redsquirrel Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 An activist and film maker named Bree Newsome climbed that flagpole and took the flag down. When she was halfway up the pole police surrounded her but she didn't come down until she finished what she set out to do. When she got down she, and a helper, were arrested without incident. The flag has been put back up in time for a rally of confederacy supporters. There will be Klan members at the rally. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/woman-removes-confederate-flag-s-statehouse-grounds-article-1.2273299 I can't believe I am linking to Daily News, but they got the story before anyone else, lol. If you are twitter, the hashtag is #freebree 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I support both the right of Ms. Newsome to practice her act of civil disobedience and the right of the KKK to hold a rally in favor of keeping the flag (ugh, but we need to defend the rights of horrible people to peacefully say horrible things). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsquirrel Posted June 27, 2015 Author Share Posted June 27, 2015 Here is another link to the story that includes a statement from her http://jezebel.com/badass-bree-newsome-climbs-s-c-flagpole-to-remove-conf-1714372554 “We removed the flag today because we can’t wait any longer. It’s time for a new chapter where we are sincere about dismantling white supremacy and building toward true racial justice and equality.†There is also a video of her climbing the pole. She is very polite and saying that she is prepared to be arrested and quoting scripture throughout. It was quite moving. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trulycrabby Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I am in awe of her flagpole climbing skills! :) 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Btervet Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 That was awesome. Such a great example of how civil disobedience should be done. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 That was awesome. Such a great example of how civil disobedience should be done. Exactly. This stands in direct contrast to all the yahoos who decide to block major freeways during peak commute times... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsquirrel Posted June 27, 2015 Author Share Posted June 27, 2015 My heart goes out to the law enforcement people who had to put that flag back up. I am sure for some it was not an easy thing to do. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I personally think it was a silly bid for attention, and I'm in favor of removing it from display! Let the governing authorities do it, lady. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 ^Easy to say that as a White American Christian woman who has never had to face the ramifications of living in a place where the confederate flag is proudly flown at government buildings and streets and schools are named after the very generals who fought to deny you the most basic human right of freedom. Civil disobedience sends a message, even when the message is largely symbolic. She made her point and she made it well. 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 No, easy to say as someone who believes that, since it has been flying for so long already, waiting a few more days or weeks for it to be permanently removed and never reinstated over that building is a better cause to rally. The governor has issued eloquent statements on this that I fully agree with, and the state house and senate look to be favorable to removal. I'm all for it. But climbing the flag pole isnt the answer. You're welcome to your opinion and I disagree, and can do it with no need to try to delegitimize you by group association. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Your statement was offensive and you lack the context to comment or understand the perspective. It was just wholly unnecessary as a comment and unkind, not very Jesus-y at all. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Ah, so I cannot dissent from an opinion you hold without being racist and unChristian? And I cannot understand context of events because of my skin color? That's a bigoted argument if I ever heard one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Climbing the pole to take it down isn't the way to enact permanent change and dismantle white supremacy, which was her stated objective. The legal process is working, let it work. You do not change hearts by removing objects, you change hearts by the strength of your argument. Her argument is a good one, her actions are unnecessary. I hope it is removed. As Governor Haley said, it's time. Civil disobedience by either side is a distraction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Ah, so I cannot dissent from an opinion you hold without being racist and unChristian? And I cannot understand context of events because of my skin color? That's a bigoted argument if I ever heard one. Yes, clearly you're being persecuted and treated unfairly because you're White. Must be hard. Trivializing an act of disobedience that meant a lot to that individual as well as to many people of color throughout the US as just a silly bid for attention shows that you're lacking context. Most people who had that as their first impression would realize that they may be missing something due to the fact they lack the same experiences. I didn't say racist in my post, did I? As for the unChristian part, does this sound like a charitable, Christian statement that was necessary to add here? Would Jesus be down with that? I personally think it was a silly bid for attention, and I'm in favor of removing it from display! Let the governing authorities do it, lady. