when white will embrace what is right

[Thorgasm]

China, Iraq, England, France, Spain and the list goes on.

If that were the case I would still not agree. It is as much a part of the south as red beans and rice. It is also part of our history, good or bad.

Because some find it offensive or better yet "racist" we should remove it? Just because some ignorant fringe group uses it to represent racism does not make it racist.

I wouldn't say it's just because a fringe group that uses it to represent racism.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I wouldn't say it's just because a fringe group that uses it to represent racism.

Some people use it to represent their regional beliefs.

Others use it to display their dislike of federalism.

 

[Thorgasm]

Some people use it to represent their regional beliefs.

Others use it to display their dislike of federalism.

Some people use it to lower the value of their monster trucks.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Some people use it to lower the value of their monster trucks.

I am sympathetic to southern independence but some of those make themselves look dumb as hell for sure.

 

[rivrrat]

I proudly fly the Confederate flag whenever I get the chance. If anyone wants to incorrectly assume it's racist, they can ****ing kiss my ass.

 

[Thorgasm]

I proudly fly the Confederate flag whenever I get the chance. If anyone wants to incorrectly assume it's racist, they can ****ing kiss my ass.

What is there to be proud about?

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

What is there to be proud about?

Many people view the "Civil War" as a War of Independence.

By definition "The Civil War" was not a civil war.

 

[rivrrat]

What is there to be proud about?

Same reason anyone would be proud to fly any flag. I believe in what they stood for, and what they fought for: State's Rights

 

[Thorgasm]

Same reason anyone would be proud to fly any flag. I believe in what they stood for, and what they fought for: State's Rights

Are you familiar with the Cornerstone Speech by Alexander Stephens?

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other —though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution—African slavery as it exists amongst us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone 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. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind—from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just—but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.

 

[rivrrat]

Are you familiar with the Cornerstone Speech by Alexander Stephens?

I'm familiar with the Confederates fighting for state's rights.

 

[Thorgasm]

I'm familiar with the Confederates fighting for state's rights.

That was one component which was directly tied to slavery.

 

[StandUpChuck]

I'm a proud Northerner. My husband's great uncle served with President Lincoln. I don't think slavery was just wrong, I think it was an atrocity (don't forget we weren't the only nation to have slaves). But when I see the Rebel Flag, I do not think of racism. Southerners are the proudest people I've met. We won the war. That should have been enough. They didn't need carpet baggers and other low life raping their way of life when they were trying to rebuild. Had Lincoln survived, he never would have allowed that. The Confederate Flag represents a way of life (without the slaves) that we didn't have to take from them. Let 'em be proud.

I'm white, and I've never embraced what wasn't right. :roll: Obama has a history of surrounding himself with racist fools who he "had no idea they felt that way." He's either a real bad judge of character or a liar and/or a closet racist. It was high time the US elected a person of color. Too bad it happened to be this tool.

It's funny that the usual suspects can have a problem with the Confederate Flag and attach a meaning THEY have to it, but when a racist preacher sh*ts on white people during an inaugural ceremony, they just don't see the issue. :roll:

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

That was one component which was directly tied to slavery.

I think you are ignoring the overall concept.

The federal government was raising import tariffs and southern states relied on imports for their economy.
Their economy at the time was largely agriculture. Its easy for northern states who were the first to legalize slavery and use it to their advantage demonize the southern states who had not caught up. Of the original 13 colonies slavery was illegal in Georgia and legal in Massachusetts in the beginning.

Nearly everyone admits that slavery was wrong but everyone thinks that if the Unions forces had not invaded that slavery would still persist today which is not true.

Mechanization of agriculture would have wiped out the need for slavery and in my opinion race relations would be 100x better than they are today.

 

[Thorgasm]

I think you are ignoring the overall concept.

I think you are ignoring the Cornerstone Speech.

The federal government was raising import tariffs and southern states relied on imports for their economy.
Their economy at the time was largely agriculture. Its easy for northern states who were the first to legalize slavery and use it to their advantage demonize the southern states who had not caught up. Of the original 13 colonies slavery was illegal in Georgia and legal in Massachusetts in the beginning.

