Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Culture

Old Photo of Confederate Flag a Possible Safety Threat, Says U. of Missouri

Swift investigation promised

Robby Soave | 7.15.2015 9:15 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | Dreamstime
(Dreamstime)
Confederate flag
Dreamstime

University of Missouri-Columbia Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin promised a swift investigation of a three-year-old photo of the Confederate flag that surfaced this week. The photo could be considered a threat to the safety of the UM community, according to Loftin.

The Twitter account FratScenery tweets collected images of fraternities from around the country; the images are scheduled for release in advance, and as it so happens, Sunday's picture featured several people holding the Confederate flag in front of the Phi Kappa Theta house. According to The Maneater:

The photograph was likely taken in the days surrounding a September 8, 2012 football game between the University of Georgia and MU. Three of the five men in the photo are wearing Bulldogs apparel and a University of Georgia flag flies alongside the Confederate Navy Jack.

The photograph drew swift condemnation—and panic—from the chancellor's office:

Today, University of Missouri officials became aware of a photo taken in 2012 at a Greek house located near the MU campus in which individuals displayed a Confederate flag. Especially considering recent events in South Carolina concerning the Confederate flag, this photo may be considered offensive and possibly even threatening to some of our community members. We do not believe any of the individuals in the photo are past or current MU students; however, we will be working to identify those in the photo.

MU officials do not condone any activities that could threaten the safety of our community.

Saying a photograph of the Confederate flag is offensive is one thing. Labelling it a threat is quite another. No one's safety is impugned by the old photo, and it's ludicrous to think otherwise.

Loftin does not believe the participants were students, but so what if they were? His statement implies that they might have faced some kind of punishment. Would UM have eagerly trampled its students' free expression rights to protect the community from the imaginary threat of a tasteless photo?

Hat tip: The College Fix

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Video Shows Calif. Cops Killing Unarmed Man, Catholic Employers Lose at Court, Should Libertarians Be Drowned?: A.M. Links

Robby Soave is a senior editor at Reason.

CultureCampus Free SpeechFree Speech
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (82)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Monty Crisco   10 years ago

    The TOTAL pussification of America continues....

    And related:

    Pussies watch a guy get murdered on a train:
    http://thefederalist.com/2015/.....a-man-die/

    Money quote:

    ?What I don't wish is that I had somehow tried to attack the assailant. I am a little bit larger than he was, but I would not have won. It's scary, because if we had been sitting closer and had seen the attack start I probably would have tried to help, and would have been stabbed.

    Heaven forfend, pussy.

    1. Bill Dalasio   10 years ago

      On the other hand, would you want to risk your life for the guy from that quote?

      Yeah, there probably is a degree of pussification. But, I suspect there's just as much degree of "don't-give-a-shitification".

      1. Monty Crisco   10 years ago

        Well, as the author of the article says, "If I was being attacked by a man with a knife, I would want someone to intervene". I can't speak for anyone else, but I feel the same. I guess I would feel a moral imperative to fight against the predator, but that is me.

        1. mad.casual   10 years ago

          I guess I would feel a moral imperative to fight against the predator, but that is me.

          Not even a moral imperative or *fighting* a predator but for some notion of equality, human decency, and self-preservation, I agree.

          You don't have to kick his ass to get him to stop stabbing the guy to death and cowering in the corner in no way guarantees your safety (and, IMO, is a strong indicator *against* "don't-give-a-shitification").

    2. WoodchipperPatriarch   10 years ago

      I can't say I would've intervened, but I at least wouldn't try to justify my cowardice as anything else.

    3. PapayaSF   10 years ago

      The ironic aspect of that murder is that the victim was a stereotypical progressive/Democratic/gay activist campaign worker who liked to complain about white racism. He then gets murdered on public transportation in a 100% Democratic city that does its best to ban guns, by a black punk recently released by the police.

      1. Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper   10 years ago

        Be careful what you wish for.

