Principalities & Powersrnhy Samuel FrancisrnCapitalism the EnemyrnBy a margin of 63-56, the South CaroHnarnHouse of Representatives voted on Mayrn10 to pull down the Confederate batdernflag that has fluttered above the state’srneapitol dome sinee 1962 and to remove itrnto “a place of honor” on the eapitolrngrounds. The vote was the grand (or perhapsrnthe petty) finale to a controversy thatrnhas lurked below the surface of SouthrnCarolina’s politics for much of the lastrndecade and has now begun to haunt thernpolities of other Southern states and, indeed,rnof the whole nation. Proponents ofrnremoving the Confederate flag arguedrnthat it is, in the immortal and typicallyrnstilted phrasing of a 1991 resolution ofrnthe NMCP, “an odious blight upon thernuniverse,” or, in the lesser eloquence ofrnSen. John McCain, “a symbol of racismrnand slavery.” Supporters of the flag argued,rngenerally, that it was not a symbolrnof racism and slavery, though theyrnseemed to disagree as to what it actuallyrndoes symbolize—states’ rights, Southernrnindependence, cultural tradition, or simplyrnthe martial virtues of honor, loyalt)’,rncourage, and willingness to sacrifice for arncause that most Americans associate withrnthe Confederacy and its hapless warriors.rnLike all real symbols, the flag representsrnmany different things, most of them intimatelyrnconnected to each other in thernenduring bond called “civilization.” Ifrnthe meaning of symbols could be translatedrninto simple and clear language,rnthere would be no need for svmbolism atrnall.rnThe absence of a simple and clear sloganrnthat encapsulates the real meaning ofrnthe flag, as opposed to the simple, clear,rnand false slogans that encapsulated itsrnmeaning for its enemies, may tell us arngood deal about why the defenders of thernflag lost and its foes prevailed, and it is everrnthus in the continuing conflict betweenrnthe forces of civilization and tradition,rnon the one hand, and barbarism, onrnthe other. At no time since the FrenchrnRevolution have the forces of traditionrnbeen able to enlist simplicit}’ and clearnessrnon their side, and the immense powerrnthat simplicity and clearness exert onrnthe human mind is a major reason thernenemies of tradition triumph. The powerrnof tradition and its allies lies not inrntheir ability to jusfifv themselves throughrnlogic but in their capacity to mobilizernthose who remain attached to tradition;rnin a declining civilizahon, or one challengedrnby the enemies of tradition, thatrncapacitv’ will dwindle as the power of thernchallengers grows. So it was in SouthrnCarolina, where, as in most of the South,rnthe memor)- of its traditions has beenrndwindling for the last centur)’, even as thernpower of its enemies—simple, clear, andrnprofoundly evil—grew.rnThe NAACP and nitwits like JohnrnMcCain are b}’ no means the most dangerousrnenemies of Southern traditions.rnThe NAACP has been crusading againstrnthe Confederate flag since at least 1991,rnbut only this year was its crusade successful.rnIt is impossible to account for thisrnvictory without considering the immensernassistance the NAACP received from thernRepublican Part}- and the “capitalism”rnbefore which the party loves to prostraternitself. If it’s dangerous enemies you’rernlooking for, those tvvo will give you a fightrnto riie death any day.rnThe unreliability of the Republicansrnon the flag has been manifest since atrnleast the early 1990’s (some would sayrnsince the lS60’s), when South Carolina’srnRepublican Gov. Da’id Beasley violatedrna campaign promise he had made inrn1994 not to try to remove the flag fromrndie eapitol dome. He soon gathered thernsupport of Sen. Strom Thurmond, formerrnGov. Carroll Campbell, and thernChristian Coalition. As it developed, arnpopulist movement centered on defensernof the flag stopped the Republican establishment.rnGovernor Beasley —whomrnChristian Coalition leader Ralph Reedrnhad boomed as a possible presidentialrncandidate—was prompfly bounced fromrnoffice in the following election, largelyrnbecause of his treachen,- over the flag issue.rnThe Republican betraal in the earlierrnflag eontro’ersy was grounded in a lust torngain black votes (which never materialized),rnbut in the most recent battle, it wasrncompounded by greed and fear, whichrnthe N A A C P cleerly managed to incite.rnThe campaign against flie flag was joinedrnto the NA^CP’s national boycott of thernstate until flie flag was removed from flicrneapitol building, and since the boycottrnstruck direcfly at flie capitalist heart of thernRepublican Party (indeed, at capitalismrnitself), it was a far more efficacious tacticrnthan simply threatening to vote againstrnpoliticians who refused to remove thernflag. By targeting the business elites whorncall the shots in the GOP (which has arnmajority in the South Carolina House)rnand the $14 billion tourist industry of thernstate, the NMCP achially struck at thernheart of the modern South.rnThe role of Big Business in forcing thernflag off the dome was clear at least as earlyrnas last year. In a report in the New YorkrnTimes, Paula Harper Bethea, chairwomanrnof the South Carolina Chamber ofrnCommerce, offered up most of therncliches put forward to justif}’ removingrnthe flag. “The shrinking world in whichrnwe live, the way technolog)’ has broughtrnus together,” Miss Bethea beamed, “hasrnmade us come to realize that we are notrnislands unto ourselves. If we’re going tornbe part of the next millennium, we havernto move that flag off our Statehouserndome and put it in a place of honor elsewhere.”rnOf course, the reason thernNAACP demanded its removal was thatrnit claimed the flag is a symbol of racismrnand slavery, and if that were so, why onrnearth would anyone want to “put it in arnplace of honor elsewhere”? The statementrnmade little sense, but what wasrndriving it was not sensibility so much asrnthe mere determination to make the controversyrngo away before it hurt business.rnMichelin Tire Companv, which has constructedrna new plant in South Carolina tornreplace the textile mills put out of businessrnb}’ free trade, was also “particularl)-rnvocal about the need to move the flag offrnthe dome,” the Times reported.rnIn Alabama, the same dynamic was evident.rnNeal Wade, of a group called thernEconomic Development Partnership ofrnAlabama, told the Times that the Confederaternflag had to go because “Anythingrnthat causes division within a state makesrnit less attractive to a potential emplover,rnparticularly from overseas,” and thernTimes itself commented that “the pressurernis even greater to join the globalrneeonom}’, and foreign employers do notrnwant flie slightest hint of a divided workrnforce or a reputation for backwardness.”rnConservatives —real conservatives, atrnleast, not classical liberals or neoconser-rn34/CHRONICLESrnrnrn