Thank you for this excellent letter, Safiya.  I saw this booth at the Sweetcorn Festival and was surprised by how many people were walking by it or even interacting with the booth without outrage, shock, anger, or even recognition that the confederate flag operates as a racist and hostile symbol in our society.  The lack of engagemen/awarenesst around the presence and role of these symbols in our commuity is disturbing and I am pleased to see your letter here in a forum that allows for further discussion.  More discussion is needed in our community to raise conciousness around both overt and embedded sysmbols of hate that create an environment of microagression and hostility.  I appreciate your response to this event and hope that the outcome of this is the chance for wider discussions about how we can advocate to make our communities safe spaces.

Thanks for writing about this issue.  Hopefully, there will be a positive change in the future.  Hate and prejudice have no place anywhere especially at a family event.

I’m really glad that SP has taken the time and space to address the issue of the confederate flags at the Sweetcorn Festival.  Hot on the heels of a racially-motivated crime in which an African-American man was targeted and then murdered by a group of teenage boys - for literally no reason other than racist motivations of the gang of white teens - this symbol must be taken seriously as the banner of aggression and white supremacy that it is.  To not take it in the light is simply ahistorical and dishonest. While I realize that this was not a flag hoisted by festival organizers or in any way officially displayed, the fact that it was displayed at all shows an oversight and judgment gap; this vendor should have been made to remove it, as I am sure he/she would have been asked to do if similar vitriolic symbols had been on display and for sale.

Thank you for writing this letter
 
 

I wholeheartedly agree with the comments regarding the need to extinguish this archaic symbol of fear and repression. Education is the key to helping our fellow citizens to understand that the Confederate flag does not merely represent the “South” or “Southern Pride.” Besides, this is Illinois. I’ve always found it odd to see vendors selling these flags at the State Fair, too.
As an aside, I must say respectfully that I don’t see why the author chose to make a tie-in at the beginning of the “death of a young African American man at the hands of the Champaign Police.” How does that fit with the theme of this story, other than making an underhanded swipe at the people who protect this community? That’s certainly not fostering “cross cultural understanding.” That’s basically tying together the ignorance of portraying and selling Confederate flags with our community police, and as a professor that teaches about diversity you should know better than to generalize a group of people. 

“In the United States, freedom of expression does not protect hate speech”

Yes it does.

I don’t think a swastika flag is the same as a confederate flag?

I don’t want to take away from the great piece that was written by PROFESSOR NOBLE; thank you for your bravery!
I do want to say to those who may not believe that what happen to the young man in Champaign (Mr. Kiwane Carrington); As a Black Man, I was hurt! The dialogue shared the days to follow, once again affirmed, to me, that people of color are still not supposed to “feel” (undervalued, expendable, mistreated, etc.) in this world. Which I have to tell you, seeing the “Confederate Flag” reminded me of all over again!
Please, stop telling those who are connected to symbols, words, and imagery of a segregated reality, and acts such as the death of a BLACK YOUNG COMMUNITY MEMBER, how they are supposed to feel! So Sad….
III

“I don’t support all of the policies of the time but there were good parts too.”

Yes. I believe the trains ran on time…

I don’t think it’s PROFESSOR NOBLE—she’s listed as a grad student with the Illinois directory.

/just sayin’

What else was that vendor selling? Were they selling items related to history, or items related to the redneck lifestyle?

this is america get over it.

There are two solutions to this problem:
1) Any vendor should have to sign an agreement saying they won’t display anything controversial or offensive (at the sole judgement of the Committee) and if they don’t take the stuff down, they’ll be kicked out.
2) Calmly tell the guy his flags are offensive and don’t worry about his feelings.  But don’t ban him or kick him out.  That will just draw attention to his cause, which is exactly what he wants. 
I prefer the latter method.  The guy can say or show whatever he wants, but he should know he’s an a-hole and nobody likes him.

I would’ve had to see the booth for myself, but if your problem is solely with the Confederate flag and the Swastika, then you are a moron. The Swastika is a religious symbol that dates back to the Bronze age, and is still being used as such in India, Persia, China, and Japan. The Confederate Battle Flag was created and used as a symbol representing the Confederate States of America, the group of southern states that wanted independence from the north’s bullying and hypocritical politics. Although I may not agree with all of the policies of certain groups who have adopted these symbols, this is still the Land of The Free. The 1st Amendment protects EVERYONE. Even hypocritical leftist boobs like yourself.

If you think the swastika is just a religious symbol and the Confederate Battle Flag is just an old battle flag, then you are either a moron, willfully ignorant, or living in 1865.  This is 2011 and these are symbols that certain groups use to express their hatred of other groups.  We don’t want to be hypocrites, but the swastika is a symbol of pure evil, and the Confederate Battle Flag is now a racist symbol.  If you don’t like racism, you probably aren’t going to be too fond of anyone who displays that flag.  If you want to be a free speech advocate, then fine.  However, saying that the Confederate flag isn’t racist is just dumb apologetics.

