ADVERTISEMENT

**New** (Larry) Voices carry

If I read the article correctly, it sounds like the Post and Courier folks posed the question about the flag. I'm not sure if Clements, Drad or Dabo could say anything other than what they said. The flag is such an emotional issue more so than a political one (unlike gun control which is an emotional issue but also a constitutional and political issue), and because this is an emotional time of introspection, then I think the timing is OK. I really don't think the flag issue being raised right now by Haley and others is about politics. I truly believe it is coming from a place of genuine brokenness and an impassioned desire for reconciliation and healing. I think so many people have "racial tension fatigue" and want to take an appropriate step forward.
 
I think the families directly impacted by the tragedy would be the only voices that really matter much if Now is too early to discuss the appropriateness of the confederate flag on the state grounds. Seems to me they are all on the same page with wanting it down post haste. I missed it if any of them have objected to the timing of the discussion.
 
giphy.gif
 
It wasn't always named after Tillman right? I have no problem dropping his name. Rename it Tiger Hall but don't rename it after another person. Too often something bad comes out later about people who have things named after them.
 
I'll echo my thoughts regarding the confederate flag at the Capitol... I'm an educated, conservative, 51-year-old white male. I think we should re-name Tillman Hall.

The further Clemson can distance itself from that clown the better.

good idea....let's rename it Clyburn Hall.
 
And thus begins the slippery slope. You can't sanitize history. I agree the timing was not the best, but I'm ok with the flag coming down and I didn't always feel that way. As momentum builds, I'm afraid we'll see more attempts to cleanse our past of any and all distasteful elements.
 
It wasn't always named after Tillman right? I have no problem dropping his name. Rename it Tiger Hall but don't rename it after another person. Too often something bad comes out later about people who have things named after them.

How many Clemson Students, or South Carolina citizens, know who Pitchfork Ben was? 6&....3%,,,,The PC crowd won't be happy it'll every Confederate monument is bulldozed into rubble.
 
It wasn't always named after Tillman right? I have no problem dropping his name. Rename it Tiger Hall but don't rename it after another person. Too often something bad comes out later about people who have things named after them.
What's next? At what point do you stop? Are we going to re-name the Washington monument because George Washington had slaves? Something to think about when you go down the path of re-naming historical buildings.
 
And thus begins the slippery slope. You can't sanitize history. I agree the timing was not the best, but I'm ok with the flag coming down and I didn't always feel that way. As momentum builds, I'm afraid we'll see more attempts to cleanse our past of any and all distasteful elements.

12 US Presidents (one of whom was Grant) owned slaves. Now what?
 
Here's the voice today of Paul Thurmond, son of perhaps South Carolina's most famous citizen and former arch segregationist, Strom Thurmond on the floor of the South Carolina Senate:

“For the life of me, I will never understand how anyone could fight a civil war based in part on the desire to continue the practice of slavery,” Thurmond said.

“Think about it for just a second: our ancestors were literally fighting to continue to keep human beings as slaves, and continue the unimaginable acts that occur when someone is held against their will. I am not proud of that heritage.”


South Carolinians, however, CAN be proud of the stand he took today.

Yes, Larry, I have always felt that within 10 years, the BOT will find a way to change the name of Tillman Hall. Clemson will do the right thing just like (finally) the state legislature is doing the right thing in Columbia.
 
Here's the voice today of Paul Thurmond, son of perhaps South Carolina's most famous citizen and former arch segregationist, Strom Thurmond on the floor of the South Carolina Senate:

“For the life of me, I will never understand how anyone could fight a civil war based in part on the desire to continue the practice of slavery,” Thurmond said.

“Think about it for just a second: our ancestors were literally fighting to continue to keep human beings as slaves, and continue the unimaginable acts that occur when someone is held against their will. I am not proud of that heritage.”


South Carolinians, however, CAN be proud of the stand he took today.

Yes, Larry, I have always felt that within 10 years, the BOT will find a way to change the name of Tillman Hall. Clemson will do the right thing just like (finally) the state legislature is doing the right thing in Columbia.

I bet you that Strom never thought he would have a son make those sort of statements. My how things have changed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerLion06
I'll echo my thoughts regarding the confederate flag at the Capitol... I'm an educated, conservative, 51-year-old white male. I think we should re-name Tillman Hall.

The further Clemson can distance itself from that clown the better.
Lincoln ordered the systemic killing of hundreds of Indian women and children by the US Army as an act of vengeance in Minnesota. Worse than anything Tillman did. Do you want everything Lincoln renamed? Where do you stop and end? Where is a line drawn? Tillman was an average and typical South Carolinian of his era except he had leadership and influence. In his day, he was considered a hero to farmers and the working poor.

