Confederate Flag: Pride or Bigotry?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Where in the Constitution does it say that states choosing to leave (not rebel, not try and overthrow the existing central government) may be invaded by Federal troops?

Excuse me- who fired on who? As I recall, the South made their decree that all Federal troops must leave the forts- when Major Anderson gave them the figurative finger, they started the war.

And the Constitution does not say that states are allowed to fuckin leave. This means that the government is allowed to keep them there. And when you fire on Federal forts, what exactly do you think is going to happen?

Apparently leaving a party is now equivalent to attacking the host and trying to destroy their home?

Once again, who fired on whom? They weren’t leaving a party- they were trying to leave the nation. That’s not so much someone trying to leave your party as it is someone who’s been drinking all night and blowing coke who’s trying to convince you that if they get pulled over, they won’t tall the cops they were by you.

No- you don’t get it- you’re not allowed to leave

Lincoln was really good at changing the meaning of words/phraes to suit him. ‘Saving the Union’ means to now stand at the doorway with a rifle and refuse anyone leaving. And powers not delegated to the central government being reserved to the states becomes an empty phrase

Again- states are not allowed to leave. They’re not fucking sovereign countries. You show me the part where it says, “We can leave if we don’t like it” and I’ll stop arguing.

You honestly, and I mean that, think that the people who signed on to the Constitution gave away any right to leave the Union? They just seceded from the British Empire and now permanently agreed to never secede?

[/quote]

Yes, they declared that governments were made by the people and for the people, then fought long and hard and won against the odds and then turned around and shackled themselves for eternity to a new government that they had just created.

Like any clear thinking person obviously would do.

82

[quote]Gregus wrote:
Professor X wrote:
SSC wrote:
Gregus wrote:
SSC wrote:
D3HT09 wrote:
I’ve found it to be a symbol of southern heritege (sp?). There is really nothing racist about it.

P.S. I’m a northern boy

Sometimes… But I’ve also seen them used in highly antagonizing ways against minority communities, just to provoke reactions and hostility. It’s a big “Fuck You,” as far as I’m concerned.

And seriously, what do people in the south have to be proud about? That it’s hot? That Mississippi is like the worst state in the nation (sans Indiana.) Or maybe that they have the best conference in college football?

I don’t get it. They [i]LOST[/i] the war. It’d be like romping around down in Vietnam with an American flag, sticking our tongues out at them. Whaa?

So my answer: It’s niether pride nor bigotry. It’s hillbilly-ism.

You’re being ignorant of someone else’s culture right there. You also assume that because some idiots use it to antagonize minorities it must be a racist symbol. It is a racist symbol only to them, if you know what i’m saying.

No, I’m not being ignorant. I come from a hick area. No one around here is from the south, yet the rock their Confederate flags. Most people (I KNOW) who have them know damn well the underlying connotations the flag represents, and are perfectly fine with it. Most of these people also drive big ‘ol trucks, and have huntin’ and fishin’ decals on there, and most of them probably have a can of Skoal or twelve in their glove compartments. So again, I’ll answer again. It’s niether pride nor bigotry - It’s HILLBILLYISM.

What people from the South don’t realize is that we do the EXACT same shit up here. Except it’s really fucking cold for half of the year. It’s not a “Southern” lifestyle.

But if I’m wrong, please, enlighten me. What does the almighty Confederate flag represent? (If you’re a Southerner, I’m serious. I’m truly interested.) I’d be really surprised to hear that all those folks are truly proud of losing a war in which they defended slavery.

In the South it is commonly understood that there is some racist connotation to the more current use of that symbol. I am not sure why people try to deny this or act like it doesn’t matter.

No, most black people today don’t give a shit and it will take more than that to piss someone off…

Commonly understood by who? People of like mindedness? You state that people act like it does not matter, and then go on to say how to black people it indeed does not matter. So if it does not matter to anyone then it should be good to go.

