- Joined
- Jul 7, 2015
- Messages
- 39,463
- Reaction score
- 10,165
- Location
- California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Nobody is proposing digging up people's graves and desecrating their remains. Calm down your hysterics.
This is about flying a flag that clearly advertises socially controversial connotations over state-owned property.
Fly it over your property, fine.
You don't get to complain about them pulling the Dukes of Hazard. Sorry. That's how it works. They are free to pull the show out of syndication, just like you're free to buy the dvd box set. You don't get to complain that people aren't making it easier to retain an offensive symbol, nobody else has any obligation to do that. They're just being free.
Memphis seeks to remove remains of Confederate general from park | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Um...yea they are actually.
And it is kind of stupid to pull dukes of hazard. Why? Mainly because it is stupid that people are still pissed off at this.
As we've documented many times, horsegirl, you "know" a lot of things that either never happened and are not true.
The best part of this debate is that I've seen more flags now that people are complaining about them. And I live in the south lol.
And you have proven so many times that the history of the South has been rewritten to make the South look bad. Thank you for once again proving that to be true
This discussion is not about digging up remains.
There might be other reasons to dig up remains.
This discussion is about flying the flag. Go start another thread if you want to discuss something off topic.
You think it's stupid to pull dukes. Cool. You're free to your opinion. It's stupid to complain about. It would be foolish for a large tv station to give a prominent symbol of racism front-and-center treatment because it would limit their consumer base. That's how business works, finding the least common denominator. That's why people get all pissed off about PC-ness, but it's the way of the world that a bigger audience means you have to be more responsible to not project an image that is widely offensive. In this country, you're free to grow up, or whine about it.
a nasty cruel smile of gloating narcissism.1) you said nobody was trying. People are. You introduced it. I am free to point it out.
2) dukes of hazard isn't a symbol of racism. That is why it is stupid.
PC is tyranny with a smile.
As opposed to trying to make the maintaining and expansion of slavery look good.And you have proven so many times that the history of the South has been rewritten to make the South look bad. Thank you for once again proving that to be true
1) you said nobody was trying. People are. You introduced it. I am free to point it out.
2) dukes of hazard isn't a symbol of racism. That is why it is stupid.
PC is tyranny with a smile.
1) what i meant was that our arguments against flying that particular flag are not also saying we should dig up remains. No one here, in saying that flag should not be flown on government property, is saying that it also immediately follows that we should dig up graves. You can create an imaginary claim to defeat, but it won't be mine.
2) the dukes of hazard widely contains and popularizes an offensive symbol. If you grew up on Nazi propaganda videos, and really liked them, you would NOT be allowed to force their broadcast on people. THAT would be tyranny.
Political correctness is being mature in the face of globalization. Being considerate and aware of a wider spectrum of views than that of maw and paw down by the dunkin' pond.
Let's examine 1. People have done just that. And it won't stop with the flag. It will go on to bones and monuments. It will go too far. And the question will be what damage will have been done. Anyone not concerned about their first amendment isn't paying attention
On par or maybe even worse than the Dred Scot decision.
1) what i meant was that our arguments against flying that particular flag are not also saying we should dig up remains. No one here, in saying that flag should not be flown on government property, is saying that it also immediately follows that we should dig up graves. You can create an imaginary claim to defeat, but it won't be mine.
2) the dukes of hazard widely contains and popularizes an offensive symbol. If you grew up on Nazi propaganda videos, and really liked them, you would NOT be allowed to force their broadcast on people. THAT would be tyranny.
Political correctness is being mature in the face of globalization. Being considerate and aware of a wider spectrum of views than that of maw and paw down by the dunkin' pond.
It's just a deflection of the real issue. And we know why you and others are so eager to deflectLmao, just because I don't like the idea of digging up dead people or removing things means I am a white supremacist now?
Good gods, then what would that make slaveowners and their apologists still going on today. Do we get to call you nazis? Worse than nazis? Get. A. Grip. Your ancestors started a war and got their asses handed to them and then were forgiven. Not a single leader of that rebellion that cost more lives than any other war we've fought was hanged for his treason as they should have been in those days.He's still a ****ing terroist by today standards and a bloody war criminal who burned most of the cites down and also ordered his men to go ****ing crazy on the civilian populations of the south which was not kosher at the time as they had no way to defend themselves.