The world and its history is messy. Man is inherently sinful. Anything good is by God's grace and mercy many of us believe.
 
Instead of destroying history, why don't we educate people. The masses are ignorant. A bunch of demagogues running the show. If we erase the painful lessons of history...how are we ever going to learn about them? It is more important to not forget about past atrocities.
Isis is doing the same crap now. Link: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/09/world/iraq-isis-heritage/


Or they can replace the battle flag of Northern Virginia (Stars & Bars) with a real Confederate flag.
 
I will not rest until that constitution written by slave owning bozos is destroyed.
 
The changing of the name of Tillman Hall will probably not happen. I believe it takes a 2/3 majority of the state legislature to change the name of a public building that is named after an individual. I think it is poor politics to ask a legislative body (where funding comes from) to take a controversial vote that really has no chance of passing. If they voted to change the name of Tillman Hall, a Pandora's box would be opened. Every building, street, etc that carries the name of a person would be under attack by some group with an ax to grind. If they vote no, then every person who takes that stance is branded as a racist. You therefore put the individual legislators in a tough situation if you ask for such a vote. If Clements or anyone else is asked about it, the response is easy. It is against state law to change the name of Tillman Hall, and therefore CU does not have the right or ability to make such a change. Simple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tigerpaw00
It's ok if you flame.
I agree with you on most things, but to say that all of a sudden all these people have had a true change of heart on the subject of the flag is ridiculous. This decision is driven by money, perception and politics. They are simply afraid it is costing the state money not to take it down and now is an opportunity to justify taking it down. The majority of people who support the confederate flag as historical symbol, do not see it as support for racism. Indeed, that is not what it is a symbol of. The perception of those who do not support it and the media and PC nuts have turned it into a symbol of racism which it was not meant to be. The flag that was at the top of the statehouse was put there by our Democratic governor Hollings - and it was not in support of racism or an objection to civil rights. If we had taken the flag down 20 years ago, would that have prevented the murders of the people in Charleston? It is not meant to be a symbol of hate. The fact that some people say it is to them should not alter the facts. Either the flag is meant to be a symbol of hate or it is not. What certain groups of people perceive it to be should be irrelevant. I support the symbol of the confederate flag as a states rights issue. I am not a racists, and just because someone says I am a racists because I support the confederate flag does not make me one.
Should we all not be able to show the symbol of the cross because it is sign of hatred for the lgbt crowd? Where do we stop? There have been public schools that have banned images of the American Flag and refused to let military personnel enter in uniform because it may be offensive to other people - if this becomes the majority view, does that make it right? By in large, it has been the media who has shaped, twisted, and altered the reality of issues over the last couple of decades.

To prove my point about it being a political issue, I will use your example of the possible Notre Dame coverage. Can you give me ANY examples of negative press Norte Dame has received because they hate gay people because they are a Catholic University? Catholic ideology clearly states that homosexuality is considered a sin. Is this an issue for them? Of course not, because a large majority of the people who assign blame and determine right and wrong these days either identify as Catholics or are surrounded by many who do. Yet how much heat did Dabo/Clemson get for not even going that far (saying it was a sin) theologically. That one person on personal time who was supporting one group and not judging another. Norte Dame as an institution supports the view that homosexuality is a sin. Based on the FACTS, who should get the most heat- Clemson or ND?
 
If you rename Tillman Hall, the name Clemson will not be far behind. TGC was very closely aligned with Tillman and there will be guilt by association.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shipyard tiger
Monument in Charleston of John C Calhoun was defaced because "he is a racist"

Liberals would have you erase history and start over. I think a lot of great men with great accomplishments and sacrifice to build this country will be forgotten because they are products of their times. Why can't we build upon their genius and learn from their mistakes?
 
It's ok if you flame.
I agree with you on most things, but to say that all of a sudden all these people have had a true change of heart on the subject of the flag is ridiculous. This decision is driven by money, perception and politics. They are simply afraid it is costing the state money not to take it down and now is an opportunity to justify taking it down. The majority of people who support the confederate flag as historical symbol, do not see it as support for racism. Indeed, that is not what it is a symbol of. The perception of those who do not support it and the media and PC nuts have turned it into a symbol of racism which it was not meant to be. The flag that was at the top of the statehouse was put there by our Democratic governor Hollings - and it was not in support of racism or an objection to civil rights. If we had taken the flag down 20 years ago, would that have prevented the murders of the people in Charleston? It is not meant to be a symbol of hate. The fact that some people say it is to them should not alter the facts. Either the flag is meant to be a symbol of hate or it is not. What certain groups of people perceive it to be should be irrelevant. I support the symbol of the confederate flag as a states rights issue. I am not a racists, and just because someone says I am a racists because I support the confederate flag does not make me one.
Should we all not be able to show the symbol of the cross because it is sign of hatred for the lgbt crowd? Where do we stop? There have been public schools that have banned images of the American Flag and refused to let military personnel enter in uniform because it may be offensive to other people - if this becomes the majority view, does that make it right? By in large, it has been the media who has shaped, twisted, and altered the reality of issues over the last couple of decades.

