Conflicting Loyalties
Sons of Confederate Veterans spokesman Frank Earnest tells 19th Century History Guy Ed Ayers how he reconciles his Confederate heritage with his identity as a veteran of the U.S. Navy. And he explains what the Confederate flag means to him.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Excerpted from: Coming Home: A History of War Veterans
3 Responses
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
-
Coming Home: A History of War Veterans | BackStory With The American History Guys :
[...] Conflicting Loyalties Sons of Confederate Veterans spokesman Frank Earnest tells 19th Century History Guy Ed Ayers how he reconciles his Confederate heritage with his identity as a veteran of the U.S. Navy. And he explains what the Confederate flag means to him. [...]
Quote -- September 16, 2010 @ 3:11 pm
I really appreciate the exchange of views recorded in this piece. As an African American and a Southerner, I’m enthralled with Southern History and it’s complex stories of how Southerners relate to one another. I’ve heard the point of view Mr. Earnest articulated before, but it gives me little comfort. What is commonly referred to as the Confederate flag was in fact the battle flag (Army of the Tennessee). The flag of the Confederacy was really a Red White and Blue flag with one white horizontal bar between two red horizontal bars and with a circle of white five pointed stars on a field of blue in the upper right hand corner. That flag is little regarded as a flag of hate. I don’t recall any teaching in my growing up of that flag being present at lynchings, burnings, massacres and such, unlike the Battle flag. The Battle flag has always been used by those who flew it to send a message, and for those descended from the enslaved, that message has never been one of “Welcome”.
QuoteListen carefully to Mr. Ernest – he talks about honoring (his) ancestor’s heritage in one breath and a minute later speaks of the comparative purity of honoring those who gave their Last Full Measure. (maybe he did it in the other order)
The later is what we do…the former is dubious at best.
What heritage? Which Part? The Armed insurrection part or the part that allowed them to build an entire way of life on the systematic dehumanization of an entire race of people? Or are we to ignore those small details in favor of the ideal of southern gentility?
Quote