Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

What thoughts go thru your head when you see the Confederate flag?


Thanos

Recommended Posts

:laugh:

I had the same thought. I picture Predicto wearing a beret with a black t shirt and black slacks sipping on Republic of Tea while reading the Communist Manifesto. :laugh:

(just kidding Pred, just kidding. Sort of. :) )

LOL.

You guys may not believe this, but I am kind of a moderate - liberal socially and conservative fiscally. I want a smaller and less intrusive government, and the government programs that we do have, I want them to work, not just make us feel good. I value the environment and our civil liberties on principle, and hate the holier-than-thou thought police of both sides. I believe our military should be the best, but also that force should be used wisely and as a last resort. I do care how we are perceived in the rest of the world because it affects us and our future. I supported the invasion of Afganistan.

I voted for Ronald Reagan in 1984 and George Bush Senior in 1988. There are Republicans out there now that I would vote for.

In case you have not noticed, I have never started a thread ridiculing the president or the military or anything. In fact, I don't start anything.

The reason that I seem so lefty on this board is because, honestly, some (not all) of the right wing posters on this board are so aggressive, so misleading, so hostile and so clueless that I feel compelled to respond to their diatribes despite myself. I am amazed that people can be so shallow and so sure of themselves, and how they refuse to even acknowledge the smallest kernel of truth in what others say. It makes me jump to take the opposite side as a matter of principle.

The country has taken a hard right turn in the past 20 years. I don't think I have changed much, but now instead of being a "Rockefeller Republican," I am labelled a "pinko fag-loving traitor." It's sad.

I often oppose the current administration because it basically stands for everything I do not. It is big government, intrusive, hostile to the environment and civil liberties, bought and sold by corporate interests, insanely free spending, secretive, cronyism, deceitful and doubletalking, spinning and labelling your opponents as traitors. It is Tom DeLay.

I hope this clarifies something for some of you. I know some of you stopped at the first line, and what is worse, you are strangely proud of that fact, because I am the Enemy. That too is sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, the war would have still occured even if slavery didn't exist. Slavery was an easy excuse. It would have ended with out the war.

The north and south were virtually two different countries at that time as it was.

That is the popular rhetoric nowadays that is all over the place, mostly in the South.

It is a way to rationalize and justify the South's behavior. I really don't blame Southerners for trying. Hell, I am one.

But sorry, that argument doesn't hold an ounce of water. Show me one issue between the North and South that existed back then, that does not exist today. Guess what? They ARE different countries, even today. Seriously, hang out in Mississippi for a week, then go up to Boston. And states rights? That has ALWAYS been an issue. Always will be. But people don't go to war over it.

Slavery is the only issue that existed then that does not exist today. It is really that simple.

I'm not so much picking on you, as I'm picking on this entire movement by many in the South to re-write history and try and spin the war into something it wasn't. Sure there were other issues, there always are... but make NO mistake, no slavery=no civil war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess what... George Washington and all of our country's forefathers committed treason as well.

Had the south won, they would have been the forefathers of the CSA, but they didn't.

You can spin it all you like, slaver is the elementary school issue when it comes to the Civil War, it was much much deeper and had more to do with 2 different cultures, the North and South. Had the South won, I doubt very seriously that slavery would have continued on much longer.

History is open to interpretation unfortunately...even history is being spun in this day and age which is sad to me...codeorama has a valid point though....slavery was on the way out at the time the Civil War began....it was a small issue in the war which was turned into a large one by Lincoln to help him sell the war. Please don't just go by what you may have learned in 6th grade history. There are many stories, histories, versions of stories, etc. on what happened and why the Civil War was caused. Don't just read the parts you agree with and discount the rest.

By the way, the confederate flag most people fly is the confederate battle flag, not the flag of the CSA.

Also, there is a reason the Civil War is still being talked about and re-fought to this day....slavery is loooong gone and we are better for it, but obviously there are other issues at hand which cause discussion such as this one. In my mind, that just proves that slavery wasn't the only and/or biggest reason for the war.

And to answer the post, I think of a flag when I see it...nothing more nor less...people will take it as they will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL.

You guys may not believe this, but I am kind of a moderate - liberal socially and conservative fiscally. I want a smaller and less intrusive government, and the government programs that we do have, I want them to work, not just make us feel good. I value the environment and our civil liberties on principle, and hate the holier-than-thou thought police of both sides. I believe our military should be the best, but also that force should be used wisely and as a last resort. I do care how we are perceived in the rest of the world because it affects us and our future. I supported the invasion of Afganistan.