To prove my point about it being a political issue, I will use your example of the possible Notre Dame coverage. Can you give me ANY examples of negative press Norte Dame has received because they hate gay people because they are a Catholic University? Catholic ideology clearly states that homosexuality is considered a sin. Is this an issue for them? Of course not, because a large majority of the people who assign blame and determine right and wrong these days either identify as Catholics or are surrounded by many who do. Yet how much heat did Dabo/Clemson get for not even going that far (saying it was a sin) theologically. That one person on personal time who was supporting one group and not judging another. Norte Dame as an institution supports the view that homosexuality is a sin. Based on the FACTS, who should get the most heat- Clemson or ND?
You posed a fair hypothetical about earlier removal and the shootings. To that I would say no one could say for certain, and honestly from my perspective probably not if the shooter's circumstances don't change, which they probably would not have. Now I propose you a hypothetical to your state's rights view. Does a war for the rights you discuss and under the flag you support take place without the racist institution of slavery? (and fyi slavery did involve racial differences hence the slave codes that had been established in 1600's denoting the differences in race and inferiority of people of color, and stating Hollings was a Dem. doesn't mean what you would hope considering the Dem. in the south were much different in their views on racial issues at that point in history). Would like to add really well-written and insightful piece from Larry. Thank you.
 
As a reminder, here is David Wilkins' statement about Tillman Hall in February:

The Clemson University Board of Trustees is committed to diversity and will continue to be so. While we respect the many differing opinions of our graduates, our students, our faculty and staff regarding this matter, the Clemson University Board does not intend to change the names of buildings on campus, including Tillman Hall. We believe that other, more meaningful, initiatives should be implemented that will have more of an impact on the diversity of our campus than this symbolic gesture.
Every great institution is built by imperfect craftsmen. Stone by stone they add to the foundation so that over many, many generations, we get a variety of stones. And so it is with Clemson. Some of our historical stones are rough and even unpleasant to look at. But they are ours and denying them as part of our history does not make them any less so. For that reason, we will not change the name of our historical buildings. Part of knowledge is to know and understand history so you learn from it. Clemson is a strong, diverse university in which all of us can be proud. That is today and tomorrow's reality and that is where all our energy is focused.
To that end, the Board recognizes there is more work to be done. President Clements has recently outlined a number of new diversity initiatives that will make meaningful progress towards our goals.
We are proud of Clemson's national reputation and leadership in increasing opportunities for minority students on our campus and elsewhere through programs such as Emerging Scholars and Call Me Mister. We are committed to increasing the number of minority students on our campus, increasing diversity among our faculty and staff, and providing an environment that is supportive of everyone.
It is time to put this issue behind us and move on. We need to look to the future, not to the past, and the future is bright for Clemson University.

One other comment...Ben Tillman was clearly a racist, but without his influence, there may very well be no Clemson University.
 
Last edited:
It's simple. The flag issue is/was number one on the list. Done. I can't wait to see what number two is. FWIW, I agree with the removal.
 
Got to agree with David Wilkens. There is a good balance to change. Some would have you believe they are "progressive" but I'd say the are "reactionists", or more accurate, "overreactionists".

The fact is, that flag should have been removed a long time ago, but because we overreacted, it's the flag that tops the news tonight, not the great people that shamefully died because of this lunatic.
 
Last edited:
Taking the flag down does not solve our obvious racial issues. I think the only reason for taking it down by government officials now is just an economical reason. I don't care if it goes or stays. I'm still a proud southern man without a flag. The issue is not the flag however. Taking the flag away, doesn't take away what's already embedded in the mind. Right or wrong, the flag no longer being in existence would never stop hatred. It's sin and a man made symbol don't contribute to it. Blacks will always feel the struggles of equality. Not because of some damn flag or war, but because of sin and history. The past is the one thing you can't run from regardless of how much you try to get rid of to forget it. Same with anyone. An alcoholic will not stop thinking about drinking if he stops watching beer commercials. The racists white people will not stop thinking about hatred attacks on blacks because a flag no longer flies, neither will the blacks stop thinking about their equality in America just because a flag doesn't fly.
 
