The Case For Criminalizing Flag Burning

political correctness, cultural marxism, feminism, saw, conservative, trump, nationalism, america, patriotism

Earlier this week, PRESIDENT ELECT DONALD TRUMP provocatively tweeted that “Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag” and that “if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or years in jail!” Of course, this caused quite the stir. As one would expect, countless big government SJWs miraculously transformed into constitutional scholars. Egghead libertarians got in on the act as well. When I dared voice my support of the suggestion, a hip millennial thought to dissuade me by quoting Antonin Scalia. Before I had the chance to congratulate him on discovering one of the great thinkers of our time, he’d already produced a clever follow-up to further highlight my perceived hypocrisy. “Gotcha!” he must have exclaimed before posting a meme showing Hillary’s support for a similar idea in 2005. Ironically however, he’d produced a meme which was primarily being used by Trump supporters as a “gotcha” comeback to SJWs. It’s precisely the type of 3rd grade level point that Sean Hannity will likely spend months, if not years screaming at his audience through his guests. The reality is that low level thinkers of both the left and the right are constantly engaging in hilarious levels of hypocrisy. When Bush is President, MSNBC complains about his golf games and vacations. When Obama is President, Hannity complains about his golf games and vacations. The difference between the two movements is that where conservative hypocrisy tends to taper off as you think more deeply about their ideas, liberal hypocrisy expands exponentially the further down the rabbit hole one goes. This is the core reason why conservatives generally fight to have conversations and why liberals are always fighting to prevent them.

But yes, hip millennial libertarian, constitutional conservatism probably protects your property rights. I’m glad that after sitting on the side lines and twiddling your thumbs as the left viciously attacked religious liberty, freedom of speech and the right to bear firearms you have suddenly found the spine to stand up for the right to set your flag on fire. Guess what? I don’t care that good conservatives have opposed the idea in the past, nor do I care that a feminist like Hillary Clinton once flirted with the idea as a way to sell herself as a hawkish centrist. I’m no longer worried about hypocrisy nor am I interested in squabbling over constitutional semantics. Unfortunately, we’re past that point and are now dealing with issues on a much deeper and more primal level. At this point in time, we are dealing with survival, an issue that ultimately supersedes even the most important of issues such as principles. When a situation collapses (as our national politics have) into a matter of life and death, the only thing of relevancy becomes living to fight another day. If you’re a pacifist and you are locked in a cage with a person whose stated aim is to kill you, and the only thing standing between the two of you is a blade, I’m here to tell you that it’s not only OK for you try to grab it first, it is the morally correct thing to do. The moderates, libertarians and other spectators watching from above might not know who started the fight or who is right or who is wrong. That doesn’t matter. You’re not fighting for them, not now anyway. In this moment, you are fighting for yourself, your family and your tribe. In moments like these there are only two parties who need to know who you are— you and your enemy.

The example and rhetoric is harsh but so too is our political reality. We are in the midst of a non-violent civil war between two distinctly different world views, that of traditional Americans and that of the Cultural Marxists. The proverbial knife we are fighting over is an executive branch whose power has grown under both Republican and Democratic party control. We have seen what the left has done with this authority and we have peered into their eyes. We've seen that their contempt for us can be quenched only with our annihilation. What is more frightening is that we have seen that they have a realistic plan to achieving that end and one that they came unbelievably close to fulfilling. No, they don’t intend to chop our heads off, although the radical muslims they welcome into our country might. Being the thoughtful intellectuals that they are, they went ahead and planned a nice, polite and sanitary departure for us. You see one day, while we were out at work, the Cultural Marxists changed all the locks to the society we built and called home. They then systematically began locking us out of our culture, academic institutions and until just a few weeks ago, they had locked us out of our government as well. The only thing left to do was to lock us out of our homes and say goodnight to our existence. Count me among those that feared we had already been banished to the cold pages of history. But somehow, in the final moments our survival instincts and will to live kicked in and we summoned the fortitude to jam a calloused foot into the door just as it was being slammed shut.

This election was not just a victory; it was an act of survival. But whether or not we rescued our Republic or merely postponed its demise depends upon what we choose to do next. Now that we are once again at the head of the table, there are two clear choices before us. One is to embrace our opponents, and govern politely and efficiently trusting that our benevolence will win their hearts and minds to our noble cause. This is a nice idea but unfortunately, it is fatally flawed for one reason. The people who just tried to lock us out of our homes (and whom still hold the keys to our classrooms and culture) actually grew out of our benevolence. They are an entitled mob farmed by the left on things like our chivalry, our belief in religious liberty and our unprecedented decision to free conquered peoples. All things that we willingly, and merrily gave to and shared with them. We welcomed them into our homes, shared our food, our beds and our ideas about a civilized and free society with them. We took them into the American family and made them a part of the greatest country in the history of the world. And in the end, all they had for us was contempt, jealousy and bloodlust. If we use this opportunity to continue governing the way we always have, largely leaving our political opponents unsupervised, they will no doubt spend the next four years sharpening their strategy and weaponry. Realize just how narrowly we escaped their wicked design. If unchecked, they will return larger, stronger and angrier to finish the job.

