Confederate flag? Yes or no?

[AxlisOld]

Not to get too involved, but didn't you tell him not to just rag on someone, but to make a point also? Seems like he did just what you asked.

Just saying.

[OmarBradley]

read what I wrote again , real slow, and without your liberal posturing, on guard reactionism making your fingers type before you even try to let it sink in.

You were arguing that slavery was a preferred alternative to Reconstruction and Jim Crow......... maybe that's not what you meant to say. But that's what you said.

Edited June 29, 2015 by OmarBradley

[Apollo]

Axlsold and Lenny - great responses in this topic. Nice job.

[Apollo]

It's been a rough week for rednecks everywhere.

Y'know, if someone was saying shit like 'well the n!ggers certainly had a rough week, what with Charlestown and all' that wouldnt be okay and thats like the umpteenth time you've made mention of rednecks, its kinda dull of you, just saying.

Very fair point.

[Apollo]

I'm also some who has studied these subjects extensively, perhaps better than anyone who regularly visits this forum. So the notion that I'm somehow blind to the racial injustices since the end of the Civil War is fucking nonsense. Jim Crow, segregation, mass incarceration: I'm well versed in the ugliness

oh here we go with that "I'm smarter than anyone on here schtick again".

Do you ever get over yourself or is it a life long love affair?

So knock off the "i know better that you do" shit and grow up.

Have you EVER been wrong about Anything? check yourself.

Last warning: making your point and move the fuck on. Any more of this petty sniping bullshit and you're gone. I'm fucking tired of your bullshit and inability to make a point without personal attacks.

Don't like it? Then fuck off.

As for the rest of your "dissertation," I'll address that later.

You've told Len to fuck off and you've told Shades to fuck off.

Shouldn't you follow the rules that you tell others to follow?

I'm sure you will tell me to fuck off and threaten to ban me now. But maybe you need to sit back and chill a little bit. And ask yourself if it is fair to have a double standard of the way you run this forum. You and people that you agree with are allowed to mock others and to tell people to fuck off if you disagree with them. Shouldn't you and those who disagree with you be held to the same standards as the rest of us?????

You own the place so you can so whatever you want. But You don't treat all posters equally......which kind of goes against the way you portray yourself in terms of the core values that make up who you are.

You are an extremely smart guy. And used to be one of the posters on here that I respected the most. Top five, no doubt. But you have really changed man.

[Len Cnut]

For my part you can tell me to fuck off all you like Downz' it's cool, as long as you love me really

Edited June 29, 2015 by Len B'stard

[downzy]

I'm also some who has studied these subjects extensively, perhaps better than anyone who regularly visits this forum. So the notion that I'm somehow blind to the racial injustices since the end of the Civil War is fucking nonsense. Jim Crow, segregation, mass incarceration: I'm well versed in the ugliness

oh here we go with that "I'm smarter than anyone on here schtick again".

Do you ever get over yourself or is it a life long love affair?

So knock off the "i know better that you do" shit and grow up.

Have you EVER been wrong about Anything? check yourself.

Last warning: making your point and move the fuck on. Any more of this petty sniping bullshit and you're gone. I'm fucking tired of your bullshit and inability to make a point without personal attacks.

Don't like it? Then fuck off.

As for the rest of your "dissertation," I'll address that later.

You've told Len to fuck off and you've told Shades to fuck off.

Shouldn't you follow the rules that you tell others to follow?

I'm sure you will tell me to fuck off and threaten to ban me now. But maybe you need to sit back and chill a little bit. And ask yourself if it is fair to have a double standard of the way you run this forum. You and people that you agree with are allowed to mock others and to tell people to fuck off if you disagree with them. Shouldn't you and those who disagree with you be held to the same standards as the rest of us?????

You own the place so you can so whatever you want. But You don't treat all posters equally......which kind of goes against the way you portray yourself in terms of the core values that make up who you are.

You are an extremely smart guy. And used to be one of the posters on here that I respected the most. Top five, no doubt. But you have really changed man.

Apollo, as I posted earlier, if you have nothing to add to the topic, then please do not post. What don't you understand about my previous warning on this? If you have an issue with my moderation style, send me a PM. Do not derail threads with posts that have nothing to do with either the topic or members' posts. Final warning on this.