Lincoln ordered the systemic killing of hundreds of Indian women and children by the US Army as an act of vengeance in Minnesota. Worse than anything Tillman did. Do you want everything Lincoln renamed? Where do you stop and end? Where is a line drawn? Tillman was an average and typical South Carolinian of his era except he had leadership and influence. In his day, he was considered a hero to farmers and the working poor.

The world and its history is messy. Man is inherently sinful. Anything good is by God's grace and mercy many of us believe.
Come on, are we really comparing Tillman to Lincoln and Washington? Simple answer is it is easy to change the name of Tillman Hall. Every man is sinful, yes. But let's be logical here.
 
And thus begins the slippery slope. You can't sanitize history. I agree the timing was not the best, but I'm ok with the flag coming down and I didn't always feel that way. As momentum builds, I'm afraid we'll see more attempts to cleanse our past of any and all distasteful elements.

I would never want some of you to make an argument on my behalf. Slippery slope? Sanitize history? I wish i could find the first person to make that excuse so i could shoot them in the face with my legally owned AR-15.

The history of the state is still taught and remembered. People are well aware of Hitler even tho there's no Hitler Ave in downtown Anderson or downtown Berlin for that matter. Some of you must be morons. Not because of your stance on the flag but the stupid excuses. Because we don't HONOR them with names on buildings we are going to forget our history? Don't give those evil men the honor of being named on such things. THE prime location on Clemson's beautiful campus deserves better. Don't worry Tillman won't be forgotten ever. We'll remember him more after its removed so there you go.

As for the all time stupid comparison using the fact that someone owned slaves as a parallel. Retarded much? Owning slaves legally is far different than murdering and encouraging others to murder. Do you get that? Murder wasn't legal. Owning slaves was. And by all reports there were actually slave owners legally who treated their slaves better than the law demanded. Someone said MLK should be removed from everything because he committed adultery. Classic. I'm not mad if you believe in Tillman not being changed but if you are stupid enough to use those reasons......in honor of the folks in Charleston, I'll just pray for you.

Cleansing our past? I'm still shaking my head. My kids are still aware of the institution of slavery, the existence of the Native Americans, etc even tho there is NO direct evidence like Tillman Hall. My Lord we'll forget, we'll forget!!!
 
Actually Old Strom would be OK with those statements as he changed his position in his later years. Read about it.

How come he never publicly repudiated his earlier, segregationist views then? At least that is what I read.... Never publicly acknowledging his half black daughter is something I read about too.
 
If I read the article correctly, it sounds like the Post and Courier folks posed the question about the flag. I'm not sure if Clements, Drad or Dabo could say anything other than what they said. The flag is such an emotional issue more so than a political one (unlike gun control which is an emotional issue but also a constitutional and political issue), and because this is an emotional time of introspection, then I think the timing is OK. I really don't think the flag issue being raised right now by Haley and others is about politics. I truly believe it is coming from a place of genuine brokenness and an impassioned desire for reconciliation and healing. I think so many people have "racial tension fatigue" and want to take an appropriate step forward.

I think the average white citizen in SC is genuinely reconsidering based on true compassion and the fatigue you mentioned. As for SOME of the politicians, they are still playing politics in my humble opinion. Haley to be direct. She changed in 24hrs post Charleston. Didn't her CEO comment happen after the shooting?
 
Come on, are we really comparing Tillman to Lincoln and Washington? Simple answer is it is easy to change the name of Tillman Hall. Every man is sinful, yes. But let's be logical here.
You clearly don't get his point. Change Tillman and it'll soon be something else, then another change, and so on. Where does it end? Give it a rest, it's absurd.
 
It's ok if you flame.
I agree with you on most things, but to say that all of a sudden all these people have had a true change of heart on the subject of the flag is ridiculous. This decision is driven by money, perception and politics. They are simply afraid it is costing the state money not to take it down and now is an opportunity to justify taking it down. The majority of people who support the confederate flag as historical symbol, do not see it as support for racism. Indeed, that is not what it is a symbol of. The perception of those who do not support it and the media and PC nuts have turned it into a symbol of racism which it was not meant to be. The flag that was at the top of the statehouse was put there by our Democratic governor Hollings - and it was not in support of racism or an objection to civil rights. If we had taken the flag down 20 years ago, would that have prevented the murders of the people in Charleston? It is not meant to be a symbol of hate. The fact that some people say it is to them should not alter the facts. Either the flag is meant to be a symbol of hate or it is not. What certain groups of people perceive it to be should be irrelevant. I support the symbol of the confederate flag as a states rights issue. I am not a racists, and just because someone says I am a racists because I support the confederate flag does not make me one.
Should we all not be able to show the symbol of the cross because it is sign of hatred for the lgbt crowd? Where do we stop? There have been public schools that have banned images of the American Flag and refused to let military personnel enter in uniform because it may be offensive to other people - if this becomes the majority view, does that make it right? By in large, it has been the media who has shaped, twisted, and altered the reality of issues over the last couple of decades.

