Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The confederate flag debate.      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 BussOfEsprit
Joined: 10/10/2014
Msg: 151
half-mast arguementsPage 7 of 9    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

Yes! All those Boston Irish and Scots went south and were the original plantation owners...Proving that any azzhole can say anything on the internet and think some gullible soul will believe his bullshyte

You’re coming across as cranky and confused but I suspect you didn’t get your nap today!

The concept that the Civil War wasn’t really about slavery derived from a basic U.S. History course my 1st or 2nd year of college, in California as a young man. I, along with other classmates were quite shocked about this revelation because it contradicted much of the information we were indoctrinated with.

No, no, I’m not talking about the “Irish and Scots” in Boston rather the offspring of cheaper (I think you’re a good example of why they were so much cheaper) and more disposable white slaves (The Forbidden History that doesn’t have a political benefit) that worked the fields of plantations in the South and South America prior to black slaves.

Have you ever watched the movie “A Civil Action” with John Travolta and Robert Devall? There is a scene where Robert Duvall is teaching a law course and explaining a tactic using “objections”. “Relevance…. objection, Hearsay….. objection, Best evidence….. objection, Authenticity….objection, if you should fall asleep at the council table the first thing you should say when you wake up should be??????? Objection”. The reason I asked is because the democrat party uses the same tactic. They condition dimwits to repeatedly regurgitate the words “racism, bigot, slavery, white privilege, etc.” upon hearing certain trigger words. Of course I’m not referring to anyone here in these forums but thought it was interesting and wanted to share ;)
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 152
half-mast arguements
Posted: 7/19/2015 11:04:51 PM

No, no, I’m not talking about the “Irish and Scots” in Boston rather the offspring of cheaper (I think you’re a good example of why they were so much cheaper) and more disposable white slaves (The Forbidden History that doesn’t have a political benefit) that worked the fields of plantations in the South and South America prior to black slaves.

Oh God... now we're right back to that "indentured servant/white slave" silliness again...

Don't you see Irish...? It can't be about slavery because the white people who used it... were the descendants of "white slaves"... and JUST EVERYBODY knows that the white descendants of "white slaves" could NEVER fight for the continued enslavement of blacks... All it means is that these white descendants of "white slaves" were fighting against the very same kind of "tyranny" they fought against in the British Isles... You know... like in "Braveheart" and "The Last Prince of Ireland"...
 robaustralia
Joined: 12/1/2014
Msg: 153
half-mast arguements
Posted: 7/20/2015 4:18:16 AM

Oh God... now we're right back to that "indentured servant/white slave" silliness again...


When I had a crap this morning and checked my stool I'm positive I seen your face. The beauty was though when I flushed the turd that resembled your face I took solace in the fact it would have ended up in the shit farm where it belongs.


Don't you see Irish...? It can't be about slavery because the white people who used it... were the descendants of "white slaves"... and JUST EVERYBODY knows that the white descendants of "white slaves" could NEVER fight for the continued enslavement of blacks... All it means is that these white descendants of "white slaves" were fighting against the very same kind of "tyranny" they fought against in the British Isles... You know... like in "Braveheart" and "The Last Prince of Ireland"...


Are you talking to yourself again? You must be really comfortable dragging your knuckles along the ground eh?
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 154
view profile
History
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 11:55:29 AM
“I don’t believe the Confederate Flag is a racist symbol”

How is that you see what the flag designers and the commissioners of the flag wrote about the flag they made and make that determination? For the third bloody time in this thread:

“As a people, we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race... Such a flag would soon take rank among the proudest ensigns of the nations, and be hailed by the civilized world as THE WHITE MAN'S FLAG. As a national emblem, it is significant of our higher cause, the cause of a superior race, and a higher civilization contending against ignorance, infidelity, and barbarism.” – William T. Thompson, designer of CSA’s second flag, the first to include the Confederate Battle Flag

Seriously, every Confederate sympathizer in this thread (except the one who outwardly admits to being a racist) has just completely ignored all the racist rantings of the Confederate founders and flag designers, although they sure call Lincoln a racist every chance they get. Which nobody is arguing that he wasn’t, so why you morons keep bringing that up, I have no idea. There is evidence piled on top of evidence that the Confederacy and nearly all of its founders and contemporary supporters were racist white supremacists, and you guys just want to sweep that all under the carpet just so you can keep waving a colorful flag and claiming it means something other than what your heroes originally claimed it meant.

I need one of you to explain to me why the words of the Confederate flag designers and founders do not matter to you – why you insist that the flag is not a racist symbol, even though the people that designed the flag and asked for it to be designed said it was a racist symbol. I just don’t understand how you can glorify these dead ancestors so much and yet not believe in any of the racist things they said. That makes absolutely no sense. Just happily be a goddamn racist already --don’t half-azz it by supporting a racist symbol and not its original meaning.

And please, read all of my previous posts in this thread so I don’t have to repeat myself yet again when one of you responds with something I already addressed/debunked.
 Peppermint_Petunias
Joined: 3/30/2012
Msg: 155
view profile
History
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 1:09:30 PM

I don’t believe the Confederate Flag is a racist symbol

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well please tell the KKK that were just in Columbia SC demonstrating to put those dam flags and t shirts away.
Now that you have been told. You would be ignorant to say that again.