And once again, the civil war was not fought over slavery. Attaching the flag to this issue is a stupid stereotype, one where you will be able to find and support your dislike for it. Much like a black kid wearing a shirt with a big “X” on it. Wouldn’t it be stereotypical of me to assume he hates whites and partakes in militant Islam?

[/quote]

Just because the civil war wasn’t fought over slavery (or at least predominately with the goal of liberation as a moral imperative) doesn’t mean that the Confederte flag hasn’t been used as a racist symbol and to subjugate blacks in the 150+ years since then. To a very large extent it has.

Back at my college, KA hung confederate flags off their house and pointed a canon at the black frat. Just “coincidentally,” it was the annivesary of Grant’s surrender when they did this. They were kicked off campus. Now, of course many don’t use the Confederate flag in this manner and may simply be expressing pride in Southern heritage, but it certainly has thse conotations. And that is because of the way it has been used and celebrated by many.

I also wonder how it is an appropriate symbol of pride in Southern heritage in the any case. Just what is it celebrating? A government that does not exist? Secession? The disolution of the Union?

83

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Gregus wrote:

And once again, the civil war was not fought over slavery. Attaching the flag to this issue is a stupid stereotype, one where you will be able to find and support your dislike for it.

This is unequivocally wrong, and a product of revisionist history. The Civil War was absolutely over slavery, and would have never occurred had slavery not existed.

On top of this, something like 618,000 Americans died during the conflict; 250,000 of these were Southerners who died in a vain attempt to preserve a way of life. For many of them, that flag was the last thing they saw before they died.

To say that there is not “an issue” attached to the flag and what it represents is recklessly ignorant. [/quote]

This is wrong and significantly oversimplies things. Slavery certainly was an issue. But the North did NOT decide to fight the civil war as a moral imperative to liberate the slaves. The civil war was fought over a funadmental schism in North/South and their values. It was about the future of the Union and its make up. It was about States Rights and the Union as a whole. It was about whose vision of America would prevail in the Western states. Slavery was a big issue but only one issue, and it sparked the kind of moral outrage that it does today in few Northerners.

84

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Southerners then and now but especially then had a distinct culture even aside from slavery. That culture and mindset trumpeted that Massachusetts had no business telling Mississippi how to run their lives.

Mississippi said, “Massachusetts, we aint a-botherin you so you need not bother us.”

Massachusetts responded with, “We know what’s best for Mississippi and we intend to make it so.”

And the fight was on.

As I said, slavery was surely part of the mix but no matter how much Irish and others preach it, it was not the reason for the war. It was the tension of more populous states “bossin’ around” their redneck cousins and the cousins simply saying, “Enough is enough. Get lost! We can sail this ship without you.”[/quote]

This is true. The South did not like how the North attempting to dictate certain aspects of life. Slavery was one. And BOTH the South and North had their own ideas of what the newly forming Western states should look like. Neither side liked the other’s ideas.

85

Well, I have known many black people to carry/have the Rebel Flag. I have seen people from Ying Yang Twins, black judges in the South, to the hood-rats on the basketball court.

I understand the connotations of the Flag, and I understand the (general) view points of the classes in the North and South. Visiting the North and looking at the demographics of the different major cities, suburbs, and rural areas for land development, then comparing it to the cities of the South. The North is more segregated then the South. Yet, they are the one portraying we are the racist bunch of the group.

Second, I understand there will always be bad apples and followers of the bad apples in groups. However, that does not mean the ones that actually appreciate what the Rebel Flag stood for are the bad people.

The Rebel flag is not offensive to me, it is a symbol of pride from my ancestors fighting in the war. It is also a symbol of my political beliefs, states rights, no taxation, etc. I have to side with General Lee and say I wish we would have not have had the fight for independence. I also side with Lee and other prominent people from the South that thought slavery was not right, but it was crucial to economy as a whole (the whole America). I do wish we could go back to a time when we had states rights before the Civil War, but I do not think we should include slavery. I do not have a rebel flag belt buckle, I do collect rebel flags from history, and have one bolted onto my truck (yes it’s big ol’ 4x4 truck). But I also collect journals, guns, maps, portraits of generals, and other Civil War timed era stuff.