As for the issue of using heated language in regards to contentious topic, let's be clear: if two individuals, and I'll use Len and I as an example, are squaring off on a topic, then there's a certain amount of space for heated language and some give and take. I took exception to Len accusing me of moral cowardice since as someone who posts here a lot and involves himself in many threads on politics, he should know that more than anyone I'm well aware of America's moral sins with respect to race. I felt it was unwarranted charge and used some heated language in response. I have nothing against Len and have been enjoying our conversation, even if some of the things have irked me at times.

As for Shades, if he wants to cherry pick my remarks, take them out of context, and the attack me personally before he even makes his point, that's not going to be accepted. It's one thing for two individuals to go back and forth on something, it's another when a third party who has already been warned on the matter decides to kick off his post with a personal snipe. Moreover, his shots at me had nothing to do with the conversation at hand.

At the end of the day, if you don't like it, either ignore my posts or don't post here. Simple as that. I don't have time to babysit grown individuals who feel the need to intervene on conversations for the primary purpose of speaking ill of others, whether it be me or anyone else.

[magisme]

lol flags

people dying from starvation, disesases, terrorism etc.

why people care about stupid flags?

That's the trick. If we're arguing about this, we're not paying attention to shit that matters, and all the right people keep making money.

[arnold layne]

lol flags

people dying from starvation, disesases, terrorism etc.

why people care about stupid flags?

That's the trick. If we're arguing about this, we're not paying attention to shit that matters, and all the right people keep making money.

Who are the right people?

[magisme]

lol flags

people dying from starvation, disesases, terrorism etc.

why people care about stupid flags?

That's the trick. If we're arguing about this, we're not paying attention to shit that matters, and all the right people keep making money.

Who are the right people?

The ones who make the money. It's a circular logic.

Edited June 29, 2015 by magisme

[downzy]

No, and this is where you're making a false equivalency. The U.S. flag does not REPRESENT the institutions of repressions in the same manner that the Confederate flag.

Is any manner of representing institutions of repression a good one?

The Confederate flag became the symbol of that fight. To say that they're one in the same is false.

I didn't say they were one and the same, what I am saying is that there is enough in the way of atrocity under each one surely, if we're gonna start throwing stones, to justify this sort of an attack and exclusivity in the way in which, as you tell me, the confederate flag represents oppression is not not reason enough for the stars and stripes to get a pass, when considering what went on under it after slavery.

Surely, there were institutions of repression that operated under the U.S. flag. No denying that. But those who perpetrated and executed such systems under the guise of the U.S. flag did so at the expense of the ideals it has long represented.

Long represented in the eyes of whom? I mean we're talking pre-slavery right? What ideals are these and what acts are they exemplified by? This singling out of this one group in American history and attacking this flag as being culpable for fucked up shit is just the political posturing of the day, an easy to marginalise group to have a pop at and ignore equivalent bullshit done under the auspices of another flag cuz it's convenient.

It's fair to critique the U.S. for such wanton and hypocritical actions when it expresses such lofty ideals (as it still falls short in many areas), but it's an entirely other matter to put the stars and stripes and the flag of the confederacy on the same moral ground.

I'm not the first person to level a similar indictment and I won't be the last and y'know what, some of the other people who have made a similar moral indictment have been some of the very same people who were subject to it's oppression...and they are many, as in over decade after decade. When those wanton and hypocritical actions include the oppression of generations upon generations of a race i think 'critique' is kind of a soft word. I wonder what the innocent men that got lynched, flames lickin' around their arse, in a country where they are treated like animals thought about what moral ground the flag stood on, as they smelt their bollocks cooking before he died.

Furthermore, to suggest that it's only a few people who counter the inherent racism within the institution is wrong (it is one of the reasons why the North beat the South; far more Northern soldiers). The fast majority of citizens within the Antebellum South disagreed with Jim Crow laws. The reason they lasted as long as they did was a result of the few in power who prevented change.

Really? I don't even know where to begin to address that. So all those years post slavery, those centuries, it was just a few people in the drivers seat fuckin' it up for an otherwise idyllic America. Well they must've been a busy bunch of few people in power, riding around the country lynching black people for eyeballing white women and burning em and blowing up churches and raping women and all the awful things that happened across those decades upon decades that are difficult to sum up in a neat little paragraph on an internet forum. And while this inexhaustible bionic few were going around doing all this 99.9% of America were all just 'we all love each other!'.

Suffice to say i don't suppose to mattered to the ones on the sharp end of a kicking why it lasted so long, fact is that it did.

With respect to your last paragraph, yes, those who enacted and enforced Jim Crow laws in the South did not represent the majority of most southern states. African Americans account for a large percentage of many Southern States, but were left little recourse in overturning said power structure due to a violent, powerful, and entrenched minority. Many ended up leaving in the great migration beginning in the early 1910s.