Also many of the men and women carrying the confederate flags and in the confederate flag t shirts also had swastikas on.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/19/us/ku-klux-klanprotests-at-south-carolina-capitol.html?_r=0
New York Time has a pic ..but its not like what we saw on TV

A racist white protester with a swastika on his shirt got ill in the heat and a black cop in SC helps him out.
I think the Daily News has a pic of that for you to peek at.
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 156
view profile
History
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 1:39:51 PM
“Well please tell the KKK that were just in Columbia SC demonstrating to put those dam flags and t shirts away.”

In a very weak, unspirited defense of this cat, I think what he is saying is that he *personally* doesn’t find it to be a racist symbol and that he does not believe that it was originally a racist symbol and that the KKK and other white supremacist organizations hijacked a non-racist symbol and gave it a meaning that it doesn’t deserve. Which leads to the question: why exactly is it that white supremacists decided to “hijack” the Confederate flag of all symbols in the world they could have “hijacked”? Did they put a bunch of flags on their wall and blindly throw a dart at it and the Confederate flag was the unlucky one that it hit? Is it only sheer luck they aren’t prancing around with the Swiss flag?

You would think white supremacists would have put some thought into choosing a symbol to represent them, but on the other hand, that's also suggesting that white supremacists think.
 BussOfEsprit
Joined: 10/10/2014
Msg: 157
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 2:58:12 PM

Oh God... now we're right back to that "indentured servant/white slave" silliness again

Predictable answer but very good Joe! You’re partially correct but you did leave out the part about white slaves. This should be no surprise because white slaves were sold in Asia, Middle East (very brutal), and Africa for centuries.


Well please tell the KKK that were just in Columbia SC demonstrating to put those dam flags and t shirts away.
Now that you have been told. You would be ignorant to say that again

Msg. 151. Read the first sentence again!


How is that you see what the flag designers and the commissioners of the flag wrote about the flag they made and make that determination? For the third bloody time in this thread

I’m not saying there wasn’t racism and bigotry because that was the world that existed. African slave owners felt superior to their black and white slaves, Middle Eastern slave owners felt superior to their white and black slaves, slave owners in America felt superior to their Indian, white, and black slaves, etc. It’s hard for us to truly comprehend but people of different races fought for their lives and there is a reason why there was so much hatred against others that were different.

During Lincoln’s Presidential Campaign, he promised the public and financial supporters (large monopolies in the Northeast) that he would double sales tax on imported goods to the South from 20% to 40%. The South was greatly outvoted in the Congress by the Northern States, especially with a number of high tax Senators and Representatives in the most recent national election.

The South exported and imported 80% of the nation’s goods and paid 80% of the nation’s import taxes and only represented 33% of the nation’s population. 80% of the tax revenue was spent up North on Northern canals and railroads instead of the South.

Lincoln endorsed the Permanent Slavery Amendment that passed in 1861 and this was after many of the Southern States had withdrawn from the U.S. and had formed their own nation. The same day Congress also passed the Morrill Tariff Act which was the highest import tax in U.S. history (40%).

Lincoln’s platform was to bring about a “Forced Union” (changed from the previous “Voluntary Union”) and to centralize the banking system. Andrew Jackson was the last President to take on the central bankers and rout them out to a degree.

I agree with you that there was aspect of racial superiority (where did this not exist?) but you have focused your opinions completely on this aspect alone. When you get passed the rhetoric the Confederate States were against the same things that the American Colonies were against with Great Britain.
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 158
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 4:04:03 PM

Predictable answer

Well yes... the written truth usually is predictable...

but very good Joe!

It's an easy target to hit...

but you did leave out the part about white slaves.

It's odd that you should perceive that... particularly considering that the words "white" and "slave" are found side-by-side... as in "white slave"... in the part you quoted...

Even more so... considering the exact same pairing occured 3 more times... subsequent to that...

Are you sure the prescription on your glasses is up-to-date...? Could that be the reason you so... well, let's just say "absent-mindedly"... overlooked all those occurrences of something you so "authoritatively" declare "did not happen"...? You may want to answer "No, I'm blind as a bat" to that... because the alternatives are... well... "uncomplimentary" to say the least... you know, stuff along the lines of "intentional obfuscation" or "dumb as a stump"... that kind of thing... And I would just hate to think that your posts fell into one of THOSE categories...

I’m not saying there wasn’t racism and bigotry because that was the world that existed.

Aaahhhh... So... Because racism, bigotry and slavery were commonplace... and slavery... which has always existed... was still considered "socially acceptable" among those who still supported slavery... the the war COULDN'T POSSIBLY have been fought primarily to support the continuation of slavery as "commonplace" and "socially acceptable"... Because, of course... we all JUST KNOW that people don't fight wars over things which they consider "commonplace" or "socially acceptable"...
 motowncowgirl
Joined: 3/24/2015
Msg: 159
half-mast arguements
Posted: 7/20/2015 4:09:56 PM

I don’t believe the Confederate Flag is a racist symbol

the racists do
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 160
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 4:41:56 PM

Because racism, bigotry and slavery were commonplace... and slavery... which has always existed... was still considered "socially acceptable" among those who still supported slavery... the the war COULDN'T POSSIBLY have been fought primarily to support the continuation of slavery as "commonplace" and "socially acceptable"...


