Just for the record, this is NOT the Confederate Flag:

[Stinky The Clown]

That one is the Confederate Battle Flag, flown over Confederate military units at war. It was never the state flag of the Confederacy, and therefor, is not The Confederate Flag.

This was the first flag of the Confederate States of America. From the time of its initial adoption, long about 1860 or 1861, until its discontinuance in about 1863, it changed only as additional stars were added:



The second flag of the Confederate States of America makes use of the battle flag, but in a white field. It was called by some the Stainless Flag, referring to the purity of its white field.



The third flag, used only very briefly toward the end of the Civil War, was also called the Blood Flag for the red stripe at its end.





With this in mind, it seems to me anyone who is defending the continued use of the battle flag out of some sense or another of pride is celebrating only the Civil War, not some cultural heritage of the Confederacy.


This is not to somehow demean the South or Southerners. Though not Southern by birth or heritage, I have been a citizen of the South, by conscious choice, for virtually all of my adult life. Rather, this discussion is to put in some perspective the celebration and use of the "confederate flag" that continues to this day.

[Pab Sungenis]

1. They're either celebrating the Civil War

or declaring open hostilities on the government of the Union.

[gopiscrap]

2. Probably both

[SharonAnn]

117. So we should refer to it as the "Confederate Battle Flag"?

And point out that it's used by "military units at war".

"That one is the Confederate Battle Flag, flown over Confederate military units at war. It was never the state flag of the Confederacy, and therefor, is not The Confederate Flag. "

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. Or...they just support White Supremacy.

lots of folks like that too...

I have been asking that question for years. What country allows the people to openly display their battle flag after such a crushing defeat?

[ReRe]

81. I've wondered the same thing... n/t

[Uncle Joe]

4. I take an opposing point of view, the flag which flew over the Confederate Military represents

the 300,000+ dead, a massive loss of life in a region with a population of only 9 million total black and white, along with countless wounded.

To many southerners this sacrifice is what they honor, that's why Generals such as Lee are held in much higher esteem than Jefferson Davis, his Vice President and the forgotten members of the Confederate Government.

If the South were flying the flag of the Confederate Government that would be even more offensive for it represents the policies of the government ie: slavery and secession.

Thanks for the thread, Stinky The Clown.

[RainDog]

6. But it celebrates a shameful legacy

..we've talked about this, a lot, recently.

And, again, as a southerner - this flag, to me, represents an attempt to honor the fight to continue slavery as an institution. I don't give a fuck if any of my ancestors died defending this flag, or what it stood for in regard to their deaths.

If they died for this flag, they died for the rights of oppressors to continue to oppress an entire group of people.

But you and I both know that the reality is that white males, mostly, in the south use this flag as an expression that they are clueless, thoughtless jerks.

[Uncle Joe]

8. We did discuss it and this link which I posted during that exchange was part of it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_of_America

Motivations of soldiers [edit]

The great majority of young white men voluntarily joined Confederate national or state military units. Perman (2010) says historians are of two minds on why millions of men seemed so eager to fight, suffer and die over four years:

”Some historians emphasize that Civil War soldiers were driven by political ideology, holding firm beliefs about the importance of liberty, Union, or state rights, or about the need to protect or to destroy slavery. Others point to less overtly political reasons to fight, such as the defense of one's home and family, or the honor and brotherhood to be preserved when fighting alongside other men. Most historians agree that, no matter what he thought about when he went into the war, the experience of combat affected him profoundly and sometimes affected his reasons for continuing to fight.”[91]

Depending on their descendants beliefs men or women as to why those soldiers fought and died will reflect their underlying view as to what that legacy is.

[RainDog]

11. Yes. But that no longer matters

because the meaning of the symbol - the flag is a symbol - and the war is long over, and anyone who participated in that moment in history is long dead - the meaning of the symbol is the system of slavery that constituted the reason for the war, for the nation.

And, no matter why those who fought did fight - if you read the history of the era - those who were leading this fight in the govt. were doing so to continue to be able to treat African-Americans as subhumans.

So, again, the meaning of the flag is now tied to a system that is as shameful as other horrible state institutions.

That's the meaning that matters - the meaning assigned to it by those who are living today, apart from a very, very few who think of family losses, and to those who defeated the south's attempt to continue to hold people in bondage slavery by fighting a war to continue to have the right to treat other humans as property.

If someone wants to communicate within a society, they have to recognize what symbols mean to a larger population - and this support for slavery is what the flag means to the larger population.

If people don't want to be tagged as racist for flying the flag, then they shouldn't fly it because there's no way that flag is not now associated with support for slavery.

[Uncle Joe]

13. In the big scheme of things, this is what symbols mean.

Willy T. has a great OP by George Carlin, don't just read Carlin's quote, listen to the video as well.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023946482

As to your statement that it no longer matters.

It does matter to their descendants whenever contention is brought up as to why those Southerners' Ancestors' fought and died in such great numbers.

I have no doubt the Confederate Government fought to defend slavery, but that's not the case with most of the soldiers.

Just as George W. Bush sent the nation to a war with Iraq based on lies that has no to little reflection in regards to the bravery and sacrifice of the Americans that died and were grievously wounded over there.

[RainDog]

14. You can't compare the two flags

the confederate flag is the flag of a treasonous bunch of bastards who sought to split this nation apart because of slavery.

That's the SOLE PURPOSE FOR ITS EXISTENCE.

Unlike the U.S. flag. I'm no great fan of flags in general.

You know, as I've said before, I grew up in the south and lived there most of my life, in different cities, until I moved above the Ohio river (the unofficial dividing line for slave states.)

I never knew one person who owned a confederate flag or associated it with family members they lost during the war.

Never.

I know African-Americans who see that flag and view it as a symbol for genocide in America.

As Carlin says... flags are a whole lot of men waving their dicks at one another.

So, that's what you're supporting?

[Uncle Joe]

17. That's the Confederacy's sole purpose because it lost, was frozen in time

and had no chance to evolve.

Make no mistake about it, had the U.S. lost the Revolutionary War, Great Britain; which had outlawed slavery by 1772 would have written the history books and labeled the Patriots as being both treasonous and supporters of slavery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism

The last known form of enforced servitude of adults (villeinage) had disappeared in England by the beginning of the 17th century. In a 1569 court case involving Cartwright, who had bought a slave from Russia, the court ruled that English law could not recognise slavery, as it was never established officially. This ruling was overshadowed by later developments. It was upheld in 1700 by the Lord Chief Justice John Holt when he ruled that a slave became free as soon as he arrived in England.[4]

(snip)

African slaves were not bought or sold in London but were brought by masters from other areas. Together with people from other nations, especially non-Christian, Africans were considered foreigners, not able to be English subjects. At the time, England had no naturalization procedure. The African slaves' legal status was unclear until 1772 and Somersett's Case, when the fugitive slave James Somersett forced a legal decision. Somersett had escaped, and his master, Charles Steuart, had him captured and imprisoned on board a ship, intending to ship him to Jamaica to be resold into slavery. While in London, Somersett had been baptised; three godparents issued a writ of habeas corpus. As a result, Lord Mansfield, Chief Justice of the Court of the King's Bench, had to judge whether Somersett's abduction was legal or not under English Common Law. No legislation had ever been passed to establish slavery in England. The case received national attention, and five advocates defended Somersett.

