Confederate Battle Flag

[barfbag]

The Confederacy was formed over states' rights. It was based on lifestyle, values and belief system. 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. To say it was all a matter of slavery is both partisan and foolish. Brothers fought against and killed each other over this tragedy all because the north was aggressive in its politics to the point of making slaves out of the southerners as federal policies favored northern over southern economic interests. To this day it should be held that the federal government should not pick winners and losers. Helping a sector out in order to prevent other sectors from falling is one thing, but picking one sector to succeed over another based on politics isn't right. This is exactly what was going on. In a way it was 19th century earmarks. A century and a half later, I am one who holds the good fight to eliminate earmarks in order to prevent such travesties. The south wanted to have freedom because the north treated the south like second class citizens. I'm sure if those today who blurt out that the Civil War was about slavery knew what it was like to be treated like a second class citizen, they would wise up and appreciate the truth of history which was that the south was attacked by a viscous neighbor. Also how nationalistic are those who fought or would have fought for the Yankee states during the Civil War? The U.S. Constitution can be abandoned at any time by any state which chooses to do so. Across the world, the Confederacy was seen as a serious attempt at nationhood. Had the south won, international conflicts and even Hitler could've been stopped before the United States waited until it was politically convenient to become involved. Was it so much to ask for the south to ask for liberty from an oppressive government of oppressive policies towards them? All they wanted was their freedom. It was right for slavery to end though.

[barfbag]

It's all about context. There's nothing wrong with representing values, independence, and states' rights, but slavery is wrong. It just depends on the person who has the flag.

[barfbag]

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.

[barfbag]

Symbol of racism, should be illegal.

What is your take on our first amendment?

[barfbag]

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?

[barfbag]

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. 

[barfbag]

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.

[barfbag]

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.

[barfbag]

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.

[barfbag]

Choice 2. Under that flag the South seceded and attempted an invasion of the North in order to march on Washington. At the present who seems most interested in it are certain types of young males, so I think of it as more a symbol of ignorance than anything presently.

It really depends on how it's being used. My stepbrother is 16 and has one in his room, but is it worse than other kids his age who get into drugs and alcohol? He's not hurting anyone.

[barfbag]

Naturally the treason argument is silly; the reason that the Confederacy was evil is not that it was treasonous.

You're of course correct, but it sure does make the pro-Confederates squirm.  Remember that the people who wave Confederate flags the hardest are the people who wave American flags the hardest and are normally very offended by the idea of anyone being treasonous.

They have a sense of pride though!

[barfbag]

Naturally the treason argument is silly; the reason that the Confederacy was evil is not that it was treasonous.

You're of course correct, but it sure does make the pro-Confederates squirm.  Remember that the people who wave Confederate flags the hardest are the people who wave American flags the hardest and are normally very offended by the idea of anyone being treasonous.

They have a sense of pride though!

Pride in what? Losing? Cause that's what they did. They lost. They would lose the war no matter what was going to happen, because England was not going to enter on their side as long as they held people in bondage and that was the only thing that could have saved the day.

England was irrelevant. They have pride in what they stand for. I have no idea what winning or losing has to do with pride in what one believes in.

[barfbag]

Naturally the treason argument is silly; the reason that the Confederacy was evil is not that it was treasonous.

You're of course correct, but it sure does make the pro-Confederates squirm.  Remember that the people who wave Confederate flags the hardest are the people who wave American flags the hardest and are normally very offended by the idea of anyone being treasonous.

They have a sense of pride though!

Pride in what? Losing? Cause that's what they did. They lost. They would lose the war no matter what was going to happen, because England was not going to enter on their side as long as they held people in bondage and that was the only thing that could have saved the day.

England was irrelevant. They have pride in what they stand for. I have no idea what winning or losing has to do with pride in what one believes in.

What one believes? Are you referring to institutional racism, owning of other human beings, and so on, Mr. Bag?

No and I've continuously made that clear.

[barfbag]

A symbol of traitors who tried to leave the United States for slavery.  Granted, the vast majority of Southern whites didn't own slaves, but (unless they individually stayed loyal to the Union) they did fight against the Union on behalf of the rights of the rich to own people.  Absolutely shameful.

Anyone who tries to argue "bbbbut it wasn't really about slavery!!1" is an apologist moron.

The fact that it's become the beloved symbol of Dixiecrats, the KKK, and other white supremacists should be a clue to the people who aren't sure...

You nailed it. Anyone who uses it as a symbol for Southern pride needs to take a good look at history and themselves. You may as well be a German flying a nazi flag as a symbol of German pride and say that the nazis weren't all bad. Completely illogical.

Anyone who views the German Nazi flag as a symbol of German pride is ignorant of history. The schwastika was originally used as a symbol of peace in Buddhism.

[barfbag]

It's 100% totally fine to have Southern pride -- it's just not OK to express it with the flag of a bunch of people who tried to form a separate country to keep their slaves.

Maybe they're fans of the Dukes of Hazzard or the Haunted Tank?

You're a fellow southerner. What are your thoughts on the Confederate Flag?

[barfbag]

It's 100% totally fine to have Southern pride -- it's just not OK to express it with the flag of a bunch of people who tried to form a separate country to keep their slaves.

Is it OK for someone to celebrate their Jewish heritage by raising or waving the Israeli flag, even though it is highly offensive to the Palestinian people?

yes

[barfbag]

It's 100% totally fine to have Southern pride -- it's just not OK to express it with the flag of a bunch of people who tried to form a separate country to keep their slaves.

Maybe they're fans of the Dukes of Hazzard or the Haunted Tank?

You're a fellow southerner. What are your thoughts on the Confederate Flag?

Southerner by birth, but not breeding.  My parents were Yankees who had moved south and my ancestors were Canadians and Dutchmen at the time of the war.  The South could use a symbol less tainted with the heritage of slavery than the Flag, but there isn't one.

I'm a Yankee by birth too.

[barfbag]

It's like flying a right-facing red and black swastika and saying "well, for me, the swastika stands for German pride and heritage, plus the swastika was originally a symbol for peace," and as a guy born smack in the middle of Texas, I think I have a right to say this.

As for the Israeli flag, it's a symbol of a religion being used for a symbol of a country.

Would you have a problem with someone in India painting a swawtika on both sides of the door of their house?  Or ... how about someone flying the US flag in Vietnam? 

Are you saying religious symbols can't be offensive?  How about go and place some Islamic symbols at the 911 World Trade Center memorial.  I'm sure lots of people would be offended.  Symbols can mean different things to different people.

Yes and often people are too ignorant to know their original meaning.

[barfbag]

That may be true, barfbag, but meanings can change. And that doesn't make everyone who subscribes to the new meaning an asshole.

No not everyone, but there are a lot of people who get worked up without knowing what they're talking about. The truth is I've never really felt strongly either way about the confederate flag.

[barfbag]

Swastika symbols date back to the Indus Valley civilization, long before the emergence of Buddhism, and they are symbolic of various divine figures or tantric ideas in Hindu and Jain traditions too.  It was partly from this Indian heritage and partly from Schliemann's excavation of Troy that German Orientalists began speculating about the cultural origins of the symbol, and from there that the Nazis adopted the symbol. 

Anyway, I think over-intellectualization about such symbols and their origin leads us down paths of irrelevance, and that precisely because the histories of such symbols are not widely known,but are instead associated with their most recent socio-political uses.  I don't think either Nazi flags or Confederate battle flags should be displayed in celebration of anything, since they have in times that have directly effected ours been used to represent horrible things, things we should not idealize, no matter where we are from.

This is what I've been saying all along about the swastikas.