Gero - Blog Post 8

            In Chapter 1 of When the State Speaks, What Should It Say?, Brettschneider discusses the unspoken expressive ways that the state can use “to defend the core values” (page 45). Brettschneider proposes funding, formal education, and public holidays as examples of unspoken expressive state speech that can be used to promote equal freedom and citizenship. I think an important aspect of unspoken expressive state speech that Brettschneider failed to consider was public symbols or monuments.

            In using democratic persuasion to promote freedom and equality for all citizens, the government must actively remove monuments or symbols that oppose these values as well educate the citizenry of their significance. For example, monuments to Confederate war heroes, racist colonial statues, and the Confederate flag are all in opposition to the core values of freedom and equality. Keeping such representations in public spaces qualifies as a form of the state acting in complicity with views that undermine and oppose core values (page 43). 

            A common argument against removing such monuments is that they are merely a chronicle of U.S. history. Treating these monuments as purely historical takes the stance of neutrality, which, as Brettschneider explains, “fails to answer the challenge that hateful viewpoints pose to the values of freedom and equality” (page 3). An example of this is the Mississippi state flag containing the Confederate flag from 1894 to 2021. Including such a racist and hateful symbol in a representation of the state clearly contradicts any professed commitment to equality and freedom. The Confederates fought against freedom and equality in order to protect the institution of slavery, which stands in stark contrast to contemporary American core values. While it is essential to understand America’s past, the representation of that past is inherently value-laden. Memorializing bigoted individuals in public spaces is very different from teaching about that same history in the classroom or at museums. It is the state’s obligation as an educator to take a stance on this history and teach about it in an appropriate forum.  

Along those same lines, it is an obligation of the state to uplift and memorialize Americans who embody the ideals of freedom and equality for all citizens. Erecting such monuments in public spaces would democratically persuade the citizenry to learn from and reproduce similar ideas. The state has attempted to do this by replacing Andrew Jackson with Harriet Tubman on the twenty dollar bill. Actions like this are value laden and express the state’s core values. 

            In extending Brettschneider’s analysis of unspoken expressive state speech, the removal of bigoted monuments or symbols of from America’s past is a form of democratic persuasion. A failure to do so takes a stance of neutrality on a racist, sexist, xenophobic, and homophobic history and makes the state complicit in the memorialization of hateful viewpoints.