What does the confederate flag mean to you?

[b.c.]

*does a flying dive and steals the point before it reaches Bardox's hands*

Don't give him that thing

There've been numerous attempts to get that flag taken down, driven both locally, and nationally, over the years, including very recent years. This isn't something everyone was content with for the past 20 years.

There's so much national attention on it right now because it's clear that something needs to be done, and talking about that flag is a lot easier than talking about gun control, so flag it is.

But just because there may finally be a success in taking it down doesn't mean that it hasn't been a constant sore point and something that people have been trying to take care of (with only limited success) for years.

Perhaps it's best that Bardox be taken with a grain of salt, followed by a large glass of water.

While he fancies himself the voice of cold calculating reason, logic, and rationale (see: fence sitting 101) he makes others out to be radical alarmists who need "calm down" and who (allegedly) believe American society to be more racist than it actually is.

Hence his tact of throwing cold water on issues via semantics, arguments of technicalities, and other diversions such as saying s**** like the flag (in question) couldn't be lowered to half mast because it's fixed to the pole (though I can help but wonder where the f***** did I ever SAY it should), or by arguing that the arrest of Dylann Roof, who was subsequently bought a hamburger, doesn't prove cops treat blacks differently from whites... per SE....

The details behind the flag issue are explored in articles like this, for one, and rather than being considered a diversion from some issue of greater importance as suggested, maybe one should consider it as part of the WHOLE:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...flag-isnt-at-half-mast-after-church-shooting/

 

[424365]

No, it is not a valid question: it is a fallacious question--in two respects: (1) It rests on a false presupposition, namely that raising objections to the public display of the Rebel flag means that such displays bother us more than does the killing of nine black churchgoers in Charleston. (2) "It won't stop the thousands of people dying from gang violence, the black on black crime in Chicago or Detroit, the thousands of homicides that happen yearly to people of all walks of life" is an instance of the "But what about . . . ?" strategy--a technique of distraction that is useful when one is on the losing side of an argument.

I disagree, it broadens the scope of the situation to me at least. Any loss of life is unfortunate but to be up in arms over 7 but not 1000's is a bit selective don't you think? A flag won't stop people from killing each other. Why not focus on educating the people instead of addressing inanimate objects?

 

[slurper_la]

Slurp, re:

Ummmm, bad example....'cause he is!!!!
:biggrin:

Dubya would't have the courage to suck cock, unless Cheney told him to...

But, but, but, it was Cheney's cock he's been sucking since the Ford administration.

 

[halcyondays]

1. Treason under Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution.
2. Treason for the "states' right" of maintaining African chattel slavery. (The states' rights crowd never bothers to mention the right for which the confederates committed treason, but I always remind them.)
3. One hundred years of Jim Crow, Plessy v Ferguson, separate-but-equal, explicit, legal racial discrimination against blacks.
4. KKK intimidation and terrorism.

Almost forgot:

5. Nine dead in Charleston, one wounded.

 

[Jjz1109]

So by taking the flag down, this will prevent a repeat of a similar killing spree? Whew. Glad we solved that.

 

[Jjz1109]

And before you little boys get in a tizzy and accuse me of being a racist, and supporting the confederate flag (all the usual stuff tossed around), don't miss the sarcasm. I personally could care less one way or the other. I'm a Yank-ee, and it has no meaning to me.

Just felt the need to clarify that to avoid another sh**-storm.

 

[Chrysippus]

So by taking the flag down, this will prevent a repeat of a similar killing spree? Whew. Glad we solved that.

No one in this thread said or implied taking the s&b down will prevent a repeat of a similar killing spree. You're an embarrassment to yourself.

 

[Jjz1109]

No one in this thread said or implied taking the s&b down will prevent a repeat of a similar killing spree. You're an embarrassment to yourself.

Yep, didn't get it.

 

[Chris1969]

There is a confederate memorial near me in portsmouth va they want to completely remove, and has been there for over 100 years. Its a memorial honoring ALL who have fallen in the civil war, even african americans.
I cant see why so many are up n arms to remove memorials and flags honoring them...what if the japaneese removed all our memorials of our fallen men from their soil?

 

[Uncutsouthernboy]

Really? What do you say to that, South Carolina?

In the present case, that fact is established with certainty. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.


n who had for four years presided over a slaveholders’ republic. And it was a frank admission that blacks had long since become, as one southern editor put it, “a sort of balance power in this contest, and that the side which succeeds in enlisting the feelings and in securing the active operation and services of the four millions of blacks, must ultimately triumph.”128 The observation was true enough, but the Confederacy came to realize it far too late. No more than a few dozen blacks were ever enlisted under its banner. Sixty from Richmond’s Jackson Hospital came under fire at Petersburg on March 11, 1865, as members of the Jackson Battalion, composed of three companies of white convalescents and two companies of black hospital workers. That was two days before the Confederate Congress authorized black enlistments. On very rare occasions throughout the war, blacks such as those at Jackson Hospital had been pressed into combat service, often with guns at their backs and their families held hostage in slavery. But no black units ever saw combat as congressionally authorized Confederate soldiers. No regiment of Confederate States Colored Troops was ever formed. By contrast, more than two hundred thousand blacks had joined Union forces by March 1865. Hundreds of thousands more were already free. They needed no favors from a near-dead Confederacy to secure that freedom."​

So uh, where did the 65,000 number come from?

