Confederate Flag

[halcionne]

Because in my mind the Confederate flag is really no worse than our current one. New York and Boston were some of the biggest participants in the slave trade profits and the entire country was responsible for the treatment of the natives here and the racism you want to relegate to the Confederacy was essentially present in the entire country and I would argue exists in a a large subculture of this country to this day.

And I don't have a Confederate flag up now nor do I intend to in the future but I think those calling for its complete removal are under a delusion that they don't hold a double standard.

But the Confederate battle flag (probably--I admire your preference for original documents and I don't have any) regained popularity in the modern era because of Strom Thurmond and his pro-segregation Dixiecrats: http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/24/us/confed ... ths-facts/

After the Civil War ended, the battle flag turned up here and there only occasionally -- at events to commemorate fallen soldiers.

So, when did the flag explode into prominence? It was during the struggle for civil rights for black Americans, in the middle of the 20th century.

The first burst may have been in 1948. South Carolina politician Strom Thurmond ran for president under the newly founded States Rights Democratic Party, also known as the Dixiecrats. The party's purpose was clear: "We stand for the segregation of the races," said Article 4 of its platform.

The link below discusses the history of the modern use of the Confederate battle flag and how it came to be displayed as a response to the civil rights movement. For me (I'm not a southerner, so I admittedly don't attach any sentimental or traditional value to the Confederate flag), once I learned that pro-segregationists were responsible for the flag's renewed popularity, it nullified any arguments about tradition or southern pride. Use of this flag did dwindle down to historic, ceremonial events at one time. Twentieth century racists brought it back. http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/st ... na-state-/

[DeFrauder]

Yeah, I need someone to explain to me how our current prison system is not enslaving people? Some places they do jobs for pennies, they aren't allowed to leave at all, they are told when to eat and sleep. They are dehumanized. They may not be whipped with the full knowledge of the establishment, but they are certainly mistreated or not treated with the respect a human being deserves. And after all that, some are actually legally killed via death penalty.

Edited to add that in no way do I think we need to make our prison system a slave system. Just that our prison system is a horrific thing that needs a LOT of reform with emphasis on rehabilitation not punishment.

I agree that the prison system is increasingly becoming an institution that relies on slavery as both an assumed deterrent to crime and as a punishment for those who have committed crimes. It is also increasingly relying on slave labor to financially support itself and become profitable for the private owners of prisons.

And it is not right.

Prison labor COULD become a useful tool of rehabilitation, but it should be voluntary and result in a fair wage. The wages earned by incarcerated laborers could be saved into a nest egg for when the prisoner is released, or it could be used to financially support their family members such as wives and children.

Right now, however, it is just slave labor where the fruits of the labor of inmates goes directly into the pockets of their slavers.

[HereticHick]

CloakNDagger-

From one descendant of Confederates to another:

Lay your burden down. Stop trying to justify the Confederacy. You are wasting your time and everyone else's time. It is helping no one, here in 2015, but it sure as hell is hurting your brothers and sisters who are descended from the enslaved. Join us here in 2015, and lets work together to built a real, inclusive, future.

Let the flag go.

[CloakNDagger]

CloakNDagger-

From one descendant of Confederates to another:

Lay your burden down. Stop trying to justify the Confederacy. You are wasting your time and everyone else's time. It is helping no one, here in 2015, but it sure as hell is hurting your brothers and sisters who are descended from the enslaved. Join us here in 2015, and lets work together to built a real, inclusive, future.

Let the flag go.

Sometimes I argue for arguments' sake. I've let it go, but I think a lot of folks here mis-understand what is in the head of those that haven't. It's obvious they don't care to understand, either. They'll never CHANGE the "racist" attitudes - or the "states rights" misundertandings unless they understand what those people think, and anger and stupidity will continue. That's why it's not a waste of time (and yeah, I have a TON of better things to do / think about).

[formergothardite]

Sometimes I argue for arguments' sake. I've let it go, but I think a lot of folks here mis-understand what is in the head of those that haven't. It's obvious they don't care to understand, either. They'll never CHANGE the "racist" attitudes - or the "states rights" misundertandings unless they understand what those people think, and anger and stupidity will continue. That's why it's not a waste of time (and yeah, I have a TON of better things to do / think about).

I think you are poorly misinformed about the knowledge of people here. I for one know plenty of "state rights" Confederate flag loving, "the South will rise again folks". I know that some a good bit of the defensiveness is clinging to ignorance because the truth about the South and the Confederacy is hard for them to accept. You know what is not helpful? People, arguing on the side of ignorance, which is what you are doing. When you pick to defend the side of claiming that the Civil War was really about "state rights" or that the Confederate flag isn't as offensive as other symbols of racism and oppression you are picking to perpetuate ignorance. Defending ignorance isn't going to help people realize the truth about what the Confederacy really stood for. If you want to change the anger and stupidity about the Confederacy and the Civil War start making posts about how you once believed these things and how you learned that you were wrong. Pretending that you still believe isn't going to help.