I voted for Ronald Reagan in 1984 and George Bush Senior in 1988. There are Republicans out there now that I would vote for.

In case you have not noticed, I have never started a thread ridiculing the president or the military or anything. In fact, I don't start anything.

The reason that I seem so lefty on this board is because, honestly, some (not all) of the right wing posters on this board are so aggressive, so misleading, so hostile and so clueless that I feel compelled to respond to their diatribes despite myself. I am amazed that people can be so shallow and so sure of themselves, and how they refuse to even acknowledge the smallest kernel of truth in what others say. It makes me jump to take the opposite side as a matter of principle.

The country has taken a hard right turn in the past 20 years. I don't think I have changed much, but now instead of being a "Rockefeller Republican," I am labelled a "pinko fag-loving traitor." It's sad.

I often oppose the current administration because it basically stands for everything I do not. It is big government, intrusive, hostile to the environment and civil liberties, bought and sold by corporate interests, insanely free spending, secretive, cronyism, deceitful and doubletalking, spinning and labelling your opponents as traitors. It is Tom DeLay.

I hope this clarifies something for some of you. I know some of you stopped at the first line, and what is worse, you are strangely proud of that fact, because I am the Enemy. That too is sad.

Amen, brother, amen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Code are you telling me that outlawing slavery is economic oppression? So what if only 1% owned slaves? Those 1% were able to convince the rest of their brothers to go fight and die to stop this "economic oppression."

Come on man...

And those 1% accounted for the majority of the wealth and economic interests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If slavery was just an excuse explain the Kansas-Nebraska Act or the Missouri Compromise. Explain why congress was so interested in keeping equal number of free states vs slave states admitted into the union? There was NO OTHER ISSUE included, just slavery. The only condition at the time was that 1 slave for 1 free and they battled it out this way as the US expanded west.

Here's my point, slavery was the most prominant "media headline" type issue. But what was on the surface was what was more important. The south did not want the north to tell them what to do, they felt that the north had a specific way of life and they didn't respect that the south was different. The north wanted to "impose" upon the south and the south fought back.

If it wasn't slavery, it would have been something else.

My great great uncle went to west point, was a prominant figure and actually ended up inventing the anti aircraft cannon, but he never owned slaves. So why did he fight? What about the 95% of people that didn't own slaves? Why did they fight? Because it was their land, their state and they didn't want someone else dictating to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the notion that the people on this continent, slaves in particular, would have been better off had they simply waited for the Southern economy to collapse under the weight of an impractical and immoral method of production is patently insane. To list the extensive reasons why would take up the rest of my work day, and frankly should be obvious to anyone with half a brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the popular rhetoric nowadays that is all over the place, mostly in the South.

It is a way to rationalize and justify the South's behavior. I really don't blame Southerners for trying. Hell, I am one.

But sorry, that argument doesn't hold an ounce of water. Show me one issue between the North and South that existed back then, that does not exist today. Guess what? They ARE different countries, even today. Seriously, hang out in Mississippi for a week, then go up to Boston. And states rights? That has ALWAYS been an issue. Always will be. But people don't go to war over it.

Slavery is the only issue that existed then that does not exist today. It is really that simple.

I'm not so much picking on you, as I'm picking on this entire movement by many in the South to re-write history and try and spin the war into something it wasn't. Sure there were other issues, there always are... but make NO mistake, no slavery=no civil war.

You echo my thoughts exactly, except I always take it a step further and call it a treasanous act

The fact that southern leaders nowadays can be seen as "honorable" is a joke to me. Even Lee, who although was a man of integrity and character, led an army whose goal was to SPLIT the Union for an unjust cause

The cause of the CSA cannot even be compared to the cause of the Colonies a few generations earlier. Maybe the spirit of '76 still lived on in some southern leaders, I don't know, but there cause was not one of freedom or justice it was a cause of states rights to maintain an absurd institution.

The act of seccestion was an act of treason. And the fact that it is not portrayed in that light absolutley baffles me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know that the Civil War's main point was not Slavery, but perceived economic oppression from the North towards the South. I can say that I feel quite proud that my wives' family heritage reaches back to the Civil War (My family imigrated here in the 30's). Her family fought for what they beleived in, which was not slavery. Mind you that only 5% of the people owned slaves and only 1% of the people owned more than 10.

