What is the deal with half-mast flags?

What do flags represent?

What is the deal with all the U.S. flags flown at half-mast? 

As I drive around Long Island, I am continually spotting U.S. flags flown at half-mast--at firehouses, schools, car dealerships, etc. etc. According to various flag etiquette sites, "Only the president of the United States or the governor of the state may order the flag to be at half-staff to honor the death of a national or state figure." There are a handful of days (five) when it is customarily flown at half-staff, and on special occasions to honor the death of former presidents, vice presidents, Supreme Court justices, and members of congress. Other than that, it is not ever supposed to be flown at half mast. Flying state or organizational flags at half mast is the appropriate way to honor local personages.

Conservatives have, for as long as I have been an adult, complained that disrespect for the flag is so dire a problem, so dangerous a threat to the country, that it is worth an amendment to the U.S. Constition to outlaw it.

Yet, here is a picture of George W. Bush, a darling of the conservative movement if there ever was one, signing a U.S. flag at a political rally. He's autographing it, as if he is a rock star and the flag is his personal iconic token.

Do I particularly care if he signs a flag? Not really, because I don't think any object intrinsically deserves honor--certainly not to the point of deserving special legal protection. What I am offended by is the rank hypocrisy represented by Bush (or anyone else) signing a U.S. flag as if it is his or her property, while at the same time claiming special status for that symbol (and vilifying their political opponents for not respecting the symbol enough).

One can choose to honor the flag, but only as a symbol for abstract ideals that the flag can stand for. But if someone abuses or desecrates the symbol, the abstract ideals remain unsullied. And in the case of the U.S. flag, one of those abstract ideals that it stands for is freedom of speech, expression, and political opinion. Therefore, the abuse or desecration of the flag (if someone cares enough to do it) represents the highest ideals the flag stands for. Neither the flag as a symbol, or the ideals it stands for, are in any way harmed by one person burning or desecrating a piece of cloth.

Indeed, honoring and burning a flag are two sides of the same coin. I love my country, and honor the flag because it represents the good the country has done. But I have also been ashamed of my country and fellow citizens, so I can also understand the desire to dishonor the flag, because it also represents the evil the country has done. Can anyone claim (with a straight face) that the United States and our system of government has not been responsible for both good and evil? The U.S. is the country of the Bill of Rights, universal suffrage (ultimately), limited and divided government, a real commitment to the rule of law, and social, religious, and economic freedom. The U.S. is also a country of 70 years of chattel slavery, 100 years of Jim Crow and lynchings, massacred Native Americans, Robber Barons, child labor, company towns, global military adventurism on behalf of big business, and lots of other nasty, ugly misbehavior.

The American tragedy is not that so much evil has been done, since as is often pointed out, many countries have done many of the same things throughout history. The real tragedy is twofold. First, the dramatic mismatch between the high-minded ideals expressed in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, and the ugly realities of stolen Native American land and chattel slavery. And second, the way that Americans' idealized image of themselves (made possible by many real historical advances) has prevented them from closely looking at the ugly side of their own history.

This second issue is precisely what is involved with all the flag nonsense. People feel outraged about dissent and protest against the government that involves the flag, because the think that it unfairly nullifies the good or is an attack on the nation in the abstract. But can anyone reasonably claim that the flag gets to represent only the good done in and by the U.S.? That it gets amnesty from also representing the evil? The point they are forgetting is that no one would bother to desecrate a flag unless they were calling for Americans and the U.S. to live up to their own stated high ideals; unless they also believed in the idea that the flag also represented the good.

Here's my idea. If we as a country decide that the U.S. flag is so profound an embodiment of the nation that it is to be granted special legal status, so be it. I might even agree to the idea in principle. But if we do, let's do it with a full-on Constitutional amendment that goes all the way. Burning or desecrating the flag should be illegal, but so should flying it at half mast against federal rules. So should wearing a flag pin, or imprinting the image of the flag on any surface, stickers, or placards. No flag-like pattern of red and white stripes, or a blue field with stars should be permitted on clothing, towels, banners, curtains, or any other material. No one person, group of people, or political party should have any greater claim on the flag or its image than anyone else. And enforcement of the law should be universal, even, and vigorous. If we are going to carve out a fundamental exception to the First Amendment, let's do it right. So we won't have any images like this:

Given the current climate, I think conservatives and Republicans would fall afoul of such a law far more than liberals or Democrats, because they are the ones with a penchant for printing or wearing the flag on their lapels and their SUVs. And don't claim that it is because liberals or Democrats don't respect the flag. In my experience, they do. It is just that they are less prone to mistaking the sign for the destination it points to.