Picture above, black people with Confederate Flags.

86

[quote]jsbrook wrote:

This is wrong and significantly oversimplies things. Slavery certainly was an issue. But the North did NOT decide to fight the civil war as a moral imperative to liberate the slaves. The civil war was fought over a funadmental schism in North/South and their values. It was about the future of the Union and its make up. It was about States Rights and the Union as a whole. It was about whose vision of America would prevail in the Western states. Slavery was a big issue but only one issue, and it sparked the kind of moral outrage that it does today in few Northerners. [/quote]

You’re full of shit.

Without slavery, there would have been no Civil War. Anyone who says any differently is absolutely lying to themselves.

That state’s rights bullshit is what southerners who don’t want to own up to the past claim. Nothing more.

87

No one is stupid enough not to realize the racist connotations of displaying the flag. That’s one of the reasons it excites people to do it - it’s dangerous, it’s rebellious, it says “fuck you” to all the PC police who associate it with racism, etc. etc. etc.

People do it precisely to provoke the type of argument/discussion going on here, so that they can accuse the people who it offends of being overly sensitive, politically correct, blah blah blah.

It’s just a dumb, childish game.

88

[quote]jacross wrote:
I think the US Civil War was more complex than most people pretend it was. I’m not going to go as far as to suggest that slavery was not an issue but (especially to a foreigner like me) it seems that the prevailing attitude is that slavery was the only issue. I’m reminded of that scene from the episode of The Simpsons where Apu attempts to get his US Citizenship:

Proctor: All right, here’s your last question. What was the cause of
the Civil War?
Apu: Actually, there were numerous causes. Aside from the obvious
schism between the abolitionists and the anti-abolitionists,
there were economic factors, both domestic and inter–
Proctor: … just say slavery.
Apu: Slavery it is, sir.

There’s no doubt that the ‘North’ which had the political votes places very punitive taxes on the ‘South’ prior to secession. In addition, the whole ‘we love slaves’ myth of the Union doesn’t accord with reality in my poinion but as they say history is written by the victor.

So I don’t know, it’s a tough issue. You certainly can’t deny that to many people it is a symbol of oppression and slavery, to others it is a symbol of defiance against oppression and slavery, and the right to secede.

In Australia it is more a symbol of the Rebels Motorcycle Club, one of our bikie gangs.

I have Confederate Flag dog tags which I bought simply because I thought it was funny that a tacky jewellery store in Australia with a clear demographic of teen girls, would carry such a thing.

Sooo, yeah I guess after all that all I can say is ‘I dunno’.[/quote]

I’d agree with you. i didn’t live then and I can’t say what it was. But I do know that freeing the slaves gave the industrial north pull over the agricultural south.

It’s easy to do the “right” thing when you might benefit economically. So I can see it as a source of southern pride. but I can also see white a black person can be or might be offended.

89

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Surely the racists aspects of the confederate flag are balanced out by the pure awsomeness of the General Lee?

V

You’d be surprised. That show did more to erase the negative connotation of that flag than many realize. My grandmother LOVED that show…and she also understood how that flag had been used by many as some sort of racist statement.

The bottom line is, it used to mean much more as far as racial relations. Today, it means far less but people should understand what it may still mean to some people.[/quote]

Also well said.

90

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
Makavali wrote:
kaaleppi wrote:
Makavali wrote:
kaaleppi wrote:
In this part of the world, the confederate flag stands for rockabilly, southern rock, southern comfort, american cars, and a rebellious attitude. It has nothing to do with race relations.

In India, the swastika has nothing to do with Nazis.

Should I set up a flag outside my house with a Swastika on it?

If you have a heap of cowdung on your head and sit immobile for hours nobody will notice. They’ll just say ‘aahh, a hindu’ and nod understandingly. <:)
Is the confederate flag a symbol for slavery in NZ?

