Confederate Battle Flag
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 12:42:48 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Confederate Battle Flag
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Poll
Question: What does it mean to you?
#1
proud emblem of Southern heritage
 
#2
dark symbol of slavery and segregation
 
#3
other
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 104

Author Topic: Confederate Battle Flag  (Read 11885 times)
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,218
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: August 04, 2013, 05:33:31 PM »

The Confederacy was formed over states' rights.
To slavery.

It was based on lifestyle, values and belief system.
Of slavery.

Its "way of life" became sacred to its adherents. Everything of the South became a moral question, commingling love of things Southern. Not only did national political parties split, but national churches and interstate. Families as well divided along sectional lines as the war approached.
Yep, a bunch of racist slaver dickbags who wanted to keep their slaves, and a much larger group of slaveless poors who wanted the slave system to continue.

To say it was all a matter of slavery is both partisan and foolish.
Partisan?  Almost every Republican and Democrat alike knows slavery caused the war.  True, many Northerners didn't necessarily fight the war to free the slaves, but slavery is the reason the South seceded.  It's explicitly stated in the secession ordinances.  Slavery was the sole reason why the North and South had different cultures and ways of life at the time.  Some apologists want to try be like "no! it was just states' rights!"  They're correct in a sense -- it was about states' rights ... to slavery.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: August 04, 2013, 05:47:40 PM »

I can understand why it would matter to some people (it represents Southern history), but I consider it to be offensive.  It may be part of your history, but it doesn't have to be how you live now.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: August 04, 2013, 05:54:00 PM »

It is a symbol of both, for better or worst.

Symbol of racism, should be illegal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: August 04, 2013, 05:57:29 PM »

The Confederacy was formed over states' rights.
To slavery.

It was based on lifestyle, values and belief system.
Of slavery.

Its "way of life" became sacred to its adherents. Everything of the South became a moral question, commingling love of things Southern. Not only did national political parties split, but national churches and interstate. Families as well divided along sectional lines as the war approached.
Yep, a bunch of racist slaver dickbags who wanted to keep their slaves, and a much larger group of slaveless poors who wanted the slave system to continue.

To say it was all a matter of slavery is both partisan and foolish.
Partisan?  Almost every Republican and Democrat alike knows slavery caused the war.  True, many Northerners didn't necessarily fight the war to free the slaves, but slavery is the reason the South seceded.  It's explicitly stated in the secession ordinances.  Slavery was the sole reason why the North and South had different cultures and ways of life at the time.  Some apologists want to try be like "no! it was just states' rights!"  They're correct in a sense -- it was about states' rights ... to slavery.

Your demeanor of "dick bag" sounds unprofessional. Please tone it down and debate the issues in a civil manner. The reason most people think the war was about slavery is because such a line of thought has bled into our academic curriculum thanks to liberals. Why do you automatically assume that people who say the Civil War wasn't about slavery must support slavery? I don't support slavery but I know the Civil War was about economic policies favoring northern industries over those in the south among other alienating factors. The Union states were opposed to slavery simply because it helped the southern states to become more productive which helped their representation in the federal government due to population attraction. No one is saying that slavery had nothing to do with the Civil War because it did, but to say it was simply about slavery is a disservice to our youth and those who are growing up in our education system now.
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: August 04, 2013, 05:58:15 PM »

Symbol of racism, should be illegal.

What is your take on our first amendment?
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: August 04, 2013, 06:45:16 PM »

Symbol of racism, should be illegal.

What is your take on our first amendment?

Hate speech shouldn't be covered by it.
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: August 04, 2013, 06:51:15 PM »

Symbol of racism, should be illegal.

What is your take on our first amendment?

Hate speech Things I don't like shouldn't be covered by it.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: August 04, 2013, 07:11:33 PM »

I would hope that everyone doesn't like enslaving an entire race of people, but maybe that's just me.
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: August 04, 2013, 07:58:10 PM »

I would hope that everyone doesn't like enslaving an entire race of people, but maybe that's just me.

What makes you think everyone likes enslaving an entire race of people? What does that have to do with anything?
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: August 04, 2013, 10:21:25 PM »

Anyone who knows American history, knows that the South's desire to maintain the slavery system was the reason for the Civil War.  Thus, the raison d'etre for the Confederacy was slavery.  So, celebrating and identifying with the iconography of the Confederacy is tantamount to  supporting for slavery and racism.
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: August 05, 2013, 12:05:41 AM »

Anyone who knows American history, knows that the South's desire to maintain the slavery system was the reason for the Civil War.  Thus, the raison d'etre for the Confederacy was slavery.  So, celebrating and identifying with the iconography of the Confederacy is tantamount to  supporting for slavery and racism.