  2. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

    This has descended into self parody.

    1. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

      Ugh. That is a tasteless remark.

      1. commodious spittoon   10 years ago

        Do you feel threatened?

        1. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

          Ugh. You deny minorities their lived experiences?

          1. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

            Is this some kind of random grieved talking point generator?

            1. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

              Ugh. #BlackLivesMatter

  3. Poppa Kilo   10 years ago

    I resent people who try to make me care about such things.

    My advice? "Toughen up, buttercup!"

    1. Sigivald   10 years ago

      "Lighten up, Francis."

  4. Rich   10 years ago

    No one's safety is impugned by the old photo, and it's ludicrous to think otherwise.

    HATE SPEECH!

  5. SIV   10 years ago

    however, we will be working to identify those in the photo.

    Dox the fucking administrators who prepared this statement. Every last one of them. Names photos addresses, phone numbers....

    1. Sigivald   10 years ago

      Since they're university administrators, everything but their address is already gonna be on the website.

      And their address is almost certainly in the phone book.

      As I said above, "lighten up, Francis".

      Two jerks don't make a non-jerk.

      1. SIV   10 years ago

        we will be working to identify those in the photo.

        They mean that as a "threat". They can't do anything more.
        They'll shit bricks if someone actually does to them what they are threatening. Even if all their info is readily available to the public. Tell them you've forwarded all their info to several "pro-Confederate flag" orgs. Hell, the SCV might even send them a nice letter or make a polite phone call 😉

  6. Rich   10 years ago

    Old Photo of Confederate Flag a Possible Safety Threat, Says U. of Missouri

    Indeed. No one can deny the possibility that it may be an incitement to sheep-fucking.

    1. Poppa Kilo   10 years ago

      I don't think they require any incitement.

  7. Dark Lord of the wood chipper   10 years ago

    This is what happens when you compromise with progtards.

  8. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

    Okay, so six months ago, Confederate flags were not a threat at all. Sure, some were offended, but we could tolerate seeing them.

    Now they're the greatest threat ever, raping our women, killing our people. To the extent that even images or mentions of them will make people faint.

    1. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

      Why do you hate progress, you reactionary?

      1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

        It would be nice to hear someone publicly ask that question--why is it unbearable now but was bearable before? What's different? The answer is, of course, that it was an opportunity to fan the flames of cultural warfare and serves no other purpose whatsoever.

        1. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

          "What's different? ""

          You're going to have to ask Robby why flags are suddenly 'tasteless'

          I personally think demonizing hundreds of thousands of dead Americans is more apropos use of that term

          1. RBS   10 years ago

            It's like he just can't resist.

          2. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

            As a Southerner descended from people who fought on the losing side of that war, I'd say we've paid our dues for slavery, particularly since we're generations away from the last people who owned slaves. These same people, condemning the South for its culture, history, symbols, whatever, would be the first to say that any other civil war should result in everyone forgiving everyone else. I mean, did Mandela start executing white people when the blacks took over there? Nope.

            1. Hyperbolical (wadair)   10 years ago

              Mandela was a better person than the average progressive.

              1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

                It's so messed up now, this kind of thinking. Individuals are all that matters. Groups are abstractions, as far as attributing human feelings and thoughts to them goes.

                1. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

                  Ken Burns, maker of epic Civil War documentary, decides 10 hours was probably way too much to devote to the nuances of the conflict, and decides history is far better understood as a one-dimensional narrative shaped by contemporary politics.

                  Or just banned and shit.

                2. mad.casual   10 years ago

                  Individuals are all that matters.

                  Not even individuals. Symbols. They gushed and gushed on NPR this past weekend about Bree Newsome climbing the flagpole and taking down the Confederate Flag. They went into the discussion about the flag and it's racist overtones.

                  Zero mention was made about how/why the flag was originally created or how/why it was put up again in the 60s or that Bree Newsome wasn't old enough or in any way related to either of those events.