In his judgment of 22 June 1772, Mansfield declared:

"The state of slavery is of such a nature that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons, moral or political, but only by positive law, which preserves its force long after the reasons, occasions, and time itself from whence it was created, is erased from memory. It is so odious, that nothing can be suffered to support it, but positive law. Whatever inconveniences, therefore, may follow from a decision, I cannot say this case is allowed or approved by the law of England; and therefore the black must be discharged."[8]

Although the exact legal implications of the judgement are unclear when analysed by lawyers, it was generally taken at the time to have determined that slavery did not exist under English common law and was thus prohibited in England.[9] The decision did not apply to other British territories; by then, for example, the American colonies had established slavery by positive laws.[10] The Somersett's case became a significant part of the common law of slavery in the English-speaking world, and it helped launch the movement to abolish slavery.[11]

Howard Dean had to apologize for claiming to represent all Americans including Confederate Flag Wavers, because the forces that wish to divide rather than unite were too powerful.

I'm supporting that we get over this shit and quit giving our power away.

We should be Americans first despite our differences.

[RainDog]

19. Yes. Unite

Unite behind the knowledge that slavery ceased to exist in the U.S. because the treasonous confederacy was defeated, thankfully.

And everything associated with it should be destroyed as well.

Unite behind the reality that white people who fly that flag are spitting on the rest of this nation and the American flag.

There's nothing to unite behind in support of the putrid confederate flag. Nothing. nothing. nothing.

If someone wants to be an American in spite of differences, they can put away that goddamn flag once and for all.

Says this southerner.

The reason slavery continued to exist, beyond the founding of this nation is because of those same treasonous bastards in the south who considered African-Americans subhuman, so your argument is in favor of my contention that the confederacy was and still is the cause of many of the problems in this nation.

Nothing to celebrate and nothing to unite behind, other than to indicate that support for that flag is support for genocide.

GENOCIDE.

[Uncle Joe]

23. You say the U.S. Flag is no comparison, tell that to the Native Americans using your definition

of genocide, they would certainly qualify, would they not?

Should we eliminate the U.S. Flag and all it stands for because of what was done to them?

Edit for P.S. The only difference is we won those wars.

[RainDog]

25. We should definitely acknowledge that genocide

and, frankly, as I said, I don't care about flags too much in general.

If you cannot accept that the ENTIRE REASON for the confederate flag, in any iteration, is to signal support for a treasonous bastard wing of this nation that defined itself in support of slavery...

... you are choosing to ignore the obvious.

your choice.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Then I take it we should get rid of the U.S. Flag as well and no doubt give their land

back to them?

As far as many of them are concerned that's the ENTIRE REASON for the U.S. Flag.

That to me is also obvious and it's our choice.

[RainDog]

28. LOL

beyond a small subset of southerners, NO ONE thinks the confederate flag is anything other than a symbol of modern assholes.

that's the truth, whether you like it or not.

you are trying to create a false equivalence in your statements, bring in the idea that the U.S. was more backward than GB to pretend that it wasn't the fucking southern states that kept slavery alive as long as it did.

lie to yourself all you want, but you're not fooling anyone else.

[Uncle Joe]

35. You never answered my question nor explained why that's a false equivalency by your own definition

what was committed against the Native Americans was in fact genocide.

GB did outlaw slavery before at least some of the colonies/states even some in the North.

[RainDog]

38. The entire existence of the U.S.

was not predicated on genocide of Native Americans.

Yes. GB outlawed slavery, as did other nations in Western Europe.

The U.S. didn't because of the south.

The reason the U.S. continued slavery for as long as it did is because of the south.

Without the southern support for slavery, it would've ended long before it did.

That's why it's a false equivalence - the arguments of the northern states, and the western states, as the U.S. took territory, indicates that the U.S. had to walk a tightrope with southern genocidal assholes.

The south kept slavery alive.

The south comprised the subset of this population with treasonous bastards who would rather have the "right" to beat someone to death for his personal profit, or to rape someone he perceived as his personal property, because it made a few rich.

The poor whites who fought for the south are no different than the poor whites who vote for Republicans now, and their motivations are, sickeningly, too similar.

[Uncle Joe]

43. Did the U.S. commit genocide and take the vast majority of the Continental United States

from the Native Americans because of the South?

The South was more rural and isolated and I will grant that's why slavery existed as long as it did, but not all Northern States which had legalized slavery were dependent on the South.

[RainDog]

47. You simply refuse to acknowledge what is history

and that is your right.

[Uncle Joe]

40. It's not just whites in the South

There is a video on this link.

http://www.wtsp.com/news/article/224554/81/Black-student-defends-his-Confederate-flag

"I know it's kinda weird because I'm black," Thomas said in a CNN iReport he submitted. "When I look at this flag, I just don't see racism. I see pride, respect. Southern pride, that's what I see."

(snip)

Thomas: It is very important that I be allowed to exercise my freedom of free speech. I'm one of the nicest people, but today, you can't say anything without people getting offended or hurt by what you are saying. I felt very offended when I was asked to take down that flag because [the housing department] said it violated the racist code. It's a freedom thing to me.

The generation before us told us that the flag is racist. It's not going anywhere. No one is going to burn all of the flags. If me or someone else can show my generation that it means something different maybe it won't divide us. I haven't experienced racism myself but it still exists. Maybe if we start now with this flag, racism can continue to get smaller.

(snip)

Some black students came to me and have said I have changed their viewpoint on the Confederate flag and that I helped change them. They have said [like me] they also don't want to be called African-American anymore. They, too, feel like they want to be American, not African-America, because it's like a second category and they were born in America not Africa. So other people have come up to me, not just my roommates.

[RainDog]

49. take a poll about that

among southerners, black and white, and find out the overwhelming opinion.

ask African-Americans all over the U.S, since the overwhelming majority of them are the descendants of people who were enslaved.

I wouldn't refer to anyone as African-American beyond the need to point out that they had no choice about whether or not to come to this nation, were kept in slavery for about a hundred years, experienced systematic oppression after a war to accept their civil rights, and continue to face discrimination based upon the level of melatonin in their skin. It's a political category that tracks things like civil rights violations.

I'm gonna stop with this now because it disgusts me.

take care.

[Uncle Joe]

52. I have no doubt what the response would be, it would be as you believe, however I see that young

man as a possible vanguard to healing our divisions and overcoming the divisive power of the Confederate Flag.

I am sorry if my opinion disgusts you but that's the way I feel.

You take care as well.

[pnwmom]

18. Why would anyone want to honor the death of someone who died

fighting for the evil of slavery?

[Uncle Joe]

20. Why would anyone want to honor the death of someone that wiped out

the Native Americans, taking their land, waged multiple wars based on lies and I'm not just talking about Iraq.

As I posted below historians are divided on what motivated Confederate Soldiers; most of them never owning slaves, to fight and dies in such great numbers.

P.S. Edit for this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_of_America

Motivations of soldiers

The great majority of young white men voluntarily joined Confederate national or state military units. Perman (2010) says historians are of two minds on why millions of men seemed so eager to fight, suffer and die over four years:

”Some historians emphasize that Civil War soldiers were driven by political ideology, holding firm beliefs about the importance of liberty, Union, or state rights, or about the need to protect or to destroy slavery. Others point to less overtly political reasons to fight, such as the defense of one's home and family, or the honor and brotherhood to be preserved when fighting alongside other men. Most historians agree that, no matter what he thought about when he went into the war, the experience of combat affected him profoundly and sometimes affected his reasons for continuing to fight.”

[FourScore]

39. I'm a Southerner and Uncle Joe is right. But so is RainDog.

I've heard both arguments. But I have to say, the Civil War never died in the South. It's not slavery they are holding onto. It's the people who lost loved ones, the destruction of life and property, the burning of Atlanta. Tales of relatives of the war still circulate at family gatherings and Thanksgiving dinners. Old Southern families know what I'm talkin' about.

The flag is a symbol of slavery today. Right or wrong, that's what it is. And just as the Germans cannot fly a Nazi flag in remembrance of loved ones lost in a terrible war, Southerners should not fly the "Confederate Flag". It is disrespectful and hurtful to others. That's the bottom line now.