Economic oppression in the from of a ban on slavery. Only 5% owned slaves because most of the people in the south at the time WERE slaves.

I cant say that Civil War history is my wheelhouse, but I do know that the Civil War WAS largely due to the issue of slavery, its outcome was the abolishment of slavery, and the Flag of the Confederacy represents a faction of the people who wanted to CONTINUE slavery. It also was flown over the capitols of the southern states during the Jim Crow era.

It may very well represent other things that this, such as southern pride, etc, but symbols can have multiple meanings. Racism will forever be tied to the rebel flag. If you choose to fly it, go ahead. Just understand that other people around you are going to ASSUME you are a racist, whether you are or not. :2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You echo my thoughts exactly, except I always take it a step further and call it a treasanous act

The fact that southern leaders nowadays can be seen as "honorable" is a joke to me. Even Lee, who although was a man of integrity and character, led an army whose goal was to SPLIT the Union for an unjust cause

The cause of the CSA cannot even be compared to the cause of the Colonies a few generations earlier. Maybe the spirit of '76 still lived on in some southern leaders, I don't know, but there cause was not one of freedom or justice it was a cause of states rights to maintain an absurd institution.

The act of seccestion was an act of treason. And the fact that it is not portrayed in that light absolutley baffles me

I think you missed my point earlier.

Our country was founded by a revolution. Men decided that they were being opressed.

Whether you agree or not, that's how the Southers felt and at that time, they were revolutionaries.

Had they won, history would view them differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The act of seccestion was an act of treason. And the fact that it is not portrayed in that light absolutley baffles me

agreed. Look at the way history has looked upon Benedict Arnold -vs- Robert E. Lee.

Pride is a hell of a thing. Especially when it requires the occassional swallow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my point, slavery was the most prominant "media headline" type issue. But what was on the surface was what was more important. The south did not want the north to tell them what to do, they felt that the north had a specific way of life and they didn't respect that the south was different. The north wanted to "impose" upon the south and the south fought back.

If it wasn't slavery, it would have been something else.

My great great uncle went to west point, was a prominant figure and actually ended up inventing the anti aircraft cannon, but he never owned slaves. So why did he fight? What about the 95% of people that didn't own slaves? Why did they fight? Because it was their land, their state and they didn't want someone else dictating to them.

Code, you say this every time this subject comes up, and every time I post the Delcaration of Causes of the seceding states, which all focus on the North's behaviour regarding slavery and the election of Abraham Lincoln, an anti-slavery President, as the primary reason for secession.

http://americancivilwar.com/documents/causes_south_carolina.html

http://americancivilwar.com/documents/causes_mississippi.html

http://americancivilwar.com/documents/causes_georgia.html

http://americancivilwar.com/documents/causes_texas.html

I tire of reprinting these documents, but I will say that if forced to choose between your interpretation and the written words of the leaders of the South in 1860, I'll believe the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you missed my point earlier.

Our country was founded by a revolution. Men decided that they were being opressed.

Whether you agree or not, that's how the Southers felt and at that time, they were revolutionaries.

Had they won, history would view them differently.

Oh noes! The slave owners were being opressed!!!

Revolutionaries my ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you missed my point earlier.

Our country was founded by a revolution. Men decided that they were being opressed.

Whether you agree or not, that's how the Southers felt and at that time, they were revolutionaries.

Had they won, history would view them differently.

I know what you mean by it, I simply do not view it the same way

They did believe in a cause they thought was worthy enough to die for. There certainly is some honor in that, to risk losing everything you have over a cause you strongly believe in

However I do not think it can be equated to what Washington and Jefferson and the Founding Fathers did. The southern states DID have represenation in Congress, their voices WERE heard, and they COULD elect leaders to represent them

Yet they still took the most reckless and bloody route of splitting the Union for 4 years at the cost of hundreds of thousands of young men, and wrecked the southern economy to this day

To call it anything but an act of treason is laughable in my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

History is open to interpretation unfortunately...even history is being spun in this day and age which is sad to me...codeorama has a valid point though....slavery was on the way out at the time the Civil War began....it was a small issue in the war which was turned into a large one by Lincoln to help him sell the war. Please don't just go by what you may have learned in 6th grade history. There are many stories, histories, versions of stories, etc. on what happened and why the Civil War was caused. Don't just read the parts you agree with and discount the rest.

