Saturday, December 6, 2014

Kevin Levin's Ludicrous Blog Post

Titled "Same Flag: From Selma to Ferguson"

He doesn't say much in the blog post -- just puts up two photos, one of somebody holding a Confederate flag as the Selma marchers go by, and another one showing somebody in camo with his face covered, and a CBF nearby, on the protesters' route from Ferguson to Jefferson City, Missouri.

He's attempting to equate Ferguson riots with the Selma March. I lived in Alabama when that happened, and as far as I can remember, the Selma marchers didn't burn any towns or loot any stores...

But because somebody waved a Confederate flag at each event, that makes them the same in his mind, I guess.

Anyway, my blog post is in response to one of Levin's commenters as much as to Levin himself. Said the commenter:
I’m sure all of the southern heritage groups and flagger organizations will rush to denounce this racially charged abuse of the same Confederate flag which they all are so devoted to; or should I rephrase that as a question.
My comment, which I'm sure he will not let through:
Interesting  to see what disturbs you enough to focus on it on your blog, and what you are apparently comfortable disregarding. So you zoom in on one guy and the CBF, but you don't show the Ferguson rioters burning several US flags...  Am I to assume burning U.S. flags does not bother you enough to blog about it?  Shouldn't it? After all, it can fall under the rubric of "civil war memory" since the US was one side of that war, and the same flag being burned in Ferguson (with fewer stars) led the US armies into battle then...

Personally, seeing the CBF used this way galls me, but then, I'm still enough of an American that burning the US flag galls me, too. And I'm doing as much about the misuse of the CBF as you Confederacy haters are doing about the extreme dishonor frequently shown to the US flag. I also note that said dishonor to the US flag is a violation of federal law, while abusing  the CBF is simply an affront to the memory of Confederate soldiers.

Ferguson protesters burning US flags
 I would just ask Mr. J--- H----- what he imagines denunciation by heritage groups would accomplish.  Would the fellow in the photo, should he discover such denunciation, suddenly have a change of heart, acknowledge the error of his ways, and work atonement for his misdeed?

The difference between most heritage folks and most civil war memory/era/other stuff blogger-folks is the affinity for controlling others. The liberal mentality is all about controlling what other people say or do (that is the purpose of political correctness, to control speech); it's about silencing what you disagree with and stopping behavior you don't like, even if it is not unlawful.  OTOH, while not universal in the heritage community, the prevailing attitude of heritage folks is that people are free to say what they wish, even if we don't like it. That's why I may argue with what you bloggers say, but I've never advocated that you take down your blogs the way Levin ordered Ann Dewitt to take hers down.
See? He will never let that through moderation.  Regardless....


  1. At least in the case of Missouri, could it be that numbers of Leftist activists from Chicago and other deep North cities trying to inflame the protests into riots, might be the vague reason for the VBF in Rosebud? I'd say that these flags were aimed more at Northern Leftists, who exploit Black folks as political weapons against white Southerners, than against Black folks themselves. Certainly it's dissatisfaction at the government's failure to deal with this political/social unrest. As an aside, if the Ferguson shooting had taken place on the east side of the Mississippi, probably little or no mention would have been made of it. Definitely, little has been said about the two questionable shootings in Ohio.

    1. Well, the report (who knows how accurate it is) says the people who were waving the Confederate flag also "met" the protesters with fried chicken, a melon, and a beer bottle, which typically aren't associated with northern leftists. But, yes, elitist white liberals are responsible for a lot of racial problems in the US.

  2. I did in fact offer a condemnation of the act, as I always do whenever and wherever someone uses that noble banner as a tool of hatred.
    Why? Certainly I do it for the benefit of people who are still on the fence regarding our civil rights struggle as Confederate descendants not to be labeled, as well as the fact that the marchers in question were not the same radicals who burned Ferguson (even if they had been, two wrongs would not make a right)....but those are far from the only reasons.

    There is a quote that I have known since my youth which holds a profound meaning for me and shapes my worldview:
    "Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God does not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act." - Deitrich Bonhoeffer

    Among other things this also defines my perspective on the defense of our Southern-Confederate heritage and its symbols.

    I have always held the opinion that defenders of Southern heritage have a moral obligation to speak out and facedown any misuse of the Southern Cross as a tool of hatred and bigotry. I would also add that that standing up to hate is the moral duty of any decent human being, no matter if that hatred is directed toward us, or another person.
    I also hold the belief that any misuse of the Southern Cross as a symbol of hatred toward another human being not only insults and harms the person or individuals targeted, but it also dishonors the memories of those men who died protecting our Southland from invasion, and denigrates all Southern people - especially us their descendants who honor their memories. I also strongly feel that failing to speak out against said misuses is the same as approval of that misuse.
    I am pleased to note that many Southern heritage proponents DO in fact speak out on message boards and news stories whenever some hateful individual does display that flag as a tool of hatred, and in many cases there are people who do listen to and accept those words, and I am thankful for each and every one of them.

    Because I hold people on our side to such high standards, I likewise hold our opponents accountable for their own actions toward us and toward our honored but embattled banner.

    In the past I have condemned those members of the opposition for attacking our flag and its defenders, for accusing us of being racist and hateful, while throwing their own arguments back into their faces. They attack us for honoring our Southern heritage and being proud of our identity as Confederate descendants even as we speak out against hatred and the misuse of our flag.
    As I pointed out, I view anyone who fails to speak out against evil acts as someone who approve of such evil. It therefore stands to reason that anyone who attacks someone who stands up against evil, themselves promotes said evil, or approve of those who commit it by default.

    Just remember that those like Levin who mock us for speaking out against such misuse and doing the right thing themselves accept a status quo view of white supremacist ideologues where a small group of degenerates can wave a cheap novelty version of the Southern Cross in an effort to attack other human beings....and from his and his fanbase's POV, people who do commit such hateful acts not only have the right, but apparently their full approval to do so as well.

  3. Oh and some more food for thought, in the video of the protesters in that town shouting obscenities at the Ferguson marchers, Levin and company fail to speak about the fact that while only one battle flag (a cheap novelty flag with a picture of Hank Williams Jr. on it no less) was on display, there were four - count em - FOUR US flags waved by the obscenity-shouting protesters. The same US flag that the Selma marchers carried with them 50 years before...the same US flag that the radical factions of the Ferguson protesters burned with glee.

    But then again, in the worldview of people like Kevin Levin and his peanut gallery, burning the national colors is an "accepted" form of protest.
    In my own worldview: legal and constitutionally protected free speech: yes. Tasteful way to protest anything: not so much.

    1. Yes, I see one Confederate flag and several US flags...

      And which flag makes the news?

      You guessed it...

      "...About 200 people met the marchers as they reached Rosebud around noon, activists said. A display of fried chicken, a melon and a 40-ounce beer bottle had been placed in the street. A Confederate flag flew...."

  4. Well did the fellow waving the CBF get attacked? Surely with the numbers they had harming him in honor of Brown would have been no problem.

    Think about it.

  5. The whole thing could have been staged for the media....

    1. Also a distinct possibility, one that I considered too. We know that the NAACP and KKK have in the past done such clandestine acts in order to feed off the media attention and further their own goals.

  6. From what I've heard from someone who was at the Selma protest, the blacks were blocking traffic and throwing bottles at the police. So, they might not have been looting and burning down buildings that day (which did happen in other cities during the civil rights movement) but they weren't being peaceful either, from what I've been told.


Comments are welcome, but monitored.