4A
Opinion
Friday, November 19, 1999
Arguments for stars and bars don't fly
South Carolina economy now will suffer because of flag
It is time to take down the Confederate flag once and for all. The need for it has long since passed and little good is associated with it.After all, the only time
in, the only time most of us Yankees see a Confederate flag is Friday and Saturday nights on Massachusetts Street, when all rednecks named Bubba are apparently required to drive their Chevys and yell obscenities at anyone who didn't eat a mayonnaise sandwich for dinner.
South Carolina is the last state to fly the Confederate flag over its statehouse, though Georgia and Mississippi have the battle flag incorporated into their state flags. Now, South Carolina is feeling the heat of a boycott by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which is set to begin Jan. 1. As a result of the planned boycott, both the state chamber of commerce and South Carolina Baptist Convention have called for the flag's removal, and more than 80 groups have cancelled conferences planned for South Carolina.
Feeling the pinch, the governor of South Carolina, Democrat Jim Hodges, tried to placate the NAACP by promising to work toward making Martin
Luther King's birthday a formal state holiday, something almost every other state has done. In return, the NAACP was asked to call off its boycott.
To review: The NAACP boycotts the state in an effort to rid the statehouse of a flag it thinks is a symbol of oppression. Instead of lowering the flag, the governor offers to try to permanently celebrate a holiday that is long overdue. What a deal.
In South Carolina and elsewhere, the main argument for keeping the Confederate flag is its use as a symbol of
Seth
Hoffman
associate
editorial editor
opinion@kansas.com
the South's heritage and the war they fought to protect it. It's called a symbol of the South's sovereign right to protect its way of life and economic system from Yankee encroachers. That's all fine, except that that system was built on the backs of slaves.
In addition, in the civil rights era of
the 1950s and 60s, the rebel flag became a symbol of defiance to federal attempts to integrate the South. At least that's what the NAACP says.
They're right. For many people, the Confederate flag is as much a symbol of hate as a
Nazi swastika, yet the Confederate flag shows up all over the place. After World War II, though, Germans had the good sense to get rid of the swastika, and even went as far as to ban it. There are still those in Germany that say that the Nazi symbol in an important part of their heritage — they are called neo-Nazis.
The good news is that the list of organizations and institutions denouncing the flag is growing. In addition to the South Carolina Baptist Convention and the state chamber of commerce, even Ole Miss University has banned waving the stars and bars at home football games.
There still is a long way to go. As more people find disfavor with the Confederate flag, the louder those who support it protest. Any Hank Williams Jr. fan (who will admit it) will tell you
that the rebel flag is displayed loud and proud at every Bocephus concert. Ironically, because of the growing list of organizations denouncing the flag, its defenders are becoming a minority.
As a freshman, my best friend wrote a column on this subject for his school newspaper during his first month at Texas Christian University. It was a bold move, considering most of the great state of Texas vehemently disagreed with his view. In fact, his potluck assigned roommate definitely saw things differently. His truck sported a Confederate flag license plate, had a Confederate flag blanket on his bed, and if you ever heard him talk, you'd guess he ate Klan Flakes for breakfast every morning.
When the column ran, flag supporters didn't write dissenting columns or letters to the editor, they threatened his life. The Fort Worth police never found the guys (there were two) that called him, but they said that kind of thing happened all the time.
This "kind of thing" has to end. Does the South really need a symbol of its heritage so badly that it's worth threatening someone's life? Maybe the South can come up with a new symbol. How about cotton, the banjo or Burt Reynolds?
Hoffman is a Lenexa senior in journalism.
Editorials
First lady Clinton must balance duties with political aspirations
Hillary Rodham Clinton, first lady of the United States and would-be New York senator, is playing a risky game with U.S. foreign policy because of her dual roles. She must begin making it clear when she is acting as the first lady and when she is campaigning for Senate. Her current noncommittal approach will create confusion and, potentially, harm.
The essence of this problem is that Clinton cannot wear both hats at once. The reason that there are senators is so that the United States is not run solely by a centralized elite in the Washington executive branch. A senator from New York is supposed to be especially sensitive to the needs of New Yorkers — not a representative
Running for Senate and playing first lady can send mixed messages to the world
of the whole nation.