This number of 65,000 was documented by the "Confederate Pension Rolls, Veterans and Widows." pub. 1903. University of Virginia.

In 1862, Dr. Lewis Steiner, Chief Inspector of he United States Army Sanitary Commission, an eyewitness to the occupation of Grederick, Maryland, by Gen. "Stonewall" Jackson's army, stated "Over 3,000 negroes must be included in this number (Confederate Troops). These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured US uniforms, but in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons etc. These were shabby, but not shabbier or seedier than those worn by white men in the rebel ranks. Most of the negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabres, bowie-knives, dirks, etc....and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy Army."

Black Confederate Soldiers were such a common sight that many US officers and soldiers made many comments about it in their writings. Even foreign visitors wrote of them in their accounts. In 1863, Captain Arthur Freemantle, a British observer was attached to R.E.Lee's army on the Gettysburg campaign. During this time he reported many accounts of Black loyalty to the SOuthern cause, including one case in which a black soldier was in charge of white Yankee prisoners. He remarked, "This little episode of a Southern slave leading a white Yankee solier through a NOrthern village alone and of his own accord, would not have grattifying to an abolitionist...nor would the sympathizers both in England and in the North feel encouraged if they could hear the language of detestation and contempt with which the numerous Negroes with Southern armies speak of their 'liberators'."

The evidence is there, you just have to study it for yourself. There are several books written on the Confederate soldiers who were "of color". There are websites dedicated to the Confederate Soldiers of Color.
Not only were there Negros but also Native American, Jews, and Latinos were in the ranks of the Confederate Army.
All this info is available in several books written on the subject. Take a little time and educate yourself. Not everything you learned in school is correct. There is documented proof that contradicts the textbooks you had in school.
"To the Victor go the spoils". But, It don't change the truth.

 

[Chrysippus]

UCSB,
re:
'The evidence is there, you just have to study it for yourself. There are several books written on the Confederate soldiers who were "of color". There are websites dedicated to the Confederate Soldiers of Color.
Not only were there Negros but also Native American, Jews, and Latinos were in the ranks of the Confederate Army.'
It doesn't change this:

 

[deleted858776]

I was told in my segregated 6th grade class In MS that the ". War between the States" was a battle over the industrial North trying to control the rural agrarian South. But it doesn't take much research to read exactly why MS seceded - it was clearly a slavery issue. MS should work to improve race relations and not let an Old South symbol continue to cause division.

 

[StormfrontFL]

No one in this thread said or implied taking the s&b down will prevent a repeat of a similar killing spree. You're an embarrassment to yourself.

If you follow nearly every thread he involves himself in he attempts to divert the thread by implying things that were never said as a way to extricate his foot from his mouth.

 

[StormfrontFL]

I was told in my segregated 6th grade class In MS that the ". War between the States" was a battle over the industrial North trying to control the rural agrarian South. But it doesn't take much research to read exactly why MS seceded - it was clearly a slavery issue. MS should work to improve race relations and not let an Old South symbol continue to cause division.

Exactly. Rewriting the story may make some people feel better but it doesn't help fix the wrong. Confronting the past and dealing with it is the only way to start bringing about change.

 

[Boobalaa]

This number of 65,000 was documented by the "Confederate Pension Rolls, Veterans and Widows." pub. 1903. University of Virginia.

In 1862, Dr. Lewis Steiner, Chief Inspector of he United States Army Sanitary Commission, an eyewitness to the occupation of Grederick, Maryland, by Gen. "Stonewall" Jackson's army, stated "Over 3,000 negroes must be included in this number (Confederate Troops). These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured US uniforms, but in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons etc. These were shabby, but not shabbier or seedier than those worn by white men in the rebel ranks. Most of the negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabres, bowie-knives, dirks, etc....and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy Army."

Black Confederate Soldiers were such a common sight that many US officers and soldiers made many comments about it in their writings. Even foreign visitors wrote of them in their accounts. In 1863, Captain Arthur Freemantle, a British observer was attached to R.E.Lee's army on the Gettysburg campaign. During this time he reported many accounts of Black loyalty to the SOuthern cause, including one case in which a black soldier was in charge of white Yankee prisoners. He remarked, "This little episode of a Southern slave leading a white Yankee solier through a NOrthern village alone and of his own accord, would not have grattifying to an abolitionist...nor would the sympathizers both in England and in the North feel encouraged if they could hear the language of detestation and contempt with which the numerous Negroes with Southern armies speak of their 'liberators'."