BUY it, then have a good old flag burning.  Preferably nice and close to their booth. Typically those establishments sell lighters too, or borrow one if you don’t wish to support them any more than you have to in order to express yourself.
THAT my friends is constitutionally protected freedom of speech/expression.  Would’ve felt damn good too, I’m sure!
Use it or lose it:  make your voice and sentiment known.  Freedom and Democracy isn’t pretty:  Don’t sit on the sidelines!  Don’t ask for censorship—OUTBLAST it!  Show them via your constitutional right of freedom of speech/expression that their line of thought isn’t welcome in our community. 
After the first one burns, step back to the vendor’s booth (you’re only a step away, right?), if they put another one out, buy it and burn it until they stop putting them on display.  Police come, but hey, you’re protected by <span style=“font-family: Arial,Helvetica;”><span>Texas vs Johnson.  They take you to jail, and I’ll be right beind to buy the next !#$!# flag.  And light it up.  And then we’ve got a movement:  I have faith in this town that two things will happen:  somebody will step up should I get a free ride to follow you to the pokey, and that there’s more than one lawyer in this town that will take it as far as we need pro bono.</span></span><span style=“font-family: Arial,Helvetica;”><span>

</span></span><span style=“font-family: Arial,Helvetica;”><span>At THAT point, selling that flag becomes a public safety issue (censorable).  But YOU gotta stand up, in public, when it happens (and yes, it’s easy to come up with the idea to burn a flag sitting listening to Louis Amrstrong typing on the Internet).  But freedom isn’t easy—it’s hard!  Asking for censorship while understandable, is absolutely, positively unacceptable and the easy way out: Those who would give up essetial liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither. 
</span></span>
<span style=“font-family: Arial,Helvetica;”><span>They come back, our community now has a plan. Somebody said a little rebellion now and then is a good thing.  And now you have a plan WHEREVER you see the accursed flag on sale.  Buy it, head to the sidewalk in front of the establishment, and LIGHT IT UP!

</span><span>Or, if you’re the more peaceful type, smother their hate speech with peace, ala the Angel Patrol for Matthew Sheppard, and stand in front of their stand all night with your wings of peace on.  Me, I was raised to have a passion for fire and brimstone ;-)</span></span><span class=“st”>
</span>

The Swastika is a religious symbol that dates back to the Bronze age,  and is still being used as such in India, Persia, China, and Japan

That is true, the swastika is a religious symbol that dates back thousands of years.  A Swastika surrounded by a white circle on a red background is not.  That is a symbol of hate.
The Confederate flag is a symbol of hate too, especially to those sympathetic to the suffering of millions of slaves in our country.  People who aren’t sympathetic to that are lame.
Look, people have the right to display the flag.  It’s who we are as Americans, freedom of speech and all, the good and the bad.  But, displaying the flag at a booth at the Sweetcorn Festival, a community event?  It’s wrong and poor judgment.  You might as well have brought out the Chief, a Sambo in black face, and a dude dressed like a Hasidic Jew during Survivor.

Unfortunately, what the writer doesn’t understand is that hate speech IS something that is protected under the first amendment (our right to free speech), save for instances of Obscenity, defamation or “fighting words” (words/statements/etc that are meant to incite violence).
In fact, historically, there are several instances in which hate speech has been upheld by the United States Supreme Court under the protection of the first amendment. Such cases include Terminiello v. Chicago (1949), Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), National Socialist Party v. Skokie (1977), R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992),  Virginia v. Black (2003) and Snyder v. Phelps (2011).
While I am in no way supportive of racism or discrimination, I AM in full support of freedom of speech.  Without it,  this very piece would not exist. Though abrasive, anything that prohibits hate speech is unconstitutional.  So the vendor - had he/she been turned away - would have had every right to question why.

the nazi flag is always offensive and racist.  the confederate flag is not the same.  the state of mississippi uses it in their state flag.  to say that the confederate flag is always a racist symbol is untrue.  it means a lot more to people in the south, and it’s easy for uptight northerners to just assume it’s racist every time it’s displayed.  having said that, i do recognize that it is abused by complete idiots to promote their racist ideology, but that shouldn’t ruin completely what the confederate flag stands for.  i wasn’t at the sweetcorn fest, but i’m guessing the people running this booth were displaying it with some racial implications, so i’m glad that it was brought to light and hopefully it doesn’t happen again.  it’s a family event and it’s not needed.  however, i just disagree with the author’s assertion that the confederate flag is always racist.  i would hope someone teaching at a higher level could have some understanding or accpetance of a culture they do not know.

Why didn’t the author confront the vendor, and ask, “Hey dude, what’s with the selling of the confederate flag?” There is a great possibility the vendor thought he was selling historical war memorabilia or a slice of “southern culture”; and not a charged racist symbol. Without direct citizenship, the vendor learned nothing, he was able “to get away with it” during the entire festival, and will probably take his wares down the way to the next carnival. For the good professor to sit there “uncomfortable and concerned” is an inadequate response. It was legal for the vendor to be doing what he was doing, and therefore the professor needed to forego her fear of racists and give this vendor some serious customer feedback. I agree with earlier commenters, there should have been some outblasting of this insensitive display. Instead, the professor blames the UBA. Ridiculous. And since the professor brought up the Carrington killing, remember the first dominoe to fall was the next door neighbor forsaking his citizenship rights and upon the sight of two children pulling on windows next door, instead of going outside and confronting the two little brats, he calls the cops- a decision I’m sure he regrets more than anybody. It’s time to stop being afraid of each other and start calling each other on our shit. The nanny government and the UBA are unreliable stewards of common sense and decency.