Joe, it becomes clear that those from Texas are unaware that Texas, Mississippi, Georgia and South Carolina all issued additional documents, usually referred to as the “Declarations of Causes," which explain their decision to leave the Union. This "Declaration of Causes" was in addition to the "Articles of Secession" and strongly defended, and in some cases, called for the expansion of slavery.

From the Texas "Declarations of Causes:"


The servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations.


All those Irish and Scottish Texans (ROFLMAO) thought it was their god given right to enslave the African race.
 BussOfEsprit
Joined: 10/10/2014
Msg: 161
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 7:26:15 PM
Lincoln’s first Inaugural Speech (March 4, 1861), he approved a Constitutional Amendment that would guarantee permanent slavery in the U.S.

In his speech,

“I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. Holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable”

The "Permanent Slavery Amendment” that Lincoln endorsed was passed March 2, 1861 by both houses.

If the southern states came back to the Union and ratified the Amendment, it would prevent the federal government from abolishing slavery or interfering with slavery in any State in the U.S.
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 162
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 8:27:33 PM

The "Permanent Slavery Amendment” that Lincoln endorsed was passed March 2, 1861 by both houses.

If the southern states came back to the Union and ratified the Amendment, it would prevent the federal government from abolishing slavery or interfering with slavery in any State in the U.S.

Ooohh... And I bet you think that "proves" that slavery wasn't what the war was about... It probably goes something like "If slavery was so important, the south would have rejoined to pass the Amendment"...

What such a position would ignore is... the amendment wasn't about slavery any more than you say the south fought the war for... it was about "states' rights", exactly what you say they were looking for... here is the text of the amendment...

"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."

Do you see that...? Not EVEN ONE mention of slavery... just a guarantee of the states' right to their own domestic institutions... "States' Rights"... and that wasn't good enough... It COULDN'T have been about "states' rights" because the south still rejected it so it MUST have been about slavery... Do you see how that argument works...?

And do you know why it wasn't good enough...? because it only applied to states existing at the time... It did nothing to allow for slavery in the new territories which meant that federal anti-slavery rules could be applied... and the slave states couldn't do anything about it...

In other words... the Southern states rejected rejoining with this amendment... because it didn't carry slavery guarantees far enough...
 8inscrew
Joined: 11/17/2014
Msg: 163
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/20/2015 10:27:21 PM
Hey Irish, I want to apologize to the forum for going off on you.
They didn't deserve that.

And thanks Joe... civility suits you and everyone else better. I think.
Some of the ladies thinks its hot... I know that one, I think.


This is an emotional topic for some, a rational topic for others.
When misinformation is sold as truth.... it bugs me.

Even the title.
"It"is the Southern Cross. Never "the Confederate flag".
When I read confederate flag... I envision the actual confederate flag.


Personally, it represents other Americans who died in one of our wars. Literally.
Picture lil' white stone geometrically laid out as reminder to all. Our veterans.
Black and brown and yellow and red and white. Nortenos y surenos.
What's the slang name for a family fought both sides? Americon?

And...my opinion of where the Feds are overstepping their ground.
Ground. Not grounds. What is being done around the world and in my homeland does not always reflect
What I want my government to do. They had an original purchase. I mean purpose.
That's another story.

And... rebellion of if a different sort. The younger sort.




It HAS been **stardized by racist groups trying to cower behind those fallen soldiers' burial grounds.
Those should be duckin' their heads.

Shun those groups. Their deeds. By name.
Don't categorize every flag waver as a skinhead, klan member, racist, cousin fvcker, or poor. Much less
trash of any sorts. Non yall had a ma'amy? Tsk tsk tsk.
That is just another ignorant form of hate and it's perpetration. 'Noncho know¿

Well now you know.

Retain your hate of hate..... just quit being ignorant and repeating propaganda.

If I caught some nutter who pretends to be a nattiopathic professional (hipster slang for organic doctor without the actual degree)
vandalizing my Audi in a Florida targ`et parking lot..... I'd probably taze her and call 911, while trying to hold the steady cam still.
"when people making asinine statements start ignoring objective statistical analysis countering those stateme n video".... blah blah blah
... and try to keep my white dog from eating her, without prejudice, and but with real concern for some bodies well being.
Guess who?


Jr. For you it's easy to call me a racist. You don't understand me.
Have I made indirect or even slightly direct statements that I'm racist?
No. ( let the quoting begin) lol

Because I don't feel superior for being an American pit bull terrier.
I'm a direct mix of 4 cultures. American born. 3rd gen and 100 plus.
Whiter than white on my feet. Browner than our sub southern border friends on my arms,
and yes my complexion is ruddy. I'm not office material. I still go to my offices. Wink n tungsten
Compare me to other cultures same age/demo.... I'm probably sub par.
Working on it.
The real indians and asians still have me by a bit.
within 17 k I think..

