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.
I think there is a difference between recognizing/studying something and celebrating it. I think people are mostly disagreeing on whether or not it is something that should be celebrated.
Hmm, ok, I get your point. I just don't agree. You have Kwaanza, Yom Kippur, Ramadan (granted these are religious holidays/celebrations) Cinco de Mayo, MLK Day, Columbus Day, etc. Why isn't there a let's say, Robert E Lee Day or Ulysses Grant Day? Actually, people would probably be ok with Ulysses since he was a Union General but if it was REL, hell no, he was from the south. No way that can happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlGreen
Black History Month isn't "ours", it's everybody's.
I understand these are for everyone. But still....why isn't there a White History Month? Heaven forbid!!!
Hmm, ok, I get your point. I just don't agree. You have Kwaanza, Yom Kippur, Ramadan (granted these are religious holidays/celebrations) Cinco de Mayo, MLK Day, Columbus Day, etc. Why isn't there a let's say, Robert E Lee Day or Ulysses Grant Day? Actually, people would probably be ok with Ulysses since he was a Union General but if it was REL, hell no, he was from the south. No way that can happen.
I understand these are for everyone. But still....why isn't there a White History Month? Heaven forbid!!!
I don't quite understand your point. Columbus was a European. It's a holiday because he discovered America (although he just rediscovered it and brought Europe's attention to it).
I don't see how Kwaanza, Yom Kippur, and Ramadan are different from Christmas, Easter, and Thanksgiving. We have Memorial Day and Veterans' Day to honor those who fought and died in wars.
Presidents' Day is meant to honor all presidents, but mostly George Washington and Lincoln. Why not have an MLK Day? Was he not an important person in American history?
Cinco de Mayo is a Mexican holiday commemorating a Mexican battle. Since this area has a lot of people of Mexican descent, they celebrate it. It's not much different from St. Patrick's Day.
There is no need for a white history month. Whites are discussed all throughout history all year. How much time did you spend in school on Hispanic, black, and Native American figures? Black history month came from black history week which was started at a time when the contributions of black people were not discussed in classrooms.
I don't quite understand your point. Columbus was a European. It's a holiday because he discovered America (although he just rediscovered it and brought Europe's attention to it).
I don't see how Kwaanza, Yom Kippur, and Ramadan are different from Christmas, Easter, and Thanksgiving. We have Memorial Day and Veterans' Day to honor those who fought and died in wars.
Presidents' Day is meant to honor all presidents, but mostly George Washington and Lincoln. Why not have an MLK Day? Was he not an important person in American history?
Cinco de Mayo is a Mexican holiday commemorating a Mexican battle. Since this area has a lot of people of Mexican descent, they celebrate it. It's not much different from St. Patrick's Day.
There is no need for a white history month. Whites are discussed all throughout history all year. How much time did you spend in school on Hispanic, black, and Native American figures? Black history month came from black history week which was started at a time when the contributions of black people were not discussed in classrooms.
My point is, people should be able to celebrate what they want. If people want to celebrate Confederate History and Heritage Month, let them.
Yeahhhhh,
let's celebrate the people that took arms against US soldiers and didn't want to be part of the US.
I think this is an over-generalisation and over-simplification. In terms of the Southern politicians who led the secessionist movement and Confederate government, I do indeed consider them to have been traitors to their rightful country, the United States of America. They were self-interested demagogues who represented the interests of a slave labour dependent agri-business economic class. The common people were a sacrifice to the class interests of the people who led the secession. I submit, therefore, that far from being a "war of Northern aggression", it was really a war of Southern class exploitation -- with, of course, African-American chattel at the very bottom of the class exploitation system. Ordinary white Southerners - the majority of whom did not hold persons in slave-bondage - were caught up in the situation for a whole host of understandable reasons, but really they were at the mercy of wolves like Jefferson Davis and Alexander Stephens and the wealthy, slave-owning class whose interests such politicians aimed to advance.
Now this is where I am going to call you, my friend. I hear this canard constantly repeated without those who repeat it furnishing the slightest bit of evidence it is so. There may have been more recent ones, but here is the latest Gallup poll on the subject that I can find. As you can see, a clear majority of the respondents saw the CF as representative of Southern history and pride, not racism
Well, you've got me there. I worded that poorly. Still, I have to wonder what that percentage is today. Seeing as how the percentage of Americans who associate the flag with southern pride as opposed to racism fell 10 percentage points from 69% to 59% in the course of 8 years from 1992 to 2000, I wish they'd do a similar poll today. I usually take the "who cares what other people think" approach to Texas life, but not on this topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Name one symbol in American history that is not shrouded in racism if that is all one wants to focus on...?
It's hardly what I spend my days thinking about, but I acknowledge it's a reality. Name one symbol in American history more Americans assocaite with racism? I can't think of one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Should it fly as part of the Six Flags over Texas display at the state capitol building? Or that of the Texas Tourist Bureau? Or any other Texas states grounds where it is displayed?
In a historical context with the other five flags which have flown over our state? Fine by me.
Well, you've got me there. I worded that poorly. Still, I have to wonder what that percentage is today. Seeing as how the percentage of Americans who associate the flag with southern pride as opposed to racism fell 10 percentage points from 69% to 59% in the course of 8 years from 1992 to 2000, I wish they'd do a similar poll today. I usually take the "who cares what other people think" approach to Texas life, but not on this topic.