Safiya is pretty ignorant for a professor on these type of issues.  What does she do when “The Dukes of Hazzard” pops on the screen?  My thinking is she probably does what she should have done here….TURN THE CHANNEL. Does she write a letter to the station broadcasting it and tell them they cannot show it because that lil’ ol’ flag hurts her feelings?   She could have asked right away to be moved to another booth. Safiya, how about this.  Instead of writing a backhanded article about how the UBA is a racist orginization, why don’t you bring it up at the time?  I heard from a source that was in her booth, that she was having a good time and did not make any mention of the flag at that time.  So why did she get so upset after?  With over 40 - 50,000 people being at the Sweet Corn Festival, and all you hear about is this one complaint…I would say this is very minor and is getting more attention than it deserves.  To also include mention of the unrelated death of that 15 year old attempted burglar from 2 years ago is also another signof ignorance from Safiya.  Is she saying that the cops are racist?  Sounds like it to me.  Amazing how one incident will give people a platform to make broad statements and accusations of irrational grounds.  I think there should be a movement for her to resign from teaching classes she herself is so ignorant on.

Hmm, you may disagree with Ms. Noble’s point of view (are you on a first-name basis with her, “Doug”?) but denegrating her status or knowledge as an academic is probably a dubious endeavor for you to be engaging in. :)

Really, her personal opinion was so controversial, so threatening, so outlandish that you impugn her professional standing and suggest she be without a job?  My, my, my.  Maybe she’s onto something, after all.

ahhh yes miss “Sarah Roberts”  uhhhhh is her name not Safiya?  I am sorry. Am I supposed to call her Ms.  How are you so presumptuous to be able to assume she is not married. What if she is Mrs. Noble.  What are you even talking about?  I bet you have a proble using the Presidents middle name too.  Well she seems to think her opinion is so valid that the persons involved with the UBA should be fired…so I say fire her [REDACTED]!  Sarah stay out of this conversation, if you have nothing valid to add!

These personal attacks on the author provide further evidence of the hostile climate the author is pointing to.  Instead of participating in a community dialogue and taking seriously the charges that this opinion piece lays bare, those commentors are demonstrating the power of microagressions in creating a hostile environment where even the possibility of larger cultural critique is nullified.  I read these slanderous comments as further examples of how critical dialogue around racism is policed and how racist beliefs are protected and remain upheld.
 

I would much rather take a course presented by Ms. Noble (and have actually had the privelege to be in a course of which she was a TA) than anyone who spews such vitriolic nonsense as “Doug”.   Honest and open dialogue is vital, but personal attacks and flammable statements just serve to feed anger and division.  Didn’t we all learn in kindergarten, “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say something at all?”  I hope “Doug’s” responses don’t discourage anyone from speaking their truth.

Actually, we learned, “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say ANYTHING at all.”  Apologies to Mrs. Wiseleader (could there be a better name for a kindergarten teacher?).
 

There absolutely are limits on our freedom of speech (no yelling fire in a crowded theater, for example.)  This was a family event and confederate flags had no business being there.  The UBA certainly wouldn’t have allowed pornography, even though a lot of pornography is perfectly legal; they had a choice about what they allowed to be displayed, and they should have shown more responsibility to the people that they represent.  I don’t think that Professor Noble called it a racist organization and I don’t think that she probably thinks that they are.  She was shocked by the lack of judgement, at least that’s how I read it.  By not making the vendor remove the flags or leave, the UBA essentially supported the vendor, which is not appropriate and not very smart if they want the community to support them.  Open dialogue is crucial to make positive change and Professor Noble is right to bring this topic to a public forum. The UBA needs to be made aware that the tacit approval of racist symbols will not be tolerated in Urbana. Thank you Professor, for sharing your views!

I am a native Mississipian; born and raised. I am also a Black man. I can tell you first hand that the Confederate flag is very much a symbol of fear, a source of pain, and a constant reminder of what our ancestors suffered during slavery; an insitution whose remnants are still entrenched in the fabric of our country.
At one time, I was asked to be on a team of people working against keeping the Confederate flag as part of the Mississippi state flag. I did design work to urge people to vote in 2001 against keeping this symbol of a terrible time in our nation’s history. We campaigned very hard to change it. Of course, the vote went through to keep the “stars and bars” because racism in Mississippi is in the soil. It’s in the air. You can see it in the cobblestone streets in parts of the downtown Jackson area; each brick laid by dark enslaved hands. It’s part of the experience there. That is a sad fact that keeps rearing its evil head too. Just this summer in the Mississippi capitol of Jackson, a Black man was beaten within an inch of his life and then run down by several white teenage boys who just wanted to hurt someone Black. They succeeded in killing this innocent man. Why? Because the melanin content of his skin was a bit more than their own. The Ghosts of Mississipi indeed.
Of course, a great deal of people will say that this is an isolated incident and that by punishing these unfortunate young men that justice is served. Racism hides in plain sight though…and It’s very hard to deal with racism when our society as a whole doesn’t understand that it is a systemic issue that goes far beyond a few “bad apples”. It’s just as hard to get some people to comprehend that a flag that represents pride in a time when human beings were treated as property, murdered, raped, exploited, traumatized, and disenfranchised to an unprecendented extent is doing an extreme disservice to the principles our country was supposedly founded on. Freedom of Speech or not…Why would any sane human being be proud of this? There’s no glory in this. There’s no honor. The blood spilt on those lovely rolling hills was spent to preserve a society that deluded itself into ACTUALLY BELIEVING that destroying another human being for profit was the right thing to do.
Having freedom should also be tempered with common sense, respect, and responsibility. Just because you CAN do something does not mean that is ethical to do so.
Safiya Noble is a brilliant woman and I commend her for speaking out. A confederate flag IS on the same level as the Nazi swastika, in my opinion and American families should not have to be in the presence of such a vile relic of an America that was far less than our forefathers meant for this great nation to be.