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 My statement and opinions stand. Being a Christian in no way disallows my disagreement with this article or your bigotry. Civil disobedience is absolutely about bids for attention - that the whole point. I don't believe climbing a flag poll and getting cited or imprisoned is necessary or helpful in the current context. It has nothing to do with race, regardless of your accusations on that point. And for the record, you're the one who keep bringing up skin color, not me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 ^Easy to say that as a White American Christian woman who has never had to face the ramifications of living in a place where the confederate flag is proudly flown at government buildings and streets and schools are named after the very generals who fought to deny you the most basic human right of freedom. Civil disobedience sends a message, even when the message is largely symbolic. She made her point and she made it well. Your statement was offensive and you lack the context to comment or understand the perspective. It was just wholly unnecessary as a comment and unkind, not very Jesus-y at all. Yes, clearly you're being persecuted and treated unfairly because you're White. Must be hard. Trivializing an act of disobedience that meant a lot to that individual as well as to many people of color throughout the US as just a silly bid for attention shows that you're lacking context. Most people who had that as their first impression would realize that they may be missing something due to the fact they lack the same experiences. I didn't say racist in my post, did I? As for the unChristian part, does this sound like a charitable, Christian statement that was necessary to add here? Would Jesus be down with that? I'm out of likes for the day, apparently. I'm glad you said these things because I think it is very important to help people remove their privilege blinders, and the most immediate way to do that is to keep pointing out where they are blind. This needs to come from multiple sources again and again. It is not just one group or type of person that has blinders and not just one group or type of person who can help lift the veils of ignorance thusly. Ignorance can almost always be remedied with knowledge, including personal and firsthand knowledge. So, thank you. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8circles Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I personally think it was a silly bid for attention, and I'm in favor of removing it from display! Let the governing authorities do it, lady. It's silly TO YOU, it isn't silly TO HER. Caps for emphasis, not shouting. I'm also a white woman who doesn't know first-hand what this feels like as an African American. I can imagine what it feels like, though. I can imagine that it isn't silly for her at all. You cannot understand the context of events, not because of your skin color, but because you refuse to try. It isn't hard to do. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 So any disagreement with anyone who differs in group identity, even slightly, from me, means privilege is at play? So she is a Christian and I am, too, but because she has brown skin nobody who doesn't can disagree with her actions? Seriously? Is this what civil discourse has come down to? You disagree and dislike dissent so one must shout about inequality, privilege, and try to shut down all discussion because of ascribed traits that neither side can control? The perspective and viewpoint of an individual is not made valid or invalid by their identity. That is ad hominem fallacy at its finest, and using that as the basis of discrediting and silencing opposition is pathetic. I have stated my opinion and reasons. I am with her argument about flag removal and getting rid of the symbols of inequality and hatred. I disagree with her act of civil disobedience when action is already underway to permanently resolve the issue. Yes, this must just be white privilege talking. Give me a break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I think Ms. Newsome did an excellent job making the point in a dramatic, yet civil and peaceful, manner. She took full responsibilities for her actions and made no excuses for them, as it should be. She gave a classic example of civil disobedience. What she did was inspiring. I hope it continues to inspire others. 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 So any disagreement with anyone who differs in group identity, even slightly, from me, means privilege is at play? So she is a Christian and I am, too, but because she has brown skin nobody who doesn't can disagree with her actions! Seriously? Is this what civil discourse has come down to? You disagree and dislike dissent so one must shout about inequality, privilege, and try to shut down all discussion because of ascribed traits that neither side can control? The perspective and viewpoint of an individual is not made valid or invalid by their identity. That is ad hominem fallacy at its finest, and using that as the basis of discrediting and silencing opposition is pathetic. I have stated my opinion and reasons. I am with her argument about flag removal and getting rid of the symbols of inequality and hatred. I disagree with her act of civil disobedience when action is already underway to permanently resolve the issue. Yes, this must just be white privilege talking. Give me a break. No. It's silly TO YOU, it isn't silly TO HER. Caps for emphasis, not shouting. I'm also a white woman who doesn't know first-hand what this feels like as an African American. I can imagine what it feels like, though. I can imagine that it isn't silly for her at all. You cannot understand the context of events, not because of your skin color, but because you refuse to try. It isn't hard to do. Because the bolded. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8circles Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 So any disagreement with anyone who differs in group identity, even slightly, from me, means privilege is at play? So she is a Christian and I am, too, but because she has brown skin nobody who doesn't can disagree with her actions! Seriously? Is this what civil discourse has come down to? You disagree and dislike dissent so one must shout about inequality, privilege, and try to shut down all discussion because of ascribed traits that neither side can control? The perspective and viewpoint of an individual is not made valid or invalid by their identity. That is ad hominem fallacy at its finest, and using that as the basis of discrediting and silencing opposition is pathetic. No. Priveledge is always "at play". There is nothing we can do to change that in the right now. What we can do, is realize the priveledge and try to see it from the other perspective. Instead of calling it "silly" - which most definitely comes from a place of priveledge. There is absolutely room to have a different opinion. If you think the move was unhelpful to the cause, fine. I don't think anyone would have a problem with that. But to then call it "silly"? Yeah, that's unrecognized priveledge. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 It's silly TO YOU, it isn't silly TO HER. Caps for emphasis, not shouting. I'm also a white woman who doesn't know first-hand what this feels like as an African American. I can imagine what it feels like, though. I can imagine that it isn't silly for her at all. You cannot understand the context of events, not because of your skin color, but because you refuse to try. It isn't hard to do. Strong feelings are not an automatically validating basis for action. Don't presume to tell me what I do and don't understand - you have as little basis for assuming my motivations as you claim I have for hers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SporkUK Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I don't think any single act of civil disobedience is meant to bring about sudden permanent change. It's the continuing message, continuing standing up that creates that. Any single act can be said to be silly or unimportant without the rest. It's why I get frustrated when people act like Rosa Parks's one act changed everything when she was a professional activist who was re-enacting previous events and then helped push forward the bus boycott (with replacement services) for over a year. One thing can be seen as trivial, but it's part of a wider whole of people who are fighting the systems. Governing authorities are all about maintaining status quo and order. We need more than that to bring real change to the system. That flag was hung there in 1961, as the civil rights movement began gaining momentum as a symbol to the populace. This can be symbol as well for more to come. The fact the state made a black worker put the thing back up says gives us quite a message as well, I think. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8circles Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Strong feelings are not an automatically validating basis for action. Nobody is saying that they are. There is no problem with not agreeing with her actions. Don't presume to tell me what I do and don't understand If you really think what she did was a "silly bid for attention" then you don't understand. You cannot understand from her POV & believe it was silly. - you have as little basis for assuming my motivations as you claim I have for hers. ?? I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean here at all. I'll have to take back my last comment. If you actually understand from her POV and you still think it's a "silly bid for attention", then what you are doing is worse than not being willing to understand. I was being charitable. I can only give again the benefit of the doubt to you, believing you to be a kind human being from your prior posts, that you truly do not understand. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I personally think it was a silly bid for attention, and I'm in favor of removing it from display! Let the governing authorities do it, lady. I can understand wanting to take some of the media attention away from the planned KKK rally. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I can't wrap my brain around the fact that they put it back up at all. I understand why they followed procedure and arrested her, even if they may inwardly have respected and applauded what she did (which I hope they did). But surely it could have just taken awhile for them to get around to figuring out how to get it put back up, what with government bureaucracy and all, right? Couldn't it just conveniently not have been priority for awhile....say, until after session convenes and agrees it should be permanently removed? I don't know, that's just me. Because I look at the above statement, and on the one hand I seethe thinking of them having sent a black man to put the darn thing back on the pole, but then I think of the alternative and I seethe thinking of them sending a white man to put the thing back up. There's no "right" way to do a wrong thing. The whole thing has me so riled up, but I think this is precisely the right kind of civil disobedience. This is the kind that