(BTW: True Southerners call it "The Wowa" -- as if it were the only war Southerners had ever engaged in)

[Uncle Joe]

45. I hate it that RainDog and I disagree on this, she is one of my favorite posters, and I acknowledge

your points of view as well.

Vicksburg was so traumatized from the war, they never celebrated the 4th of July until World War II started after Pearl Harbor was attacked.

I told RainDog on another thread regarding this issue that the only flag I own is a U.S. Flag which covered my father's coffin.

I agree with your last paragraph but the way I see it as in physics for every action there is a reaction and the hatred spewed toward those that have no malice but view the Confederate Flag in a different light can only serve to alienate, divide and increase the will to fly it.

The racist powers that be then use this as a means to attain and maintain a stranglehold over the people.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

55. I think you are right, FourScore. The flags should no longer be flown because they no longer

hold the same meaning. The Nazi analogy is spot on.

As a southerner I have mixed feelings about all this because I understand the first statement you make but, out of respect for what MOST AMERICANS think it represents and out of respect for those feelings I think it is best to remember that the last flag the South flew was a solid white flag. We surrendered. It is time to move on and it is time for Southerners (and whomever else in this country is flying them because they have been seen all over) to quit flying these flags.

[pnwmom]

41. The schools are named after the Generals, and they were fighting for slavery.

What the individual soldiers were fighting for is a different matter.

[Uncle Joe]

46. Robert E. Lee was only a step behind Lincoln in his view of slavery and race. n/t

[pnwmom]

63. More like a mile. n/t

[Uncle Joe]

69. This was Lee's view regarding race and slavery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Lee

Since the end of the Civil War, it has often been suggested Lee was in some sense opposed to slavery. In the period following the war, Lee became a central figure in the Lost Cause interpretation of the war. The argument that Lee had always somehow opposed slavery helped maintain his stature as a symbol of Southern honor and national reconciliation.

The evidence cited in favor of the claim that Lee opposed slavery included his direct statements and his actions before and during the war, including Lee's support of the work by his wife and her mother to liberate slaves and fund their move to Liberia,[50] the success of his wife and daughter in setting up an illegal school for slaves on the Arlington plantation,[51] the freeing of Custis' slaves in 1862, and, as the Confederacy's position in the war became desperate, his petitioning slaveholders in 1864–65 to allow slaves to volunteer for the Army with manumission offered as a reward for outstanding service.[52][53]

In December 1864 Lee was shown a letter by Louisiana Senator Edward Sparrow, written by General St. John R. Liddell, which noted Lee would be hard-pressed in the interior of Virginia by spring, and the need to consider Patrick Cleburne's plan to emancipate the slaves and put all men in the army who were willing to join. Lee was said to have agreed on all points and desired to get black soldiers, saying "he could make soldiers out of any human being that had arms and legs."[54]

(snip)

AThis [opinion] was the prevailing view among most religious people of Lee's class in the border states. They believed that slavery existed because God willed it and they thought it would end when God so ruled. The time and the means were not theirs to decide, conscious though they were of the ill-effects of Negro slavery on both races. Lee shared these convictions of his neighbors without having come in contact with the worst evils of African bondage. He spent no considerable time in any state south of Virginia from the day he left Fort Pulaski in 1831 until he went to Texas in 1856. All his reflective years had been passed in the North or in the border states. He had never been among the blacks on a cotton or rice plantation. At Arlington, the servants had been notoriously indolent, their master's master. Lee, in short, was only acquainted with slavery at its best, and he judged it accordingly. At the same time, he was under no illusion regarding the aims of the Abolitionists or the effect of their agitation.[56]

This was Lincoln's view regarding race and slavery.

Views on African Americans[edit]Known as the Great Emancipator, Lincoln was a complicated figure who wrestled with his own views on race.[57] Lincoln's primary audience were white voters. Lincoln's views on slavery, race equality, and African American colonization are often intermixed.[57] During the 1858 debates with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln expressed his contemporary view that he believed whites were superior to blacks.[57] Lincoln stated he was against miscegenation and blacks to serve as jurors. While President, as the American Civil War progressed, Lincoln advocated or implemented anti-racist policies including the Emancipation Proclamation and limited suffrage for African Americans.[57] Former slave and leading abolitionist, Frederick Douglass once observed of Lincoln: "In his company, I was never reminded of my humble origin, or of my unpopular color".[58] Douglass praised Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation; however, he stated that Lincoln "was preeminently the white man’s President, entirely devoted to the welfare of white men."[59] Before his presidency, Lincoln lived in a middle-class, racially mixed neighborhood of Springfield, Illinois; one of his long-time neighbors, Jameson Jenkins (who may have been born a slave), had come from North Carolina and was publicly implicated in the 1850s as a Springfield conductor on the underground railroad, sheltering escaped slaves. In 1861, Lincoln called on Jenkins to give him a ride to the train depot, where Lincoln delivered his farewell address before leaving Springfield for the last time.[60] Generations through changing times have interpreted independently Lincoln's views on African Americans.[57]

[pnwmom]

82. So, as the South began to lose the war, he thought letting the slaves

fight for the South was a good idea, and was willing to let them be freed afterward if they did so.

How generous of him.

From the link:

"Since the end of the Civil War, it has often been suggested Lee was in some sense opposed to slavery. In the period following the war, Lee became a central figure in the Lost Cause interpretation of the war. The argument that Lee had always somehow opposed slavery helped maintain his stature as a symbol of Southern honor and national reconciliation."

This seems like a pretty weak argument to me -- and not nearly enough to overcome the fact that he led the fight against the Union in the war of secession that occurred over the issue of slavery.

Whereas Lincoln, despite his complicated feelings, and in the face of huge opposition, finally felt compelled to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, freeing the slaves.

No, they weren't miles apart. They were light years apart.

[Uncle Joe]

103. "Before and during the war"

The evidence cited in favor of the claim that Lee opposed slavery included his direct statements and his actions before and during the war, including Lee's support of the work by his wife and her mother to liberate slaves and fund their move to Liberia, the success of his wife and daughter in setting up an illegal school for slaves on the Arlington plantation, the freeing of Custis' slaves in 1862, and, as the Confederacy's position in the war became desperate, his petitioning slaveholders in 1864–65 to allow slaves to volunteer for the Army with manumission offered as a reward for outstanding service.

It was a great moral and strategic move of Lincoln to issue the Emancipation Proclamation but it didn't free slaves in the states fighting for the union only those in rebellion and in the same year that Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation and within days after Gettysburg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_Proclamation

The Emancipation Proclamation was an executive order issued by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863, as a war measure during the American Civil War, to all segments of the Executive branch (including the Army and Navy) of the United States. It proclaimed the freedom of slaves in the ten states that were still in rebellion,[1] thus applying to 3.1 million of the 4 million slaves in the U.S. at the time. The Proclamation was based on the president's constitutional authority as commander in chief of the armed forces;[2] it was not a law passed by Congress. The Proclamation also ordered that "suitable" persons among those freed could be enrolled into the paid service of United States' forces, and ordered the Union Army (and all segments of the Executive branch) to "recognize and maintain the freedom of" the ex-slaves. The Proclamation did not compensate the owners, did not itself outlaw slavery, and did not make the ex-slaves (called freedmen) citizens. It made the eradication of slavery an explicit war goal, in addition to the goal of reuniting the Union.[3]

The North was getting its' fill of the Civil War about that time as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_draft_riots