By the way, the confederate flag most people fly is the confederate battle flag, not the flag of the CSA.

Also, there is a reason the Civil War is still being talked about and re-fought to this day....slavery is loooong gone and we are better for it, but obviously there are other issues at hand which cause discussion such as this one. In my mind, that just proves that slavery wasn't the only and/or biggest reason for the war.

And to answer the post, I think of a flag when I see it...nothing more nor less...people will take it as they will.

What were the other reasons for the war? What are the other issues at hand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Code, you say this every time this subject comes up, and every time I post the Delcaration of Causes of the seceding states, which all focus on the North's behaviour regarding slavery and the election of Abraham Lincoln, an anti-slavery President, as the primary reason for secession.

http://americancivilwar.com/documents/index.html

I tire of reprinting these documents, but I will say that if forced to choose between your interpretation and the written words of the leaders of the South in 1860, I'll believe the latter.

Not sure what's not clear...

Thus were established the two great principles asserted by the Colonies, namely: the right of a State to govern itself; and the right of a people to abolish a Government when it becomes destructive of the ends for which it was instituted. And concurrent with the establishment of these principles, was the fact, that each Colony became and was recognized by the mother Country a FREE, SOVEREIGN AND INDEPENDENT STATE.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm getting a little annoyed with all the people who say "the confederate states committed treason." Of course they did. That's a truism. You aren't saying anything meaningful.

Treason isn't wrong in and of it self. It just means that a country has irreconcilable differences with whoever it is that's committing treason. Treason is only wrong if the the country is right and the traitor is wrong. I think that's the case in the civil war, however, in order to make an argument you have to go futher than calling the south's actions treason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That may be because the army sporting that flag was the most powerful instrument of war ever employed against the United States of America on American soil.

I find the flag offensive, not simply because it represents an Army of a nation that considered slavery the cornerstone of it's existence, but because it also represents the willingness of some Americans to kill other Americans in order to stop being Americans. I would think that any patriotic citizen of this country would find that notion offensive.

Are you kidding? A Redskin fan hasn't heard it from Native American groups? Have you been reading this board over the years? :)

I have never thought of the flag the way you stated Henry and that is a good point. It is strange to see people's different perceptions on this issue. Growing up with it around you all the time you do not realize other people's thoughts on it. That is why I said it seems like more people hate it up here then down south (I DO NOT CONSIDER NOVA THE SOUTH THEIR IS NOT ANY SWEET TEA HERE :D ) It is strange to me. you would be surprised at the supporters of the flag down there. It is ALL races. Not one against the other.

I am not trying to upset anyone. I am trying to learn different oppinons. I always thought of it as perception and that most people hated it because of the way certain people use it.

My great great grandmother was full cherokee indian and my mom's family traces back to being related to "Sitting Bull" I do not find any offense to the Redskin name. once again to me it is history. You do have to admit though you hear more about the Cival War than you do the Indian wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It symbolizes the most shameful memories of our nation.

Nothing makes me more peeved than the "civil war wasn't about slavery" argument.

Sure there were lots of other issues - it was a many-faceted decision to try and secede.

However, lets not forget that all those Southern states DID have slavery. That, by itself, makes them morally repugnant and underserving of any respect or "glory." Slavery, as practiced in the US south, was among the most vile, disgusting, immoral episodes in human history. We, as a people and a culture, should be ashamed and should be doing far more to remember.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what's not clear...

That's a given. I guess I do have to print out this stuff ... again:

South Carolina: "A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery."

Mississippi, the first three sentences:"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course. 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."

And Georgia's first two lines: "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."

And lastly, Texas. Less specific, but here in paragrph three: "[Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time."

Again ... AGAIN Code, these are the actual words of the actual leaders of the secessionists. I don't give a crap that Joe Podunk from South Carolina didn't own a slave when he picked up a rifle. The men he chose to lead him said what they said. Their intentions were abundantly clear. Lincoln didn't write this stuff. He didn't force them to list slavery at the top of their list of grievances. They did that all by themselves.

These words, Code. The ones right above, are the words behind Lee's Army in 1863 when he marched into Pennsylvania and into one of the bloodiest battles in American History. The flag representing that Army does not call up any images of glory or heritage to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...