Flag unfurls images, emotions

Who decides the meaning of a symbol?

Symbols are a form of communication, meant to convey a feeling, idea, or identifying characteristic to others who view it. So should official interpretation of a symbol align more with the stated intention of he who displays it, the feelings (especially those commonly experienced) aroused in those subjected to its view, or both? Where those two conflict in public displays, where do we draw the line?

That's what Texas is trying to figure out. At issue is a license plate, proposed by a historical society (Sons of Confederate Veterans) and ultimately rejected by the state, because the Confederacy's symbols are also deeply offensive to others. So now it's a First Amendment question in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Slavery in the American past was no small thing. If you're a Texan, neither are symbols of independence from the Union. To many Texans, certain Confederate flags - of which there are literally dozens representing various times and military groups during the "War Between the States" (to the South), or the Civil War (to the North) - are symbols of cultural identity and independent spirit, not racism. Yet to many others within and without Texas borders, the "way of life" that flag represented was more about the oppressions of slavery than of politics.

Trust me on this; I lived there 22 years. Both views have solid foundations. Then again, the same symbol is used by those who have no particular historical pride or ancestry, but simply want to exclaim their prejudices and racism.

So whose view should prevail here? Does the importance of free speech, free symbolism, weigh heavier than its potential interpretation as hate speech which evokes deep pain? More than other forms of speech, symbols are used specifically to evoke thoughts and feelings in others, designed to elicit a response.

The Court will focus on more technical grounds (e.g., is a state-owned license plate - to be displayed on a private car - regulated government speech, private speech, or a blend), but the general populace is more concerned with the symbol itself. Whose interpretation of such a symbol matters most, those who display it, or those who see it? Should we care about the feelings of others so much we restrict speech?

We already do. Human life is fraught with emotionally charged conflicts of interest and desires. Society's fabric is woven with the lines drawn between them. Do I have the right to publicly display a symbol that means one thing to me (conceding the benefit of doubt here), but a different, as well as violent and illegal, thing to others? Does it matter that I am fully aware of both when I display it?

Society has drawn similar lines. We hold free speech so precious that we protect even offensive speech, but we do draw the line at certain expressions of harm to others. We have laws prohibiting public images of extreme violence, nudity, and other visual or verbal symbols which may incite or encourage harm to others. More difficult is the less direct example, such as a flag which stood for more than one thing, and emotional vs. physical harm. Yet even there, we have drawn legal lines prohibiting hate speech in certain circumstances. Is a Confederate symbol on a license plate hate speech, if it isn't meant by its designers to be so, but may be used, or at least interpreted, both ways?

While I generally don't, it's my purview as a columnist to opine as well as inform. My young son once kept a Confederate flag in the privacy of his room; to him and a few others in the family (with ancestors who fought for the South in the War Between the States), the Southern flags are historical symbols of independence and Texas pride. I knew how he meant it, so I didn't object.

Would any of us publicly display such a symbol, such as on a car? No (I had him put away the flag when we had visitors). Why would I want to hurt others by reminding them of terrifying realities of man's inhumanity to man, and to risk being associated - quite logically - with supporting prejudice? What a symbol means to those viewing it matters; that is the point of a symbol.

When a publicly displayed, commonly recognized image symbolizes - even in part - violence and once-legalized racial oppression, the scale tips too heavily in the direction of social harm. Even if it isn't meant to cause any, to know that it will is enough.

"A people that values its privileges over its principles soon loses both." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

Sholeh Patrick is a columnist for the Hagadone News Network. Contact her at [email protected]