                  Symbolically selling out anyone and everyone in order to make people who have no skin in any part of the game feel better about themselves. I can't wait for that message to start sinking in.

    2. PapayaSF   10 years ago

      This calls for an episode of South Park involving a giant Confederate flag terrorizing the population.

      1. Pro Libertate   10 years ago

        I have visions of the Fat Albert episode with the Chicken Heart monster. But the with Confederate flag.

    3. bob sacomano   10 years ago

      Jonah Goldberg has a nice piece asking where the left's love for "nuance" in every debate over Islam is when it comes to the confederate flag?

      http://www.nationalreview.com/.....-hypocrisy

    4. Sigivald   10 years ago

      A Confederate flag killed my entire family.

      All by itself.

      They're MONSTERS.

    5. Cloudbuster   10 years ago

      I've been looking and looking for videos or accounts of confederate flags attacking people, but I can't find any. Confederate flags are like ninjas,apparently: only attacking when no one is looking. The cowards!

  9. Rebel Scum   10 years ago

    In USSA pictures are considered safety threats.

    1. Gilbert Martin   10 years ago

      Unless they are pictures of Soviet Union flags or any other communist symbols in which case no one is supposed to utter a peep about it.

  10. NL_   10 years ago

    Having grown up in Missouri and known tons of people who went to Columbia, MO for college, I'm not sure I've ever seen it referred to as MU or UM. We always called it Mizzou unless the full University of Missouri - Columbia. I think I've seen "Mizzou" on resumes. Too many "M" states, so it's not very distinctive. Yet the Rolla campus we used to called UM Rolla.

  11. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

    I saw Saving Private Ryan on TV a couple days ago.

    It had Nazis in it.

    Yeah, I was pretty scared. Felt threatened.

    Why does the FCC allow this threatening stuff to be broadcast?

    Where people might see it.

    1. pan fried wylie   10 years ago

      *machine guns*

      *head explodes* *another man falls clutching a ruined stump*

      "F[BEEP]k you N[BEEP]is!"

      /FCCMissionAccomplished

    2. Rt. Hon. Judge Woodrow Chipper   10 years ago

      The other day I saw a Bugs Bunny cartoon with Yosemite Sam defending the South. So there was a cartoon Confederate flag in it. I cowered in the corner until the cartoon was over.

      I would have turned on the cartoon "Coal Black And the Sebben Dwarfs" to cleanse myself of such awful hate speech but idiotically that one is banned, too.

  12. commodious spittoon   10 years ago

    Munchkins in a moral panic.

    1. Lee G   10 years ago

      Attention whores seeking attention.

      1. Citizen X   10 years ago

        You're doing a disservice to actual, honest, hard-working whores.

        1. mad.casual   10 years ago

          Also, whores are motivated by money; which I can relate to. These people are more just zealots.

          1. commodious spittoon   10 years ago

            I prefer munchkins.

  13. CharlieInCO   10 years ago

    Would UM have eagerly trampled its students' free expression rights to protect the community from the imaginary threat of a tasteless photo?

    That would be one of those rhetorical questions, right?

  14. Number 2   10 years ago

    I recently watched "The Civil War" by Ken Burns. It displayed the Confederate flag multiple times. Worse yet, it portrays the Confederates soldiers as honorable but misguided men instead of subhuman racist beasts. Why hasn't Netflix removed this hate-filled, violence-inducing travesty from its website? Why hasn't PBS dissociated itself from this Burns racist? Why haven't colleges and universities, not to mention CALPERS, divested themselves of stock in any Evil Corporation that helped underwrite this problematic abuse of speech?

    1. mad.casual   10 years ago

      My first thought was similar. A photograph of a flag is threatening, so a war movie with the flag must be outright aggression.

    2. RBS   10 years ago

      I took a Civil War class in college, an entire class!