We all know slavery was horribly wrong. The truth is very few people actually owned slaves. What most people don't know about history is that the first slave owner in our country was a black man from Massachusetts. Yes, the south was trying to protect slavery but it's not like the north had any higher morals. They simply wanted to end slavery in order to cause suffering for the southern economy which in turn would give northern Republicans even more political power as southerners would've migrated north. At the time the radical Republicans were already at a huge advantage and abolishing slavery was their final move for complete control. I have mixed views on the Confederate flag. It is part of my state's heritage so while I'm proud of my state's heritage, I'm not particularly proud of slavery. Bottom line is that the abolition of slavery is a mute point in discussing who was right and who was wrong on the Civil War because neither side really had a problem with it on moral grounds despite what Republicans and northern politicians were saying. There was no intention of forcing the southern states to eliminate slavery until after the war as a concession to re-entering the union. Concessions are what happens when one side loses to another in a war. Slavery was something very beneficial to the southern economy and therefore the north abolished it. It is VERY naïve to think the Civil War was only over the morality of slavery. 
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: August 05, 2013, 12:56:41 AM »

Both.  There is an undeniable cultural factor, and not everyone who flag that flag supports what it stood for 150 years ago.  Plenty of racist jackasses claim the flag, and will try to argue that the Confederacy didn't stand for slavery, which is idiotic.  That said, the flag is a part of Southern culture beyond the racism, and needs to be recognized as such.
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: August 05, 2013, 02:47:35 AM »

There are no concrete meanings or ideas that can be attached to symbols.







The signifigance or meaning that an individual attaches to a symbol is an entirely personal choice and does not actually reflect anything inherent about the symbol itself.

Yeah, until tens or hundreds of millions of people start applying the same meaning to said symbol. There are only three options for those who hold this flag in any regard other than contempt: you're either a traitor (secession), a libertarian (states rights) or a racist (slavery). In regards to the states rights argument, if someone can't honestly find a better symbol through which to idolize the notion of states rights, then that certainly explains a lot. Pray tell: what did the Confederate Flag stand for prior to the Civil War?

Therefore, the Confederate flag can both be a positive or negative symbol at the same time.

No, it can't.

The Confederacy was formed over states' rights.

No, it wasn't. That's what the Daughters of the Confederacy wanted you to believe - and it's worked. I recall seeing somewhere that a few years ago and for the first time ever, a majority of high school students referenced states rights as the cause of the Civil War, as opposed to the correct answer of slavery.

     Slavery was bad, though so was invading the South over them trying to form their own country. It's government of the people, by the people, for the people...except if the people want out, in which case it's just tough [inks].

I don't recall any slaves having a say in whether a new country in which they'd be kept in perpetual servitude would be formed. Oh, right: of, by and for (61% of) the people.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,663
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: August 05, 2013, 03:22:10 AM »

let's remember that this is the Confederate Battle flag. The debate over slavery was the main precipitant of the Civil War, but you can bet the men and boys fighting and dying on the fields and hills and sea had other things on their mind.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,478
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: August 05, 2013, 04:13:13 AM »
« Edited: August 05, 2013, 04:25:37 AM by Senator Gass3268 »

Some of the opinions in here are why this guy is one of my heroes. He had to put those traitors down!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5mmFPyDK_8
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: August 05, 2013, 09:29:13 AM »
« Edited: August 05, 2013, 09:33:57 AM by angus »

There are no concrete meanings or ideas that can be attached to symbols.







you have made his point very well, in fact.  

Here, for example are the hoods and robes.  What meaning is intrinsically attached to them?  I don't know, let's ask this procession of folks celebrating Holy Week in Spain.



Here, is a swastika in a circle.  What meaning is intrinsically attached to it?  I don't know, let's ask this observant Hindu family celebrating Diwali in India.



If you don't like the broken cross, then what about the intrinsic meaning in a burning cross?  Let's ask these folks taking part in the procession of the Martyr's Crosses.