is meaningful and non-harmful to others. I just can't see a reason for anyone to be against it. I think they wanted to do it as a statement against civil disobedience and to discourage it, or not rile up the KKK activitists. I wish they'd used it as an excuse to conveniently leave it down, too. It seems like it would have been easier to just 'lose' it for a bit, whether what she did was condoned or condemned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I can understand wanting to take some of the media attention away from the planned KKK rally.If her purpose was really to syphon media attention away from the opposition by a carefully contrived and timed act of flag removal, I take back everything I said. She's a tactical genius. I'm dead serious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caroline Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 It would be cool if people of all races would do this each day until the law is finally passed. A ton of people marched at Selma. This time they would be climbing a flag pole. What a great idea. I wish I were that brave. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Climbing the pole to take it down isn't the way to enact permanent change and dismantle white supremacy, which was her stated objective. The legal process is working, let it work. You do not change hearts by removing objects, you change hearts by the strength of your argument. Her argument is a good one, her actions are unnecessary. I hope it is removed. As Governor Haley said, it's time. Civil disobedience by either side is a distraction. Maybe her argument was "you shall know [me] by [my] fruits." Christians in many places and many times have had to peacefully dissent from certain noxious laws. She found the continued display of a symbol of hatred, oppression, and death to be intolerable. Her continuous quoting of the Psalm speaks for her motivation. This was a peaceful act of religious conviction in defiance of the hatred and violence that took 9 lives recently, and was epitomized by that flag. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 God forbid you rile up the KKK activists. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livetoread Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I don't know the minds of the SC congress, but I would hardly be shocked if they were hoping that by stalling the debate, let alone the vote, until next month, something else would have caught people's attention and they could quietly shelve the whole thing. They could make some speeches and do some legislative paper shuffling and it could all go away like it has so many times before. Civil disobedience keeps things front and center. It keeps attention on that legislative body so they can't make it go away quietly. Maybe they really are finally ready to vote to take it down and I am questioning their enthusiasm to do so unfairly. But they have hardly been willing before and keeping attention on the issue through acts exactly like this might very well be needed. 15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SproutMamaK Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 It would be cool if people of all races would do this each day until the law is finally passed. A ton of people marched at Selma. This time they would be climbing a flag pole. To be fair, the man who was assisting her at the base of the flag pole, making sure she didn't fall and also being arrested, was white, so it's already crossing racial boundaries, which I think is fantastic. I actually very much like the symbolism in that, even if it was unintentional. The oppressed taking matter in to their own hands and standing up for the themselves, being giving the space to sight their battles as they see fit, but those of other races standing alongside them, supporting them in whatever ways they can. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joules Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I don't know the minds of the SC congress, but I would hardly be shocked if they were hoping that by stalling the debate, let alone the vote, until next month, something else would have caught people's attention and they could quietly shelve the whole thing. They could make some speeches and do some legislative paper shuffling and it could all go away like it has so many times before. Civil disobedience keeps things front and center. It keeps attention on that legislative body so they can't make it go away quietly. Maybe they really are finally ready to vote to take it down and I am questioning their enthusiasm to do so unfairly. But they have hardly been willing before and keeping attention on the issue through acts exactly like this might very well be needed. I can't like this enough! Your first paragraph rings SO true. If it is not kept front and center, they will get away with just leaving it. As for questioning their enthusiasm, I think every legislator should have been in his/her car to the state capital for a special vote last week. I know it would have been inconvenient, but that's their fault for passing the 2/3 rule in the first place. Since they did not act swiftly and decisively, I too question their resolve to make this right. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SporkUK Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Bree Newsome has a long history of activism, I would not be surprised if it were planned as Crimson Wife said, especially with the person who helped her with her climbing gear (as SproutMamaK said, James Ian Dyson who spotted for her was also arrested and can be seen in videos and photos at the bottom with a hard hat and hi-vis) and cameras on hand from beginning to end. It was lovely hearing her, I hope we can hear more from her later. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I am in awe of her flagpole climbing skills! :) That was the first thing I thought! :lol: If it had been me, all these people would be gathered around to watch the dramatic moment, and I would have kept sliding back down... such a disappointment! It would have been very anticlimactic! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 The flag has been put back up in time for a rally of confederacy supporters. There will be Klan members at the rally. THIS, right here, speaks volumes. Other people may be in favor of the flag for *whatever* reason...but do they not see what company that places them in? Who could actually think, I want to go to that rally and support the flag and be standing arm and arm with KKK members... UGH. That alone should cause someone to rethink their stand. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joules Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 THIS, right here, speaks volumes. Other people may be in favor of the flag for *whatever* reason...but do they not see what company that places them in? Who could actually think, I want to go to that rally and support the flag and be standing arm and arm with KKK members... UGH. That alone should cause someone to rethink their stand. So here's a question that I'm pondering...Should one wish for news coverage of the KKK rally or not? My first thought is that I hope it gets NO news coverage. On the other hand, there seem to be people who really do not understand what they are supporting when they support the flag. (Obviously they aren't from around here.) Would images of Bree taking it down and then the KKK demonstrating under the restored flag help people understand the connection? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 So here's a question that I'm pondering...Should one wish for news coverage of the KKK rally or not? My first thought is that I hope it gets NO news coverage. On the other hand, there seem to be people who really do not understand what they are supporting when they support the flag. (Obviously they aren't from around here.) Would images of Bree taking it down and then the KKK demonstrating under the restored flag help people understand the connection? I'm for coverage. Lots of photos of the cowards in their hoods. Then let's match those up with photos of the legislators who put the flag there and have not voted to remove the flag. Let the voting public be able to put some faces with the hoods and know the real meaning of the flag today. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 They put it back up ??!! Question - why is the KKK given permission to protest ? Freedom of speech. As long as you file for the proper permit, you can protest anything here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 God forbid you rile up the KKK activists. I wouldn't mind seeing them riled up. I am sure South Carolina has some water hoses and police dogs it can break out. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 They put it back up ??!! Question - why is the KKK given permission to protest ? Same reason Westboro Baptist is allowed to protest. It is disgusting, but it is free speech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I wouldn't mind seeing them riled up. I am sure South Carolina has some water hoses and police dogs it can break out. Don't be silly. Those are reserved for rioting thugs, not good ol' boys. Are there any exceptions to what they can say during their protest ? Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Are there any exceptions to what they can say during their protest ? No threats or calls for violence. Same as any other protest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Are there any exceptions to what they can say during their protest ? Exceptions to free speech: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 No threats or calls for violence. Same as any other protest. Well, I've found that the threats and calls for violence have to be extremely explicit. A lot of stuff seems to slide that I would think crosses that line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Well, I've found that the threats and calls for violence have to be extremely explicit. A lot of stuff seems to slide that I would think crosses that line. Yes, it has to be a specific threat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateReignRemix Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Thanks. False statements of fact ? Is that ever enforced ? Slander and libel laws. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoobie Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I wouldn't mind seeing them riled up. I am sure South Carolina has some water hoses and police dogs it can break out. You know they wouldn't get the dogs and hoses though. They'd be politely asked to sit (biker brawl in Texas) or bought Burger King if they're peckish. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldberry Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Thanks. False statements of fact ? Is that ever enforced ? Mwahahaha... not for politicians certainly! And regarding violence, I believe the terms are that *advocacy* of violence is okay if you are not calling for immediate or specific violence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susan Wise Bauer Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 ArcticMama and Shahrazad, Further posts responding to each other will be removed. Please take the personal remarks to PM. Thank you. SWB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.