The Corner


Heads or Tails, You’re a Racist: The Political Convenience of the Flag Debate

In response to Cross About The Cross

Rich, in your post on non-sequiturs, you write: “After every mass shooting, there has to be some ready politically convenient reason for the shooting or some ready politically convenient solution or both.” The emphasis, of course, is on “politically convenient.” The obsession over “civility” following the Giffords shooting — when there was no evidence that the intensity of political discourse played any role at all in the shooting — is one of the most infamous recent examples. While some people genuinely anguished over civility, others saw the moment as an opportunity to climb to unassailable moral high ground and either discredit political opponents or shame them into silence. The civility brigades were notably less vocal when a man tried to massacre employees of the Family Research Council after reading the Southern Poverty Law Center’s political discourse labeling the FRC as a “hate group.” 

In this case, it appears that the racist terrorist in Charleston says he was radicalized by the Trayvon Martin case. But no rational person would blame that case — or the way it was handled in court or in the court of public opinion — for his evil acts. Nor does any rational person think that he would have spared the church if the Confederate battle flag wasn’t flying at a Confederate memorial in a different city. Yes, there are genuine and sincere people who truly want to spare people the pain of seeing a flag they abhor, but there are also quite a few people who are only too happy to grill Republican presidential candidates about this issue from now until the 2016 election (unless a better non-sequitur emerges in the interim). It’s a cultural and political marker. Candidates are either “for the flag” — and either racist or uncaring — or they’re bowing to the unrelenting, morally superior voice of the media. Heads, you’re a racist. Tails, you’re a racist, but at least you can be shamed.

David French — David French is a senior writer for National Review, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

The Second(-Class) Amendment

Editor’s Note: The following is the fourth in a series of articles in which Mr. Yoo and Mr. Phillips will lay out a course of constitutional restoration, pointing out areas where the Supreme Court has driven the Constitution off its rails and the ways the current Court can put it back on track. The first entry ... Read More

The Brexit Crisis

After what seem like years of a phony war, British and European Union negotiators finally agreed on the terms of Britain’s departure from the EU earlier this week, and Theresa May announced it in the House of Commons. The deal covers more than 500 pages of legal and bureaucratic prose, and few but the ... Read More

Friends of Elmer

Do you know what scares an American outdoorsman more than a grizzly bear? Twitter. In the late summer and early autumn, the hunting world had its eyes on the courts: The Trump administration had issued new guidance that would permit the hunting of brown bears (popularly known as grizzly bears), including in ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Basta La Vista, Baby

Dear Reader (And especially Martha McSally’s dog), As I often note, I increasingly tend to see the political scene as a scripted reality show in which the writers don’t flesh out the dialogue so much as move characters into weird, wacky, confrontational, or embarrassing positions. It’s a lot like The ... Read More