Today, Mississippi State will play host to the first and second rounds of the NCAA Women’s Basketball Tournament, which prompted a curious reader to call and ask for an explanation.
For some time now, athletic officials from Mississippi’s universities have said they supported replacing the current state flag, with its Confederate imagery, on the grounds that as long as it remained in use, NCAA rules dictate that none of its championships would be held in Mississippi.
Given that, the reader wondered, how could it be that MSU would be allowed to host this week’s NCAA tournament events?
There is no inconsistency, however. The NCAA has said this ban applies to championships only. After all, over the years, many of our schools have hosted NCAA events such as baseball regionals.
Even so, the NCAA’s stance is interesting. It appears the state’s flag only becomes offensive where the NCAA’s highest level of competition is concerned. Common sense might dictate that the symbol is as offensive to the ideals of the NCAA during the first round of a national tournament as it would be in the championship round.
It is obvious the NCAA’s policy concerning Mississippi’s flag is, pardon the pun, symbolic only.
The flag could come down tomorrow and Mississippi would remain as unlikely to host a major championship then as it has been until now. It has nothing to do with the flag and everything to do with facilities, infrastructure and amenities.
It would be logistically impossible for our state to host a basketball Final Four, a football championship or even baseball’s College World Series.
It is conceivable that the state would have the resources to host an obscure championship — maybe the college rodeo or badminton. But in terms championships that carry real prestige, it’s a moot point. The NCAA’s position on the flag is an empty threat.
That is not the only argument given for removing the flag, of course.
In fact, much of the recent narrative from those who propose a change in the flag is focused on pragmatism.
Keeping the flag, it is argued, may discourage new businesses from coming to our state. It may be disruptive in selling our goods and services outside the state. It might hurt tourism. It’s bad for our image.
The economic implications are real and should not be dismissed. Nor should we dismiss what kind of message keeping the flag sends to others who are unlikely to bother with the nuanced arguments for keeping the flag as it is.
Still, shouldn’t this issue be decided on something more essential to who we are as a people: What is the right and moral thing to do?
It takes courage to make that kind of argument in this state, of course. One look no farther than our Legislature to see evidence of that. No fewer than 12 bills concerning the flag were proposed in this year’s session. Not a single one made it out of committee.
Clearly, the majority of our legislators want nothing to do with the issue. They lack the moral courage, political will or statesmanship required to accept this burden.
It is interesting to note that virtually every person we send to Jackson campaigns on a commitment to “values.” Yet isn’t our flag a reflection of those “values?” Their silence on this subject exposes their hypocrisy.
The question of our flag should not be a debate about ballgames or business prospects.
It should be a discussion about the character of the people of our state.
All other factors are secondary.
Slim Smith is a columnist and feature writer for The Dispatch. His email address is [email protected].
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 32 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.