Does The Confederate Flag Promote Love?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Your quotes do nothing to nullify the quoted portion of my comment that you included in your response, nor does it prove it's a myth—in fact, it bolsters the veracity of my comment.

Show me proof that, to many now (the time of our nation that I referenced in my post), the battle flag is not a symbol of rebelling against federal government overreach. You can point to original charters all you want, but that doesn't mean it reflects the current use the symbol by many who display or use it.

But I don't need to run around in circles on another thread about this...

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Edit: To answer your question, though, I don't think that it promotes love, and it was never meant to: It serves as a reminder about government overreach and what it can lead to, and it should be a constant reminder to the federal government that we'll only take so much before we'll step up and fight back.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. Don't believe me, its all right there in the declarations made by the states when they seceded. Read a few

Georgia's:

The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.

Mississippi's:

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.

...

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

EDIT: oh and let's not forget South Carolina:

Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

Please stop repeating this myth.

DO you know when these were written and by whom each was ?

a reply to: TheRedneck

Our take has not changed. It represents pride in our forefathers, a spirit of independence, a refusal to surrender even in the face of insurmountable odds, a resilient and tenacious refusal to back down from who we are and what we believe. It is our fathers' flag, our brothers' flag, our people's flag.

Everyone always thinks that they are fighting on the side of good. I'm sure that 99.9% of ISIS believes they are fighting on the side of good. It doesn't make a very good narrative to say that they were fighting for the right to keep people in bondage and treat them as cattle to be bought and sold and bred and tortured, murdered and raped and denied basic human dignities to fuel an economy from which they derived absolutely no benefit. There's no nobility in that to fill their descendants with pride.

All you've managed in my opinion is a statement on the power of spin and the need for people to embrace justifications for their actions so they can avoid the guilt and shame.

The secession was over a law that taxed all property at a single rate. That meant 10 acres in New England, heavily industrialied, paid one tenth the tax of 100 acres in Georgia, although the 10 acres made many times the income and was worth many times more. It was an unjust law designed to target the Southern states to take revenue for the Northern states, and multiple attempts to fight this law in Congress were struck down by political means.

Except you're wrong. I can only assume you're referring to the Morrill Tariff. A lot of revisionists point to the Morrill Tariff as "the real cause" but that's BS. For one, it hadn't been enacted yet and had passed the House months before any serious talk of secession started. At that point, the Tariff of 1857 was in effect. The proposed Morrill Tariff became part of the secessionist's list of grievances in some states, but it was never the principle reason.

Secession began with seven states following the election of Lincoln. In fact, if those states hadn't seceded and their senators hadn't resigned, the bill wouldn't have passed Senate on February 20, 1860.

Furthermore, if you're going to try to paint this as an issue of taxation in some misguided attempt to strike that same emotional chord that modern day right-wingers do with the Tea Party, perhaps you would like to address the taxation policies of the Confederacy?

How about the tax-in-kind law? That was an actual 10% tax on all agricultural products, actually imposed on southern farmers, by the Confederate Congress.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I never side I was fighting on the side of "good." That's a oft-used line to try and besmirtch any argument that uses historical facts. I fight on the side of me and mine. I retain the right to be proud of the good was in my forefathers and in my culture, despite any bad that may have existed alongside it. just as I am sure you do.

No man, no culture, no society is perfect. Might I remind you that the Stars and Bars flew over the Trail of Tears? Over the burning of Atlanta? Over the overthrow of the rightful government of Iran to institute Reza Shah? Over the wholesale slaughter of the native occupants? Over numerous other atroicities committed in the name of "right"?

No, the South was not perfect. Neither was the North. But on which side was the first shots fired?

Here's a hint: South Carolina is in the South.

The vast majority of the battles were in the South. The bulk of the destruction was in the South. The only Southern advances happened well into the war, becuase we didn't want to fight. We wanted to be free.

Even after the war ended, the abuses continued... our lands were stolen through the same treachery that caused the war in the first place.

It is ironic that you accuse me of spin. Will you now accuse a certain church in South Carolina of racism against Dylann Roof?

TheRedneck

It's just a piece of cloth. It doesn't promote anything. Anything, good or bad, comes from the people that see it.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Show me proof that, to many now (the time of our nation that I referenced in my post), the battle flag is not a symbol of rebelling against federal government overreach.

To many others (in modern times), it's a persisting symbol of white southerner's willingness to fight and die to form a new country for the purpose of preserving the institution of slavery.

Is that any less valid?

a reply to: deadeyedick

The Confederate Flag represents a lot of things. Love isn't one of them. We are talking about a symbol that represents the bloodiest conflict that Americans have EVER fought. To many, it represents people defending the right to have slaves. And at the very least, it promotes a stark division between the Northern and Southern states of America when we should all be united as one.

a reply to: TheRedneck

You're not telling me anything. I grew up playing in trenches dug in the Stoneman-McCook raid (1864) — literally in a Civil War battlefield right smack in the heart of Dixie. My first bicycle was an orange General Lee (Dukes of Hazzard) themed bike with a plastic confederate flag across the front of the handle bars. All of my K-12 education was in the great state of Georgia. As I've often told my Yankee wife, there ain't much you're going to tell me on the subject that I don't already know.