The New York City draft riots (July 13–16, 1863; known at the time as Draft Week[2]) were violent disturbances in New York City that were the culmination of working-class discontent with new laws passed by Congress that year to draft men to fight in the ongoing American Civil War. The riots remain the largest civil insurrection in American history outside of the Civil War itself.[3]

President Lincoln was forced to divert several regiments of militia and volunteer troops from following up after the Battle of Gettysburg to control the city. The rioters were overwhelmingly working-class men, primarily ethnic Irish, resenting particularly that wealthier men, who could afford to pay a $300 commutation fee to hire a substitute, were spared the draft.[4][5]

Initially intended to express anger at the draft, the protests turned into an ugly race riot, with the white rioters, chiefly Irish immigrants,[6] attacking blacks wherever they could be found. At least 100 black people were estimated to have been killed. The conditions in the city were such that Major General John E. Wool, commander of the Department of the East, stated on July 16, "Martial law ought to be proclaimed, but I have not a sufficient force to enforce it."[7] The military did not reach the city until after the first day of rioting, when mobs had already ransacked or destroyed numerous public buildings, two Protestant churches, the homes of various abolitionists or sympathisers, many black homes, and the Colored Orphan Asylum at 44th Street and Fifth Avenue, which was burned to the ground.[8]

[pnwmom]

107. The "evidence cited in favor of the claim" -- it is only a claim.

Lincoln freed the slaves in the 10 states in Rebellion through the proclamation, but he pushed Congress to free the rest (those who hadn't been freed in their states) with the 13th Amendment, which was signed by the Senate in 1864 and the House in 1865.

Lee, on the other hand, only offered to free those slaves who fought in the war, which would have left millions of women and children in slavery. Not the same thing at all.

[Uncle Joe]

108. Lee wasn't President and it wasn't just slaves that fought in the war that Lee freed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E_Lee

The evidence cited in favor of the claim that Lee opposed slavery included his direct statements and his actions before and during the war, including Lee's support of the work by his wife and her mother to liberate slaves and fund their move to Liberia,[50] the success of his wife and daughter in setting up an illegal school for slaves on the Arlington plantation,[51] the freeing of Custis' slaves in 1862, and, as the Confederacy's position in the war became desperate, his petitioning slaveholders in 1864–65 to allow slaves to volunteer for the Army with manumission offered as a reward for outstanding service.[52][53]

[pnwmom]

111. And how many slaves did Custis have? n/t

[Uncle Joe]

112. That's not the point, the point is what did Lee have control over, he wasn't President. n/t

[pnwmom]

113. If the South had won the war he could have ended up with the job. n/t

[Uncle Joe]

115. I agree. n/t

[pnwmom]

116. I just found something else that lends a different perspective

on the Custis situation.

According to the National Park Service, it wasn’t Lee who decided on freeing the Custis slaves; “Mrs. Custis persuaded her husband” to do so – either in his lifetime or through his will, which directed they be freed within 5 years. Lee was merely the executor of Custis’s will – though he didn’t immediately free the slaves, believing they were necessary for financial reasons. He waited the full five years that the will allowed before he freed them.

http://www.nps.gov/arho/historyculture/slavery.htm

While such allowances may have improved the quality of life for the Arlington slaves, most black men and women on the estate remained legally in bondage until the Civil War. In his will, George Washington Parke Custis stipulated that all the Arlington slaves should be freed upon his death if the estate was found to be in good financial standing or within five years otherwise. When Custis died in 1857, Robert E. Lee—the executor of the estate—determined that the slave labor was necessary to improve Arlington's financial status. The Arlington slaves found Lee to be a more stringent taskmaster than his predecessor. Eleven slaves were “hired out” while others were sent to the Pamunkey River estates. In accordance with Custis's instructions, Lee officially freed the slaves on December 29, 1862.

[Uncle Joe]

120. Lee was a man of many conflicts just as Lincoln, he knew slavery was evil even in 1856

but he rationalized it while relying on his religious faith to sustain that rationalization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E_Lee

... In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery as an institution, is a moral & political evil in any Country. It is useless to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it however a greater evil to the white man than to the black race, & while my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more strong for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically. The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise Merciful Providence.

—Robert E. Lee, to Mary Anna Lee, December 27, 1856

Freeman's analysis places Lee's attitude toward slavery and abolition in a historical context:

This [opinion] was the prevailing view among most religious people of Lee's class in the border states. They believed that slavery existed because God willed it and they thought it would end when God so ruled. The time and the means were not theirs to decide, conscious though they were of the ill-effects of Negro slavery on both races. Lee shared these convictions of his neighbors without having come in contact with the worst evils of African bondage. He spent no considerable time in any state south of Virginia from the day he left Fort Pulaski in 1831 until he went to Texas in 1856. All his reflective years had been passed in the North or in the border states. He had never been among the blacks on a cotton or rice plantation. At Arlington, the servants had been notoriously indolent, their master's master. Lee, in short, was only acquainted with slavery at its best, and he judged it accordingly. At the same time, he was under no illusion regarding the aims of the Abolitionists or the effect of their agitation.[56]

As for being a stern taskmaster, Lee was stern taskmaster in all aspects of his life in large part because of his strong beliefs in regards to "duty" and his life long military career.

[pnwmom]

122. Not "just as Lincoln." Lincoln worked to free the slaves; Lee led a rebellion

for the right to keep the system of slavery in the South.

[Uncle Joe]

123. Yes he did but it was more politically and strategically expedient for Lincoln to do so and even

then it was in a halting manner, Lincoln would've accepted slavery even though he didn't approve of it, the Civil War totally changed those dynamics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln_and_slavery

Many of Lincoln's public anti-slavery sentiments were shown in the seven Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858 between Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, his opponent who defeated him in the Senate race. Douglas criticized him as being inconsistent, saying he altered his message and position on slavery and on the political rights of freed blacks in order to appeal to the audience before him, as northern Illinois was more hostile to slavery than southern Illinois.

(snip)

Because he thought it was essentially a reaffirmation of terms already in the Constitution, Lincoln supported the compromise Corwin amendment in 1861. Before Lincoln became President, the proposed amendment was passed by Congress and later two states, but was abandoned once the Civil War began. It would have explicitly prohibited congressional interference with slavery in states where it already existed. The Corwin amendment was a late attempt at reconciliation, but it also was a measure of reassurance to the slave-holding border states that the federal government was not intent on taking away their powers.[18] Nonetheless, Lincoln was bitterly attacked throughout the secession crisis and Civil War regarding his anti-slavey views. Many of Lincoln's opponents, especially in the South, regarded him as an "abominable" abolitionist, even before the war.[19]

At the beginning of the war, Lincoln prohibited his generals from freeing slaves even in captured territories. On August 30, 1861, Major General John C. Frémont, the commander of the Union Army in St. Louis, proclaimed that all slaves owned by Confederates in Missouri were free. Lincoln opposed allowing military leaders to take executive actions that were not authorized by the government, and realized that such actions could induce slaveowners in border states to oppose the Union or even start supporting the enemy. Lincoln demanded Frémont modify his order and free only slaves owned by Missourians actively working for the South. When Frémont refused, he was replaced by the conservative General Henry Wager Halleck.

(snip)

Lincoln addresses the issue of his consistency (or lack thereof) between his earlier position and his later position of emancipation in an 1864 letter to Albert G. Hodges.[22] In that letter, Lincoln states his ethical opposition to slavery, that he did not think he had the constitutional power to abolish it everywhere initially, and that emancipation became necessary for the preservation of the Union.

Lincoln evolved over time and circumstance and I believe Lee would've done the same but as I first stated in our exchange there is no doubt Lee was behind Lincoln in his thinking and ability to effect change.

[pnwmom]

124. But we shouldn't be naming schools after Lee on the basis that

some people believe that he "would have" freed the slaves in the future.