Listen, I will admit that my comments would cause a rucous.  That was the point.  I am sure you all know about Morgan Freeman.  A very prominent AA man that is an inspiration to our AA community.  He said and I whole heartedly agree, “The way to stop racism is to stop talking about it.”  Here is the link, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2d2SzRZvsQ  Watch and soak in the lesson.  The only people talking about racism, are people who either seek to gain from it, or racists themselves.  If someone was “racist” towards you. Fuck them.  Ignore them.  If they threaten you you.  Fight them.  Go to jail for it!  Rosa Parks did!  And look what she accomplished.  For any person of color, like myself, to sit here and even write about it…is a coward. That is why I have a problem with Safiya.  She did nothing about it at the time.  She is no Rosa Parks.  She is a coward hiding behind her keyboard.  If you have a problem with them, GET IN THEIR FACES!! That is why I don’t believe she was truly offended.  She did nothing about it at the time.  Just wrote a letter…pfffff

Wow Rob.  I wish there was both a “like”, and a “folllow” button here.  I would do both!  I know that I may have contributed to some of the last few distractions, but I had to get some stuff off my chest.  I agree with your mature view.  But ultimately I disagree with the immature view of the original author.
 

As the author noted, this seems to be the first year that this vendor, or any vendor, put out confederate flags for sale. I doubt the UBA expected it or had any prior knowledge that this merchandise would be brought by the vendor. If I were in their shoes, in the midst of trying to pull together the last details of their biggest event of the year attended by thousands of people, and currently accomplishing this without the benefit of an active executive director, and then suddenly I saw this symbol often used to declare proud racism that represents a terrible part our country’s history I’d be a) shocked and then b) dismayed because it hadn’t occurred to me that this might come up and now there is likely no time at all to get a hold of my lawyer and figure out what I can and can’t do. Treading on anything that can be protected by free speech is not to be taken lightly when you are legally a representative of an organization, especially when there is no executive director there to make the call. 
I’d also be wondering if I’d be making things worse by asking this person to removed the flags, if that would just create an incident in the here and now that would start a fight with the vendor - am I empowered to remove them? Would that just give them more attention and bring others in on their side? Remember, you’ve just found out about this symbol being in the booth and you are in the midst of 100 things you’ve got to do *right now* to pull off a safe, successful event for the community that is just about to start. 
I think it is important, until there is evidence otherwise, to assume the best of the UBA staff and board and realize this likely came as a total surprise and that they will have to review their vendor agreements with the help of their lawyer, and think through their options for preventing this in the future. Now, if someone contacted the UBA about this symbol’s presence at Sweet Corn and was told the UBA was unconcerned or got brushed off, that would be a different story. But in both the article and the comments I don’t see mention that anyone has contacted the UBA and asked for their views on the situation. 
I appreciate Ms. Nobel’s article and her point - I find the confederate flag a chilling symbol ever time I see it and know that as a person of caucasian decent I can’t even begin to understand what having this symbol displayed at my community’s event as if it was no big deal must feel like. I deeply appreciate her pointing this out to the community (as many of us, including me, were not there and would want to know). But before those of us in the comments start pontificating on what the UBA should have done or should do now, we have to consider it is a complex issue both legally and socially to navigate for the best result and our arm chair view of law isn’t going to cut it for those who work for the UBA and have a great deal of responsibility for not only its legal well being but for the ramifications of any action they take that might only inflame the situation and turn it into something far worse.
The UBA should be contacted to find out their view on the situation and if they are doing or intend to do anything before next year’s Sweet Corn to address preventing a repeat of the situation and, if they know, what their legal constraints are in the situation, before we we start getting into judging our fellow community members who work to enrich our community through the work of the UBA.

I think that you are probably right about there not being prior knowledge that the vendor was going to display racist items, but whoever was in charge of the event (there had to have been someone in charge, even without an active executive director) should have taken action.  Removing racist displays should have taken priority over the other “to do” items on the organizers list, and if they did not have the knowledge of how to handle the situation, then they had no business organizing a high profile community event.  It is unacceptable to me to allow something like that to happen and I personally don’t believe that any excuse makes it acceptable.  I would be very interested in hearing what actions will be taken to prevent something like that happening in the future, though. To Rob, I didn’t intend to imply that pornography and political speech are the same thing; my point is that there are limitations placed on free speech. I can’t cite case law or statutes, but it doesn’t take a lawyer to realize that the UBA had some control over the situation.  I also don’t consider displaying symbols of oppression and hate to be political speech.  It is vile to me that they were allowed to be present at a family, community event.  To Doug, it isn’t cowardly to write an op-ed piece regarding this issue, that’s what op-ed sections are for.  It wasn’t Safiya’s responsibility to try to get the vendor to take the flags down, it was the organizer’s.  What she is doing is opening a dialogue and expressing her displeasure with this aspect of the event.  Your opinions about the topic further the discussion; the personal attacks to her character do not, and they diminish your credibility as a thoughtful, intelligent participant in the discussion.

Why did the north fight this War of Northern Aggression?
All me grand pappy’s slaves are gone, and me kin-folk dead and now the gov’t mammies are eating my gov’t alive?
I want reperations!  All me kin-folk are dead in a cemetary and all I gits is wrap musik!
 

