Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"One" is an insufficient basis on which to conceptually equate two things. One apple, one orange. Both "one," but still totally different fruit.
What happened in SF is very bad. I live in this area, and I don't condone or excuse it. The guy should be held responsible, and I don't like whatever sanctuary nonsense allowed him to come here and stick around.
But that doesn't change the fact that the confederate flag is inextricably and indelibly a symbol of white supremacy - always was and always will be. As such, it should not be supported on public land (but privately, people of course have the right to fly whatever flag and subscribe to whatever philosophy they want).
There is no reason why these two opinions on these two topics cannot both stand as valid at the same time; one does not invalidate the other.
Actually no, it wasn't always a symbol of white supremacy. But they have adopted it as their symbol in the last few decades.
It was a battle flag during the civil war, which you know. It had nothing to do with white supremacists.
Yes, a battle flag of the people fighting for a societal view that was foundational tied to white supremacy and, consequently, slavery. Ergo, it is inextricably linked with the philosophy white supremacy; it is not by happenstance that it somehow "evolved" so years later. That's not to say that slavery was the sole thing for which they were fighting, but this whole whitewashing notion you hear from conservatives that slavery was not at all part of the civil war equation is a bunch of hogwash.
The US flag was also witness to white supremacist actions, but at least we as a people under that flag eventually parted with that philosophy. That battle flag, on the other hand, was the flag of those who were not going to part with it. That's the major difference.
Yes, a battle flag of the people fighting for a societal view that was foundational tied to white supremacy and, consequently, slavery. Ergo, it is inextricably linked with the philosophy white supremacy; it is not by happenstance that it somehow "evolved" so years later. That's not to say that slavery was the sole thing for which they were fighting, but this whole whitewashing notion you hear from conservatives that slavery was not at all part of the civil war equation is a bunch of hogwash.
The US flag was also witness to white supremacist actions, but at least we as a people under that flag eventually parted with that philosophy. That battle flag, on the other hand, was the flag of those who were not going to part with it. That's the major difference.
The civil war was not all about slavery. Many who fought in that war didn't even own slaves. Sorry, the flag was not tied to white supremacy. It is unfortunately now.
The civil war was not all about slavery. Many who fought in that war didn't even own slaves. Sorry, the flag was not tied to white supremacy. It is unfortunately now.
Yeah, that's the whitewashed conservative rhetoric that is very popular nowadays. Many now like to say that slavery basically had nothing to do with it, which is, of course, bull****. Many of these types also spread stories about how slavery was actually benevolent and actually better for black people and so on... I've heard it all on here.
Not that slavery was the sole reason for going to war, but it was a fundamental part of the Southern societal identity and economic system, and so it was inevitably a significant factor in the conflict. They can couch it as "states' rights," but we're talking about rights to do things like maintain a system that profits off of slavery. There is no getting around the fact that the South was very much pro-slavery, and in my opinion, you really can't separate the confederate flag from its core societal underpinnings.
Conservative flag? Manslaughter, are you kidding? First degree, premediated murder is not manslaughter. Project much?
That was a mistype that I realized too late. I meant confederate but Swype went silly. As for the shooting, are you sure it was premeditated murder? All reports as of right now is that it was at most murder 2 or likely man-1'
Yeah, that's the whitewashed conservative rhetoric that is very popular nowadays. Many now like to say that slavery basically had nothing to do with it, which is, of course, bull****.
Time for a quick history lesson:
Robert E. Lee, Colonel, US Army, was in command of the Federal forces at Harpers Ferry. At the outbreak of the War of Northern Aggression, Abraham Lincoln offered the command of ALL US forces to Lee. Abe looked over EVERY Army general. Lee refused and resigned his commission. Jefferson Davis made the same offer for the Confederacy (interesting because there was NEVER a Confederate army). Now why is this important, because Lee believed in states rights. Lee became the Commander of the Army of Northern Virginia. Yankee historians are unable to comprehend the difference between that army and the non-existent Confederate Army. It is also significant to note, most of the soldiers in the various Confederate State Armies did not own slaves. They were fighting for the different types of national government ... federalism and confederation. Ask yourself this question, why would some poor farm kid want to die so some rich landowner could keep his slaves?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
Many of these types also spread stories about how slavery was actually benevolent and actually better for black people and so on... I've heard it all on here.