Yes, that was another aspect. The Vice President of the CSA said it was African slavery as I've quoted above.

Nearly everyone admits that slavery was wrong but everyone thinks that if the Unions forces had not invaded that slavery would still persist today which is not true.

I don't know anyone who thinks slavery would exist today if the Union forces hadn't invaded.

Mechanization of agriculture would have wiped out the need for slavery and in my opinion race relations would be 100x better than they are today.

I don't know how you arrive at that opinion. Racism existed overtly and institutionally for another 100 years, even in the north.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I think you are ignoring the Cornerstone Speech.

No I see it. Both the north and the south used it for propaganda because saying "the north is gonna tax us more" coming from business owners to regular folks just doesn't do the trick.

The commoners didn't give a crap if the various agri-businesses payed more taxes and to that the local politicians were having their power contested.

Yes, that was another aspect. The Vice President of the CSA said it was African slavery as I've quoted above.

See above.

I don't know anyone who thinks slavery would exist today if the Union forces hadn't invaded.

I'm used to having explain to people this fact out of their own sheer ignorance. Spike lee made a dumb ass movie about it to.

Didn't mean to suggest you believed that.

I don't know how you arrive at that opinion. Racism existed overtly and institutionally for another 100 years, even in the north.

Yea but think about it. The northern states came and destroyed your home and your livelihood because they were freeing black people, you'd be pissed to.

Don't forget the loyal leagues and carpet baggers.

 

[Thorgasm]

No I see it. Both the north and the south used it for propaganda because saying "the north is gonna tax us more" coming from business owners to regular folks just doesn't do the trick.

The commoners didn't give a crap if the various agri-businesses payed more taxes and to that the local politicians were having their power contested.

I don't buy that it was used for propaganda. Propaganda would be saying the the free blacks in the north were unable to assimilate and white women were being raped in epidemic proportions. (I'm not claiming they said that. I'm just using that as an example.)

With the division between north and south, if it was primarily about state's rights, that case could have been made easily. It would go like: "How can those people a 1000 miles away tell us how to live when they don't know our concerns?"

I'm used to having explain to people this fact out of their own sheer ignorance. Spike lee made a dumb ass movie about it to.

Didn't mean to suggest you believed that.

I didn't see the Spike Lee movie. I guess I don't know as ignorant people as you do.

I didn't think you thought I thought that.

Yea but think about it. The northern states came and destroyed your home and your livelihood because they were freeing black people, you'd be pissed to.

Don't forget the loyal leagues and carpet baggers.

Why did the north have racism too?

And besides, that would only last for a generation. We had two world wars in that timespan.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I don't buy that it was used for propaganda. Propaganda would be saying the the free blacks in the north were unable to assimilate and white women were being raped in epidemic proportions. (I'm not claiming they said that. I'm just using that as an example.)

With the division between north and south, if it was primarily about state's rights, that case could have been made easily. It would go like: "How can those people a 1000 miles away tell us how to live when they don't know our concerns?"

I can't irrefutably prove it I don't think anyone can. It wasn't just propaganda but was perfect to attract the common people. It had a two sides first if it was going to happen your economy will be screwed and you could use it as the reason to recruit soldiers.
State rights were apart of it to.

I didn't see the Spike Lee movie. I guess I don't know as ignorant people as you do.

I didn't think you thought I thought that.

Man I've heard it all from everyone about it. I usually never say anything and just walk away or change the subject.

Why did the north have racism too?

And besides, that would only last for a generation. We had two world wars in that timespan.

First its just belief structure. If your told all your life that you are naturally superior to someone else what else where to believe.

The war wasn't very popular for the common people in the north because they were the ones being drafted to fight it. You'd be angry if you were fighting to free people you thought were inferior to yourself.

Most of these people were ignorant as hell. That **** lasts for generations.
Economic devistation also lasted in the south up until about 30-50 years ago.