.jpg){kind=small}
The Naming Commission reveals with its analysis of the 29th Infantry Division Symbol that it is more concerned with rooting out symbols of the Union, rather than symbols of the Confederacy. In most of the report it hides its reasoning, sources and methodology. The Naming Commission has an ax to grind, and that ax is not limited to the Confederate States of America.
The Naming Commission's admits on page 14 of Part III that the symbol means many things to many people: "As with all symbols, interpretation of the patch’s meaning over the last 105 years has been a subjective exercise. In its research, the Commission found that a wide range of different descriptions have been applied to the patch, spanning the gamut of commemoration." As The Naming Commission is allowed to take into consideration local sentiments, they could simply move on to another item. But it isn't the Confederate Battle Flag that will not let them move forward: it is the colors blue and gray.
What are the two recommendations they make?
1. "Removing the language that implies Confederate service, and reconciliation of the North and South."
2. " Modifying the language to reflect the rich history of the 29th Infantry Division, with focus on the unification of American citizens through service in the 29th Infantry Division."
The recommendation is not rooted in Confederate service: it is derived from concepts of "unification" and "reconciliation." While The Naming Commission publicly stated it was not interested in erasing history, this recommendation is an insult to all the Union officers that fought a war specifically preserve the concept of a single nation.
General George McClellan, who for a time commanded all the Union armies stated on September 4th, 1864:
The preservation of our Union was the sole avowed object for which the war was commenced. It should have been conducted for that object only, and in accordance with those principles which I took occasion to declare when in active service. Thus conducted, the work of reconciliation would have been easy, and we might have reaped the benefits of our many victories on land and sea. The Union was originally formed by the exercise of a spirit of conciliation and compromise. To restore and preserve it, the same spirit must prevail in our councils, and in the hearts of the people.
The Naming Commission never cites its sources and the basis of its thinking, so we do not know where it got the idea that reconciliation is a Confederate conspiracy. We are forced to ask whether the writers of the report are against the entire concept of the Union?
Before Americans destroy their symbols, memorials and monuments, they should get a clear answer to this question. Do not be shocked by the answer.
Comments