Call me a racist then tell me to "crack that whip" in "lily white Montana".
My ancestors weren't just enslaved.
"Our" Federal government opted for genocide.
Thanks for validating ignorance.
Bet you drive a Pontiac too.
Do you also slap redheads?



You said many blacks, including yourself, won't even do farm work because your ancestors did enough...
I have with pride. Still do, when i have to. Believe me... I'd rather be someplace else.
Money is needed even if good jobs are scarce. You're above that?
Were your people decimated? Driven to extinction? I mean the rez?
which are barren alkaline fields, deserts, and swamps..... and told to "farm"¿
You got a rez box you get "new" movies from?


Fyi... natives accept everyone into the tribe. After trial.
Berdashe is what BJ would be, not man, not woman. Not wrong.
No mis-labeling the truth.
No for inability to pass into adulthood.




Edit. Lol joe.... have you even read it?
16 th paragraph. If it was prominent, you think it'd be prominent.
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 164
view profile
History
The confederate flag debate.
Posted: 7/21/2015 6:30:28 AM
“When you get passed the rhetoric”

You’re acting as if the Confederacy didn’t create the “rhetoric.” I’m not really into excusing people for acting inhumane just because “those were just the times,” but even if you do, that doesn’t excuse modern people for glorifying people from those times who were acting inhumane. Nobody looks back at Pol Pot and says, “Oh, those were just the times.” Nobody looks back at mustard gas and says “Oh, those were just the times.” Nobody looks back at Hitler and says “Oh, those were just the times” – and that was only 70 years ago, not 150 (of course, maybe that’s part of the problem – people are still alive from Nazi Germany and can tell us exactly what was going on, whereas we can all twist the written words of Civil War Era people into whatever it is that we believe in).

If you’re perfectly happy wrapping yourself up in a flag whose creators declared it a symbol of white supremacy and the organization it originally represented declared itself an organization of white supremacy -- which you readily acknowledge – if you have no problem doing that, then so be it. Just quit pretending you aren’t racist if you’re going to support the ideals and goals of racists. You can’t separate the white supremacy aspect of the Confederacy from the organization as a whole when the Confederacy never would have existed without white supremacy – you think those poor whites (among the ones who signed up vs. being drafted) would have risked their lives jumping onboard with the plantation owners and other rich Confederate leaders if the latter hadn’t preached the gospel of white supremacy and what would happen to their society if the black slaves became freemen?

“It’s hard for us to truly comprehend but people of different races fought for their lives and there is a reason why there was so much hatred against others that were different.”

It’s truly hard for YOU to comprehend because your ancestors didn’t spend the next 100+ years CONTINUING to fight for their lives in a world filled with lynchings, cross-burnings, church-bombings, terrorizing hooded figures and brutal elected officials. I have no problem whatsoever comprehending what life was like 150 years ago because my youth was spent in an area that was still behaving like it was the 1860s. Which perhaps you did, too, but I can promise you our experiences were vastly different.

“It HAS been **stardized by racist groups trying to cower behind those fallen soldiers' burial grounds.”

How can it be “b*astardized” by racist groups when the people who originally made the flags were themselves racist and declared that their symbol represented their white supremacist views?

It doesn’t matter if you are a racist. What matters is you’re trying to claim a symbol that was made by racists to represent an organization that was unquestionably racist for its entire existence is somehow not racist. Ignoring the flag creators’ declared meaning behind the flag is like someone watching one of my movies and claiming it means X when on the special features I’m sitting there in front of the camera telling everyone that it actually means Y.

“You said many blacks, including yourself, won't even do farm work because your ancestors did enough...I have with pride.”

I said other blacks won’t do it for those reasons. I said I won’t do it because I *personally* have done enough of it, as I lived the first 18 years of my miserable life on a farm.

“My ancestors weren't just enslaved. "Our" Federal government opted for genocide.”

Your profile says “Caucasian” – not “mixed” or “Native American.” That’s not validating ignorance – that’s validating your profile as misleading. I am mixed with Creek – specifically ones that murdering azzhole on the 20 dollar bill slaughtered at the Battle of Horseshoe Bend during the War of 1812. As the story of the river behind my parents’ house running red with my ancestors’ blood was passed down for generations, I’m well aware of what the federal government did to Native Americans. I’m also well-aware of what my white ancestors did to my black ancestors in the name of Confederate ideals. When you’re mixed up enough, there’s a lot of self-hatred. But in the end, we have one country that’s done much wrong and much right, and that’s what we live in today, while on the other hand we have a terrorist rebellious organization that did only wrong for 5 years as it waved its colorful flag in the name of “states’ rights” to keep the inferior black population enslaved. Which do you think a rational non-racist modern human being would support?
 carolann0308
Joined: 12/9/2006
Msg: 165
view profile
History
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/21/2015 10:27:46 AM
Well said Hawking.