Any hope of a peaceful future is predicated upon our ability to first and foremost restore order to our homes and our communities. First order of business is to take your enemies’ weapons away from them so that they cannot use them against you again. Pry their perverted ideas out of stuff we pay for like education and assistance programs. Change the channel to something family friendly. If you can’t find anything that fits the bill, throw the entertainment boxes in the dumpster. Step 3, install new locks on the doors, put up a fence. Round up the academics and government employees separated from their work during step one and give them something to work on with their hands in the backyard. Inform them that if they want to eat they’ll be expected to contribute by producing something of tangible value. As they’re doing this, round up your families for a nice warm meal and talk about your day. Tuck your kids into bed and read them a passage from your holy book. Kiss your wife goodnight. When you’ve done all these things, you go and find yourself a beautiful flag and hang that sucker up on the front of your home to signal to your neighbors that you’re home. We’re a tolerant people so If anyone is bothered by your flag no need to get violent, simply show them to the door. It’s a big world, encourage them to find or build a flag that suits them better. Once you've done all this and you know your families and communities are safe, then it’s appropriate for you to freshen up on the constitution and evaluate your principles.

The media is calling on Trump to speak to “all Americans” but is such a thing possible? It shouldn’t be that difficult to find things we all agree on. Sure, a people can argue about tax rates, government assistance programs, labor laws etc., but any country should be able to agree on simple things likes borders and defense. And yet even on these simplest of issues we often fail to find common ground. I recently heard Van Jones defend political correctness as being something that used to simply be known as civility. How wrong he is. Political correctness is actually a set of counter values designed to replace the boundaries imposed by civility. For half of the country, civility means what it always meant, things like being polite to elders and saluting your flag during the national anthem. These are things that used to be untouchable, non-political. For the other half of the country, the half in which Van Jones lives, saluting the flag, supporting our borders, even standing up to people that want to kill are highly contentious topics. For them, the untouchable, unifying issues for which all civilized people must surely agree on are their radical views on social issues. If for example, you do not agree that men should be free to use women’s restrooms (as is the current leftist insanity du jour,) then you simply aren’t fit to interact with other adults. In places controlled by progressives like Massachusetts, which openly banned Chick-Fil-A from opening stores in their city because ownership had once expressed a traditional view on marriage, we see a policy of zero tolerance for dissent. Because the latter set of values were designed out of the direct rejection of the former and because they're openly seeking to not only ban but criminalize the expression of our traditional views—it is fundamentally impossible for the two to be reconciled. The very purpose of these new, politically correct values is to mock and tear down everything that we were, believed in and once understood as virtuous and true. How could the two possibly co-exist? We correctly value tolerance but that tolerance does not extend to those who refuse to tolerate us. In 30-50 years, one of these two sets of values will not exist. While again, this is a non-violent conflict, from an ideological standpoint the Cultural Marxists are an enemy like ISIS in that they have no interest in negotiating. Their sole aim is to destroy us and when faced with such an enemy, the only sane course of action is to destroy them first.

I believe that in such a political climate for a leader to speak to all Americans he must first assert some basic, reasonable boundaries about what it means to actually be an American. Our national identity has been under assault for decades and many citizens have actually forgotten what it means to be an American. It’s hard to blame them for this confusion after sitting through eight years of scolding from a President who repeatedly used the bully pulpit to tell them that there was something fundamentally wrong with them. The damage inflicted is real and our country is not only demoralized but is actually bleeding to death. Four years of constitutional austerity is not enough, the wounds must actively be tended to. If the goal of Obama’s administration was to radically transform America, the goal of PRESIDENT TRUMP must be to bandage and restore it. Calling for the criminalization of flag burning is precisely the kind of proactive, morale boosting leadership that is needed during such a time. As discussed earlier, the idea draws out hypocrisy from both political parties. That’s because it is a transcendent idea that seeks to restore the one thing that used to unite both the left and the right, our Americanism. Trump is building a coalition formed first and foremost around America and the interests of its people. That such a coalition would be viewed as conservative says much more about what the Democratic Party has become than it ever could about the Republicans.

Whether or not he pursues the idea, the message being sent is loud and clear. It’s a gentle reminder about the basics of Americanism. Basics like what borders are used to identify America on a map, what language is spoken here and how we feel about our flag. The great thing is, if you buy into simple things like these it doesn’t matter what color your skin is or how you pray to your god. Believe it or not, even with such primitive and simple parameters, there will still be some who will be excluded. For some, their contempt for America is so pervasive and all-consuming that they will never acknowledge a national identity that is not defined primarily by self-loathing. We will likely lose the Lena Dunhams and Al Sharptons of the world to the misandry and racial hatred that empirically define their view of the world—but quite frankly, who cares? If you don’t like the country, its flag or its values and you ultimately don't like us, why should we bother to drag you, kicking and screaming, to your seat at the table? These are after all the very ideologues referred to, who by virtue of their steadfast commitment to destroying us, have insisted upon making this an "us or them" conflict. PRESIDENT ELECT TRUMP is not drawing this line in this sand, rather it was drawn hundreds of years ago when the founding fathers fought to create this great country we have inherited. It is the obscuring of this line which the constitutionalists should be examining, not the effort to restore it. Statements like these, along with aggressive cabinet appointments, suggest to me that PRESIDENT ELECT TRUMP has concluded correctly that in this particular game the best defense must ultimately be a strong offense.

Top Stories