The top six submissions to become the new state flag are now in the hands of the State Emblems Redesign Commission, one of the six to be chosen by Jan. 1. The commission’s task is unenviable, but made easier by the six finalists all being equally meaningless.

The finalists are the same flag. The commission can’t go wrong.

All six feature a star, or a facsimile of a star. And all six feature the star placed in a variety of positions on the field, upper left, center, right middle. The fields are blue, green or white.

The fear of the submissions being meaningful is palpable. Our public decision-making has been infused with timidity disguised as virtue, so as not to offend any human, animal or plant. The state holds that we are incapable of discernment and thus will enforce the whitewashing of what used to be called American history.

None of this is an indictment of the applicants or their designs. They were handcuffed at the starting line. The commission presented six rules, including simplicity and recognizability, “so simple that a child can draw it.’’

“It should be a flag that Minnesotans can proudly identify with.’’

But what if we can’t? Stars are seen in every state. Every state has some water. Every state has a tree or two.

The commission wished for enduring appeal. While honoring the state’s history, the flag design “should also represent Minnesota’s enduring values and aspirations, emphasizing inclusivity and unity.’’

That describes perfectly the flag they intend to abandon, the farmer, inconveniently enough white, tilling the soil while a Native American fellow rides behind him on his horse, all encircled by a garland of lady’s slippers and blue water, trees and a bright horizon.

Sorry, that’s the way it was. But let’s not understand that. Let’s pretend that everything was starlit and sun-kissed and there was never any pain.

The chosen among us have been chirping about the flag for years, having finally convinced themselves and state authorities that when Amelia Hyde Center won the flag contest in 1893 (she won $15), she was obviously callous and dark of heart. Her design represents only racism and genocide and probably environmentally damaging agricultural practices.

The final instruction to the competitors read as follows: “Mandatory: Symbols, emblems, or likenesses that represent only a single community or person, regardless of whether real or stylized, may not be included in a design.’’

Pretty sure that means no Paul Bunyan types.

From the new flag, easily drawn by a child, even by accident, we are supposed to divine enduring values and aspirations, emphasizing inclusivity and unity. Many of us have seen children at their drawing table with a variety of colored pens produce, by today’s corrupted standards, a new state flag.

When you prescribe meaninglessness, that’s what you get, nothing meaningful. And from nothing we are supposed to extract aspirations and pride and enduring values.

We are pathetic in our pursuit of mediocrity for all, and hardly enriched.

Joe Soucheray can be reached at jsoucheray@pioneerpress.com. Soucheray’s “Garage Logic’’ podcast can be heard at garagelogic.com.

Related Articles

Real World Economics: Capital reserves needed; here’s why

Rosario: Every generation has its greatest. These kids are on their way.

Skywatch: Jupiter’s jumped in

Working Strategies: Career management for middle-aged tweens

Joe Soucheray: There they were, bobbing and weaving, ruffians at my window