He is known primarily for leading the rebellion. What kind of message are we giving to young people when their schools are named after Confederate generals who fought for slavery? Are you really going to argue that that is a good message because maybe in the future Lee would have taken a different position?

Aren't there many more people in the meantime who better deserve to have schools named after them, if we have to name them after anyone? In my town, most of the schools are named after places rather than people. Maybe that's the solution.

[Uncle Joe]

125. Perhaps and I believe they are withering on the vine but Lee is known for many things aside from

what you mentioned.

This is a long read but it's well worth it. and it was difficult for me to just edit four paragraphs.

http://www.neh.gov/humanities/2011/julyaugust/feature/how-did-robert-e-lee-become-american-icon

How Did Robert E. Lee Become an American Icon?

After President Dwight D. Eisenhower revealed on national television that one of the four “great Americans” whose pictures hung in his office was none other than Robert E. Lee, a thoroughly perplexed New York dentist reminded him that Lee had devoted “his best efforts to the destruction of the United States government” and confessed that since he could not see “how any American can include Robert E. Lee as a person to be emulated, why the President of the United States of America should do so is certainly beyond me.” Eisenhower replied personally and without hesitation, explaining that Lee was, “in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. . . . selfless almost to a fault . . . noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history. From deep conviction I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s caliber would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities . . . we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.”

(snip)

Davis’s beloved Southern Historical Society would nonetheless prove critical to sacralizing the historical and personal reputation of the man who would actually become not just an embodiment of the highest ideals of the Lost Cause, but one whom succeeding generations of northern and southern whites alike found both admirable and inspiring. As the son of a Revolutionary War hero whose thirty-two years of exemplary military service had actually earned him an invitation to lead the Union Army in suppressing the southern rebellion, Robert Edward Lee had known his own very personal Gethsemane before respectfully declining this offer, explaining that he could not bring himself to take up arms against his native state. In his role as Commander of the Army of Northern Virginia, Lee had quickly earned the respect of comrades and foes alike, and when it had finally become inescapably apparent that nothing was to be gained from fighting further, he had respectfully rejected Jefferson Davis’s call for continued resistance through guerilla tactics that would reduce his men to “mere bands of marauders” and serve only to inflict further suffering on the civilian population. In stark contrast to Davis’s unbridled bitterness, Lee had advised his fellow southerners to “unite in honest efforts to obliterate the effects of the war” and endeavor to “promote harmony and good feeling.” Finally, instead of launching an undignified and divisive campaign for personal vindication, Lee had humbly sequestered himself in relative obscurity as president of little Washington College until his death in 1870.

(snip)

Finally, there is surely polarization enough over the far more substantive and urgent concerns of a needful present without incessant quarreling over how the past is represented. When an Annapolis councilman called for the former slave port to issue an official apology for the “perpetual pain, distrust and bitterness” that slavery inflicted on black people, a constituent allowed that she would “prefer that the aldermen have a resolution to atone for the lack of a decent middle school curriculum in Anne Arundel County.”

For all his apparent personal virtues, there is no denying Robert E. Lee’s direct connection with the cause of slavery or his symbolic appropriation by those who succeeded in replacing slavery with Jim Crow. Unfortunately, although it might make for good political melodrama and perhaps even gladden the departed soul of Frederick Douglass, stripping Lee’s name from a school is unlikely to reduce overcrowding in its classrooms, upgrade its computer or science labs, or end drug trafficking in its corridors. If it would, ironically enough, Lee—at least the one Dwight Eisenhower saw in the portrait on his wall—would likely be the first to join Douglass in endorsing the move.

I've posted this before but I believe politics and social change work in the same manner as Newton's Third Law of motion in physics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_laws_of_motion

3.Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to that of the first body.

Or another way I view it is "hate breeds hate," so the method of how our society changes is every bit as important as the end result and if done wisely more likely to reach optimum results.

[pnwmom]

129. Are you aware that after the war, Lee opposed giving

black people the right to vote, and he recommended that black people be deported from Virginia?

The bottom line is, to the vast majority of the kids in any school, Robert E. Lee is known for one thing only: being a Confederate general in the war of rebellion. Assuming we would like to live in a country that isn't always fighting along regional lines, what possible good is there in continuing to celebrate him?

I think if we could wave a wand and magically erase all the signs of the Confederacy from the South -- the flags, the statues, the school names, and other reminders of the "lost cause," that in a generation there would be significantly less support for causes like the tea party. I think these symbols are more than just background noise. I think they help to keep stirring the pot -- serving as a continual reminder of the war with the north, and making the leaders of that war heroes -- and by extension, making heroes of all the modern day leaders who are continually setting themselves against the Federal government.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Lee

Postwar politics:

Lee told the Committee, "...every one with whom I associate expresses kind feelings towards the freedmen. They wish to see them get on in the world, and particularly to take up some occupation for a living, and to turn their hands to some work." Lee also expressed his "willingness that blacks should be educated, and ... that it would be better for the blacks and for the whites." Lee forthrightly opposed allowing blacks to vote: "My own opinion is that, at this time, they cannot vote intelligently, and that giving them the vote would lead to a great deal of demagogism, and lead to embarrassments in various ways. Lee also recommended the deportation of African Americans from Virginia and even mentioned that Virginians would give aid in the deportation. "I think it would be better for Virginia if she could get rid of them [African Americans]. ... I think that everyone there would be willing to aid it.”

[Uncle Joe]

130. Are you aware, that's not too far removed from what Lincoln thought?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln_and_slavery

Colonization[edit]

One of several failed colonization attempts during Lincoln's presidency was on Île à Vache off the coast of Haiti.Colonization of freed slaves was long seen by many as an answer to the problem of slavery. One of President Abraham Lincoln's policies during his administration was the voluntary colonization of African American Freedmen. Historians have debated and have remained divided over whether Lincoln's racial views (or merely his acceptance of the political reality) included that African Americans could not live in the same society as white Americans. Benjamin Butler stated that Lincoln in 1865 firmly denied that "racial harmony" would be possible in the United States.[28] One view (known to scholars as the "lullaby" theory) is that Lincoln adopted colonization for Freedmen in order to make his Emancipation Proclamation politically acceptable.[28] This view has been challenged with new evidence of the Lincoln administration's attempts to colonize freedmen in British Honduras after the Emancipation Proclamation took effect on January 1, 1863.[28]

Political stance[edit]Since the 1840s Lincoln had been an advocate of the American Colonization Society program of colonizing blacks in Liberia. In an October 16, 1854,[29]:a speech at Peoria, Illinois[30] (transcribed after the fact by Lincoln himself),[29]:b Lincoln points out the immense difficulties of such a task are an obstacle to finding an easy way to quickly end slavery.[29]:c [31]

If all earthly power were given to me [...] my first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia,—to their own native land. But a moment’s reflection would convince me that whatever of high hope (as I think there is) there may be in this, in the long run, its sudden execution is impossible.[32][33]

According to historian Paul Escott, Lincoln thus favored a system of gradual emancipation that would allow for controlled management of free Negroes.[33]

Whether one likes the phrase or not, these men were indeed products of their time with all the virtue and vice.

They could scarcely conceive that blacks and whites could live together or marry one another, their world was entirely different than ours.

[geek tragedy]

29. Well, I'm sure the Waffen SS had some lads who sacrificed

everything to protect Germany. Doesn't change the fact that they fought on behalf of pure evil.

[RainDog]

32. exactly

there is no reasonable defense for the Confederate flag.

none.

[Uncle Joe]

34. Two points, The Waffen SS was fighting for a dictatorship, the Confederacy was democratically

elected for it's day although women and African Americans weren't allowed to vote, the same held true in the North.

