It's despicable to see an American burning the nation's flag or claiming the United States deserves whatever evils terrorists can visit upon it. But as reprehensible as such unpatriotic acts can be, they enjoy constitutional protection and, from a legal standpoint, must be tolerated.
The ironic silver lining is that the same people who curse the United States only serve to highlight the country's greatness. Care for an example? How about Ward Churchill?
The University of Colorado professor has become infamous for equating those killed in the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, with Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi who helped organized the systematic genocide of Jews. Since Churchill's essay came into the public's eye in January (it was written soon after the attacks and sat largely unnoticed for over three years) Churchill has quite rightly become the subject of nearly universal disgust.
Churchill's essay, which demonstrates a remarkable ability to blend abject stupidity with vicious heartlessness, led Colorado Governor Bill Owens to call for Churchill's dismissal. Tempers have cooled somewhat in the weeks since, and though Churchill stepped down from the chair of the Ethnic Studies program, it now seems unlikely that the uproar will lead to an outright dismissal.
Churchill has paid a righteous price for his comments --- after all, he did expose himself as being not only moronic, but also an ass --- yet his freedom of speech is ultimately being protected. Unlike countries such as China, Cuba or North Korea, in the U.S., people who peacefully voice opposition to the government aren't prone to simply disappearing. This constitutional right to voice unpopular beliefs is one of the great things about the United States.
You often see this point illustrated during protests. When a flag is burned or an effigy of the president is lynched and set ablaze, those responsible face no persecution. Civil libertarians might raise concern over the increased powers granted to law enforcement by the PATRIOT Act. This is a valid concern that I share, yet the disparity between the fates awaiting an American who burns President Bush in effigy and a North Korean who does the same to Kim Jung Il is as immeasurable as it is indisputable.
Every few years, a movement to ban desecration of the American flag gains momentum. The idea often draws support from veterans who say they fought for the flag and don't appreciate some privileged 19 year-old protestor burning it because of their outrage over everything from war to the plight of baby seals.
With deep respect to those veterans, I'd contend that what they actually fight for isn't the flag but for the nation and freedoms the flag represents. It speaks volumes that someone can burn the American flag and then, instead of being shipped off to a gulag, go peacefully back home.
My point is not that the U.S. should be immune from criticism. Like all countries, there are shameful periods in our past -- the interment of Japanese Americans during World War II and slavery of course come to mind --- but unlike many countries, here, one is free to discuss such injustices, criticize leaders and even voice absurd opinions like Churchill's.
The next time you see someone unfairly lambasting the U.S., take comfort that however treasonous their act may seem, it only highlights the freedom they take for granted and for which this country stands.
Write to Jake at jymoore@bsu.edu
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