That would be interesting to see, I agree. Personally, I would not be surprised to see the numbers even higher in touting Southern heritage as I think a lot of people are getting sick and tired of everything being about race.
Quote:
It's hardly what I spend my days thinking about, but I acknowledge it's a reality. Name one symbol in American history more Americans assocaite with racism? I can't think of one.
The squeak wheel gets the grease, so the Confederate Flag is very high profile. But I wasn't making a comparative statement as to which stacks up against what so much as there is no symbol in American history that does not have an association with "racism" (whatever one means by that...and often the answer is anything one wants it to!) if one wants to look for it and focus on it.
Some hispanics consider the Alamo and the Texas flag to be symbols of imperialism and land-stealing. Ditto with some Native-Americans and the American Flag and memorials to Custer. The biggest difference is the Americans and Texans won their/our war for indepenence, whereas the CSA lost. And to the victors go the spoils...and the right to pen the history! LOL
Quote:
In a historical context with the other five flags which have flown over our state? Fine by me.
As it was, the whole thing was in an historical context and had the media brought that out, doubtful most people would have known or cared one way or another. But anyway, if my opinion had meant anything, I would have agreed to a seperate, nearby, historical display honoring Confederate History Month. That seems a reasonable compromise...
I think this is an over-generalisation and over-simplification. In terms of the Southern politicians who led the secessionist movement and Confederate government, I do indeed consider them to have been traitors to their rightful country, the United States of America. They were self-interested demagogues who represented the interests of a slave labour dependent agri-business economic class. The common people were a sacrifice to the class interests of the people who led the secession. I submit, therefore, that far from being a "war of Northern aggression", it was really a war of Southern class exploitation -- with, of course, African-American chattel at the very bottom of the class exploitation system. Ordinary white Southerners - the majority of whom did not hold persons in slave-bondage - were caught up in the situation for a whole host of understandable reasons, but really they were at the mercy of wolves like Jefferson Davis and Alexander Stephens and the wealthy, slave-owning class whose interests such politicians aimed to advance.
Just to say DocJ, I know you pretty much take a class-warfare viewpoint and interpretation of history and nothing wrong with that. I am sure however, you would acknowledge that such works both ways, and that Northern commercial and industrial interests were every bit as manipulative and self-interested as the Southern planter class. Here is a fairly recent book on the topic (although I haven't had a chance to read it myself): Here is a column about it by the author, however:
Anyway, without getting deeply into that, the real thing I wanted to address briefly is "traitor" aspect. Even the northern powers of the day admitted as such after the arrest of Jefferson Davis on that very charge. While Davis' lawyers pressed for a trial, northern leaders became increasingly reluctant to procede, and later pretty much said they feared what would happen if Davis were allowed to give the Southern side of the war and the secession question in open court. To save face, a pardon was issued, but the words of Chief Justice Salmon Chase to Sec. of War Edwin Stanton (in a letter) are telling (Burke Davis cites this in his book The Long Surrender):
"If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not rebellion...His (Jeff Davis') capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason. Secession is settled, let it stay settled."
And then again on page 214, he notes that a certain Judge Franz Leiber, told a Congressional Committee: "After studying more than 270,000 Confederate documents, seeking evidence against Davis, the court discouraged the War Department: 'Davis will be found not guilty and we shall stand there completely beaten'."
Anyway, naturally we are all free to advance personal defintions of treason and traitor, but I submit that the above is very relevent. Too, it is important to note that the CSA had no desire to alter nor overthrow the U.S. goverment. They only defended themselves when invaded, which any people would do if attacked. Along those lines as well, the Confederates did not wish to seperate themselves from the principles of the Old Union and the American Revolution (this shows in their constitution and even orginal national flag...the Stars and Bars), but only from northern states who continued to operate under the name United States only by default. Really, in a sense, it was less CSA against USA as it was American southern states against American northern states...
Hmm, ok, I get your point. I just don't agree. You have Kwaanza, Yom Kippur, Ramadan (granted these are religious holidays/celebrations) Cinco de Mayo, MLK Day, Columbus Day, etc. Why isn't there a let's say, Robert E Lee Day or Ulysses Grant Day? Actually, people would probably be ok with Ulysses since he was a Union General but if it was REL, hell no, he was from the south. No way that can happen.
I understand these are for everyone. But still....why isn't there a White History Month? Heaven forbid!!!
Simple. "White History" has never been marginalized and overlooked the way Black History has.
TexasReb, we shall have to agree to disagree on the nature of secession. I accept Lincoln's constitutional arguments which revolve around the establishment of a Union defined as "perpetual" by the Articles of Confederation, with the subsequent Constitution implicitly accepting the perpetual nature of the Union and aiming to "form a more perfect Union". Clearly by that Constitution the several states are subservient to the federal government, whose laws prevail in the case of any conflict between state and federal law (thus rendering the idea of nullification a complete legal fiction). The states maintain only a limited sovereignty under the Constitution. The Union, per Lincoln, is a consumated contract whose term of duration is perpetual.
You are, of course, absolutely correct that motivations on both sides have to be subjected to economic class analysis.
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.
I hear this canard constantly repeated without those who repeat it furnishing the slightest bit of evidence it is so. There may have been more recent ones, but here is the latest Gallup poll on the subject that I can find. As you can see, a clear majority of the respondents saw the CF as representative of Southern history and pride, not racism