So was your statement about it being "over the top" to say that the Confederate flag is just as offensive as the Nazi flag your beliefs or were you just arguing for ignorance in that case. Usually when people do things like this(try to defend beliefs based on racism or ignorance) they throw in a "I don't believe this but to play the devil's advocate" to let people know. You haven't ever done that so we are going to just assume you have chose willful ignorance and really believe the stuff you are defending.

[J.O.Y.nomore]

The Confederate flag is in the news again.

http://gazette.com/manitou-springs-woman-arrested-on-suspicion-of-arson-for-burning-confederate-flag/article/1556169

(not breaking because newspaper)

This article indicates racism or Confederate flag pride were not motives for arrest. Apparently, an accelerant was poured on the flag, which officials deemed dangerous. Also, burning anything under the pavilion is prohibited. However, I bet no one would be arrested for using a grill and lighting it with kerosene under the pavilion.

[samurai_sarah]

Sometimes I argue for arguments' sake. I've let it go, but I think a lot of folks here mis-understand what is in the head of those that haven't. It's obvious they don't care to understand, either. They'll never CHANGE the "racist" attitudes - or the "states rights" misundertandings unless they understand what those people think, and anger and stupidity will continue. That's why it's not a waste of time (and yeah, I have a TON of better things to do / think about).

Here's what I hear from you: Slavery was bad, but look at how whites suffered, when they were forced to end it. Look at all the white suffering!

[CloakNDagger]

Here's what I hear from you: Slavery was bad, but look at how whites suffered, when they were forced to end it. Look at all the white suffering!

Whatever LOL.

[formergothardite]

Let me simply it for you a little more.

Guy A kidnaps and murders someone.

Guy B kidnaps someone but instead of just straight up murder he uses the person to make himself money. He provides very, very minimal food, shelter and clothing, just enough to keep them from dying, but the person is still underfed, kept in dismal living conditions and clothed in almost nothing. He is working the person to death with the hard labor, little food and poor living conditions, but the person isn't going to die right away.

In your mind it would be completely over the top to act like Guy A and B are equally bad people. Correct? It would be okay for some people to even support Guy B because he has some other points that are really good even if that support means that he can keep working his kidnapped person to death and then gain the opportunity to kidnap more people. Those people who support his other causes and keep it so that he can continue kidnapping and working people to death shouldn't be judged for that. Right?

Stop justifying the Confederacy by saying that their actions were "basically defensive". You know what they were fucking defending? Enslaving people.

I really want to know the answer to this.

[formergothardite]

Here's what I hear from you: Slavery was bad, but look at how whites suffered, when they were forced to end it. Look at all the white suffering!

What he is trying to say is that states should have the right to go off and form their own country if they get tired of the government telling them what to do. He is saying that the rights of the state to oppress and abuse a group of people trumps the lives of those people. State rights above human lives. So lets say North Carolina says "Fuck the marriage equality and non-discrimination laws, we are starting our own damn country where we can treat gays and minorities like we want to." He thinks the Unites States should let that happen without a war. Correct me if I am wrong on this CnD. Because you have made it clear that you place a very, very, very high value on state rights.

Of course, the Confederacy wasn't actually forming a country that gave states more rights and was all ready to start a war if any state dared to leave this new country, so the argument saying that supporting the Confederacy is supporting fighting a tyrannical government doesn't really hold water and ignores that the Confederacy was forming a government based on always being tyrannical towards black people.

[samurai_sarah]

What he is trying to say is that states should have the right to go off and form their own country if they get tired of the government telling them what to do. He is saying that the rights of the state to oppress and abuse a group of people trumps the lives of those people. State rights above human lives. So lets say North Carolina says "Fuck the marriage equality and non-discrimination laws, we are starting our own damn country where we can treat gays and minorities like we want to." He thinks the Unites States should let that happen without a war. Correct me if I am wrong on this CnD. Because you have made it clear that you place a very, very, very high value on state rights.

Of course, the Confederacy wasn't actually forming a country that gave states more rights and was all ready to start a war if any state dared to leave this new country, so the argument saying that supporting the Confederacy is supporting fighting a tyrannical government doesn't really hold water and ignores that the Confederacy was forming a government based on always being tyrannical towards black people.

You're right. I was just trying to boil down to what I find so offensive about CnD.

[samurai_sarah]

Whatever LOL.

Read what you write.

[formergothardite]

You're right. I was just trying to boil down to what I find so offensive about CnD.