I think a lot of people who display it on their cars, trucks and man-caves ignorantly look at it as just another redneck hello or Nascar symbol. They don't think about it representing a way of life that was never moral, kind or just.
We are all horrified when we see a person wearing a KKK robe, or read about some hoarder keeping 50 dogs in cages but for some reason the Confederate flag is supposed to be just a bumper sticker or room decor?
 BussOfEsprit
Joined: 10/10/2014
Msg: 166
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/21/2015 1:51:43 PM
@Joe, The point was about Lincoln endorsing permanent slavery! He also said he would only invade tax collection forts (the point about taxes).


You’re acting as if the Confederacy didn’t create the “rhetoric.” I’m not really into excusing people for acting inhumane just because “those were just the times,” but even if you do, that doesn’t excuse modern people for glorifying people from those times who were acting inhumane

If your interpretation of my words are that I’m “excusing people for acting inhumane” than you haven’t understood a word I’ve written. People across the world, of all races, all throughout history created symbols in lands that they had or wanted to reign supreme. This is no revelation and you’re acting like the southern states were doing something different from others around the globe (not an excuse but acknowledgment of the history of the world). Bigotry, racism, prejudice, slavery, and exploitation were the norm of the world and had been for a very long time. Supremacy and racism existed in just about every city, kingdom, country, continent, etc. across the globe throughout history. Your angle is of racism and supremacy and my angle is of a historical aspect.


It’s truly hard for YOU to comprehend because your ancestors didn’t spend the next 100+ years CONTINUING to fight for their lives in a world filled with lynchings, cross-burnings, church-bombings, terrorizing hooded figures and brutal elected officials. I have no problem whatsoever comprehending what life was like 150 years ago because my youth was spent in an area that was still behaving like it was the 1860s. Which perhaps you did, too, but I can promise you our experiences were vastly different

If you think you understand what it was like to live 150 years ago, that’s a fantasy of your own making. You may have lived in some little town trying to catch up with the modern word but hardly a comparison. It did sound good and if I were naïve I might have believed you.

Now I do believe that Black Americans continue to be exploited and manipulated but we would probably differ on who and why.
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 167
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/21/2015 3:02:47 PM

@Joe, The point was about Lincoln endorsing permanent slavery!

So what...? How does that keep the south's secession... or the flags they flew... from being specifically about racism and slavery...? That IS the point you've been trying to make after all...

Your angle is of racism and supremacy and my angle is of a historical aspect.

Except your "historical aspect" is dishonest and disingenuous... Yes slavery, racism and oppression have existed since day one... yes many flags and symbols have existed... and still exist... which represent nations and people who did these things at some point...

But here is the real "rub" for your argument... and what makes it dishonest and disingenuous... very few... if any... of those nations were created SPECIFICALLY for the purpose of promulgating slavery and racism... and very few of the symbols were created and styled SPECIFICALLY to represent the promulgation of that slavery and racism... but the south's confederacy... and the symbols it created... are very much among that very small and select "elite"...

You... however... want to manipulate the retelling of history to erase that particular... and quite relevant and important... distinction... And likely... for purely partisan political purposes...
 drinkthesunwithmyface
Joined: 3/27/2012
Msg: 168
view profile
History
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/21/2015 4:48:09 PM
Just a reminder - I'm not trying to argue for or against anything here, I just like to test ideas and different ways of thinking about things in order to facilitate trying to find the applicable truth of something...

If an ex-confederate state waved this flag officially on government grounds, I can see how it matters to see it all one way, which is really what this is all about...but otherwise -

It is professed that people appropriated the Confederate flag symbology for racist or slavery views (or for the confederacy, whatever), in order to say that's how it should be thought of today. This along with citing that many people display this flag with a completely different intention, "not aware" of what it's "supposed" to mean.

Cannot, therefore, people appropriate this flag for those different intentions just as legitimately, without being judged as being racist, etc? Are they really necessarily mistaken when they display it?

Hitler appropriated the swastika. But that swastika meant something else before Hitler. These days, would you socially persecute someone for having a swastika...with or without Nazi embellishments...with or without Hindu embellishments?
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 169
view profile
History
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/22/2015 7:44:43 AM
“If your interpretation of my words are that I’m ‘excusing people for acting inhumane’ than you haven’t understood a word I’ve written. People across the world, of all races, all throughout history created symbols in lands that they had or wanted to reign supreme. This is no revelation and you’re acting like the southern states were doing something different from others around the globe (not an excuse but acknowledgment of the history of the world).”

But you’re STILL doing it. You’re saying that it was okay for the Confederacy to be racist because some people in the Union (and elsewhere) were also racist due to it being “just the times.” You want to compare the founding of the United States and designing of its flag to that of the Confederacy?

Francis Hopkinson never said of his flag: “As a people, we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race... Such a flag would soon take rank among the proudest ensigns of the nations, and be hailed by the civilized world as THE WHITE MAN'S FLAG. As a national emblem, it is significant of our higher cause, the cause of a superior race, and a higher civilization contending against ignorance, infidelity, and barbarism”.

And first “Union” vice-president John Adams never said anything remotely close to: “Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition”.