You’d think they would, but they don’t. Also, my being from NZ doesn’t make the point any less valid, and I wish you people would stop beating that dead horse.

What? Sorry Makavali, I don’t know what or whom you are debating here. I’ll rephrase, in this part of the world (Finland, Sweden, Denmark), the confederate flag stands for rockabilly, southern rock, southern comfort, american cars, and a rebellious attitude. It has practically nothing to do with race relations.
So, you don’t believe it?[/quote]

I’ll break it down.

  1. In India, the swastika is a holy symbol. Even so, I know that Indians tone down and even avoid using the swastika around people who might be offended (i.e. people who aren’t Hindu). I am using this as an example of a symbol that has positive and negative meaning, but is still kept “out of the way” to avoid offending people.

  2. “Is the confederate flag a symbol for slavery in NZ?” When yo write this, you imply that the view I hold is not valid, simply for the country I live in. I am also pointing out that this is not so, and it’s a pretty lame excuse to avoid real discussion.

92

I’m reading Joseph Ellis’ “Founding Brothers” now… He seems pretty convinced slavery was “the” issue and his third chapter is all about it. Here are some excerpts:

“The most tangible and enduring antislavery effects of the revolutionary mentality occured in the northern states during and immediately after the war. Vermont (1777) and New Hampshire (1779) made slavery illegal in their state constitutions. Massachusettsdeclaired it unconstitutional in a state Supreme Courrt decision (1783), Pennsylvania (1780) and Rhode Island *1784) followed suit with a grandual emancipation plan…defenders of slavery in the northern states were clearly fighting a losing battle; abolition in the North was more a question of when than whether.” pg 89.

"the depth and apparent intractability of the problem [slavery] became much clearer during the debates surrounding the drafting oand ratification of the Constitution. Although the final draft of the document was conspicuously silent on slavery, the subect itself haunted the closed-door debates. No less a source than Madison believed that slavery was the central cause of the most elemental division in the Constitutional Convetion: “the States were divided into different interests not by their difference of size,” Madison observed, “but principally from their having or not having slaves.” Pg 91

Pierce Butler and John Rutledge of South Carolina…[their] implicit but unmistakably clear message, which became the trump card played…by the sessionists in 1861, was the threat to leave the union if the federal government ever attempted to implement a national emancipation policy. pg 93

There’s a lot more, but I’m tired of typing now… a good read if anyone cares to pick 'er up.

93

[quote]pushharder wrote:
There was a host of issues involved and slavery was surely one of the most vital but it had an awful lot to do with testing the notion (which is not addressed in the Constitution) that despite the fact that a State had a freewill choice to join the Union it had no such right to withdraw.

[/quote]

I do not look at these as separate issues though. It was more that slavery led to the issue of the “right” of secession being forced- without slavery as the sparks on the powder keg, the situation would not have gotten as brutally serious as it did.

Say what you will about the tariffs, but if the South truly had deep reservations about them, they would have seceded then. It was no coincidence that they seceded after the election of a president from a new party which drew all of the most prominent abolitionists.

95

[quote]Makavali wrote:

I’ll break it down.

  1. In India, the swastika is a holy symbol. Even so, I know that Indians tone down and even avoid using the swastika around people who might be offended (i.e. people who aren’t Hindu). I am using this as an example of a symbol that has positive and negative meaning, but is still kept “out of the way” to avoid offending people.

  2. “Is the confederate flag a symbol for slavery in NZ?” When yo write this, you imply that the view I hold is not valid, simply for the country I live in. I am also pointing out that this is not so, and it’s a pretty lame excuse to avoid real discussion.[/quote]

In this part of the world (still here), if you want to make a racist statment you are much more successfull when you use the swastika, or better still the finnish, swedish or danish flag on your sleeve. That’s a racist statement. I don’t think many people think about racism when they see the confederate flag (I don’t), it’s mainly an emblem for a subculture.
But the confederate flag has strong racist connotations in NZ, then?

