The Confederate Battle Flag - My Uncomfortably, Comfortable Position

Old Cleveland County, NC Courthouse
from www.ncmomuments.ncdcr.gov

Sometime during the first week of September, 1862, my great-great grandfather Caveny’s three brothers crossed the Potomac River as part of the Army of Northern Virginia’s Maryland Campaign.  Over the next days as soldiers in the 17^th South Carolina Infantry Regiment, they fought in a mountain gap at the Battle of South Mountain and then fell back to a position near the small town of Sharpsburg.  On September 17^th, they fought in the Battle of Antietam.  One brother was killed and one was seriously injured.  He died days later as a prisoner of war.  Only one of the three came home.

The next year, my great, great, great grandfather Jolley followed General Lee north during the Gettysburg Campaign with the 28th North Carolina Regiment.  Grandpa Jolley survived his wounds at Gettysburg but his brother was killed.  Of his four brothers who fought in the war, two were killed in action and one died of other causes. 

I understand and appreciate my Southern heritage.

For those of us in the rural south, the Civil War is never far from conscious thought.  At virtually every old courthouse, a lone Confederate soldier stands atop a slab of stone as if waiting for the Yankees to return.  Here in western North Carolina, highway markers trace Stoneman's Raid from one small town to another.  And of course there is the flag.

Wilkesboro, NC

The shooting of nine African-American church members at a Charleston, SC Bible study by a white man has revived calls to remove the Confederate Battle Flag from the South Carolina State House grounds.  There seems to be momentum for that outcome with a vote scheduled for next week.  NASCAR has even weighed in asking fans not to fly the flag at NASCAR events.

www.thestate.com

“Heritage not hate” is the rallying cry for flag supporters.  We complain that the KKK and other white supremacist groups have hijacked our flag and are using it for evil purposes.  Yet, we seem to conveniently forget that the flag was raised over the South Carolina State House in 1962 in response to the federal government’s push to end segregation. 

We argue that the Civil War (or is it War of Northern Aggression?) wasn’t about slavery at all but that it was about states’ rights.  So, by logical extension, the flag represents states’ rights.  For those politically right of center, anything that challenges the federal government is a good thing. And the further we move to the right, the more gun rights, social reform, and now the flag issue become intertwined. 

What if we are wrong?

What if the Civil War actually was about slavery for those in the South?  What if those aristocratic, low country rice and cotton plantation owners knew that their empires would fall apart without slave labor?  What if those same rich farmers knew they could never get my subsistence farmer, ancestors to buy into fighting to maintain slavery?  What if they knew they had to spin the truth as “states rights” to get them to march across an open field at Gettysburg against Union troops firmly anchored behind a stone wall?

Fodder for endless and spirited discussions.

The biggest “what if” is whether the Confederate Battle flag symbolizes hatred and a history of oppression to a large portion of our community.

I must admit that when I see the flag publicly displayed these days I don’t think about my heritage – at least not in a romantic, chivalrous sense.  Now I see someone who is thumbing their nose at society and authority – the same sentiment that hoisted the flag over the SC State House in 1962.  I hear a nonverbal “fuck you” spoken loudly in mixed, unfamiliar company because it is our right to speak freely as we chose regardless of who we offend.  I think about my folks dying because some slave owner took advantage of my people’s Scots-Irish tendency to buck authority.

None of that leaves me feeling warm and fuzzy.

In all fairness, my opinions are just opinions.  For Christians, we are fortunate to have scripture to help us with these thorny issues.

How should we interact with the government, especially one with whom we disagree?

“Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.” Romans 13:1-2

Why should I have to sacrifice something that means so much to me?

“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire. If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it from you. It is better for you to enter life with one eye, than to have two eyes and be cast into the fiery hell.”  Matthew 18:8-9

But what about my rights?  Am I responsible for how someone (mis)perceives my actions or cultural symbols?

“But take care that this liberty of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.” 1 Corinthian 8:9

“All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify. Let no one seek his own good, but that of his neighbor.”

1 Corinthians 10:23-24

In his sermon on 4 Biblical Insights for Christians on the Events in Charleston, SC, Fellowship Raleigh Church Pastor Matt Schoolfield challenges us to be more focused on making a difference than on making a point.  Wise words.

I have come to realize that there is rarely change without loss.  We have to give up something to initiate change - to make a difference. 

As a true son of the south, I feel uncomfortably comfortable acknowledging that it’s time to fold up the flag and put it away.  It's time.

Small Business of the Week - Bullhead Bear Farms

When I was a big kid, maybe 12 or 13 years old, I was struck by an entrepreneurial spirit.  I had had a taste of real work – picking okra for a truck farmer and push-mowing grass.  Facing a long row of okra with a peck basket was not an attractive career path.  I knew there were easier ways to earn money.  So, I decided to go into the possum business. 

My friend and I lured three of four possums into box traps with open cans of sardines.  We built a rather large cage of questionable durability and paired the possums off to do what possums do.  These were going to be our foundation stock – the basis for our possum empire.

I’m not sure who said, “Find a job you enjoy and you will never work a day of your life,” but I pretty sure he was a possum farmer.  No more grass-stained Chuck Taylors or prickly okra stalks for me.  Instead, I envisioned the inspiring words: “That’s a fine looking possum young man – How much do you want for him?”  It all begins with a dream.

But, like most budding business owners, we focused on the aspects we enjoyed most – catching and raising the critters.  We never gave much thought to the vitality of the possum market which surprisingly was nil.

Nowadays I am much older and wiser.  And since I am semi-retired, I have time for a new animal husbandry venture that I’m sure will be profitable.