Ultimately, my argument here is that it's not hypocritical to wave the Stars and Stripes in one hand while judging the Confederate flag with the other. The reason why the Stars and Stripes gets a pass whereas the Confederate flag does not is that there are many other developments and histories surrounding the former where there is little for the latter. Sure, on the negative side of the ledger both have some strong negative numbers; but we'd be doing a disservice to the American flag if it were solely judged on such a myopic perspective. America is more than just its negatives in a way that the Confederate flag cannot speak to. It came into being for the purpose of galvanizing men who sought to continue the enslavement of black men. It was later regurgitated when the federal government finally got around to properly enforcing the 14th amendment on mostly Southern states. There are no other connotations or histories surrounding the Confederate flag in the same way that American flag can speak to.

[DieselDaisy]

Yes, I have to agree with Downzy. The thing is with the Confederate flag, it represented a state whose whole purpose and reasons for existence (secession) is connected with its reliance of chattel slavery.

[ZoSoRose]

Seems like I've missed a lot, I'm just going to guess what is happening-

Shades- hurr durr liberals hurr hurr something ignorant

Len- Incoherent but very opinionated British-speak

Mags and Axilisold- Short, to the point one liners on their opinions

Downzy- Telling Shades and everyone to rightfully shut the fuck up

Is that a good tldr?

Edited June 29, 2015 by ZoSoRose

[AxlisOld]

Mags and Axilisold- Short, to the point one liners on their opinions

Putting in too much effort to a post is a waste of a good buzz. Though so Is posting here I guess...fuck...now I'm sad.

[ZoSoRose]

I'm also some who has studied these subjects extensively, perhaps better than anyone who regularly visits this forum. So the notion that I'm somehow blind to the racial injustices since the end of the Civil War is fucking nonsense. Jim Crow, segregation, mass incarceration: I'm well versed in the ugliness

oh here we go with that "I'm smarter than anyone on here schtick again".

Do you ever get over yourself or is it a life long love affair?

anyway, "on topic"

The south was fighting for a lot more than keeping slaves.

And on that note of "keeping slaves", as inhumane as even the sound of that word infers, it didn't have the same meaning as it would today.

Times were different, and truth be told slaves were part of the family on a greater percentage of the plantations than they were this beaten, spit

on stereotype that your obvious "studies" on the subject have warped your sense of reality to come to believe.

of course slavery was wrong "duhhh", and of course slavery was partly the reason for the formation of the confederacy. But it was hardly the entirety.

The North imposed their tyranny on the south, "shut up and grow your cotton so we can sell it to England and use the wealth to build the industrial machine in the North" The railroads, factories and progress in general was being directed to the Northern part of the country and very little monies were being invested in the South.

The South wanted to secede from the union if that were to be the case, form their own government, use their own tax monies to build a future beyond working the fields.

and who knows what would have happened in regards to slavery, there is a train of thought that in good time slaves would have became their own people in short order without a half a million Americans losing their lives in the battle. Educating themselves would lead to the pursuit of happiness and they were starting to stand up for themselves in that regard. I have read stories that there had already been a movement toward that very end on the part of many "owners", many slaves were treated quite well, and brought into the families as equals, trusted with the care of white children, as midwives, and choosing their own work schedules. They worked all day and were clothed fed and housed. With wages the way they were in that day even living "free" wasn't a much better life than that for many white people. And like someone in this thread said earlier, exactly what did the north offer the suddenly "freed" slaves except a continued miserable existence as second class citizens relocated.

Brought them into their business ventures and into elected office to decide policy? yeaaa right.

I'm not in anyway condoning slavery, or that Lincoln was wrong to declare it illegal, but it's not like the North looked the other way when the ships landed and unloaded them to be sold.

Go read another book you goof, I grew up in the south and when I was in grade school it was known as the great war of northern aggression, hows that?

There's a lot more to the history of this country than the indoctrinated liberal academia study you have been brainwashed with.

How about Shermans march to the sea?, totally humane and necessary to you huh?

The confederate flag only represents hate to a few sick, warped individuals that view it as their symbol of racism, and to liberals like you that wish to use it as a political tool and wave it around in a worse light that the actual redneck bigots themselves.

To a lot of people it represents independence, standing up and even fighting for what a people thought was right for them and their families well being.

So knock off the "i know better that you do" shit and grow up.