This must be balanced with the fact that Clinton has created a very strong, political role as first lady. Anyone watching U.S. politics for the last seven years knows she is an integral, powerful part of the Clinton administration.
Thus, Clinton must be careful as to how she presents herself. This became apparent last week when she visited the Middle East. To her credit, she appeared to do a good job of sticking to
her role as a representative of the Clinton administration, yet it was not always apparent whether she was pandering to New York's Jewish vote or acting on behalf of the presidency. It would be a bad situation if she was acting as a potential New York senator while world leaders viewed her as representing her husband. The confusion of roles could send confused political messages, however unintended.
Frik Goodman for the editorial board
We do not mean to say that Clinton should not run for the Senate. We do mean to say that she should be careful as she runs. She has created for herself a visible, powerful role as first lady. She cannot expect the world to put that aside now that she is running for office.
Bomb threats neither funny nor legal
Two bomb threats were reported and investigated last week at the University of Kansas, with neither threat ending in an explosion, thankfully. Of course, most bomb threats turn out to be hoaxes, which — considering the consequences for such a hoax — is somewhat surprising.
A fake bomb threat is a criminal threat and a felony offense. As with any felony, it is serious and could result in jail time. What on the surface appears to be a prank or a procrastination tool for putting off a test could end with someone having a felony record. That is certainly far worse than any consequence that taking a test could bring about.
Furthermore, the act of calling in a fake bomb threat breaks University of Kansas code. The University's Student
Those who call in false bomb threats risk felony record and endanger students and faculty
Rights and Responsibilities state that students cannot commit offenses against the orderly process of the University. This would include a student who "intentionally causes or attempts to cause a disruption or obstruction of teaching ... administration ... or other University activities." This rule would include a student knowingly furnishing false or misleading information to the University.
Obviously a fake bomb threat would break University code, and a fake bomb threat would be a serious threat to an
academic career. The provost could decide upon further discipline.
Perhaps the most unfortunate consequence that results from a fake bomb threat is the boywho-cried-wolf syndrome. If there ever were a real bomb threat, chances are that many students and faculty would be injured or killed. No one would believe a real bomb threat because there are so many hoaxes.
It's embarrassing and ridiculous that some in the University community must be reminded that a bomb threat is not an acceptable way to get more time to study for a test. Studying is the best answer. With the consequences involved, fake bomb threats are a foolish and dangerous prank with lifelong consequences.
Consumers will make final Microsoft decision
On Nov. 5, U.S. District Judge Thomas Jackson declared Microsoft a monopoly. This was a tremendous victory for the U.S. government, which started the antitrust case in 1997 on the grounds that Microsoft had violated the 1994 consent decree by forcing computer manufacturers to include its Web browser Internet Explorer.
Emily Haverkamp for the editorial board
Jackson's decision was based on the fact that Microsoft controls the operating system market in the United States. Judge Jackson said this monopoly power was a threat to consumers and competitors.
Jackson said Microsoft threatened consumers because the company could set its prices, disregarding competition. Other operating systems account for a very small share of the market, and this leaves
Cassio
Furtado
columnist
opinion@kansan.ca
Microsoft in a strong position to raise its prices. This is extremely dangerous to everyone, not just to computer users. Users have to pay higher prices to use Windows' newer versions. Nonusers need to note that all companies use computers, and they simply pass their operating costs to consumers. If they spend more on computer programs, we will certainly pay higher prices for their products.
Second, the judge said Microsoft is a threat to competitors because Microsoft forces computer manufacturers that use Windows to use Internet Explorer and other Microsoft applications as well. This leaves other companies defenseless. Netscape, a Web browser that competes with Internet Explorer, saw its market share go from absolute dominance to almost complete insignificance since Microsoft's release of Internet Explorer four years ago.
Even with the challenges imposed by the giant of computer software, some other companies are trying to make their way to the top of the industry. Sun Microsystems is launching StarOffice, a program that is similar to Microsoft's Office. The big difference: it's free.