The United States Declaration of Independence doesn’t say anything remotely similar to “(Texas) was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time” or “(Mississippi's) position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth.” Indeed, if the northern whites were so racist, then why were so many Confederate founders making complaints such as “[Northerners/Republicans] have demanded, and now demand equality between the white and negro races, under our constitution; equality in representation, equality in right of suffrage, equality in the honors and emoluments of office, equality in the social circle, equality in the rights of matrimony... freedom to the slave, but eternal degradation for you and me” (William Harris) and “Lincoln’s program (is) based upon the single idea that the African is equal to the Anglo-Saxon, and with the purpose of placing our slaves on a position of equality with ourselves and our friends of every condition. We, of South Carolina, hope soon to greet you in a Southern Confederacy, where white men shall rule our destinies, and from which we may transmit to our posterity the rights, privileges, and honor left us by our ancestors” (John McQueen). Certainly, there were some racist people in the North, absolutely, Lincoln was far from perfect in his views (although for the most part he was just being a middle-of-the-road politician) but the Confederacy as a whole was much more racist than the rest of the country and that was the entire backbone of their existence. We can argue all we want about Lincoln's motives and timings for such things as the Emancipation Proclamation or the 13th Amendment, but can you honestly say ANY Confederate leader would have EVER done such a thing? Ultimately, the Northern Union leaders did the right thing for mostly the right reasons -- the Confederate leaders NEVER would have because the entire purpose for their existence was to maintain slavery -- "forever."

“If you think you understand what it was like to live 150 years ago, that’s a fantasy of your own making. You may have lived in some little town trying to catch up with the modern word but hardly a comparison. It did sound good and if I were naïve I might have believed you.”

When I was a kid, quite a few people still used wagons for transportation on our dirt roads -- my father had one he used every now and then, and often plowed the fields with horses. We and most of our neighbors had to get water from a well (or the river). Not an exaggeration. But that’s not really what I’m talking about. I’m talking about an overwhelmingly racist white population that was in charge and doing everything they could to fight integration, preaching ominously about the inferior black race and what would happen if they got (more) rights, and most of all, threatening lynchings and cross burnings for any perceived acts of miscegenation; my uncle had crosses burned in his yard multiple times for being a doctor and living in a white neighborhood before he finally left the state. In that sense, I was pretty much living in 1860s Alabama, although more like the second half of the 1860s, since it was pretty rare any white person claimed to be a slave master. Do you seriously believe that with the end of the Civil War, institutionalized racism came to an end in the South? Because that’s the impression I get.

Let me ask you something: do you wish the Confederacy had won the Civil War and if so, what sort of effect do you think that would have had on the black people living there? “Slavery was dying” – really? Someone should have told the South that so they wouldn’t have started a war to keep it going “forever,” in the words of Texas’ secession declaration. If the South had won and been left to their own devices for the next 150 years, there is no doubt in my mind slavery would still be legal. Hell, my home state held a referendum in the 2000s to remove an (unconstitutional) anti-miscegenation statute from its constitution: 40% of all residents and over 50% of white residents voted to keep interracial relationships illegal. So even with 150 years of “progression,” over half of Alabama's white residents are still so racist that they believe the current president’s ethnic background is an abomination. Imagine the results had the South won. (Arguably, though, it’s a good thing the South did start the Civil War, because who knows when slavery actually would have gone away in the United States had the 1860-status of the country continued unabated.)

“It is professed that people appropriated the Confederate flag symbology for racist or slavery views”

No one “appropriated” the Confederate flag for racist or slavery views – the people that designed it declared that it was a white supremacist symbol, representing a white supremacist organization. That is the difference between it and the swastika, which was indeed “designed” by someone with completely non-racist intentions and then actually “hijacked” by a racist movement. Which makes this argument all the more bizarre and ridiculous, because NOBODY is arguing that we “take back” the swastika – pretty much everyone admits the Nazis poisoned that one pretty darn good. But for some reason, Southern sympathizers are attempting to “take back” a symbol that was from the very beginning designed to express white supremacy – you can’t “take back” something that originally had the very meaning you are claiming it doesn’t!
 BussOfEsprit
Joined: 10/10/2014
Msg: 170
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/22/2015 11:18:06 PM

But you’re STILL doing it. You’re saying that it was okay for the Confederacy to be racist because some people in the Union (and elsewhere) were also racist due to it being “just the times.” You want to compare the founding of the United States and designing of its flag to that of the Confederacy?

No, you’ve ignored or missed everything I’ve been saying and again your only focus is about racism and the “WHITE MANS FLAG”. I think you’re blinded by that and it prevents a deeper conversation. I don’t think it was right for the Southern States (all of America) to be racist, endorse slavery and conquer North America, I don’t think it was right for Hernan Cortes to be racist, endorse slavery, and conquer the Aztec empire in Central America, I don’t think it was right for Rome to be so racist, endorse slavery, and conquer the territories that they did, I don’t think it was right for the black kings of Morocco to be so racist, endorse slavery, and conquer Spain, and all because of the emblems they possessed, they had a higher cause, the cause of a superior race or religion, and a higher civilization contending against ignorance, infidelity, and barbarism. As much as I disagree with what happened in history I can’t go back and change it.