96

Wait…four fucking pages just so people can admit that slavery/economy was the largest issue behind what led the South to war?..and that this is why the Confederate flag may still be seen by some as racist because of that?

Really?

I mean…REALLY?

97

[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
I don’t think many people think about racism when they see the confederate flag[/quote]

Then you’d be wrong.

Old and tired line.

98

[quote]Makavali wrote:
kaaleppi wrote:
I don’t think many people think about racism when they see the confederate flag

Then you’d be wrong.

But the confederate flag has strong racist connotations in NZ, then?

Old and tired line.

[/quote]

Big Boss wrote earlier in this thread:

“Another perspective is that some peoplev iew the flag as simply a symbol of rebellion. My wife even has told me that people waved the Confederate flag when the Berlin wall was being torn down. I’ve seen pictures of freedom fighters in Africa waving the flag as well.”

That spurred me to comment. I think it is true that outside of the US that flag is more a sign of rebellion than slavery. Now, you seem to want this to be a discussion about right and wrong, so if you are are right and I am wrong, then those people waving the flag on the Berlin wall were actually giving a resounding yes for slavery?

99

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Wait…four fucking pages just so people can admit that slavery/economy was the largest issue behind what led the South to war?..and that this is why the Confederate flag may still be seen by some as racist because of that?

Really?

I mean…REALLY?
[/quote]

Why would slavery lead the South to war?

First, they did not go to war as such and second their economy that depended heavily on slave labor was in no danger from the Norths politics.

But their way of life included slavery and yes the flag may still seem racist to a lot of people.

100

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I’m reading Joseph Ellis’ “Founding Brothers” now… He seems pretty convinced slavery was “the” issue and his third chapter is all about it. Here are some excerpts:

“The most tangible and enduring antislavery effects of the revolutionary mentality occured in the northern states during and immediately after the war. Vermont (1777) and New Hampshire (1779) made slavery illegal in their state constitutions. Massachusettsdeclaired it unconstitutional in a state Supreme Courrt decision (1783), Pennsylvania (1780) and Rhode Island *1784) followed suit with a grandual emancipation plan…defenders of slavery in the northern states were clearly fighting a losing battle; abolition in the North was more a question of when than whether.” pg 89.

"the depth and apparent intractability of the problem [slavery] became much clearer during the debates surrounding the drafting oand ratification of the Constitution. Although the final draft of the document was conspicuously silent on slavery, the subect itself haunted the closed-door debates. No less a source than Madison believed that slavery was the central cause of the most elemental division in the Constitutional Convetion: “the States were divided into different interests not by their difference of size,” Madison observed, “but principally from their having or not having slaves.” Pg 91

Pierce Butler and John Rutledge of South Carolina…[their] implicit but unmistakably clear message, which became the trump card played…by the sessionists in 1861, was the threat to leave the union if the federal government ever attempted to implement a national emancipation policy. pg 93

There’s a lot more, but I’m tired of typing now… a good read if anyone cares to pick 'er up.[/quote]

Sorry but the whole argument about slavery being a main issue in the war is horseshit. Most northern states had laws forbidding black people from moving in. Whites in the North hated and feared black people WAY more than people in the South. Illinois forbade blacks moving in and wanted to expel those already there!

Very very few white men in the North would fight and die to eradicate slavery. Desertions shot up by the tens of thousands after Lincoln began chanting about ending slavery. They were fighting to preserve the Union and didn’t give a rat’s ass about slavery. The draft and the draft riots (along with lynching of as many blacks as possible) came about when Lincoln began speaking about how noble it was to fight to eradicate slavery.

The North was far more racist than the South and you expect them to die fighting slavery?

(BTW: 2 of my great-uncles participated in the burning of Atlanta. One of them bought a farm in Illinois with the stuff he ‘liberated’ from slavery. LMAO!)