The evidence is there, you just have to study it for yourself. There are several books written on the Confederate soldiers who were "of color". There are websites dedicated to the Confederate Soldiers of Color.
Not only were there Negros but also Native American, Jews, and Latinos were in the ranks of the Confederate Army.
All this info is available in several books written on the subject. Take a little time and educate yourself. Not everything you learned in school is correct. There is documented proof that contradicts the textbooks you had in school.
"To the Victor go the spoils". But, It don't change the truth.

https://civilwargazette.wordpress.com/2008/03/13/did-blacks-fight-in-combat-for-the-confederacy/
..One of the more interesting questions related to blacks serving in the American Civil War is this, did blacks (free or slave) serve in combat roles in the Confederate Army? Unquestionably the historical evidence is strong that some blacks – perhaps several thousand – did serve in the Confederate Army in unofficial, non-combat roles as servants, laborers, teamster, musician, cooks, etc. But the official record is very unsupportive that thousands of blacks served as official soldiers in the ranks of the Southern soldiers’ rosters.

 

[vince]

So maybe some slaves fought as soldiers under the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. What does that have to do with the use of, or the perception of, the symbol in the 21st century?

You are not going to change the history of how racists have used the flag since the end of the war, by pointing out that some black men served the Confederacy 150 years ago. It's not relevant. Nor is creating a hashed up explanation of the true original meaning of the design. How and by who the flag has been used and the how offensive it is to a large portion of the population is the point.

Anyone who has fond (and not necessarily racist) feelings for the flag, should be willing to say, "Okay, if this is offensive to so many people, maybe I shouldn't fly it in their face." and leave it at that. It's not a matter of your personal safety, health or financial well being is it?

 

[Bardox]

So maybe some slaves fought as soldiers under the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. What does that have to do with the use of, or the perception of, the symbol in the 21st century?

You are not going to change the history of how racists have used the flag since the end of the war, by pointing out that some black men served the Confederacy 150 years ago. It's not relevant. Nor is creating a hashed up explanation of the true original meaning of the design. How and by who the flag has been used and the how offensive it is to a large portion of the population is the point.

Anyone who has fond (and not necessarily racist) feelings for the flag, should be willing to say, "Okay, if this is offensive to so many people, maybe I shouldn't fly it in their face." and leave it at that. It's not a matter of your personal safety, health or financial well being is it?

It's not just "fond feelings" some people have towards the stars and bars. It's pride. Granted I don't understand this pride, but some people are genuinely proud of that flag. Being proud of something makes you want to flaunt it. No one has ever had a bumper sticker that said "We are the proud parents of an honor student... who is chained under the school and no one shall ever see them because some people think our child is physically repulsive". No! They will drag that kid around and brag to everyone that can tolerate their nagging voice when they describe how great their kid is and how lucky your kid is for knowing them.

Despite the momentum, this is going to be a fight. In the base of the republican party, that flag is powerful.

 

[ClintHardBall]

Jiz1109, funny comment and true. So much effort to put forth to remove a flag. Personally I think we should remove the gay flags they are completely not appropriate and insights violence. In most cases they are hung on street lamp posts which happens to be the property of the city and or state. Slippery sloop no pun intended.

Just another way for liberals to not focus on the real issues. Hey did anyone see that Detroit had a gang shooting this weekend. 11 blacks shot 1 dead by rival black gang members. WHERE THE FUCK IS THE OUTRAGE. Maybe the focus needs to be directed at the problem and stop wasting time on flags, and cops and healthcare, etc.

 

[jaap_stam]

interesting...
How Mitt Romney’s opposition to Confederate flag just put the GOP’s current presidential candidates on the spot

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...rent-gop-presidential-candidates-on-the-spot/

From the article "His comments Saturday came amid the struggle by several candidates to articulate whether or not the flag should remain in place -- and whether the motives of the church shooter were racist."

Given the actual words the kid said, and the things he wrote, that people are still "struggling" to determine whether his motives were racist seems rather absurd...is this the white privilege benefit of the doubt people in the US are talking about?

 

[jaap_stam]

Every flag has issues attached to it. While Americans using the U.S. flag have done some shameful things, I think our past and present contributions to the world are things we can justly be proud of. I am not even going to attempt a list.

The confederate battle flag which is the flag we are talking about here - the stars and bars is the symbol of a failed rebellion. It belongs in the dustbin of history. The only issue at stake in that rebellion was the ownership of human slaves. There is nothing that flag represents that anyone should be remotely proud about. I would equate the confederate flag with the swastika Germany was rather proud of for a while.

I had ancestors on both sides of the Civil War, and one in particular was highly regarded by the South as a leader in the field. I take no pride in what my southern ancestors did.

I think that's the bigger key than anything else really. In what other country in human history has the loser of a civil war, much less rebellion, get to openly fly the colours of their lost cause within the borders of their defeat?