By Daniel Williams
It is unfortunate that such quaint radical pastimes as flag burning are still believed to be serious political messages. The image is hardly shocking. True, one FedEx driver was offended enough to be lured into the scene. But this really illustrates how the event was little more than a “troll.”
In a column that ran in the Opinions section of The Daily Iowan January 27 on the Iowa City flag burning event, the ordinary, working class man is subtly portrayed as a hysterical patriot. In his column, Jack Dugan mocked the FedEx man by presenting him as ineffectually “fuming in his delivery vehicle.” To underscore the man’s futility (the hallmark of hysteria), Dugan noted that “another flag was set ablaze.” Granted, this was an Opinions piece and we should expect the usual sophistry. On the other hand, in the front-page story, we didn’t hear from the FedEx man. While my editor assures me attempts were made to interview him, he declined comment. There was also no statement that this was done. It is a shame that more of an effort wasn’t made by both sides–the protesters and the FedEx man–to understand one another.
I view the flag-burning event as something like an Internet troll. A troll is someone who deliberately says offensive things because he or she is amused by the resultant hullabaloo. There is undoubtedly something of a troll in every good contrarian. Indeed, trolling is sometimes a way to “spark” an interesting and impassioned conversation. The true troll, however, is not interested in starting conversation. They choose statements calculated to be so offensive so as to destroy any hope of reasoned debate. (The radical right, also known as the alt-right, take special pride in their trolling abilities.)
There is, we should agree, a predatory cowardliness in trolling. Likewise, to my mind, there is something cowardly in engaging in “actions designed to agitate,” and then denying that they were to offend. One protester said, “This act wasn’t about disrespecting veterans.” Frankly, we don’t know why the FedEx man was offended by the flag burning. We can certainly take a guess, but we have no statement from him. Clearly, however, the event was designed to offend someone.
Or was it?
Most people, I imagine, associate a mixture of conflicting emotions with the American flag. They see it as neither pure good nor evil incarnate. Most people just end up seeing the American flag. This kind of sober literalism is not to be condemned. Dugan writes that “Trump is now the face of America, and thus the American flag is in part an extension of him.” Is there anything but rhetoric and wishful thinking here? Do the protesters actually think that they are harming Trump’s body by burning an American flag in the heart of the most liberal town in the most sheltered region of the world?
I doubt it. So, what were the protesters trying to do? I don’t know. Presumably to “draw attention” to issues we already know about and are powerless to prevent thanks to the divisive strategies of the radical left.
This, then, for me, is the real significance of the event. It is indicative of how the radical left continues to succeed in alienating ordinary, working- and middle-class Americans.
If the Democratic Party is to win back any seats in the congressional elections, it needs to stop with factional outrage ceremonies and start figuring out how real, legislative change can be achieved.