It wasn’t that “some” were racist (the vast majority were racist) it was that “some” were more enlightened which started a new revolution (not seen before on the planet, at least from the history we’re aware of) of human rights. We’ve progressed to the point that we have today and we use terminology such as racism, bigotry, prejudice, exploitation and sit in judgement. We’re born into a world void of slavery (at least in our area) but it wasn’t a luxury enjoyed throughout history. People were accustomed to slavery and just as every revolution it takes time to build. This revolution in the West was transitioning the world into a new era.

The South wasn’t leaving the Union to exclusively start a Nation for the White Supremacy they were leaving the union because of Representation, taxation, revenue from taxation, liberty, and a decentralized government. When I compare the South to the founding of America these are the points that I’m talking about. All which I’ve discussed prior and you have ignored.


Do you seriously believe that with the end of the Civil War, institutionalized racism came to an end in the South? Because that’s the impression I get

No, that’s your prejudice forming that conclusion. For political purposes the KKK was formed to suppress voting and Black Americans from having any economic power. When there was an uprising of Black Americans, for political purposes and to prevent Black Americans from having any economic power they instituted social programs to keep people poor and dependent on government for survival. Same tactic used with Native Americans by keeping them poor and dependent on government for survival.

That is a backward little town but you’re still missing slavery which is big part of 150 years ago. I started off in a little town (not as little as yours) that had a brick road at its center, a few red brick buildings, train tracks running down the middle of it, one church, one gas station, some rich family that had a swimming pool and would let kids swim during the summer, farmland all around and you didn’t want to blink too long because you would miss it.

No, I don’t sit around wishing the “Confederacy had won the civil war”. It’s not a thought in my mind and when or if I talk about the Civil War it’s about history. I live in the world we have today. When I talked about “Slavery Dying” it was in the context of what was occurring in the West and South America. The South was still very much dependent on slavery at the time but it was coming to an end regardless. The North was still endorsing permanent slavery but that was a dispute about representation and taxation. As the West evolved out of a world of slavery, which they were very much involved with, they put pressure on other countries to end slavery as well (trading with other countries and alliances). That’s why I hold the opinion that slavery was ending regardless and the evidence is the world we have today.
 MaleFeasance
Joined: 3/13/2015
Msg: 171
half-mast arguements
Posted: 7/23/2015 2:32:35 AM
I don’t believe the Confederate Flag is a racist symbol but I do believe some use it as such and others believe it to be.
------------
It doesn't really matter. It's not an official flag of anything and therefore does not belong on any government property.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 172
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/23/2015 5:59:10 AM

You... however... want to manipulate the retelling of history to erase that particular... and quite relevant and important... distinction... And likely... for purely partisan political purposes...

The mind boggling thing is that right wingers cannot even keep their partisan misrepresentations of history consistent. When it comes to racial issues, they say, "Remember slavery and Jim Crow? I must point out that it was the southern DEMOCRATS who were responsible!" But when it comes to controversies over the Confederate Battle Flag, they say, "The Confederacy was not so much over slavery as it was over promoting state sovereignty and having a decentralized federal government-- sound, conservative principles upon which this great nation was founded." They are all over the place depending upon the propaganda talking points to be made...
 _mungojoe_
Joined: 10/1/2014
Msg: 173
half-mast arguements
Posted: 7/23/2015 10:01:09 AM

The South wasn’t leaving the Union to exclusively start a Nation for the White Supremacy they were leaving the union because of Representation, taxation, revenue from taxation, liberty, and a decentralized government.

You aren't about to give that disingenuous deceit up easily... are you...? OK... let's just look at that a little more deeply... shall we...?

You say: "Representation"...? OK... What was the ISSUE with "representation" they were SO concerned about...? Well... It's pretty straightforward... The south felt that if slavery weren't allowed unimpeded in new states... that slavery states would become a minority in Congress... and slavery would end up outlawed...

THAT sir... IS what they meant by "representation"... The "representation" of slavery... How is THAT NOT "about slavery"...

You say: "Liberty"...? OK,,, what was the issue with "liberty"... Well... the "liberty" issues was about their "right" and "freedom" to enslave others and deny them basic liberty... just because they believed they were divinely and socially entitled to do so... And it was about the "liberty" of newly formed states to have slavery and deny others basic liberty...

THAT sir... IS what they meant by "liberty"... The "liberty" to enslave other humans... How is THAT NOT about slavery...

I can show you the same connections with taxes and decentralized gov't... AND I can back ALL of it up with quotes from southern politicians, Congressional Records and any number of other public writings... BUT... I think you should be able to get the point by now...

All of this "there were other issues" is deceit and revisionism... Nothing more or less... And it is nothing but a transparent attempt to expunge the memory of the "cause of slavery" and racism through obfuscation and the exploitation of ignorance...

That’s why I hold the opinion that slavery was ending regardless

Of course it was ending... That's WHY the south was trying to "lock it in"... That's why the south was so concerned about their representation, "liberty", taxation and central gov't authority... all those things were threats to the continuation of slavery... and they DIDN'T want to give it up...
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 174
view profile
History
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/24/2015 6:19:35 AM
“The South wasn’t leaving the Union to exclusively start a Nation for the White Supremacy they were leaving the union because of Representation, taxation, revenue from taxation, liberty, and a decentralized government.”

