnonly two colors (black and white), onerncreed (Christianity), and one culturern(Southern). That cant phrase originatedrnwith some of the governor’s politicallyrnorganized religious supporters—PromisernKeepers-types clustered around “ColumbiarnInternational Universitv” (nee ColumbiarnBible College)—almost all ofrnwhom are recent immigrants to ourrnstate. “Many colors, creeds, and cultures”rndoes not describe our presentrnstate, just the one they hope for. I thinkrnmost South Carolinians would agreern4/CHRONICLESrnrnrn