You can go on and on about the war crimes of Sherman (and ignoring those of the south, Andersonville ring a bell?) and the evil opportunism of carpetbaggers but what does that have to do with the confederate flag flying over government buildings? Do you think it would still be there if the former slaves and their descendants hadn't continued to be oppressed for the next century? Up until 1930, the descendants of African slaves were the majority of the people living in South Carolina for instance.

Why do you think that what YOU think of as a symbol of YOUR heritage is THE heritage and so much so that it should be promoted by state governments?

Using a redundant flag from a time when a divided nation fought an ideologicaly motivated civil war in which many decent young men died on both sides, can cause division in a nations society. Flying the stars and stripes would be a better way to bring americans together in an atmosphere of love and unity for a common cause as that flag does represent the UNITED states of america. Flags can be used as unifiying symbols or sometimes they are used in a devisive way to hijack protests and distract attention away from the cause of the protest.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Let me point out two other things which you've said that are entirely untrue:

The same people, the carpetbaggers, coined the word "redneck," with the connotation of dumb, backward, incestuous evil-doers (in this area) . The N-word was coined about the same time, an aberration of the word "Negro" with, yes, a connotation of hate. There was none other to attack.

"cracker," attested 1830 in a specialized sense ("This may be ascribed to the Red Necks, a name bestowed upon the Presbyterians in Fayetteville" -- Ann Royall, "Southern Tour I," p.148), from red (adj.1) + neck (n.). According to various theories, red perhaps from anger, or from pellagra, but most likely from mule farmers' outdoors labor in the sun, wearing a shirt and straw hat, with the neck exposed. Compare redshanks, old derogatory name for Scots Highlanders and Celtic Irish (1540s), from their going bare-legged.

It turns up again in an American context in 1904, again from Fayetteville, in a list of dialect words, meaning this time "an uncouth countryman" ["Dialect Notes," American Dialect Society, Vol. II, Part VI, 1904], but seems not to have been in widespread use in the U.S. before c. 1915. In the meantime, it was used from c. 1894 in South Africa (translating Dutch Roinek) as an insulting Boer name for "an Englishman."

source

The actual origins of the term probably lies with the Ulster-Scots who immigrated to the US in large numbers throughout the 18th century and settled all over the south. Regardless, it's known to have been in use in the US decades before the Civil War.

The "n-word" (which isn't an exclusively American term either) is known to predate the Civil War by a couple hundred years in various spellings and there are many written examples to attest to this: "negar" in 1619 Virginia, "niggor" in 1689 NY and so on.

However, the now common and pejorative use is attested to in the US at least decades prior to the Civil War in A Treatise on the Intellectual Character and Civil and Political Condition of the Colored People of the United States: and the Prejudice Exercised Towards Them, Hosea Easton, 1837, who said of the word:

"is an opprobrious term, employed to impose contempt upon [blacks] as an inferior race."

There's also sayings like "n----r in the woodpile" and the term "n----r lover" that predate the Civil War (one referring likely to escaped slaves and the other to abolitionists).

Well the rest of the world sees the Confederate flag as a symbol of hate, ranked up alongside the Nazi flag.

Can't help but think that should tell us something about this debate.

Does the South really need a divisive symbol to feel 'proud'?

Is this pride so fragile it needs a piece of silk?

I don't think it is. People don't need flags to feel proud of their heritage.

It's maybe time to let it go.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: kosmicjack

This. And we won't better educate our population to help end racism and bigotry. Instead we just perpetuate divides. A flag is just a thing people can point at, the real issue is inside the people themselves.

Exactly.

And what exactly do we do about the Civil War re-enactors? Are half of them racist? Do we tell them they can no longer partake of their hobby and promote study and understanding of that period of American history, one I don't think anyone should forget?

a reply to: TheRedneck

ah yes, the pride of slave labor....tell me something, how much of a "spirit of independence" do you think southern black people had back then?...how much "Pride of their forefathers" were southern black people able to enjoy back then?...how much "courage, bravery, and tenacity" did southern blacks have back when their own children had to witness their parents being raped, beaten, and lynched up in a tree?..,...maybe you can go down there yourself, and explain to them in person, your love of the confederate flag.

a reply to: theantediluvian

You're absolutely right about the term redneck having come from the hard labor combined with the sun on the back of a stooped-over person's neck. You forgot to include the fact that there is a substantial amount of Indian heritage here too, that sorta accentuates the color (I tend to tan bright red at first before it mellows).

The connotations, the widespread use as a slang derogatory term, came from the situations I mentioned.

