ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Monday, April 14, 1997 TAG: 9704140132
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO
Virginia civil-rights organizations demanded Gov. Allen's resignation because he signed a proclamation declaring Confederate History Month. Isn't there more important work to do?
VIRGINIA, like most of America, faces a number of serious race-related issues. Refighting the Civil War - or, more accurately, a burlesque version of it - isn't one of them.
How do you ensure a genuinely level playing field? How do you improve the prospects of people trapped in inner-city ghettos? How do you recognize and value ethnic differences without destroying national harmony?
Questions like those are the ones for which America and Virginia should be seeking answers - and not whether Gov. George Allen should have signed a proclamation declaring April to be Confederate History and Heritage Month.
Yet the Virginia NAACP and Southern Christian Leadership Conference not only objected last week to Allen's signing of the proclamation, but elevated the matter to center stage - to the point of calling for his immediate resignation. The governor, though not saying he erred, replied the next day that he meant no offense to anybody.
This is theater of the absurd.
Yes, symbols can be important. Some states incorporate Confederate emblems into their official flags. Until this year, Virginia had an official state song with racially demeaning and embarrassing lyrics. State flags and songs should be unifying. The divisive and offensive character of, say, flying the Confederate battle flag over state capitols was well understood by those who introduced it in the 1950s during Southern white resistance to the civil-rights movement.
Proclamations, however, aren't either-or propositions. Among the hundreds of other proclamations that Allen has signed are ones declaring Black History Month and Minority Enterprise Development Week.
The historical interpretations of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, the proclamation's sponsor, can get a little weird. But the proclamation itself neither ``border[s] on treason," to quote the hyperbole of Virginia NAACP Director Linda Byrd-Harden, nor celebrates slavery or racism. If it had, then Allen should have refused to sign it.
To assume everything about the Confederacy involved slavery is to mirror in reverse those who claim slavery had nothing to do with the Confederacy. The latter notion is refuted by the entire political history of the era. But as is suggested by Civil War historian James McPherson's new book, "For Cause & Comrades," preserving slavery was little motivation behind the sacrifices made by the rank-and-file Confederate soldiers.
The flap has brought as much attention to the critics of the governor as to the governor. But is the Virginia NAACP, in trying to recapture the relevance it once had, in danger of making itself even less relevant?
LENGTH: Medium: 54 linesby CNB