These symbols have the meaning that those who display them ascribe.  Nothing more, except in your mind.  You are free not to display them, but to cast aspersions upon all who do is narrow-minded and intolerant.  Same with the CSA naval jack or battle flag.  You should know this, as it was, until about 10 years ago, a prominent part of the flag of the great state of Georgia.  Now, the actual Stars'n'Bars of the CSA is the design upon which that state's flag is based, but maybe not for long.  The same voices of who decided that the battle flag wasn't correct thinking will probably also one day decide that the current symbol is not correct either.  Good thing we have folks telling us what to think.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: August 05, 2013, 10:48:25 AM »

fair enough.  also, the whole thread's a tangent.  

not to make excuses but it's really a bitch to type right now.  I cut the hell out of my left index finger last night.  To the bone.  I cutting a huge steak into tiny bits to make a nice meat dish and like a dumbass I held the meat in one hand while slamming down with the cleaver in the other.  Luckily all my digits are still attached.  It bled profusely.  Luckily I had lots of vodka.  My wife kept trying to take me to a physician but I'm a terrible patient and try to avoid clinics whenever possible.  We finally stopped the bleeding, and I took a bunch of antibiotics which we brought back from China--although they were probably rendered useless by the large quantity of ethyl alcohol in my stomach.  Copious quantities of h2o2, isopeopyl alcohol, and neosporin as kept it from turning green and falling off I suppose.  The bleeding has stopped.  It's ugly, but healing and I'm keeping it dry and clean.  Anyway, now I've got a huge bandage on the finger that usually types the t, g, b, v, f,r 4, and 5, so it's a bitvh to type.  searching and posting images was especially challenging.

Just as well.  Not much more to say.  I'll agree with your comment in the last sentence and leave it on a note of concurrence.
Logged
Supersonic
SupersonicVenue
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,162
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: 4.90, S: 0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: August 05, 2013, 11:37:22 AM »

I honestly don't feel too strongly one way or another, although I think this stems from not being American. It's neither the two extremes outlined in this poll, things are never that clear cut. Anyhow, neutral/other.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: August 05, 2013, 02:36:06 PM »

What most people don't know about history is that the first slave owner in our country was a black man from Massachusetts.
  Maybe because it isn't true?  Care to provide a source for your claim?  Now according to the Wiki, the first recognized slave owner in the English colonies was indeed a black man, Anthony Johnson, but he was in Virginia.

That said, the main reason that slavery prospered in the South and yet withered and was eventually abolished in the North had much more to do with circumstances than moral fortitude. The Southern colonies proved favorable to the development of plantation agriculture with crops such as tobacco, indigo, and rice that could be profitably cultivated with slave labor and widely traded.  The Northern colonies by contrast were not so well suited in land or climate for plantation agriculture.  Thus they never had much incentive to transform their system of indentured servitude to full fledged slavery.
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: August 05, 2013, 03:31:03 PM »

Anyone who knows American history, knows that the South's desire to maintain the slavery system was the reason for the Civil War.  Thus, the raison d'etre for the Confederacy was slavery.  So, celebrating and identifying with the iconography of the Confederacy is tantamount to  supporting for slavery and racism.

We all know slavery was horribly wrong. The truth is very few people actually owned slaves. What most people don't know about history is that the first slave owner in our country was a black man from Massachusetts. Yes, the south was trying to protect slavery but it's not like the north had any higher morals. They simply wanted to end slavery in order to cause suffering for the southern economy which in turn would give northern Republicans even more political power as southerners would've migrated north. At the time the radical Republicans were already at a huge advantage and abolishing slavery was their final move for complete control. I have mixed views on the Confederate flag. It is part of my state's heritage so while I'm proud of my state's heritage, I'm not particularly proud of slavery. Bottom line is that the abolition of slavery is a mute point in discussing who was right and who was wrong on the Civil War because neither side really had a problem with it on moral grounds despite what Republicans and northern politicians were saying. There was no intention of forcing the southern states to eliminate slavery until after the war as a concession to re-entering the union. Concessions are what happens when one side loses to another in a war. Slavery was something very beneficial to the southern economy and therefore the north abolished it. It is VERY naïve to think the Civil War was only over the morality of slavery. 

That's like saying it's OK for a German to put a Nazi flag on his BMW.  After all, the Soviet Union was bad too and the Allies didn't fight WWII to help out the Jews. 
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: August 05, 2013, 07:26:01 PM »

What most people don't know about history is that the first slave owner in our country was a black man from Massachusetts.
  Maybe because it isn't true?  Care to provide a source for your claim?  Now according to the Wiki, the first recognized slave owner in the English colonies was indeed a black man, Anthony Johnson, but he was in Virginia.

That said, the main reason that slavery prospered in the South and yet withered and was eventually abolished in the North had much more to do with circumstances than moral fortitude. The Southern colonies proved favorable to the development of plantation agriculture with crops such as tobacco, indigo, and rice that could be profitably cultivated with slave labor and widely traded.  The Northern colonies by contrast were not so well suited in land or climate for plantation agriculture.  Thus they never had much incentive to transform their system of indentured servitude to full fledged slavery.