The original 1812 Illinois state constitution
included S-L-A-V-E-R-Y
for those held hostage in southern Illinois salt mines.
For reals. It is time to add a 14th star to the Stars and Bars!
Illinois = Slavery

I think their opinion is dead after Citizens United.
Anyways, you keep responding to the legality of it, without recognizing that it’s an emotional issue.  No one cares about the legal side, it’s emotion that drives it.  Sure, people may argue about rights and freedoms, but it’s an emotional response to the socio-historic context of the image that is the point.

@J.Woltman- Agreed, the Carrington Killing has nothing to do with selling confederate flags at a Sweetcorn festival.
Disagree that there is no proof Carrington’s death was racially motivated. Having lived here a long time, I say there is no way the Chief of Police would have pulled out his gun and aimed it at two white children and shouted, “Stop, or I’ll shoot you!” Even though U of I students burglarize apartments and dorms, and even though white teenagers are often caught burglarizing vehicles and vandalizing stuff all over town, police never pull their guns out on them and threaten to kill them. The introduction employed by the Chief was racially motivated, in my opinion. Sadly, had the Chief pulled that stunt on some white kids, his resignation would have been on Steve Carter’s desk Oct. 10, 2009. But because the public was sold that guns were aimed at some black street thugs, nothing was done; and the Chief was eventually promoted to be the Chief of the Chiefs at ILEAP. Very sick, very twisted. But that reflects the lack of citizenship- the lack of sustained involvement by concerned citizens.

”...he obviously used very poor judgement,...” and I say that poor judgment was created by the fact that Finney was faced with two black children instead of white children. What we do know is police catch U of I students all the time in the act of various crimes and do not pull their weapons out; nor do police trained at the Police Training Institute (and you know this as a marine) attempt to go hands-on while their weapons are drawn. The entire community’s failure to demand this kind of incompetence displayed by Finney be punished with termination represents the racism this community tolerates. Kiwane’s life meant little to the public, especially after Carrington was quickly portrayed as a troubled youth by the state’s attorney’s office, the police, and the News-Gazette. Had a white university student been gunned down like that, heads would have rolled, and you know it.

...and what I mean by “gunned down like that” is: “Had an unarmed white university student been gunned down in 8 seconds, heads would have rolled,...”

@above comments
 
As a white person who was once a white teenager in Champaign-Urbana, I can personally attest to two instances when police officers drew a gun on me or one of my white teenage friends. Once was by UPD, the other was by U of I police. Granted, none of my friends were accidentally shot, but there is precedence of it happening.
 
Although, that would be merely anecdotal in nature…

sorry white guy, Local Yocal, who knows everything that “The Police’ do in each and every situation, be it past, present or future, has declaired that it never happens, ergo you are liar.

I appreciate the dis-Dane for Local Yocal’s opinions, but honestly, this anedote that police pulled guns on some white teenagers is news to me. Did you file a complaint?

To me courage means doing the needed thing. Safiya saw a need, a need of our community, and did something about it. As she points out in her article, it’s not just about a particular profiteer off racist symbols,  nor just about the Sweetcorn Festival that gave him space, nor just about that particular racist symbol no display. It’s about our community—the persistence of racial disparity, how some are persistently terrorized or harassed while others are persistently oblivious to that fact; our inability to see the connection between the tenacity of racism and our clinging to racist symbols. The mourning and healing are not over, the fundamental problems are not resolved. As a volunteer and community member and a mother she felt responsible. She spoke up for a more responsible and sensitive community. I want that too, and I’m grateful for her courage.
 

I’m not defending the flag, I’m questioning your bias.
 
There have been scores of attacks by blacks in this town against whites.  They have gone by the name “Polar Bear Hunting”, “The Knockout Game”, or the more plan spoken “Lynching a White.”  This pattern of hate crime has not been covered by your magazine.  But, you express great “disappointment” at a flag. 
 
No coverage of race based violence, but strongly worded editorials against a flag.  This demonstrates your anti-white bias.  A racist bias.  Look yourself in the mirror.