Hitler burned the Bundestag or German Parlament and made himself dictator.

Furthermore Nazi Germany tried to take over the world invading other nations to further white supremacy, the Confederacy was just seeking independence from the U.S.

[RainDog]

36. For the purpose of enslaving people

the purpose of the confederacy was to enslave other people.

that was the purpose.

that was the reason for the war.

it doesn't matter why anyone actually fought. the outcome of the fight was either to keep or abolish slavery.

the civil war itself was not enough to abolish slavery.

it required an amendment to the constitution that none of the asshole southern politicians could undo.

it astonishes me, Uncle Joe, that you are a liberal, or so I assume, and yet you defend a flag that was genocidal in its intent.

[Uncle Joe]

48. I don't defend the Confederate Flag, I defend unity of the American People.

The Confederate Flag only has power if you grant it, the power to divide the nation.

[RainDog]

51. such bullshit.

really.

goodbye.

[Uncle Joe]

54. It's true whether you wish to believe it or not.

Peace to you.

[RainDog]

56. so you support flying the swastika, too

I would assume, because it's only a symbol and only has as much power as someone allows it.

the history that it symbolizes has nothing to do with people's revulsion. Or, people should be ignorant of history so that assholes can fly a flag.

yeah.

it's true.

[Uncle Joe]

57. We're not part of Germany, we're the United States of America.

Germany has to work it out its' own demons.

[RainDog]

70. The confederate flag is a signifier

and it signifies a specific mentality. There is widespread national agreement about this. Unity about this. There was widespread revulsion about the appearance of the confederate flag in the nation's capital.

What it signifies, on the individual level, is that the person who finds this a harmless or useful symbol is an asshole.

It tells entire swaths of people who to avoid.

that's the reality of symbols and signification.

[Uncle Joe]

72. I agree symbols are signifiers

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2100077/Ku-Klux-Klan-Extraordinary-images-divisive-era-capture-day-reckoning-50-000-white-supremacists-marched-Washington-DC.html

and one can make of them whatever they wish.

[RainDog]

73. yes. many whites have been racist

throughout this nation's history.

but the flag that those assholes are appropriating does not belong with their ideology, as the civil war and the 13th amendment indicate.

The KKK came into existence as a result of the south losing the civil war. The institution and the flag, iow, are in opposition to one another. To justify their racism, the KKK wrapped themselves in the flag. Southerners who had migrated to the midwest brough their klan ideology with them.

as Sinclair Lewis noted - within the time frame more aligned with this photo - when fascism comes to America, it will carry a bible and wave a flag.

And, as we know, patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. Just ask Sarah Palin.

But for you to pretend that the KKK and the U.S. flag constitutes a valid argument that the confederate flag is not the flag of a treasonous slave holding bunch of assholes is a worthless attempt at false equivalence, yet again.

really disappointed in you.

[Uncle Joe]

80. The only point of that pic was to show how symbols can be used or misused.

As I've stated before symbols mean different things to different people, the great majority of Confederate Soldiers didn't own slaves and believed they were fighting to defend their home against invasion.

Only a small minority of people in the South actually had the money to own slaves, most were small townspeople or dirt farmers.

Just as the 13 colonies chose to leave Great Britain 89 years before, the Confederacy believed it had a right to leave the Union.

As my first post on this thread spelled out, the national flag of the Confederacy would more accurately signify Confederate Policy regarding slavery and secession than the Battle Flag.

The Battle Flag to most descendants of the Confederacy represented the troops in the field putting their lives at stake.

The KKK took up the Confederate Battle Flag after the Civil War because they knew that flag was more popular with the Southern People than the actual national Confederate Flag.

In no way shape or form have I or am I suggesting the South didn't have its' share of racists, but that wasn't limited to the South just more exaggerated due to a much greater concentration of African Americans living there and thus the chance of exposure and conflict was increased accordingly.

Large sections of the North never had contact as they were more homogeneous.

You keep bringing up false equivalence while disregarding the U.S. Flag's role and colonies before that in bascially taking the vast majority of the Continental United States from the Native Americans, using racism and committing genocide since the 1600s and that wasn't due to just the South.

It was a deliberate long term policy just as slavery had been.

[RainDog]

132. The point of the pic was to dismiss the issue of one particular flag

This is why so many people dislike what's perceived as white southern culture.

Who gives a fuck if you or others had an ancestor who died to support slavery? Who gives a fuck if your relative or others' fought for their "homeland" rather than slavery.

The reality is that the confederate flag exists because a part of this nation wanted to continue to own slaves, to see African-Americans as subhuman, and any other reason for this flag DOES NOT MATTER because of what it stood for.

A defense of this flag is spitting in the face of African-Americans in this nation.

And if some whites are so closed off from the reality of this world that they refuse to see this - well, that's why people so often lump southern whites into one big old cast iron pot of stupid.

How insensitive can you be, to dismiss the entire legacy of slavery, because your ancestor couldn't accept that it was better to side with those who lived north of the slavery line.

The issue of Native Americans is something else entirely. Yes, it's an issue, but it's a false analogy to claim that, because one flag has represented genocide and is use, another flag gets a pass for this history.

I have no quarrel with the reality that Native Americans got screwed by colonists. But that doesn't excuse the confederate flag. That's the false equivalence that has been explained repeatedly.

And, as I noted repeatedly, I'm not a person who cares much for flags, but I DO care about people I know, people who write professionally about this issue, and people who look at the impact of symbols upon children, etc. and I can say that anyone who defends this flag lacks some basic humanity, in my opinion.

[Uncle Joe]

133. In one breath you claim not to care much about flags, but obviously you do.

Who gives a fuck about what?

That's should be the question in anyone's mind.

Your argument claims not to give a fuck about what Native Americans think about the U.S. Flag, despite genocide and mass relocation to sqaulid reserves of the nation.

The only reasoning I can find for that kind of logic is because the U.S. won those Wars and/or because we're not Native Americans, they should just deal with it.

To remain consistent, if you wholesale condemn one symbol you must condemn the other.

I don't condemn the U.S. Flag and even if you "don't care much about it" I don't see you as condemning it either.

People fly flags for different reasons and symbols mean different things to different people.

You can either carte blanche disregard what peoples' motivations or cultures are and trash everybody regardless of the nuances of history and humanity, doing so only creates more blind hate which in turn feeds more hate or you can target your emotions to what's truly important, that being racism, regionalism, misogyny, homophobia, class warfare, war itself, the degradation of the environment, corporate supremacy etc. etc. all of which are alive today.

If you pursue the former, those other issues will only face additional hurdles to overcome as the people will be more easily divided, just as George Carlin quotes in that thread I linked to above.

So long as people let symbols master their passions, the nation's wounds will never heal as both Abraham Lincoln and Robert E. Lee wished and asked for at the end of the Civil War.

Both of those men were bigots if not racists by todays standards and I believe they were primarily referring to the white race binding up its' wounds, but we as a nation must transcend that message to include every American regardles of race, region, gender, sexual orientation or income status.

No doubt children are impacted by symbols but a wise parent, teacher or guardian will elevate that child (s) perception to be above the ambiguous power of symbols.

[RainDog]

135. no. you are lying about what I said

I never said what you claim was said about native americans and anyone can read this and see that you are lying.

the reality is that if you defend the confederate flag, you are not a person with much worth, to me.

[Uncle Joe]

136. This is what you said.

The issue of Native Americans is something else entirely. Yes, it's an issue, but it's a false analogy to claim that, because one flag has represented genocide and is use, another flag gets a pass for this history.

I have no quarrel with the reality that Native Americans got screwed by colonists. But that doesn't excuse the confederate flag. That's the false equivalence that has been explained repeatedly.