While I will never make the phony claim that "slavery was actually benevolent", I will say that you need to remember who the initial slaves were who came to this country were, and who made them slaves in the first place. The slaves who originally came were THE LOSERS in the multiple tribal wars in Africa. The black winners made the black losers slaves and sold them. "Better" is a relative term ... which is better life as a slave or death?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
Not that slavery was the sole reason for going to war, but it was a fundamental part of the Southern societal identity and economic system, and so it was inevitably a significant factor in the conflict.
True ... but the black revisionist historians try to make the idiotic claim that it was the SOLE reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
They can couch it as "states' rights," but we're talking about rights to do things like maintain a system that profits off of slavery.
Ever read the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
There is no getting around the fact that the South was very much pro-slavery
True. BTW, who built New York City? What did northern winters have to do with the lack of interest in keeping slaves?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
in my opinion, you really can't separate the confederate flag from its core societal underpinnings.
This is just like a discussion about religion ... when you reach the point of I BELIEVE the discussion is over and we are at that point.
I find it amazing that Dems and Libs (as if there's a difference) get their underwear tied up in knots because of one picture with him with the Confederate battle flag, yet they rationalize away the murder of a lady in SF by saying "it was only once".
El Nox
Don't expect anything rational from the leftists. It's all about emotion with them because it's all they have to sway the masses of the ignorant.
Robert E. Lee, Colonel, US Army, was in command of the Federal forces at Harpers Ferry. At the outbreak of the War of Northern Aggression, Abraham Lincoln offered the command of ALL US forces to Lee. Abe looked over EVERY Army general. Lee refused and resigned his commission. Jefferson Davis made the same offer for the Confederacy (interesting because there was NEVER a Confederate army). Now why is this important, because Lee believed in states rights. Lee became the Commander of the Army of Northern Virginia. Yankee historians are unable to comprehend the difference between that army and the non-existent Confederate Army. It is also significant to note, most of the soldiers in the various Confederate State Armies did not own slaves. They were fighting for the different types of national government ... federalism and confederation. Ask yourself this question, why would some poor farm kid want to die so some rich landowner could keep his slaves?
Poor kids have always been fighting for the rich in every war since man stopped swinging from trees; it does not say much about the drivers of a war. But anyway... Yes, people fought for many reasons other than just slavery. Does not change that slavery was an indelible part of Southern identity that was absolutely on the table as one of the largest drivers of the war. Doesn't change that the confederate flag has been one of the most indelible representations of white supremacy since that time. Since we're talking about a history lesson, we can go one by one through every state's secessionist statement, if you want...
Quote:
“The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us, the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the ‘rock upon which the old Union would split.’ He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact.
“[Our] 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.”
--Alexander Stevens, Vice President of the Confederacy
Here's just one of the statements...
Quote:
Our 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. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.
--Mississippi Declaration of Secession
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Nox
While I will never make the phony claim that "slavery was actually benevolent", I will say that you need to remember who the initial slaves were who came to this country were, and who made them slaves in the first place. The slaves who originally came were THE LOSERS in the multiple tribal wars in Africa. The black winners made the black losers slaves and sold them. "Better" is a relative term ... which is better life as a slave or death?
The real question is: which is right and defendable? The answer is: neither.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Nox
Ever read the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution?
The real point is that the issue of states' rights and slavery was inseparable: the right to buy and sell black humans was one of the biggest rights they were seeking to protect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Nox
This is just like a discussion about religion ... when you reach the point of I BELIEVE the discussion is over and we are at that point.
Ok, well, you just stated your BELIEF on the discussion... so I guess that makes you no better than me in that regard and you just ended your own thread.
Last edited by ambient; 07-12-2015 at 10:14 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
