This is a lesson that all Americans should learn from.
A Stanford University administrator had offhandedly suggested to a fraternity that was under probation that one of the things that they could do to improve their image was to remove the American flag flying outside their house.
The fraternity, Sigma Chi, had been on probation after an alleged drugging incident in January when some members of the Pi Beta Phi rowing team suspected that they had been drugged at a Sigma Chi event. The suspected perpetrator was not a Sigma Chi member, nor a Stanford student.
Sigma Chi had been meeting with a liaison between them and the university to discuss how the fraternity could become a better ‘ally of the university.’ The fraternity had a good relationship with the unnamed liaison, (in the Stanford student newspaper, he is referred to as ‘Mr. Z.’) stating that he was helpful in assisting the brothers to understand the obscure bureaucratic process, and was genuinely helpful in the process.
It was all for naught, though, as Sigma Chi has lost its charter status.
However, one suggestion, in particular, was very disturbing to members of the fraternity.
The Stanford Review wrote an article about the fate of Sigma Chi, and used a 2018 graduate, Pablo Lozano, as their primary source. They confirmed the details with other fraternity brothers that wished to remain anonymous.
While discussing improving the fraternity’s image with the university, Mr. Z offhandedly suggested that Sigma Chi remove the potentially discomforting symbol outside: the American flag flown in front of the house. Mr. Z urged Sigma Chi to consider the image being presented to the rest of campus by flying the flag out front. He furthered that if Sigma Chi wished to break away from stereotypes that plagued the house and to change its perception on campus, its members should contemplate un-hoisting the American flag.
While this remark was just one in a larger discussion on rebranding the house, it stands out. Mr. Z’s recommendation insinuated not only that the flag made others uncomfortable but that its being flown tainted Sigma Chi’s reputation and, presumably, worsened its chance of survival. Lozano understood Mr. Z to imply that the American flag, as a symbol, could be intimidating, aggressive or alienating. Mr. Z’s tone further signaled to Lozano that he found the mere sight of the American flag to be offensive.
So, in order to remain in good standing with the university, the fraternity had to remove the American flag.
Lozano recounted that the more the house talked about Mr. Z’s suggestion, the more it bothered them. Many found the proposal weird. The remark was, according to Lozano, out of the blue and incongruent with the candid rapport they had shared with Mr. Z up and until then. Furthermore, they wondered, since when is an American flag flown at an institution in the United States offensive? Lozano later observed that right down the road from Sigma Chi, an American flag is flown outside Stanford’s Post Office. Similarly, he noted, an American flag is flown outside Green Library’s Bing Wing and was once flown outside Memorial Auditorium, which commemorates fallen Stanford soldiers from WWI onward. According to Lozano’s knowledge, Mr. Z raised no objections to the Dominican flag flown by a student from his bedroom window in Sigma Chi or to the Palestinian flag which was hung across the street at Columbae.
The fraternity did the only thing that they could do — they protested in a spectacular way.
In protest of Mr. Z’s suggestion, the house declined to remove the flag, instead choosing to replace it with an even bigger one. Some members, of course, abstained from the discussion about and decision to purchase a bigger flag. The following day, by Lozano’s doing, Sigma Chi upgraded from a three-by-five-foot flag to a four-by-six-foot flag. The former flag was then framed and placed on display inside the house. This decision was, in Lozano’s words, a “silent but visible protest” against the classification of the American flag as a potentially stigmatizing symbol by a member of the Stanford administration.
The author, Antigone Xenopoulos, then gives her own opinion and a suggestion.
She first states that it’s acceptable to critique policies and individual administrations, and she encourages that, but to oppose the flag itself that symbolizes something larger than an individual or particular political movement is short-sighted.
To classify the American flag on American soil as offensive or jingoistic, however, is an entirely separate phenomenon which implies the condemnation of the United States at large…
…However, the presently taboo nature of national pride is shortsighted. The distinction between our timeless political institutions (and their hallowed symbols) and the country’s leaders and policies at any given moment in history is elementary but crucial. Condemnations of patriotism fail to recognize that the United States’ institutions have and will continue to outlive unpopular leaders. This fact alone is cause for significant national pride. The vilification of our nation and its symbols is damning for the social fabric of American society. The current political climate has destroyed the last remnants of civic unity and patriotism.
But enough with the ominous platitudes. Next time you hear someone degrade a symbol of the United States – whether in the form of a flag, the Constitution, or the national anthem – you can defend the principles of this nation through oration or just go out and, like Sigma Chi, buy a bigger one.
With all the talk about the younger generation embracing socialism, even if they don’t know what it is, stories like this are fantastic. There is a remnant of students out there that won’t stand by while our institutions are being attacked for the sake of ‘tolerance’ by the intolerant leftists leading the ‘educational’ institutions. That’s great news.
Bravo, Sigma Chi, for standing up against the intolerant administrators of Stanford!
Bravo, Antigone Xenopoulos, for the insightful article!
by Doug Giles
Doug Giles, best-selling author of Raising Righteous And Rowdy Girls and Editor-In-Chief of the mega-blog, ClashDaily.com, has just penned a book he guarantees will kick hipster males into the rarefied air of masculinity. That is, if the man-child will put down his frappuccino; shut the hell up and listen and obey everything he instructs them to do in his timely and tornadic tome. Buy Now: Pussification: The Effeminization Of The American Male
By the way, since Facebook has unpublished ClashDaily’s page, your best bet to keep in the loop is to Subscribe to our ClashDaily Newsletter right here:
We’re also moving onto a new platform, MeWe. It’s like Facebook without the data breaches and censorship.
Sign up and you can still get all the ClashDaily goodness by joining our MeWe group.
Do you love what we’re doing at Clash?
Do you want to kick in to our ‘war chest’ so that we Happy Warriors can maximize the size of the footprint we leave on Leftism’s backside? Here’s a link for ya to do just that.