      1. Entropy Drehmaschine Void   10 years ago

        You misspelled "War of Northern Aggression" Class.

      2. Number 2   10 years ago

        Was there a trigger warning?

    3. Lee G   10 years ago

      Intentions, thoughtcrimes for the win.

      1. Number 2   10 years ago

        "Lee?" What a racist name! You must be a Klansman in a starched collar and necktie.

    4. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

      You missed the part where Ken Burns has retracted the nuance from his historical work, in favor of a Bumper-Sticker-slogan version.

      1. mad.casual   10 years ago

        "This is not about heritage," Burns said. "This is about resistance to civil rights."

        Dammit, if that isn't setting fire to someone's cross, I don't know what is.

        1. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

          Your speech is not what You say it is = it is how We Say the mob interprets it.

          You have no authority over your own intentions or purposes, and deserve no respect.

          Anyone attempting to show you respect will be destroyed in advance so that no one ever speaks in your defense.

          There are no good people who tolerate unpopular ideas.

      2. Zeb   10 years ago

        To be fair, that's really all you get time for in a tv interview these days.

        Ken Burns is a turd, though. I've met him and he is a giant asshole and very full of himself. And he didn't even write the script.

      3. Number 2   10 years ago

        You mean to tell me that the bastard is repudiating his own award-winning documentary? That after all the time, effort and research put into it ... he was wrong?

        Wow. Maybe there was more truth to my sarcasm than I even imagined.

        What is next, I wonder. Will he tell us that jazz sucks, that baseball is meaningless, and that Prohibition was a good idea after all?

        1. GILMORE, Haiku Pornographer   10 years ago

          he's really just slapping a new "Executive Summary" on the front of it, saying, "Skip the details = its all about racists"

    5. Mr. Paulbotto   10 years ago

      Why haven't colleges and universities, not to mention CALPERS, divested themselves of stock in any Evil Corporation that helped underwrite this problematic abuse of speech?

      I think CalPERS should divest from itself, since if you add one letter to the beginning of its name it becomes a derogatory term for Native Americans...

      1. Mr. Paulbotto   10 years ago

        HTML tags, how do they work again?

        1. Sigivald   10 years ago

          [i I dunno?

          1. Sigivald   10 years ago

            (My awesome HTML tag joke was destroyed by half-assed HTML parsing.

            You win this round, Reason back-end code!

  15. Lee G   10 years ago

    Good move Reason. By publishing the photo of the Confederate Flag you have effectively warded the SJW nitwits away from this site.

    1. pan fried wylie   10 years ago

      *confederate flag sales skyrocket*

    2. Robert   10 years ago

      No, it attracts them like moths to a flame.

      1. Seamus   10 years ago

        Exactly. You didn't actually believe them when they said they felt unsafe in the presence of Confederate flag, did you?

        1. Sigivald   10 years ago

          Oh, but this is a picture of the Confederate Flag on a website.

          The other one was a picture of an actual Confederate Flag that was physically near the campus!

          Three years ago!

          It might still be lurking in a back alley waiting to murder them all, after all.

  16. Hyperbolical (wadair)   10 years ago

    I believe that progressives see the Confederate flag as a symbol of resistance to them and their movement. They have castigated the flag and those who fly it for decades. I remember a comment from Howard Dean about wanting to be a candidate for opponents who drive pickups with a confederate flag. It's similar to Obama's categorization of Pennsylvanian opponents as bitter clingers, etc.. They look down on southerners and want to stifle southern pride--which is represented in that flag. Their hatred of the confederate flag and its proponents is what they project onto those who fly it.

    1. mad.casual   10 years ago

      They look down on southerners and want to stifle southern pride--which is represented in that flag. Their hatred of the confederate flag and its proponents is what they project onto those who fly it.

      IMO, it's less about Southern Pride and more about absolute and total domination by controlling the narrative.

