could save the Union without freeingrnany slave, I would do it; and if Irncould do it by freeing all the slaves,rnI would do it; and if 1 could save itrnby freeing some and lea ing othersrnalone, I woidd also do that.rnHow much longer will the new racistsrnallow Lincoln’s face on the five-dollar billrnto act as a “painful reminder” to blacksrnthat Lincoln considered the Union to bernluore important than their freedom?rnNot long, perhaps. The New OdeansrnSchool Board voted to remove GeorgernWashington’s name from an elementaryrnschool because he was a slaeholder andrnthus a bad example for children. IfrnWashington’s name is so abhorrent that itrncan’t be used for a public school, whyrnshoidd it idenhfy the capital city of ourrnnation? Why shoidd we have an internationallyrnfamous monument to him, or tornJefferson, or for that matter to AbrahamrnLincoln?rnBy the way, in ease ou think this historicalrnsuppression leads to racial harmonyrnand the common good, note this: hirnmany of the public schools of New Orleans,rnstudents now pledge allegiance tornthe red, black, and green black liberationrnflag rather than the Stars and Stripes. h>rnstead of the Star-Spangled Banner, theyrnsing a black liberahon anthem.rnBlack radicals pick on General Lee,rnbut they turn a blind eye to their own history.rnHow does Mr. El-Amin reconcilernthe debasement of Lee and Washingtonrnwith the fact that African tribal leadersrnenslaved and sold manv millions ofrnblacks to the slave traders?rnAccording to political correctness,rnwhite leaders who owned slaves arernmoral lepers, but black historical figuresrnwho did so are to be honored. Whyrnshould we all not be offended by displaysrnof African dress and the celebration ofrnAfrican holidays? Might they not be arn”painful reminder” of the horrible enslavementrnof blacks by blacks?rnIf the histor)’ police want a flag to condemnrnbecause of its association vithrnracism, they need look no further thanrnone of the flags flying over flic Capitol.rnAfter all, it was under Old Glon, fliat slaveryrnflourished—much longer than underrnthe Stars and Bars. It was under Old Gloryrnfliat we pushed the Indians off theirrnlands.rnWe have no flag that has not been associatedrnwifli prejudice and unpopularrncauses. All of them can be “painful reminders”rnto someone. Using those criteria,rnwe will have no flag to flv and no imagesrnto display.rnBlacks are being denied their legitimaternheritage b their leaders’ attempt torndefine their historx exclusively in terms ofrnslaver)’. Their 350-ear association wiflirnthe land and their major eontribuHons tornSouthern cidture are suppressed by thisrnpreoccupation with slaverv—flius denyingrnbofli black and white Southerners flierncommon ground fliey share.rnThose of us who honor our Confederaternancestors todav do so not because ofrntheir—and their Northern opponents’ —rn19th-centurv iew of race relations. Wernhonor flieni because of flicir devotion —rnagainst all odds —to the cause of independence,rntheir zeal in defending theirrnhomes, their uncommon valor, and becausernthev were arguably some of thernfinest American soldiers ever to take flicrnfield.rnTheir critics are modern-day membersrnof Orwell’s “Parh ” who, not liking partsrnof our histor)’, want to suppress it. Theyrnconfuse remembrance of the best elementsrnof a soeieh’ with justification of itsrnworst. In their quest for political power,rnthe Sa’ad El-Amins of flic wodd have forgottenrnLincoln’s ad’ice —”with malicerntoward none, with eharih’ for all, let usrnbind up this nation’s wounds.” If dieyrnthink attacks against Cieneral Lee willrnlead to harmonious race relations, theyrnare indeed “whisfling Dixie.”rnLynn Hopewell writes from Warrenton,rnV irginia.rnLetter From Englandrnby Derek TurnerrnDrawing thernBlairite Battle LinesrnSpeaking to a Labour Party conference inrnOctober, British Prime Minister TonyrnBlair made a vainglorious speech he mayrnlive to regret. His words heartened somernof his more enflinsiashc supporters, butrnshocked flie shires and clarified the ideologicalrnbattle lines. Len some naivernneoeonservatives, like Paul Johnson andrnLady rhatcher, who had long maintainedrnfliat Blair was nonideological orrneven “one of us” because he had abandonedrnsocialism, have recanted or subsidedrninto shocked silence.rnSpeaking in his usual syntax-freernstyle — “Fail a single person, we havernfailed Britain ” — Blair nonetheless madernit completely clear what and whom herndidn’t like. He placed the blame for allrnthe world’s ills squarely on the shouldersrnof “flie forces of conservatism allied tornracism.”rnHe mentioned specifically the supportersrnof fox hunting, General Pinochet,rnand hereditary peers as worthy of execration.rnBut his grapeshot peppered allrnthose, past or present, who wanted orrnwant Britain to remain a united, independentrncountry and a part of Westernrncivilization. The forces of conservahsm,rnhe stated, do not reside merely in thernConservative Party, but include socialistsrnopposed to his dumping what remains ofrnthe working class in fcivor of Islingtonianrnvegetarians. He attacked all those whornsaw multiculturalism “as a left-wing conspiracy.”rnHe implied that the ConservativernParty was guilty of the death ofrnStephen Lawrence, a black teenagerrnkilled in South London in 1993 whoserndeafli was exploited for political purposesrnby some on the left, and said that thernmodem Conservative Party was “weird,rnweird, weird,” like the Addams Family.rnHe attacked “the old elites, establishmentsrnthat have run our country toornlong.” (In fact, as Melanie Phillips saidrnin a recent article in ftie Times, “The toprntier of politicians, ci’il servants, academics,rnjournalists, judges and the rest ofrnour elites are no longer conservative . . .rnbut anarcho-illiberal.”) Finally, he intonedrnelimactically, like a latter-dayrn”Praise God” Barebones, Labour wouldrn”set the people free.” As Boris Johnsonrnwrote in the Dnily Tclegniph on Octoberrn5, Blair’s speech was a “mix of puerilernmalice, historical ignorance and maudlinrnemotional blackmail.”rnWifli its combination of mawkishnessrnand ruthlessness, Blair’s speech was a perfectrnexposition of flic “Third Way.” Thernvalues of flie I bird Way are still those ofrnthe hard left, but socialism has been replacedrnwith revolutionary feminism, gayrnrights, multiculturalism, “deep ecology,”rnpolitical correctness, cultural schlockrnand relativism, and the contemptiblern”counseling eulhire.” I he left’s aim is nornlonger to corporatize society, but to breakrnit up into easily manageable lobbies,rnunited under a new, safe kind of “patriotism”rn— in a countr’ without even its ownrn38/CHRONICLESrnrnrn