For God’s sake, man – they were attempting to leave the union because they were scared that the Republicans were going to choke off slavery, which led to representation concerns, taxation concerns and other economic concerns. It all goes back to slavery (which means they obviously weren’t all that concerned about the concept of “liberty”). If all these events were because of taxation, representation, revenue, liberty and a decentralized government, then what are the chances there would have been a Confederacy or for that matter the Civil War if the South did not have slavery? According to the Southern states at the time of adoption of the U. S. Constitution, all of those representation, taxation and decentralized government questions had been resolved, and the only 2 amendments passed between then and the Civil War were unrelated to those issues. So what had gone so bad about the good-old-fashioned U. S. Constitution between when Southern states signed on to it and when they tried to sign off of it? Apparently, not much, considering the Confederate Constitution was largely a word-for-word copy of the U. S. Constitution... except for provisions related to slavery, most of which actually REDUCED states’ rights in the Confederacy, such as this one:

“The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several states; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form states to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states.”

The Confederacy basically wanted to be the United States... with permanent slavery and racism throughout. The only time conservatives become all crazy about “states’ rights” is when they’re not in charge of the federal government. Obama is letting states make their own marijuana decisions – the conservatives in charge of states bordering Colorado don’t seem to like those “states’ rights” too much and are suing the federal government and Colorado to enforce federal law over state law (“reverse nullification”?).

“When there was an uprising of Black Americans, for political purposes and to prevent Black Americans from having any economic power they instituted social programs to keep people poor and dependent on government for survival.”

That is YOUR prejudice leading to that highly distorted conclusion. And I’m assuming you’re referring to the federal government in that sentence, as opposed to the KKK mentioned in the previous sentence, nor does it sound like anything that happened in the Southern state governments during Redemption. It’s funny how you can rail on in negative fashion about how the federal government tried to help blacks one sentence after you shrug off the reason behind that. From the end of Reconstruction in the 1870s until the decade you and I were born, every Southern state did everything in their official power to keep their black populations uneducated, penniless and powerless. When the federal government would find a Jim Crow law or a grandfather clause or a “white primary” unconstitutional, the Southern states would immediately pass a new law to get around the unconstitutional law. They did nothing to stop lynchings and in many cases encouraged them. Do you think these were good applications of “states’ rights”? Of course, you’re going to say “No,” despite the fact that almost every post you’ve made says “Yes.” You WANT Southern states to be able to do these things. You just don’t think they would do them NOW so it’s safe to leave them to their own devices, but you have to ask yourself, how did we get to the point where Southern states will do the “right thing”? You seriously think they would have gotten to this point by themselves without being forced to do so?

“That’s why I hold the opinion that slavery was ending regardless and the evidence is the world we have today.”

There is, of course, no way either of us could prove what would have happened if the South had won. But regardless, there is not much question that if the federal government hadn’t said “human rights are more important than states’ rights,” the South would still be awash with institutionalized racism of some sort. How else do you explain the majority of white people in Alabama in 2000 and South Carolina in 1998 voting to keep interracial marriages illegal? If Loving had never happened and the federal government had never intervened to enforce black voting rights, what do you think are the chances that interracial marriages would be legal in Southern states today if left up to a popular vote in those states? In fact, what do you think the chances of segregation period having ended by now if the Southern states were left entirely to their own devices? It is unfortunate for you there is actually a recent voting record proving that Southern whites aren’t just “states’ rights” supporters but actually still quite racist overall – sure, things have gotten somewhat better over the past 150 years, but the reality is, it’s mostly just the past 40 years and for over 100 years after the Civil War, Southern conservatives were complete azzholes and the only reason things have gotten better is because northerners/westerners forced them to highly begrudgingly "get better."
 BialaPolska
Joined: 5/20/2015
Msg: 175
The confederate flag debate
Posted: 7/24/2015 10:51:14 PM
Hawking , I feel you are not only incorrect once , but twice. With only a scant 3% of the South holding slaves , do you think the other 97 cared either way? Sovereignty was at stake. The legitimacy of the 10th Amendment. The CSA fought for the same reason as the Framers ; Freedom from Government Intervention. If we chose to criminalize miscegination in a particular area ; why can not you appreciate that the people have spoke? Why intervene? The will of the people. Why should we pay for federal programs inciting White GeNOcide and or leading to White disadvantage? If the federal gubmint is disenfranchising Whites , what good are they ? Just as in 1865 , balkanization begins. Look at the Louisiana State House of reps in 1868 ; all Black. All appointed by the federal gubmint. Guess times don't change.

Been doing some house hunting and exploring throughout many areas of the South. I can proudly state that I have never seen more Confederate Battle Flags flown in my life !!!! Again , not really my favorite symbol of White Pride but the fact that Europeans are now using using the flag to show disdain for globalism and EU forced immigration warms my heart.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > The confederate flag debate.