So the entire argument is that adding, altering, or removing something from private property without permission is violence? I don't really see how. Since "the argument could be easily made that indirectly it can and does cause harm", I'd love to hear that argument.
My argument is "defacing property is an act of violence." "Defacing" by definition is alteration without permission, whether by act of adding of removing some feature.
Definition of Violent Knocking someone out is violent. Stabbing someone is violent. Setting off a bomb in a crowded area is horrifically violent. Defacing property is petty and disrespectful, but it is not, by any definition of the word, violent.
via Merriam-Webster Online Petty violence perhaps, but yes, defacing property is an act of violence.violent: using or involving the use of physical force to cause harm or damage to someone or something
My main problem with the whole Confederate flag fiasco is should we really be pushing to ban something because some find it offensive? I can understand how some people can feel uncomfortable about having it fly over a federal building, but trying to get rid of it entirely seem a bit dangerous to me. Also on the subject, is the flag not part of the state's history? South Carolina wasn't just one of the Confederate states, it was the first state to secede from the U.S. to form the Confederacy. It is a major part of the state's history and whether you agree with the politics of the Confederacy or not, it has its context in the history of our nation.
No one is calling for the confederate flag to be banned. They're calling for people who know better to stop flying the thing as if Jefferson Davis just stepped out for a pack of Chesterfields and will be back any minute to show those carpetbaggers what for. Private citizens are entirely within their rights to celebrate slavery and a patronistic economic system, and other private citizens are entirely within their rights to mock them resoundingly.
I am very much not trying to advocate banning a historical symbol, especially since I'm one of those people who go out of their way to read banned books, so such a consideration would be hypocrisy. While I'm not a fan of the flag flying over a government building, and a big fan of the talking being done about whether it belongs there, I agree that Ms Newsome was in the wrong when she took it down. I'm also a big advocate of freedom of speech, regardless whether I agree with the speech or the statement being made. If the end result of this mess is to put the flag back on the pole, then I won't advocate increased hostilities. I'll grumble about it, but I won't advocate -- I don't advocate -- violence.
Germany has the Nazi symbol banned, not just because it is offensive but because allowing people to wave them around could breed Nazi sympathy. Although our culture does not really permit the government banning free speech it's an interesting analogue. I think history belongs in the museum. The confederates lost, and just on a patriotism level I don't like the idea of that flag flying.
I'll just leave this here.I love my country too much to be a [patriot]. - Albert Camus
As a South Carolinian, I say remove the flag and put it in a museum. The flag represent the fight for slavery and the decision southern slave owners made because slaves made because they did not want to lose their riches.