David Eide – Opinion Columnist

I’ve always been particularly interested in flags, the idea of representing an entire group or country utilizing imagery that can fit entirely on a rectangle has always struck a chord with me. Because of this interest, I always keep an eye on any developments in Vexillology, which is the study of flags and, yes, is a real field of study. The past couple of years have been a good time to be passionate about flags. Numerous countries and states have changed or have debated changing their flags and flags have become ever more important representational tools in protests or political movements. Of note, Minnesota has recently begun to debate changing its state flag, a move that I think has been long in the making. So, I invite you to join me on a little journey through recent developments in the flag world and what they could possibly indicate about our society.
One reason that flags are so important is because they can speak to what a nation views as it’s primary values. One obvious instance is the United States flag which harkens back to the American revolution with its 13 stripes while the stars in the corner represent the unity of distinct states that define American government. However, there arise situations where some people in a country feel that their flag doesn’t capture the nation accurately or the values it conveys are no longer relevant or desired. This is particularly common in former subjects of an empire who often incorporate aspects of their former ruler’s flag to demonstrate the closeness between the two countries which can potentially lead to controversy.
One especially prominent example is the British Union Jack, which can be found in the flags of many former colonies of the British Empire such as Australia or New Zealand. Both countries have had debates over the continued presence of the Union Jack on their flags with some arguing that the continued retention of the Union Jack is inappropriate for sovereign states and that it no longer fully embodies their country. In 2016, New Zealand held a referendum proposing a flag change addressing these very complaints. However, the voters of New Zealand proved to still be attached to the current flag and rejected the redesign by a resounding margin. This indicates that beyond mere symbology, people can simply get attached to a flag regardless of what it represents.
A similar phenomenon can be found where flags contain imagery that is viewed as being directly harmful and discriminatory. One obvious example of this would be the presence of the Confederate battle flag in the state flags of many southern states. While supporters argued that these flags represented their southern heritage, the fact remains that most of them were adopted during a period where white southerners sought to intimidate newly freed African Americans and that they honor a government which was based upon the preservation of the racist institution of slavery. In recent years these flags have become a major point of contention.
In the early 2000s Georgia changed its flag to remove the confederate battle flag, an act which proved controversial enough to have been a major factor in the Democratic governor’s loss in the next election following the change. Georgia’s flag change left Mississippi as the last state standing to have integrated the confederate battle flag into its state flag. There had been a referendum in 2001 about changing the flag which failed by 30%, however the murder of George Floyd in 2020 proved to be a breaking point. After a major pressure campaign Mississippi quickly held a referendum on changing the flag which passed easily. As a consequence, Mississippi now has one of the best flags in the country and a racist symbol has been stripped from public display. This indicates that pressure can reach a boiling point and flag changes are possible given certain circumstances.
Then there are the flag changes that occur simply because the current flag just doesn’t look very good. This is probably the most common type of flag change and it’s the main reason legislators have begun to discuss changing the flag of Minnesota. Currently, Minnesota follows the state seal on a colored background format which is very common, shared by states such as Utah, Wisconsin, and Massachusetts. These flags have the downside of being both too simple and yet also overly detailed as they usually just consist of two parts however one of those parts is usually very complicated to recreate.
These flags have come under a lot of fire recently for these reasons and many state legislatures have begun to act in order to potentially change the designs to more representative and appealing ones. For example, Utah recently passed a bill creating a task force to look into redesigning its state flag from a standard and boring state seal flag into a more dynamic one. It looks like Minnesota may soon follow suit as a bill has been introduced into the state house which would establish a 14-member commission to examine the idea of redesigning the flag.
Personally, I broadly approve the idea of changing Minnesota’s flag. I believe that Minnesota has a particular dynamism and natural beauty to it that just isn’t captured by a highly detailed circle on a dark blue background. Perhaps a new flag could include a reference to the Mississippi, or the 10,000 lakes that are we supposedly the land of. A flag redesign would also be an excellent opportunity to honor the indigenous peoples who originally inhabited and continue to inhabit Minnesota whose land was stolen. It will be difficult to craft a flag that will truly please everyone, but I think it’s hard to make a flag less appealing than the current one.