My idea was generated by all this talk about deer.  There is a move to transfer captive deer to the oversight of the NC Department of Agriculture and away from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC).  Determined not to make the possum error again, I have been studying this bill’s progress.

First, semantics or word choice are important.  Those wanting to raise deer refer to it as “deer farming.”  One bill sponsor, Senator Brent Jackson, is quoted as saying, “Logically, it just makes more sense to have a livestock program placed in the same department as all the other livestock programs.”  The NCWRC and other conservationists prefer the term, “captive cervids.”  This seems to communicate that these deer are public trust resources that belong to the people as a whole and not a group of 37 individuals.  And of course “cervid” sounds much too scientific.  I’m sticking with “farming.”

Next, we need some folks who are okay with waffling.  In 2010, Agriculture Commissioner Steve Troxler said in an official press release, "Bambi is a pest."  Now Commissioner Troxler says, "It makes perfect sense" to move the oversight of captive deer to his department.  I like a man who is willing to change positions.  We will need more folks like that in our camp.

The deer farmers point to this as a growing agricultural enterprise.  I like that a lot.  “Economic development” and "job creation” are a hot topics.  Who can argue against putting money in people’s pockets?  Deer steaks, deer urine, big racked bucks for canned hunts – these guys have it figured out.  I hear there is even a budding market for deer semen (now there is a job to fluff your resume).  It all sounds as lucrative as ostrich farming.

We also need politicians willing to deal with the hard issues.  Representative Roger West’s possum bill has paved the way for abolishing wildlife laws when it is beneficial for us small business owners.  In spite of what some may say, we don’t need industry in western North Carolina.  We need principled men who are willing to expend their political capital to give us a week of unregulated access to possums.  Fingers crossed, but I hope those principles apply to other wild animals in the future.

So now for my big reveal.  If this deer bill passes it seems logical that other animals should follow (cue Ty Pennington and shouts of “move that bus”).  How does this sound? – Bullhead Bear Farm.  That’s right - I’m farming bears!  I plan to grow them out and slaughter them like beef cattle.  There is a strong Asian market for gall bladders and I know the tourists and mountain transplants will buy rugs and mounts.  Gosh, I bet ever piece can be sold.  I may even get back into possums.

But first, we have to get this current bill pushed through the NC General Assembly.  Then I can start building my bear fence. 

I wonder if there is market for squirrels.

Stripping the NCWRC

It seems that conservation in every form is under attack by legislation.  I suppose the mentality is that environmental laws are bad for economic development.  After all, the laws designed to protect our air, water, and forests must have a negative impact to those developers seeking to drain wetlands, emit pollutants in the air, and allow sediment to wash into our streams. 

Then there are all those pesky varmints.  The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission is working to conserve those critters like it is some kind of statutory mandate.  Wait, there actually is such a statute. 

Ding Darling
www.dingdarling.org

Back in the 1940s, there was a movement across the country to take conservation programs to the next level.  Folks like Ding Darling were concerned that the great restoration efforts begun by Theodore Roosevelt, Gifford Pinchot, and George Bird Grinnell were becoming too political and that conservation would suffer because of this intervention.  Building on a national model, the North Carolina Wildlife Federation was instrumental in initiating legislation that led to the creation of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) in 1947.

Darling's biography describes his frustration with petty political interference, and how he hoped that conservation could somehow be kept from the negotiated world of politics.  It was felt that creating a separate, autonomous agency would help keep politics from influencing the biological management of wildlife resources.  The NCWRC has founded on this principle of making decisions based on what was best for the resources.

Of course, politics have always been a part of any wildlife agency.  To think otherwise would be ludicrous and naive.  The NCWRC is no different.  The commissioners are political appointees.  Both state and local politicians often ask and receive favors that benefit their constituents. 

The current legislative body in North Carolina seems intent on breaking down the NCWRC stone by stone.  HB 574 was passed by the House and awaits action by the Senate.  The bill will remove all rules concerning opossums between December 29 and January 2 each year.  This action hopes to ensure that the Possum Drop can be conducted for a handful of folks in a crossroads community in Clay County.  It's not possums that are at stake - it the fundamental shift in how the General Assembly interferes with conservation efforts.

Then HB 760, the Regulatory Reform Act, had language inserted that would have stripped wildlife officers of their inspection authority.  This authority is unique to conservation officers across the country.  It allows them to temporarily stop people engaged in wildlife related activities to determine if they possess the required licenses and other equipment.  A later iteration removed the verbiage concerning inspection authority, but left language that states:

“Except as authorized by G.S. 113-137, nothing in this section gives an inspector, protector, or other law enforcement officer the authority to inspect weapons, equipment, fish, or wildlife in the absence of a person in apparent control of the item to be inspected."

Huh???

One has to wonder what the drafters of that language really want to address.  Are wildlife officers pilfering through hunters’ trucks while the hunters are in the woods?  That is already illegal.  Or maybe it is to keep those “jack booted thugs” from going into a hunter’s house to inspect his freezer without a warrant or permission.  It couldn’t be that – those actions are also illegal.  Could we be trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist?

What is easily discernible is the effect of such a law.  A wildlife officer could no longer check a trap that she suspected of being illegally set unless the trapper was present.  Or a marine patrol officer could no longer check for identification of nets until the fisherman showed up.  Many other situations come to mind where the conservation of wildlife resources, the NCWRC’s and Division of Marine Fisheries' mandate, would be adversely affected.

I suppose we could speculate on any number of reasons that one legislator has a beef with the NCWRC.  What isn’t questionable is the impact this legislator is having on an agency with a rich history of stewardship of the state’s wildlife resources.