Other than being wrong about the state which the first slave owner in our colonies was from, you have backed me up. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one on here who knows his history. If only Democrats knew why the north was "against" slavery. They have to turn everything into a race issue for their own benefit.
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: August 05, 2013, 07:37:24 PM »

Anyone who knows American history, knows that the South's desire to maintain the slavery system was the reason for the Civil War.  Thus, the raison d'etre for the Confederacy was slavery.  So, celebrating and identifying with the iconography of the Confederacy is tantamount to  supporting for slavery and racism.

We all know slavery was horribly wrong. The truth is very few people actually owned slaves. What most people don't know about history is that the first slave owner in our country was a black man from Massachusetts. Yes, the south was trying to protect slavery but it's not like the north had any higher morals. They simply wanted to end slavery in order to cause suffering for the southern economy which in turn would give northern Republicans even more political power as southerners would've migrated north. At the time the radical Republicans were already at a huge advantage and abolishing slavery was their final move for complete control. I have mixed views on the Confederate flag. It is part of my state's heritage so while I'm proud of my state's heritage, I'm not particularly proud of slavery. Bottom line is that the abolition of slavery is a mute point in discussing who was right and who was wrong on the Civil War because neither side really had a problem with it on moral grounds despite what Republicans and northern politicians were saying. There was no intention of forcing the southern states to eliminate slavery until after the war as a concession to re-entering the union. Concessions are what happens when one side loses to another in a war. Slavery was something very beneficial to the southern economy and therefore the north abolished it. It is VERY naïve to think the Civil War was only over the morality of slavery. 

That's like saying it's OK for a German to put a Nazi flag on his BMW.  After all, the Soviet Union was bad too and the Allies didn't fight WWII to help out the Jews. 

If only it were a good comparison. Nazis and slave owners were apples and oranges. I know Democrats don't want people to know this, but most slave owners took good care of their slaves and slaves accepted slavery because it was all they knew. This wasn't the case for the Jews in WWII. Of course it's easy to look back and talk about how wrong slavery was now. If it was all someone was brought up around in a time where it was rare to travel more than a county from their home, then they're not going to have been exposed to any other ideas about slavery being immoral. I suppose you'll say that Nazis were fed war propaganda from their media and didn't know what they're country was really doing. What does it matter why the Allies got involved? The fact that Nazism was stopped is the important thing. The same can be said for slavery. It was wrong and should've been abolished like it was. If you want to go ahead and tell a German they can put a swastika on their BMW, go ahead. Common sense can tell the difference. There were no gas chambers or concentration camps for slaves. Did you even know the swastika originated in the Indus Valley in antiquity and literally means "to be good?"  What about the early American flags where there were thirteen stars in a circle? Should we ban those because some of the colonies allowed slaves then? Give me a break.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,174
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: August 05, 2013, 09:11:50 PM »
« Edited: August 05, 2013, 09:21:07 PM by Scott »

Perhaps our little "historians" here would be interested in letting the states speak for themselves as to why they seceded?

You don't even have to read through it all.  Just do a word find for "slave" and "negro" and click 'Next' a bunch of times.  It is abundantly clear why those states seceded.  That's not to say there weren't a few economic disagreements here and there, but it's wrong to suggest that slavery wasn't the dominant factor.
Logged
barfbag
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,611
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -0.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: August 06, 2013, 12:01:28 AM »

Perhaps our little "historians" here would be interested in letting the states speak for themselves as to why they seceded?

You don't even have to read through it all.  Just do a word find for "slave" and "negro" and click 'Next' a bunch of times.  It is abundantly clear why those states seceded.  That's not to say there weren't a few economic disagreements here and there, but it's wrong to suggest that slavery wasn't the dominant factor.

It was the icing on the cake yes but it's much deeper than slavery. I'm wondering why people aren't attacking the north for using slavery as a way to make the southern economy suffer for the benefit of the northern states.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,419
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: August 06, 2013, 12:08:59 AM »

Perhaps our little "historians" here would be interested in letting the states speak for themselves as to why they seceded?

You don't even have to read through it all.  Just do a word find for "slave" and "negro" and click 'Next' a bunch of times.  It is abundantly clear why those states seceded.  That's not to say there weren't a few economic disagreements here and there, but it's wrong to suggest that slavery wasn't the dominant factor.

It was the icing on the cake yes but it's much deeper than slavery. I'm wondering why people aren't attacking the north for using slavery as a way to make the southern economy suffer for the benefit of the northern states.


what
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.103 seconds with 14 queries.