You did boil it down perfectly to why he is so offensive. He is just going to continue rejecting the idea that he is showing sympathy for white slave owners or white people who wanted a new country that made it illegal to ever end slavery, but that is exactly what he is doing whenever he comes up with an excuse for why it is not wrong to support the Confederacy. It is all about the white people fighting the tyrannical government to him, with very little thought about the suffering of the slaves who were suffering under the tyranny of the Confederate government and would continue to suffer if the South had won the war.

CnD, if you don't want to come off as a guy who is mostly sympathetic towards white people who who don't have a problem with slavery, you should probably stop arguing on the side of ignorance and racism. No one here needs you to explain why people cling to the Confederate flag or the idea that the South was a victim of Northern oppression.

[HereticHick]

Whatever LOL.

"Whatever LOL"?

[CloakNDagger]

No you twist my actual words and then read into them from what you perceive about my past.

[CloakNDagger]

And you won't accept that what I say for myself is true

[CloakNDagger]

One of the participants in this conversation is a lot more open-minded to the other side's views and willing to evaluate them for their merit.

[formergothardite]

No you twist my actual words and then read into them from what you perceive about my past.

This very well might be true, but you will need to be specific. If you don't believe that states have the right to leave the Union to form a nation founded around slavery, then make that very clear because with all your posts about "state rights" and the South representing standing up to a tyrannical government, it appears that you think that they were in the right to do that. If you don't want people to think you are on the side of slavery, then stop arguing for the side that enslaved people, stop acting like it is a valid argument that the Confederacy represents state right in any way. No they represent a group of states that wanted to start a country based around tyrannizing another group of people and then expanding their borders to continue tyrannizing more people.

And you won't accept that what I say for myself is true

I'm not sure what you mean by this vague post, but if you mean that we won't accept that you support/still support the Confederacy for non-racist reasons, that is actually true. I have no problems accepting that in the past you were raised with half-truths and lies about the Confederacy/Civil War and that you were raised to value state rights over human lives and that is why you were on the side of the South, because that is glaringly obvious in most of your posts. But now that you know the truth about it, well, if you continue to defend the actions of the South in forming the Confederacy then you are downplaying the horrors of slavery and acting like their lives didn't matter.

One of the participants in this conversation is a lot more open-minded to the other side's views and willing to evaluate them for their merit.

What is with the vagueness? The only person I can think you are thinking of is Mama Mia and she was saying you were wrong but you seemed to miss that part of her post. Honestly there is no merit to an argument based around lies, a misunderstanding of history and downplaying slavery, which is what your arguments are all amount to. Yes, you might be able to find some letters from the past they say that people fought for the Confederacy because they believed in the right of a state to leave the Union, but do you know what that just tells us? They believe in the right of a state to leave the Union to form a country founded with slavery as the cornerstone. They don't get any moral high ground.

[VelociRapture]

This very well might be true, but you will need to be specific. If you don't believe that states have the right to leave the Union to form a nation founded around slavery, then make that very clear because with all your posts about "state rights" and the South representing standing up to a tyrannical government, it appears that you think that they were in the right to do that. If you don't want people to think you are on the side of slavery, then stop arguing for the side that enslaved people, stop acting like it is a valid argument that the Confederacy represents state right in any way. No they represent a group of states that wanted to start a country based around tyrannizing another group of people and then expanding their borders to continue tyrannizing more people.

I'm not sure what you mean by this vague post, but if you mean that we won't accept that you support/still support the Confederacy for non-racist reasons, that is actually true. I have no problems accepting that in the past you were raised with half-truths and lies about the Confederacy/Civil War and that you were raised to value state rights over human lives and that is why you were on the side of the South, because that is glaringly obvious in most of your posts. But now that you know the truth about it, well, if you continue to defend the actions of the South in forming the Confederacy then you are downplaying the horrors of slavery and acting like their lives didn't matter.

What is with the vagueness? The only person I can think you are thinking of is Mama Mia and she was saying you were wrong but you seemed to miss that part of her post. Honestly there is no merit to an argument based around lies, a misunderstanding of history and downplaying slavery, which is what your arguments are all amount to. Yes, you might be able to find some letters from the past they say that people fought for the Confederacy because they believed in the right of a state to leave the Union, but do you know what that just tells us? They believe in the right of a state to leave the Union to form a country founded with slavery as the cornerstone. They don't get any moral high ground.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Seriously, could not have said it any better myself. Well done ma'am!

[formergothardite]

Crap. I wrote that when I first got up, made a ton of mistakes and now I can't edit. Sorry folks. :embarrassed:

[Geechee Girl]

CND, do you think we should return to convict leasing and peonage as the way to go for our current criminal justice system? What do you see as the legacy of slavery today?