You're acknowledging that one flag represented genocide, (actually both have) but another flag shouldn't get a pass for history, that's the way I interpreted your post.

I'm using the definition of genocide which we discussed and you brought up in regards to the slave trade on that other thread, the mass displacement of societies and cultures being part of it, although there is more to the definiton of genocide as well.

You're seperating the two flags, condemning one and not the other, if you have condemned the U.S. Flag, I missed it.

I don't condemn or defend either flag, I do condemn racism no matter to whom the victim is.

Edit for P.S. It wasn't just colonists it was Americans after we became the United States as well.

[uponit7771]

101. Both flags "symbolize" something regardless of origin, racist defend flying of both

[Uncle Joe]

109. I agree, uponit. n/t

[Gravitycollapse]

59. Symbolic power is transcendental.

If we remove the genocidal, racist, hate-filled history of the Confederacy, what is left? The Confederacy stands for a bunch of lazy white assholes sitting on their front porch sipping sweet tea as "field niggers" tend the cotton.

There's nothing particularly inspiring in any of that.

[Uncle Joe]

61. If you believe the United States has lily white hands if you just removed the Confederacy, then

haven't been following history.

[Gravitycollapse]

64. Of course the United States is almost exclusively a history of injustices and genocide.

I take little or no pride in the historical significance of the United States. There are stateless movements within the United States that I find to be right and just. But as far as the governmental history goes, it's pretty bleak.

[Uncle Joe]

66. It sounds to me like we're in agreement.

Peace to you, Gravitycollapse.

[LanternWaste]

84. Or fly it... or display it... or celebrate it.

"he Confederate Flag only has power if you grant it..."

Or fly it... or display it... or celebrate it.

[Uncle Joe]

105. Well since I'm a liberal and a strong believer in the 1st Amendment, they pretty much have the right

to do that, but that in itself doesn't grant the flag power.

http://dictionary.reference.com/

lib·er·al/ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/ Show Spelled [lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl] Show IPA
adjective
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. ( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

Of course people can criticize them as well, that's also part of the 1st Amendment.

That begs the question what is the power of the Confederate Flag, is it to stir hatred and fear or as some contend to remember courage and great sacrifice?

I have no doubt there is both.

A final question does hatred feed on hatred?

[geek tragedy]

37. Well, the Nazis were also too civilized to own slaves.

And they won elections too.

The south fought for one belief: the inherent superiority of the white race. That was its core assumption, its foundation.

Just ask the 'democratically elected' CSA Vice President.

Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition.[1]

That belief is what the traitors fought and died for. That is the legacy their descendants honor.

And that is why our the white nationalist party, the Republicans, dominate elections there.

[Uncle Joe]

50. The Nazis did own slaves they worked them to death in concentration camps.

The Nazis used democracy to obtain power and then overthrough it to establish a dictatorship.

[JustAnotherGen]

74. Thank you geek

Finally moved into our house this past weekend - in NJ. Every day I drive by some idiot who has hung the Confederate Battle Flag in his window.

As a black American in the North that means a few things


I'm crossing the street when i walk down it. I will not trust the residents of that home.
They show up at my front door - its a direct threat.
My father fought for and eventually died as a result of fighting under the American flag. The Confederate flag was (as I was taught) the symbol of traitors to HIS America (a black man born and raised under the Jim Crow Regime of terror), and a symbol of Jim Crow.

The Swatiska has an interesting history. But it came to mean something very different even though the symbol existed for centuries - after Hitler and his crew got hold of it.

Whether anyone likes it or not - the one hundred years of blatant terror of blacks in the South are represented by that flag.

See - I don't care about slavery. But in my lifetime - I was raised by someone who was shot, exposed to the rainbow of agents, and sacrificed his long term physical and mental health for a country that wouldn't even allow him to cast a vote. And while he was hip deep in rice fields fertilized with human waste defending those vile people in the 1960's - they were raising that flag after they lynched kids and hung them on the campus at South Carolina State at Orangeburg.

All history of "glory, God, country" got erased when it was used for 100 years in its different forms as a representation of the Regime. And the South was a regime until the rest of the country finally got the brass to make them lose the "peace" once and for all.

[uponit7771]

99. +1

[johnnyrak88]

118. the whole SS thing is confused by many people

There wasn't just one "SS"

There was the 1930's version of the SS. There were the 1939 version of the Waffen SS, there was the Concentration Camp running SS, there was the 1943 SS and the 1945 SS.

They were all different and fought for different reasons.

Ironically in the Battle of Berlin 1945 the city was defended in part by SS combat soldiers who weren't even German! Dutch, Latvian, French, Norwegian and Swedish volunteers fought fanatically against what they saw as "the scourge of Communism" invading Europe.

And these soldiers had never touched a Jewish civilian, never burnt a village or shot prisoners.

To sum it up, the 1930's SS were the fanatics, brainwashed and cold. The Waffen SS soldiers during the war were frequently the volunteers who wanted to be in a top tier military group. And even later the SS was filled with European volunteers fighting for European nationalism.

[Gravitycollapse]

58. Those 300K died fighting for the wrong side.

Tough luck.

Fuck the Confederacy and all of its many, "diverse" flags.

[Uncle Joe]

60. As has hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans in our multitude of wars.

Whether it was against the Native Americans, Mexico, Spain, Iraq and countless wars in Central or South America.

I'm of two minds regarding the Civil War, I'm happy the South lost and sad the North won, it's been nothing but a festering wound for over 150 years.

[Gravitycollapse]

62. Many Americans have died fighting on the wrong side...

In an almost endless number of immoral, illegal wars. I can't say I feel particularly bad for the ones who knowingly went out and killed unjustly. That includes a good chunk of those who went and killed in Vietnam because they were too afraid to resist the draft.

War is a racket. If you don't understand that by the time you are of draft age, you didn't pay any attention in history class.

[Uncle Joe]

65. I totally agree, Gravitycollapse. n/t

[Paladin]

86. I think you're dealing in Neo-Confederate propaganda on this thread.

It happens from time to time, here on DU. And it's never, ever pleasant or convincing.

[Uncle Joe]

104. I'm dealing in history, are you suggesting the U.S. has always been on right side of its' many wars?

Sometimes history isn't pleasant, but it's still reality.

[johnnyrak88]

119. How did they know?

You're 18 years old with an education that stopped at age 9 and you follow a horse in a field for 14 hours a day. At church they talk about Northern aggressors wanting to burn Southern farms and such things...

What do you expect the kid to do? Does anyone really think that the average Confederate soldier was following the Lincoln/Douglas debates or the slavery debate?

[kydo]

5. Well I see the second one almost everyday

down the street this house displays this flag




and this flag



of course during the 2012 election they must have had 6 romney/ryan posters not yard signs they were bigger.

[arcane1]

7. "celebrating only the Civil War, not some cultural heritage of the Confederacy"

Nailed it!

Although, to be sure, there are plenty of dumb-asses who love that flag and have no idea of the distinctions you outlined above, and are pretty ignorant when it comes to history. Many of those people love the flag because of some "rebel pride" bullshit.

Speaking as one born & raised in the capitol of the confederacy

[Hoyt]

9. Those and that yellow Garden flag have become a symbol of hatred.

[dflprincess]

10. I fail to see what there is to celebrate about the Civil War.

Except that it did bring an end to slavery - but those of us who celebrate that generally don't fly the flag of the Confederacy in any of its forms.

Whatever people want to pretend it once stood for, today it is nothing but a symbol for bigorty and hate.

[LostOne4Ever]

12. If it was truly about celebrating southern heritage and pride

Then there are a TON of symbols they could use NOT associated with racism, bigotry, and racism. A steamboat, Elvis Presely, Mark Twain, Founding father after founding father, or MLK!!!