Computer manufacturers also are reacting, Compaq, Dell and several other large corporations have started selling machines outfitted with Linux, another operating system.
Microsoft now seems to be as vulnerable as any company in America, judge or no judge.
Bill Gates certainly faces a difficult period as the leader of Microsoft. Nobody knows what will happen to his company in the near future. Gates could have his公司 divided, a process that has happened to other corporate giants such as AT&T. Another possibility is paying several million dollars in damages and having the actions of his company restricted. Gates obviously doesn't want either of these options. That's why he's investing millions of dollars lobbying Congress and hiring top lawyers.
The government is probably doing its job. It needs to protect the U.S. population and its rights. However, I suspect that several other companies use the same practices as Microsoft. If the Justice Department starts playing devil's advocate, it will probable will investigate most Fortune 500 companies. By definition, all companies want to dominate their respective markets. Therefore, all companies dream about becoming monopolies. Every CEO in this country wants to become the richest person alive. The problem here is that the only ones who worked hard enough to get into this position are Microsoft and Gates. This seems to bother those who didn't get there.
Consumers are smart enough to decide whether they want to support Microsoft. If they do not, they have several ways to demonstrate their dissatisfaction. I think that all these questions do not need to be resolved by a judge. It is imperative that we hear the voice of the citizens. Consumers need to judge Microsoft. Perhaps Adam Smith said it best in his classic *Wealth of Nations*, "Every individual in pursuing his or her own good is led, as if by an invisible hand, to achieve the best good for all. Therefore any interference with free competition by government is almost certain to be injurious."
Furtado is a Pelotas, Brazil, junior in political science and journalism.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
Kansan
Julie Wood, Editor
Laura Roddy, Managing editor
Cory Graham, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser
Published daily since 1912
Chad Bettes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editorial
Seth Hoffman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Associate editorial
Carl Kaminski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . News
Juan H. Heath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Online
Chris Fickett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sports
Brad Hallier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Associate sports
Nadia Mustafa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Campus
Heather Woodward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Campus
Steph Brewer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Features
Dan Curry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Association features
Matt Daugherty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Photo
Kristi Elliott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Design, graphics
T.J. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wire
Melody Ard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Special sections
News editors
Advertising managers
Becky LaBranch ... Special sections
Thad Crane ... Campus
Will Baxter ... Regional
Jon Schlitt ... National
Danny Pumpelly ... Online sales
Micah Kaftz ... Marketing
Emily Knowles ... Production
Jenny Weaver ... Production
Matt Thomas ... Creative
Kelly Heffernan ... Classified
Jullana Moreira ... Zone
Chad Hale ... Zone
Brad Bolyard ... Zone
Amy Miller ... Zone
Brandi Byram, Business manager
Shaantae Blue, Retail sales manager
Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser
Scott Valler, Technology coordinator
Advertising managers
Feedback
Thanks for defense of cleanliness
My thanks to the Kansan editorial board. My thanks for demonstrating that you understand the other side of the issue concerning weekend litter in the residence halls, and most especially for giving voice to it.
I no longer work for Student Housing, but I did for 25 years, so I had a large measure of experience dealing with cleaning up after others. My first thought when I read the article last week was, "The real issue is that 99 percent of the
I thought of writing a letter then, but now I'm glad I didn't. The custodial staff works very hard to provide a clean, orderly environment to relieve students of some areas of routine burden so that they can focus on the education they are here to get. It often seems that no one, most frustratingly the very students being helped, understands the magnitude and difficulty of that task. Your editorial demonstrates that some do notice, do understand, and do care. By
mess is probably stuff that shouldn't have happened to begin with."
Dennis Constance Facilities operations
speaking out, you may help others to achieve that same understanding and help it spread.
I suspect I speak for a lot of custodial professionals when I say, "Thanks."
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"I love America more than any other country in this world, and, exactly for this reason,
I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually." —James Baldwin
How to submit letters and guest columns
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and hometown if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
Guest columns: Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansan news-room, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Chad Betts or Seth Hoffman at 864-4924.
If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4924.