[zebra #13]

i guess everyone's already seen this. But the comments are legitimately scary. I know, youtube comments :lol: but some people are really arguing that skin pigment relates to IQ and how much a person is worth. Racism at its nastiest. If Mormons believe even a fraction of that mess, thank goodness Mitt didn't get elected. No way do people like that need to be in a powerful position to dole out favors to their cronies or elect supreme court judges or other appointments, etc. Kind of puts his ugly comments about the 47% in a new light. And this is a really far out there tangent comment from the confederate flag, but i know some people who want to outlaw Affirmative Action and who have given off the impression that they think that God puts people in power because they're superior, not just crooks taking advantage of marginalized lower classes.

[bBvideo 560,340:1s3ti47n]

[/bBvideo]

I was raised Mormon in the 40s and 50s in Salt Lake City. It was made VERY clear to me in church, at home, and in Seminary, that the prohibition against blacks holding the Priesthood was NOT about 1. blacks not being "valiant" in the war in heaven, nor 2. being descents of Ham. It was basically one of those "in the fullness of time" we will know things. The early church during its Missouri period actually did have black members. A least one community was slaughtered for that reason. My great grandfather was a rather large slave holder in Louisville, KY, and on joining the church, freed his slaves and migrated to Utah before the war. I've always been a bit embarrassed meeting blacks from Kentucky in case my ancestor owned their ancestors. The ONLY thing in my house that got Tabasco on the tongue was the use of the N-word.

That said, I most certainly did know Mormons who were prejudiced. When I was about 12 a black family bought the run down house on the corner. It occasioned a neighborhood meeting, where it was determined that no one would allow their children to play with the Farhat children. My parents walked out of that meeting, and we were encouraged to make the Farhat kids feel to home. We did. It was resolved, sorta, when it turned out that although they were indeed very black, they were Syrian. . . . They also fixed up the house, and were wonderful gardeners.

[FlorenceHamilton]

I was raised Mormon in the 40s and 50s in Salt Lake City. It was made VERY clear to me in church, at home, and in Seminary, that the prohibition against blacks holding the Priesthood was NOT about 1. blacks not being "valiant" in the war in heaven, nor 2. being descents of Ham. It was basically one of those "in the fullness of time" we will know things. The early church during its Missouri period actually did have black members. A least one community was slaughtered for that reason. My great grandfather was a rather large slave holder in Louisville, KY, and on joining the church, freed his slaves and migrated to Utah before the war. I've always been a bit embarrassed meeting blacks from Kentucky in case my ancestor owned their ancestors. The ONLY thing in my house that got Tabasco on the tongue was the use of the N-word.

That said, I most certainly did know Mormons who were prejudiced. When I was about 12 a black family bought the run down house on the corner. It occasioned a neighborhood meeting, where it was determined that no one would allow their children to play with the Farhat children. My parents walked out of that meeting, and we were encouraged to make the Farhat kids feel to home. We did. It was resolved, sorta, when it turned out that although they were indeed very black, they were Syrian. . . . They also fixed up the house, and were wonderful gardeners.

I am so glad that all worked out. What would have happened if they were African American all the way, manged to mow the lawn once a week and could only keep the house up as it was? Would that have been less ok?

[zebra #13]

I am so glad that all worked out. What would have happened if they were African American all the way, manged to mow the lawn once a week and could only keep the house up as it was? Would that have been less ok?

Oh, I think for the neighbors, the operative issue was if they we AA or not. Even if they'd fixed up the house, and gardened well, they might not have been forgiven. Or maybe they would have. I was pretty amused even at 12 that the *origin* of the blackness seemed so important.

ETA--it seemed, too, at the time, to me, that the non-Mormon neighbors were a lot angrier than the Mormons, though everyone but my family had issues with it.

[lascuba]

I was staying out of this discussion because I don't have the patience to engage with faux-intellectual racist shitbags and their "Oh, good for you for at least listening to the other side!" enablers on this board, but here's a post written by a libertarian gun nut who's default is sympathy for conservative racist shitbags. Even she agrees that the flag is about hate and the Civil War was primarily about slavery (though of course she's insistent that those conservatives aren't racists and it's mean to call them so. Libertarians.)

atomicnerds.com/?p=6670

– The causes of the Civil War were in fact very, very complex, and people who cite economic factors, class issues, states’ rights issues, and such aren’t wrong.

….But fighting for the right to own other people, of a certain color, was the biggest one. And if you don’t believe me go dig down into what Confederate leaders and soldiers were actually saying. They weren’t even a tiny bit shy about it. If you don’t think it was primarily about this, you’re kidding yourself.

As usual, my old man, a true son of Texas, was right: “The side that needed to win, did.â€