Something like this:


No, the stars and bars are about racism and treason. Those are the first thing anyone thinks of when they see that flag, and that is what it means to EVERYONE.

[Adam-Bomb]

15. Meh.

First, thanks, OP for the history lesson for those who don't know any better,

and secondly, who cares about folks flying and/or displaying that flag?

I'm Southern and fly Old Glory every day. I got bigger things to worry about
than the Stars and Bars. it doesn't even register on my radar.

If a piece of cloth upsets somebody THAT much, maybe they should up their meds.

[RainDog]

21. tell that to Jews who see a swastika

the callousness of some people in regard to this symbol of oppression is astonishing.

Good that you don't wave that flag.

Some asshole, however, waved that flag in front of the White House, which has a sitting biracial president.

This matters for this nation - this continued validation of a symbol of genocide.

No one should get away with using this flag without comment, unless it's okay for neo-nazis to flag its genocidal flag as well.

[Art_from_Ark]

22. I'm Southern, too, and the flag does have meaning

If it is used in, for example, some sort of historical reenactment, I have no problem with it. However, when I see it proudly displayed on the back of a pick-up truck, or in front of someone's house, then it is a clear signal to me that whoever is displaying that flag is best avoided.

[kestrel91316]

31. Tell that to your average African American.

[JustAnotherGen]

75. +1

[JustAnotherGen]

77. It's threatening

I'm telling you that as a black American. When I see it in front of a home, on a sticker on a car, etc etc I take that as a person who thinks I'm a "nigger" who needs to get in her place.

That is not you - but this America and I have a right to think that, say that, and behave accordingly. I can't be legislated or bullied into playing nice with someone who I feel is hostile to my presence in America.

[Marrah_G]

96. I agree

It is not just a historical symbol of the southern army from the civil war. It has evolved over time to be the symbol of white supremists, of hatred, of violence. If someone chooses to fly that flag then they are choosing to take on that symbolism.

That is, afterall what a flag is. A symbol.

[uponit7771]

100. wow... "who cares about folks flying that flag".. freakin wow

[baldguy]

16. They all represent the enemies of America, and celebrate racism.

[1000words]

24. Graphically speaking, the battle flag is quite well done.

The cultural ideology it symbolizes however, is antiquated and morally bankrupt.

[Eleanors38]

33. An interesting topic, the graphic qualities of flags...

I've always considered the layout and colors of the old Soviet Union flag attractive, and Macy's: Didn't they lift that star from an old Yugoslavian MiG? People regularly confuse the Texas, Cuban and Puerto Rican flags.

[geek tragedy]

27. They are all the flag of treason, slavery, and white

supremacism.

The only place they belong is imprinted on toilet paper.

[kestrel91316]

30. They're just displaying their racism. That's all it's about.

It's like a secret handshake, only not close to secret. So the good old boys can identify each other and know when they are in the company of likeminded racists.

[struggle4progress]

42. I like to call it the Brainless Banner

[Deep13]

44. The present use of the rectangular version of the battle flag...

...(the actual battle flag was usually square) probably dates from the CSA centennial in 1961. That coincided with the growing civil rights movement and the reaction to it.

[LaydeeBug]

53. It's not the flag, it's the SYMBOLISM and you know it.

It's what that flag represents.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

67. Mississippi state flag

[JustAnotherGen]

79. Eh?

And slavery was finally abolished in Mississippi by the State's adoption of the 13th Amendment earlier this year!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mississippi-finally-ratifies-slavery-ban-article-1.1267133

So glad they finally got with the program!

[joshcryer]

68. And neo-Nazi's tend fly the Confederate flags.

Especially the one with the blood stripe.

[thelordofhell]

71. Well, one thing's for sure..............

We'll never see that flag waived in front of the White House while a Senator makes a stump speech and is followed by people openly calling for kicking out The President Of The Unites States..........ooops


Tell me again why Ted Cruz hasn't been censured yet??

[Niceguy1]

76. generations hvae passed and people are still arguing

Over it and questioning peoples motives.

When will it end?

[quinnox]

78. I am not touchy about flags, and consider it a freedom of speech issue

It is part of what the United States gets right, no censorship of flags or symbols, not even the worst historical symbols such as Nazi ones.

If someone or some group wants to fly the confederate flag, they have every right to. If someone or some group wants to protest that same flag, then similarly, they have every right to.

I know a lot of people get very touchy about flags, and symbols, and what they represent, but not me.

[Go Vols]

121. +1

[eShirl]

83. Close enough. n/t

[Iggo]

85. My thoughts exactly.

[annabanana]

87. "Celebrating the Civil War"

Well, if THAT'S all flying that flag is doing, I guess it's ok . . . .

[d_r]

88. look at these comments

https://www.facebook.com/WRCBtv

scroll down to the Kanye West story and look at the comments.

I'm a southerner, I was a kid during the dukes of hazard generation. As a child I didn't understand the full picture of what is associated with this flag. As an adult I do, but some people still don't.

ETA if you don't want to bother the trouble of clicking to find the story, here is one of the worst of the comments-
"His flag?!?! What the crap!?!? I dont think so boy... He needs to get a real job cause he sure cant rap or sing. All hes good at is causing trouble."

[JNelson6563]

89. The only one that mattered.

[SeattleVet]

126. Beat me to it!

[Aristus]

90. Flying any of those flags at all is a dick thing to do.

They can fly the American flag, can't they?

[In_The_Wind]

91. I don't fly my Confederate flag but I still have a very old one.

[Aristus]

92. I have an old pic of my Dad from when he was about 20 or so.

He is shown teasing his dog with a little tabletop Confederate flag. Didn't notice it when I was a kid; don't know what to make of it now.

[In_The_Wind]

95. The one I have is the Confederate Battle Flag.

I seriously had plans of moving back south some day.
I grew up near Atlanta before it reached a population of 1,000,000.

[mockmonkey]

93. I wonder what would happen if...

you burned an American flag in front of someone carrying a Confederate Battle flag? Would most be conflicted?

There is a guy around town that drives a pick up with an huge American flag on one side of the truck bed and a huge Confederate Battle flag on the other side. I always thought, why don't you choose a side already?

To me the war was about the rich mans rights to exploit anything and anyone for profit. In the end I think they won the war even though he lost the battle.

[aikoaiko]

94. And its not the Stars and Bars either.

Stars and Bars is Confederate, but it looks like this as the 7 star version:

[bermudat]

97. It may not be the Confederate flag, but it is the Confederate swastika.

You have never seen a lynching or cross burning without the stars and bars
flying nearby.

[Iggo]

98. It's the adopted flag of racists...

...and that's all that matters.

[uponit7771]

102. +1, period.... end of story

[johnnyrak88]

106. seems to me

that flying the battle flag is a tribute to soldiers and warfare while flying the national flag is a tribute to the policies and motivations of the war

[hedgehog]

110. My favorite story of the Confederate Battle flag -

(I've posted this here before, so forgive me for repeating myself)

My dad served in the Navy during the Korean War. When his ship came into harbor, there was another Navy ship flying the Confederate battle flag. Dad's captain warned the other ship to take down that enemy banner or prepare to come under fire.

The flag came down promptly.

[yellowcanine]

114. Yawn. Filing in the "Useless Discussions" Folder

[DinahMoeHum]

127. Does it really matter? AFAIC, the only use for ALL those flags. . .

. . .should be toilet paper.

[xfundy]

128. WRONG, sir, you are WRONG. THIS is the confederate flag:

[RagAss]

131. Because it's hard walking around with a burning cross.

[B Calm]

134. No matter what, they are all loser flags!