Do you know how to debate without calling people racist? Yes I know thats what the books say on Richmond during his March they burnt their city to keep him from looting the place. sweetie And just because he told the cities before hand doesn't make what he did righteous, I bet you approve of the way Bush handled Iraq?
And you have proven so many times that the history of the South has been rewritten to make the South look bad.
Demanding people use the right terminology or face persecution is anything but "being considerate of a wider spectrum of views".
Political correctness is demanding that everyone use what is deemed as the politically correct way to view something or be called a racist, sexist, bigot, etc.
Its about shutting people who don't agree with the politically correct views up, and preventing dialogue they don't like by keying in on certain words, whether they be overt, or even *code* words that are changed and added as often as underwear.
Translation: If you don't fall in line with politically correct terms...... Your a racist/bigot/sexist/????-ist !!!!!!!!Political correctness is ENTIRELY VOLUNTARY. You're well within your rights to be as bigoted as you want. Just don't expect everyone to cheer you on while you do.
Who is celebrating racist idols?The idea that you should be elevated to hero status for celebrating racist idols is just bizarre.
I guess then you think slavery and treason followed by over 100 years of brutality and violence against the formerly enslaved people are good things. That is the story of the south in this country. No one was innocent of the crimes but there certainly were degrees of guilt and the south was the center where the guiltiest of all dwelt.
As opposed to trying to make the maintaining and expansion of slavery look good.
This isn't another "the Civil War wasn't about slavery" post, is it? If it is, it runs in stark contrast to the Southern states official secession statements, which freely admitted that the lead up to the Civil War had everything to do with slavery.
Confederate History - Dispelling The Myths Nice try, but truth prevails again
The most widespread myth is also the most basic. Across America, 60 percent to 75 percent of high-school history teachers believe and teach that the South seceded for state's rights, said Jim Loewen, author of "Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong" (Touchstone, 1996) and co-editor of "The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: The 'Great Truth' about the 'Lost Cause'" (University Press of Mississippi, 2010).
"It's complete B.S.," Loewen told LiveScience. "And by B.S., I mean 'bad scholarship.'" -6 Civil War Myths, Busted | 150th Anniversary of Civil War | Slavery, Race Relations & Battlefield Medicine
Confederate states did claim the right to secede, but no state claimed to be seceding for that right. In fact, Confederates opposed states’ rights — that is, the right of Northern states not to support slavery.
On Dec. 24, 1860, delegates at South Carolina’s secession convention adopted a “Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.” It noted “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery” and protested that Northern states had failed to “fulfill their constitutional obligations” by interfering with the return of fugitive slaves to bondage. Slavery, not states’ rights, birthed the Civil War. - Five myths about why the South seceded - The Washington Post
On 2 March 1861, the Morrill Tariff was signed into law by outgoing Democratic President James Buchanan to protect northern infant industries. A pernicious lie quickly formed around the tariff’s passage, a lie suggesting that somehow this tariff had caused the US Civil War. By ignoring slavery’s central role in precipitating secession and Civil War, this tariff myth has survived in the United States for more than a century and a half – and needs to be debunked once and for all. - Debunking the Civil War Tariff Myth | Imperial & Global Forum
Most historians agree that slavery was one of the primary issues leading to the Civil War. South Carolina seceded from the Union because of the clash between slave states and free states over the expansion of slavery. The Republican Party, then a new political party, made the fight against slavery in U.S. territories a key issue.
Historical revisionists have tried to whitewash history and improve the image of the Old South by eliminating slavery from the mix. And groups such as the Sons of Confederate Veterans insist the war was fought over self-governance and states’ rights. The war was about states’ rights, the right of Southern states to own black people. - Black History Month: Debunking the 10 biggest myths about black history | theGrio
Not true, says Levine, who has written several books on the Civil War era. While many assert that the South wanted to secede to protect states’ rights, tariffs, and other matters, Levine says, the historical record of North-South disputes during the 40 years prior to the conflict “shows unmistakably that slavery was central to it.” - The Many Myths of the Civil War « 2011 « News Archive « News « College of LAS « Illinois
Yes, yes it does.
SO you're still upset that the yankee revisionism gets shot down so you cite more revisionists
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?