The idea that not talking about racism somehow makes it go away is a dangerous one. These conversations are important, although they often attract people with extreme views and those quick to argue meaningless semantics in reaction to some feelng of a damaged ego or (perhaps unrecognized) encroachment on the enjoyment of racial privelidge. (Like, for example, the flag of Japan is not a symbol of hate because its widespread connotations are not linked to Pearl Harbor, it is linked to the country as a whole. No one is flying a Japanese flag next to their “Bomb the US” bumper sticker. The Confederate Flag, on the other hand, is widely linked to the racist history of the US because it is largely used in this context. I’m not sure how you can use the Confederate flag without calling up the recollection of American slavery. You can say it’s a symbol of Southern pride, but I suspect you’d be hard pressed to find an African American in the Southern US flying the stars and bars in a celebration of their geographic locale. Truth is, the Confederate flag is a symbol of racism because of its inexorable historical link to the longer history of US slavery and segregation. The sort of “Southern pride” that means “White pride.” You can argue the semantics, but the way it is used, and the sentiments and skin color of the people who defend the flag, reveal that there is a racial connotation to the symbol that cannot be denied. 
I was at the Sweet Corn Festival, but I somehow didn’t see this booth. Had I seen it, I would have grumbled to myself under my breath, and taken it to be symptomatic of the overal segregated racial climate of Champaign Urbana. I probably wouldn’t have written anything about it, or said anything other than to complain to friends, because to be honest I’m exhausted with immediately defensive cries of “I’m white and I’m not racist shut up liberal hippie Marxist” that evince little thought and reflection past a knee jerk response. I’ve largely given up hope on most of Illinois (and, hell, most of the US) letting go of their deeply ingrained fears and biases based so strongly on the physical appearance of others.
Ms. Noble is much less cynical than myself, and I applaud her for it. She still thinks there’s benefit to be had from civil discourse, although many of the commenters here mimic the national debates of yelling names at each other without doing much listening or thinking of someone who may have a different experience than their own.
I don’t believe Ms. Noble said that the flag caused the Carrington shooting, as other commenters seem to be saying. I think her larger point was that the flag and our community’s tolerance of it is symptomatic of the larger sense of racial prejudice intertwined with class divisions that pervades CU, and that allowed an unarmed young man to be shot by police, with the police facing no consequences for their actions. 
These things are linked not in the sense that someone saw a Confederate flag at the Sweet Corn festival, went back in time, and shot a kid. That’s obviously ridiculous. That’s why no one made that argument. 
The link is in the shared sentiment behind these two otherwise unrelated events; the mistaken belief that somehow closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears and pretending nothing is wrong means that nothing is wrong. The booth was there and people were interested in it because there is a large portion of Illinois folk who remain deeply embedded in the long history of ignorance, prejudice, and economic exploitation that persists precisely because people are unwilling to discuss these issues, and the emotions surrounding these issues, in a productive manner.
Although, honestly, I have trouble remembering what a productive conversation about race looks like, scarce as they are.

I find it interesting that for some people, the first step toward civil discourse is banning a symbol you do not like.
 
Our nation’s founding was premised, in part, on protecting the rights of the minority against majority tyranny. Throughout history, we did a terrible job at doing so when it came to racial minorities, but we have certainly done better in the last 50 or so years. We have a far ways to go, particularly in terms of LGTB rights. Until recently, a majority of Americans were not in favor of gay marriage, and yet many of us want to protect that minority group from majority opinion.
 
But it cuts both ways. We want minority rights protected, but only so long as it’s a minority we like. If it’s a viewpoint we dislike, well, it’s time for a ban. If it’s a symbol that some have used for hateful purposes - well, sorry, it’s time to ban, burn or otherwise silence it.
 
I view the confederate flag as an abomination. A fundamentalist Christian may view the rainbow flag of the LGTB community the same way. The only way to protect the views and people we like is to follow the same standard for that we detest.  
 

Thank you for the link, I had not been reading this site back then.
 
What a joke.  After your article on polar bear hunting spent tousands of words downplaying black on white violence in this town, you have the temerity to expend this effort criticizing a symbol.  Actual violence (downplayed), vs. a symbol (highly criticized).

The truth is that blacks in Champaign attack 4.6x as many whites as whites attack blacks (133 vs. 30).  If you account for the distribution of population, where blacks make up only 1/6 of the population, you find an even more disturbing rate of racist violence being perpetrated by blacks.  Any given black is more than 27x more likely to attack a white than any given white is to atack a black.  These are staggering differences.
 
Your “balanced” approach to the polar bear hunting epidemic, fails to notice this, and in fact, you choose to downplay this reality.
 
So, lets review.  A hugely higher rate of racial attacks being perpetrated by the black comunity against the white community, versus, somebody had a flag.  You choose to criticize the flag, and downplay the violence.  You are biased, and it seems clear that you are racist in your approach.

Roger, what parallel universe do you live in?
Wow, you can use stats, good for you!  “27 times more likely”  Right, what, were you out on the street doing a randomized survey?  Did you wear disguises and get beat down multiple times to test this theory?  I guess I’ve been 27 times more likely to get beat down by some friends of mine, strange that it didn’t happen. I guess I’m living on the edge.
So, let’s review.  You should get out more and turn off the tv.  Take a walk, ride a bike, eat healthy and pull your head out of your ass.  Or is that racist of me?
Granted, I’m all for freedom of speech and freedom of expression, but we should acknowledge the context/meanings of symbols and images, the entrenched legacy of racism/institutionalized and environmental discrimination and be able to have a meaningful discussion on this.
 

John,Your insults are not a meaningful discussion.  The statistics I quoted are facts.  Reported by Smiling Politely in the article referenced above.  That is not a random sample that is extrapolated across a population.  There is no 95% confidence band, no margin of error.  That is an actual count.  A fact.
 

Well, you got me there.  After all, how can facts be biased?
What is your point, exactly?  Black people are dangerous?  I think most of the nightly news covered this type of ignorance well enough for the last 50 years.  You know what else is bad, single mothers on welfare abusing Link Cards.  How about, oh I don’t know, kids in gangs selling drugs. Or maybe muslims.  or the Amish, with their wickering and fake electric stoves and whatnot.  Trying to think of other cultural scapegoats…  The Cubs, those fuckwits can’t win a world series to save their lives.  The Masons, um… those guys with the signs for This Is It! Furniture.  Those guys are 37% dangerous with a 99% degree of confidence.
Seriously, why defend a symbol that has such a loaded legacy.  Unless, of course, you’re ... Which also brings up the point, you have a lot of assumptions about race, what’s factual about that?
 
Anyways, I predict this will just go on and on ad nauseum so this is me, signing out.
Maybe you just need a good rogering. 
 