To prove my point about it being a political issue, I will use your example of the possible Notre Dame coverage. Can you give me ANY examples of negative press Norte Dame has received because they hate gay people because they are a Catholic University? Catholic ideology clearly states that homosexuality is considered a sin. Is this an issue for them? Of course not, because a large majority of the people who assign blame and determine right and wrong these days either identify as Catholics or are surrounded by many who do. Yet how much heat did Dabo/Clemson get for not even going that far (saying it was a sin) theologically. That one person on personal time who was supporting one group and not judging another. Norte Dame as an institution supports the view that homosexuality is a sin. Based on the FACTS, who should get the most heat- Clemson or ND?

I don't know where to begin. I'll make it quick. The PC crowd made it a symbol of hate? You don't say. What about the actual hate groups murdering people flying it high? Where were the flag defenders as this was going on? Who stood up then and separated the battle flag from hate groups because they saw it as something different? The flag is a symbol of hate today because the lovers of that flag did NOTHING while that name/perception was being made. People were being murdered and no one associated with the flag ever denounced it. Where were you?
 
If you rename Tillman Hall, the name Clemson will not be far behind. TGC was very closely aligned with Tillman and there will be guilt by association.

TGC was NOT aligned with Tillman. That is a complete lie that continues to be told. Tillman had a job to do that benefited him as well and he was good at his job. They had very different agendas and were not friends. Clemson was very different than most southerners as he wasn't one and didn't fit in at all. Certainly not with the likes of Tillman.
 
You clearly don't get his point. Change Tillman and it'll soon be something else, then another change, and so on. Where does it end? Give it a rest, it's absurd.
Oh, I get it. My point is that this will never get close to Lincoln and Washington. So, I guess you didn't get mine.
 
I think the average white citizen in SC is genuinely reconsidering based on true compassion and the fatigue you mentioned." As for SOME of the politicians, they are still playing politics in my humble opinion. Haley to be direct. She changed in 24hrs post Charleston. Didn't her CEO comment happen after the shooting?
I agree, consider me in this camp. I've been a huge advocate of keeping the flag "where it is" , but last week tipped the needle for me.

However, the moment folks start pushing to rename buildings and remove statues...that's a HUGE problem. Time to look forward and move on.
 
The moment folks start pushing to rename buildings and remove statues...that's a HUGE problem. Time to look forward and move on.

Please explain. If you as a state/nation decide to stop honoring hate what negatives might happen? You still teach the history. Take away the honor. Why is that concept so difficult? Pete Rose doesn't get to be honored in Cooperstown but every hitter knows and is taught he is the all time hits leader. Lord if you don't let Pete in we are just sanitizing history. Tell me more please.
 
You posed a fair hypothetical about earlier removal and the shootings. To that I would say no one could say for certain, and honestly from my perspective probably not if the shooter's circumstances don't change, which they probably would not have. Now I propose you a hypothetical to your state's rights view. Does a war for the rights you discuss and under the flag you support take place without the racist institution of slavery? (and fyi slavery did involve racial differences hence the slave codes that had been established in 1600's denoting the differences in race and inferiority of people of color, and stating Hollings was a Dem. doesn't mean what you would hope considering the Dem. in the south were much different in their views on racial issues at that point in history). Would like to add really well-written and insightful piece from Larry. Thank you.

Honestly, I don't think the civil war would have come about at that time if not for the issue of slavery. I do think it would have come about eventually, because the war truly was about states rights and the suppression of the voice of the southern states. Eventually, there would have been other additional issues that would have lead to the tipping point, but I do think it would have taken longer. I think history proves that point by the fact that many northerners owned slaves and fought for the North, while there were also those who fought for the south that were against slavery. The idea that slavery was only supported by or existed in the south is ridiculous.(not that I believe that is what you were saying)

My main point was that what people perceive as reality and what is put forth as reality is not reality in this case. The fact of the matter is that for every racist that flies the confederate flag as a symbol of hate, there are many more who view that flag as symbol of heritage and symbol of states rights and rebellion against government oppression.

I just don't think that because a group of people have decided that it represents hate to them, that we all have to accept that(false) interpretation. What it actually represents is more important than what any group perceives it represents.
 
ADVERTISEMENT