It might interest you to know that when I grew up, the "n-word" meant nothing more than "black." It was PC societal engineering that decided that it was purely a derogatory term. All that did was confuse people like me, who were absolutely incredulous that someone could decide for someone else what a word meant. But apparently that is the norm in society today; I hope no one ever decides to tell YOU what YOU mean.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

My uncle grew up in Kansas on a farm and only had a Jr. high education. He used the N word a lot, and simply didn't care what others thought. He grew up with it being the "normal" term for black people, and he wasn't going to pander to the PC crowd. He saw no reason why he shouldn't use the word, since he wasn't using it in a hateful or degrading way. There was no negative energy behind his use of the word.

a reply to: jimmyx



"pride of slave labor"?

No one in my family ever owned a slave, thank you very much. I'm really not sure where you got that....

Oh, wait, yes I do know where you got it!

This guy who calls himself "TheRedneck" has the gall to actually think he should be able to take pride in his family and heritage. How horrible! He thinks differently than I do, so he must be inferior. He must meet all the stereotypes I have ever heard, so I can make judgements about him based solely on the color of his.... oops, sorry... on the place he lives in!

TheRedneck

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Thank you; it's good to hear a little backup. and to be honest, I quit using it before things got bad, because I noticed that it did offend some people... and I had no intention of offending. Later, when it became such a hot-button issue, I almost decided to go back to using it out of spite, but today I'm glad my better judgement prevailed.

The point here is that there are offenses on all sides. Was slavery wrong? Yes, HELL yes! Was there persecution after the Civil War? Absolutely, and it was wrong. But is demanding that a symbol held dear by an entire culture be removed from existance wrong? Yes again. Is judging every individual in a culture based on something that happened over a century and a half ago wrong? Yes.

It's all based on prejudice, so it's all wrong.

My wife and I spent the day together today, as she had an apointment right after my class close to my school. She remarked how nice evryone was, how non-judgemental despite there being so many different nationalities that attend. I realized as she said that that the judgemental attitude that I am in this thread arguing about was nonexistent in that University... it only existed among the rest of society. Maybe that's why I like school so much: I am myself, a redneck raised in the Deep South from an earlier era, yet I can talk to and laugh with people from every corner of the globe and every hue of color. My lead researcher is Russian, the overseeing professor is Serbian, one of my closest frineds is Saudi, and I have had some extrenely interesting conversations with a fellow classmate from Hong Kong (even learned a bit of Mandarin writing). We can talk about cultural differences, compare life views, discuss perceptions, and debate issues without any name-calling or snap judgements.

Walk away from that campus, and I am once again in a world of prejudice and belittlement based on culture, skin color, nationality... people try to decide what I mean even before I utter the words, because they already know how I feel based on a superficial (and usually inaccurate) understanding of who I am.

I said and believed not so very long ago that racism was either dead or dying and that we had finally come to the end of that dark tunnel. But I see now I was wrong. My responses in this thread have been to point out that those screaming about how evil a flag is are doing the exact same thing as Dylann Roof... but I see those references are flying across their heads unheeded.

*sigh*

Perhaps some day we can live life in peace, but I see that day is not yet. I suppose there's too much money to be made and too much power to be weilded from stirring the pot of hatred and making sure all hate the other.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Show me proof that, to many now (the time of our nation that I referenced in my post), the battle flag is not a symbol of rebelling against federal government overreach.

To many others (in modern times), it's a persisting symbol of white southerner's willingness to fight and die to form a new country for the purpose of preserving the institution of slavery.

Is that any less valid?

No, but I'm tired of living in society where we legislate on the basis of hurt feelings--we're all adults, so we should act like it instead of running to the teacher to complain that something they're doing hurt our feelings. I fully understand the "why" behind both sides of the argument, and honestly, I subscribe to both, and I don't own a rebel flag other than on a shirt I wear when woodworking that has the Dukes of Hazzard's General Lee on it.

My point of view is based on my subjective opinion that federal intrusion on state matters is getting worse, not better, and if we remove something that can serve as a reminder of how citizens can and have responded to such overreach before AND serves as a reminder at how terrible racism and human subjugation can be, we do NOTHING--zero, zilch, nadadamnthing--that is positive for the future of our society. It's not the fault of the citizens who proudly wave that flag for the (IMO) right reasons that they get stereotyped out of ignorance, nor that the flag flies by legislation enacted by a democrat in the 60s to either honor the centennial of the Civil War, or in defiance of the civil-rights movement (we all know that there are "official reasons" and then reasons that may be closer to the truth).

In any case, trying to erase anything from history, be it painful or otherwise, negates the truth that we learn from the past and use that to better ourselves.

I don't know about you guys but I turned my flag upside down in protest.
Political correctness has taken things to far.

a reply to: 2giveup

I get it.
It's funny because the confederate flag doesn't have a top or bottom.