What I personally take from Ms. Noble’s article is a request (a need) in it for a world free of not only “racial insensitivity” (what a disgusting way to put it—“ignorant violence” is what it should be called instead, however often it might respond if not gracefully to a nudge of consciousness-raising), but also of the kind of excuse-making by community members made here for the actions of other people whose public acts, intentionally or not, reproduce terrorizing, too-familiar public displays of power and attempts at oppression—whether that’s by defending Confederate flags, burning crosses, brandishing religious images of any sort, or waving around flags in general, including this nation’s stars and stripes. As it is now, any talk of equating of flag and pride in this country reproduces the gesture that attended every violent act of power done under the color of that flag’s authority. That shit just plain makes a community unwelcoming.
I’d echo Mark Enslin. Courage includes in its needful things not only to speak up publicly about community issues (if in an article from behind the safety of one’s computer monitor), but also doing so knowing you’ll be treated to the predictable, hate-filled ignorance and smarminess that nakedly wraps itself in a flag in public (from *its* safety behind a computer monitor) as well. Anger in public discourse and public life may often be necessary; hatred is not.
People are daily treated to ignorant violence by the nation some of you claim to be proud of, who get the proverbial tear in your eye at the flap of Old Glory while indignantly denouncing Confederate flag wavers for making the same gesture. When you say, “It’s just a flag,” that’s ignorant violence. When you say, “Lighten up,” that’s ignorant violence. When you say, “My love of Old Glory’s not like those ... Southerners,” that’s ignorant violence.  We’re all complicit in the misdeeds of this nation, but not all equally.
I find myself in solidarity with Safiya Noble (along with all of the ghost of Native Americans killed here and their ancestors driven from this place) and her desire to eliminate such ignorant violence from public discourse, not through censorship but by not letting it pass.

There is a distinction between disliking something and feeling threatened by it.

When we folks with identities that have been historically privileged attempt to use the argument that a double standard is in effect when folks of historically oppressed identies demand change, in fact make plain the need for such change.
It is only from a place of privilege could i say “Ah ha! But you, who claim we all must be treated equal, are treating me in a way you would not like to be treated!”

I have not read all of the comments, my comment is directly in response to Safiya. First thank you for making the effort to raise awareness about the confederate flag at Sweet Corn, and taking an articulate stand against it.
I was struck by your closing sentence:
“<span>Many times these traveling salespeople come through and wreak havoc, but we are complicit if we silently allow it or shrug it off as inconsequential.”</span>
As I see it, the fact that this was a traveling sales person who did not have a overwhelmingly welcomed service or good to add to the festival seems like an obvious fix for next time- they are not invited or accepted as a vendor.
The act of hanging a hate symbol was not perpatrated by a local restaurant, shop, gym, MTD, or other CU establishments that exist because they are supported by the people that live here.
At a community festival it seems much more relavant to have booths and vendors that people have shown they want through supporting them. Festivals are meant to be celebrations. Let’s use have some standards and ethics about what we want to celebrate.

Safiya Noble’s criticism, and call for awareness has been echoed by countless other people all over the United States for decades now. We don’t need to hate to take part in a discourse of hate.
One of the most important inequalities here is that those who display a confederate flag and the others who experience it do not have a shared idea at all what the symbol presents. The presenters at the festival,and elsewhere—despite the fact that we live in a state which was never part of the Confederacy, much less the South—may be able to look at the symbol and be comforted, valorized, justified, encouraged, as people, and Americans, as community members. Taking part, as is said, in heritage. But for millions of persons living in the United States, who have been objects of oppression, violence, discrimination, social and economic marginalization, what that symbol means has long been and remains clear. Noble accurately includes in this body of people, to use her words, African-Americans, Jewish people, gay/lesbian and transgender community,  immigrants, non-Christians, non-Whites, and feminists. Persons of these groups all across the country know what that symbol means, and have continually been on the receiving ends of its meaning; the flag’s ubiquity even outside the American South speaks volumes.
In a modern world, where we are really only one among very, very many, a call like Noble’s is rightfully requiring us to ask ourselves to take into account what kind of reality we present in public life. What is happening to our neighbors when we identify, and to us? We must be encouraged (that is, to have courage), to confront the symbology in us and on us, and ask ourselves if they really, and have every really reflected the persons we’ve wanted to be. Furthermore, we need to see a symbol for what it is as action in the world, in accordance with what it purports to represent. What heritage, what legacy are we claiming in identification. Did it ever really exist as it has been presented?

What I find particularly galling is the fact that people still will cling to an amoral and legalistic framework to silently defend what is morally reprehensible.
Having lived in Florida for the last several years, one of the features of the local landscape which I found most alienating was a massive Confederate flag hanging over the I-4/I-75 interchange outside Tampa.
While ostensibly on private propery, the flag is inserted into the gaze of every single person who passes by that busy stretch of highway. Every time I passed by it, I tried to imagine the intention of those who put it up.
From a St. Pete Times article on the flag:

While the flag’s outline was visible from more than a mile away at some points, it was the view from the southbound lanes of I-75 that took drivers’ breath away.
It was suddenly, jarringly there as drivers rounded a bend in the road and crested the I-4 overpass, and just as they came upon the exit sign that says “Martin Luther King Blvd. 1 mile.”

While the stated goal of the flag was to commemorate the 200th birthday of Jefferson Davis, the undercurrent of hanging it there was to say, to every single person driving by (especially those going to the exit onto MLK) that they should watch their back, and that they are in hostile territory.
That is what that flag is, it’s announcement of hostility. It’s not a “free speech” issue - sure, speech is free - but it’s one of community standards which make everyone feel safe with each other.

