The South, Slaves and Subversives

Old times there are not forgotten,

Look away, look away, look away, Dixieland.
-A song, Dixie

It's
easy to make fun of the South. It was, of course, made easier by
Virginia Governor, Robert F. McDonnell who declared April Confederate
History month and in so doing omitted any reference to slavery.
Explaining the omission Mr. McDonnell said:
"there were any number of aspects to that conflict between the states.
Obviously, it involved slavery. It involved other issues. But I focused
on the ones I thought were most significant for Virginia." He also said
he hoped to promote tourism by issuing the proclamation and referring
to slavery, he probably thought, was not apt to attract a cotton candy
eating crowd. Nonetheless, the governor recognized the error of the
proclamation and corrected it.

On April 8 he said failing
to refer to slavery in the proclamation constituted a major omission.
He issued an amendment to the proclamation that said slavery "was an
evil and inhumane practice that deprived people of their God-given
inalienable rights and all Virginians are thankful for its permanent
eradication from our borders." It seems a bit awkward to be expressing
thanks for slavery's eradication as if it had just occurred a few
months ago, but when curing an insensitive proclamation it's better to
go too far than not far enough. Those who took the occasion of the
poorly proclaimed proclamation to describe the south as insensitive
have probably failed to notice the steps taken by another southern
state to acknowledge the follies of an earlier era. That state is South
Carolina.

South Carolina has lately been in the news
primarily because of the dalliances of its governor, Mark Sanford. In a
welcome distraction, legislation has been introduced in the state
legislature that would repeal a statute that was enacted in 1951. It
appears in Title 23 of the South Carolina Code of Laws and has the
catchy title of ""Subversive Activities Registration
Act.":https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t23c029.htm"; It applies to
Subversive Organizations and to Organizations Subject to Foreign
Control as broadly defined in the act. In order to keep track of these
organizations the statute requires that "Every organization or person
coming within the provisions of this chapter shall file with the
Secretary of State all information which he may request, on the forms
and at the times he may prescribe."

The Secretary of State
of South Carolina prepared a form that the described organizations are
required to fill out. The form asks for the name of the organization,
the name and address of its chief agent and then asks pleasantly: "Do
you or your organization directly or indirectly advocate, advise, teach
or practice the duty or necessity of controlling, seizing or
overthrowing the government of the United States, the state of South
Carolina or any political division thereof? " If the agent checks "yes"
the agent is requested to outline the organization's "fundamental
beliefs" and to attach its bylaws or minutes of meetings from the
preceding year. The form must be accompanied by a $5.00 filing fee.

In
late February South Carolina State Sen. Larry Martin said that the
legislature should take steps to get rid of the statute. Although not
articulated by him, there are at least three reasons it might be good
to rid itself of the statute and the legislature will probably come up
with others.

The first is that terrorists are unlikely to be
aware of the act's requirements since no one else seems to be and thus
are unlikely to have registered, thus making them scofflaws as well as
terrorists. (It wouldn't hurt for the FBI or Secret Service to stop by
the S.C. Secretary of State's office and check to see if any terrorists
have registered. It would be amusing and embarrassing if it turned out
that Osama bin Laden had registered and lives not in a remote region of
Afghanistan but in South Carolina, perhaps along the Appalachian
Trail.)

Another reason for repealing the statute is that since its
existence came to light within the past weeks it has competed with the
governor for attracting ridicule among talk show hosts and others.

The
last reason for repealing the statute and one that probably appeals to
the S.C. legislature is that the statutory description of the kinds of
organizations that must register under the Act could describe the Tea
Party movement. The rhetoric one hears from its members and the crazies
who show up at rallies, some carrying weapons of minor destruction, and
all railing against the U.S. Government, may easily cause them to fall
within the purview of the statute. South Carolina would be embarrassed
were it required to prosecute them under the provisions of the Act. Tea
party members would take great offense at the idea that they are
considered no better than, and treated the same as, communists were in
1951. Everyone will have cause to celebrate the law's repeal.