      Beating a dead horse is fun and all but it takes real power to convince everyone it was a live bear and then erase it from reality.

      1. Zeb   10 years ago

        I honestly think it is not that coherent. It's more like a mob. this is the most important thing in the world until the next thing comes along. And it's hard to predict what that will be. When the murders happened in SC, I would have guessed that we would be hearing about gun control for a while, but then this happened instead.

        1. mad.casual   10 years ago

          I honestly think it is not that coherent. It's more like a mob.

          I didn't mean to imply specific coherence or orchestration. He said 'similar to Obama's categorization' and I meant to imply that it's a sort of general feedback loop. The general 'free shit'/'ban unpopular stuff' persistent political campaign.

    2. Zeb   10 years ago

      I thought Dean said he wanted to be a candidate who would appeal to the people with confederate flags on their pickup trucks.

      The flag is about southern pride. But also about redneck pride all over the country. And rednecks are a real problem for progressives. They are often poor, but have the nerve to do things for themselves and not buy into the progressive plan to help people like them. They are just the wrong kind of people. Poor people are supposed to be grateful and reliable Democrats.

      1. Hyperbolical (wadair)   10 years ago

        Exactly, Zeb. Dean said he wanted to appeal to them, but I took it as a condescension much like Obama's condescension to bitter clingers?.

        Your second paragraph says much of what I wanted to get across. Progressives hate independent folk, probably because of their independence. Liberty is anathema to modern "liberals."

  17. Zeb   10 years ago

    Well, it probably threatens the safety of the members of that Fraternity. So in a way he is right.

    Especially considering recent events in South Carolina concerning the Confederate flag, this photo may be considered offensive and possibly even threatening to some of our community members.

    You mean the recent events where people from various political orientations all agreed that the flag should be removed from in front of the state house? Or the recent events where a racist murdering piece of shit was universally condemned for his vile actions? Or have people actually convinced themselves that the confederate flag played a role in the murders? What the fuck is wrong with people?

  18. Agammamon   10 years ago

    Would UM have eagerly trampled its students' free expression rights to protect the community from the imaginary threat of a tasteless photo?

    Yes. And if the people in that photo are found to be past students, I'd bet there will be some serious talk about revoking their diplomas.

    1. Cloudbuster   10 years ago

      Maybe Preet Bharara and Niketh Velamoor will issue subpoenas for them!

      Meanwhile social justice warriors will hound them from their jobs and communities.

      That'll show them for BadThink!

  19. WoodchipperPatriarch   10 years ago

    George Will was right. These assholes are in a contest to see who can clutch their pearls the most.

  20. Robert   10 years ago

    Saying & doing these things about those flags all of a sudden, all over the place, reminds me of the time when it became the thing to splash paint on people wearing fur. Remember that? All of a sudden it seemed to be widely understood that fur was evil & that therefore it was OK to deface it & the people wearing it.

  21. Loki   10 years ago

    We do not believe any of the individuals in the photo are past or current MU students; however, we will be working to identify those in the photo.

    If they aren't former or current students then why bother identifying them? Oh wait, I forgot that shaming people for alleged PC infractions is the only thing that gets some of these proggie twats hard anymore.

  22. brec   10 years ago

    No one's safety is impugned by the old photo...

    I hereby impugn Robby Soave's knowledge of the definition of "impugn."

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Review: A Comic Book Villain Runs for Mayor of New York in the New Daredevil Series

Joe Lancaster | From the July 2025 issue

Brickbat: Friends in High Places

Charles Oliver | 6.6.2025 4:00 AM

Is the Supreme Court Really That Divided? The Facts Say No.

Billy Binion | 6.5.2025 5:21 PM

Milton Friedman Disproved Trump's Argument for Tariffs Decades Ago

Joe Lancaster | 6.5.2025 4:35 PM

If Viewers Love PBS So Much, Let Them Pay for It

Robby Soave | 6.5.2025 3:20 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!