“What about Japan’s national flag?  Is it a symbol of hate because they bombed Pearl Harbor?” asks J. Woltman (comment #46).
 
Actually, the Japanese flag is far from an uncontested symbol and was banned in its “rising sun” form after World War II.  
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rising_Sun_Flag

Asks rhetorically, it would seem, that is…
In fact, that flag was considered aggressive and a sign of Japanese militarism/imperialism throughout East Asia and from the perspective of the United States, as well, although the original poster seems to be suggesting otherwise with his comment.

Thanks, Rob! That enlightened comment was really helpful and informative.

“What I find particularly galling is the fact that people still will cling to an amoral and legalistic framework to silently defend what is morally reprehensible.”

There’s that pesky ‘legalistic’ stuff again.  That darned ‘ole constitution saying that speech, even whatever speech at the moment is deemed reprehensible, is still protected speech.

Alex, I find your statement to be an abomination towards all I stand for; therefore I demand that you not talk anymore. I will gather enough votes to pass a law, and make your words illegal!

Legalistic framework….bah humbug. Next thing you know people will speak out freely for rights for queers and women. It never ends, does it?

#72 “A.” A ~~
Thank you for materially adding your voice to Safiya’s the notion that public hatred is not needed.  I would just add one primary thing to your post.You wrote:

But for millions of persons living in the United States, who have been objects of oppression, violence, discrimination, social and economic marginalization, what [the Confederate flag] means has long been and remains clear.  Noble accurately includes in this body of people, to use her words,  African-Americans, Jewish people, gay/lesbian and transgender community,  immigrants, non-Christians, non-Whites, and feminists

Notwithstanding that such lists balloon to limitless length when one tries to be accurately inclusive, nevertheless, the Confederate flag has also oppressed White people. It may be that I arrive at the moment of looking over my shoulder in the presence of a Confederate flag first because I’m someone gay-identified but it’s an almost sure thing, following the apocalypse, when all of civilization falls, and we’re all left fending for ourselves, that there will be no friendship for me as a White person from many who fly the stars and bars. And I mention this oppression only to show its right-this-second presence. The War of the South then, like the economic class warfare of neoliberalism now, was waged for the sake of a very, very select bunch of folks. Around the country, the “hick accent” used to indicate people merely born in a certain region illustrates the culturally normal abuse that is heaped upon them, and that abuse is no less heaped by bourgie Whites as well. You might throw Southern Catholics under the bus of the Confederate flag in all likelihood in many communities as well. And certainly any White person reconstructed enough (rich, middling, or poor) who thought to stand up against the Klan, Jim Crow Laws, etc (or standardized testing these days) would have certainly seen stars when clubbed to death by the bars.  In the most abstract sense (if it’s actually abstract), the knowledge of the oppressed is that the oppressors don’t know they’re oppressed too. In the final analysis, given one of two impossible choices, I’d rather be a camp inmate than a camp guard. I can say, for the sake of survival, part of me thinks (simply in the name of survival) that I should opt to be a guard, but ultimately (like the German soldiers commanded point-blank to simply shoot people in the head), I’d have to find a way out of that situation. The only way I could pull off being a camp guard would be if I was ignorant of being one, which is (primarily) the main mechanism by which we (and I mean pretty much all of us in the US) are able to carry on as we do, holding hundreds of millions of people in the economic prison camps of our own dire hunger for commodities.

Defending right to speech and the speech itself are two different things, and trying to conflate one with the other is deflecting this conversation toward, once again, an amoral and legalistic framework (blah blah THE CONSTITUTION HURR HURR) which still fails to address some of the issues brought up in this original article. The article wasn’t about the consitution, it was about acknowleging that we don’t need to bring this sort of hate into our community.
IN CLOSING:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv5RXPHEn5c

#81 - Rob: So the justification for the illegality of, say, murder derives from what? Is common law construed as merely cultural, rather than moral? Assuming you weren’t making a throw-away comment, which I hope you’re not, I’d be interested to know the basis for the distinction you’re offering. Obviously, it would be that one doesn’t script laws by consulting some holy book or derivatives of it, but there currently is a blurring of certain things that are construed as moral but that are still legally desirable (like a prohibition on murder). Also, it might (currently) only be on religious grounds that one can even argue that the death penalty should not be available to States so that they can murder people with impunity. By that I mean that onlya religious argument (an argument arising from a religious background) can have sufficient rhetorical force to actually make States forego the self-arrogation to put people to death. Economic arguments are the other great persuader in that regard I suppose. To be more precise, religious arguments can mobilize a populace to browbeat a State into foregoing the death penalty on economic grounds.

There seems to be an idea that if we can defend the use of a symbol, historically, we can ignore what the current use might be. For example, one reader says that the swastika has has positive meaning in some other cultures- this is true, but in our present day, it doesn’t take much to understand that it is currently used most often to show alliance with ideals of white supremacy. Symbols have social meaning and social consequences, regardless of personal intention. So, with the confederate flag or other pre-civil war era nostalgia- regardless of what a person would like to mean by it, because of the current social connotation it is ALSO going to mean a nostalgia for the era of slavery and all the inhumanity that entailed. Someone may want to argue that that’s not what they mean, but the social truth is, that’s what IT means. So, when a person lets us know that what we’re conveying is different than what we mean, it’s a gift- an opportunity to learn how to be more aware of the consequences of our choices.