Have you EVER been wrong about Anything? check yourself.

Oh my god

Congrats Shades! This is the dumbest post EVER in the history of MYGNR. You have beaten some gems by forum greats like BBA, MSL, Volano, Dexter, etc. THIS is without a doubt, the most ignorant thing I have read on here, I didn't even finish.

Mags and Axilisold- Short, to the point one liners on their opinions

Putting in too much effort to a post is a waste of a good buzz. Though so Is posting here I guess...fuck...now I'm sad.

Your posts are great just how they are =)

[DieselDaisy]

The antebellum South was like nowhere else in the United States. As a ''Southern genle' man'' you would not carry money for instance. A southern gentleman's word was binding and cash was seen as tacky and grubby, only fit for yankees. All your actual wealth was located in slaves and cotton, not money. The North was undergoing the rampant changes of industrial growth whereas the south was rural. A southerner could naturally defend slavery by pointing out the cruelty of northern factories, industrial sweat shops - Dickens territory (Dickens of course visited America before the civil war and wrote about the appalling social conditions in factories). The Southern aristocracy lived a life of genial leisure but they saw themselves as heirs to the Norman race, a warrior elite. A disproportionate number of Southerners for instance went to West Point which is why the officer corps of the Confederate armies had a great advantage over the Federal officer corps: a great majority of West Point graduates basically went with the Confederacy.

[ZoSoRose]

No one is denying the South did/does great things. I love a lot of Southern culture. But the Civil War and slavery are some of the darkest spots on the United States' history. I think the argument is simple, the flag can be used by individuals as a representation of whatever. For example, Skynyrd used it, those records don't represent racism. I think its in poor taste, but that's how it is. To some people, it does represent "The South" or rebellion instead of the actual Battle Flag of the CSA.

Now, a government building or school or something? Hell no, imo.

Seriously though, Shades indirectly defended slavery... "Well! Not ALL slaves were treated bad! Hurr durr!"

Unbelievable! I can't believe people can be so ignorant!

Edited June 29, 2015 by ZoSoRose

[AxlisOld]

Mags and Axilisold- Short, to the point one liners on their opinions

Putting in too much effort to a post is a waste of a good buzz. Though so Is posting here I guess...fuck...now I'm sad.

Your posts are great just how they are =)

Well let's face it, I'm gonna keep drinking, but really, I can't find anything better than the forums? I'm gonna play Nintendo. That's way more productive.

[Dr. Who]

I don't support the Confederate Flag - or have any horse in the race or any real opinion of it - other than it makes for a cool 'rebel rocker' thing ala Dimebag's guitar - but I think censorship in any form is the sign of a cowardly society, afraid to hear 'scary' opinions, and I think political correctness is very Orwellian and something quite dangerous to the concepts of free speech and free thought.

As a result, I must side with not banning the Confederate Flag.

I do not believe it shown be flown on or above public or government buildings - but I believe private citizens have a right to purchase and display ANY private symbol they choose - whether it be The Confederate Battle Flag or the clenched Black Power Fist or the Nazi flag or the ISIS flag - I think symbols are simply symbols and can mean many different things to different people, and yes, some deluded and deranged individuals might use symbols as an excuse or a justification of their sick deeds - but that's like the parents in the 1980s who blamed Ozzy Osbourne's music for their child committing suicide - it was bunk.

A sick individual will do sick things; if this loser in South Carolina wasn't holding a Confederate Flag in that photo, given his views, it would've been a Nazi flag or (as in other photos of the guy) a Rhodesian flag.

If we banned things because of their potential to sway weak minds to horrible acts, we'd have long ago banned Catcher in the Rye.

[ZoSoRose]

Mags and Axilisold- Short, to the point one liners on their opinions

Putting in too much effort to a post is a waste of a good buzz. Though so Is posting here I guess...fuck...now I'm sad.

Your posts are great just how they are =)

Well let's face it, I'm gonna keep drinking, but really, I can't find anything better than the forums? I'm gonna play Nintendo. That's way more productive.

You'll be back on here before bed. There is no escaping the forum...

I'm also some who has studied these subjects extensively, perhaps better than anyone who regularly visits this forum. So the notion that I'm somehow blind to the racial injustices since the end of the Civil War is fucking nonsense. Jim Crow, segregation, mass incarceration: I'm well versed in the ugliness

oh here we go with that "I'm smarter than anyone on here schtick again".

Do you ever get over yourself or is it a life long love affair?

So knock off the "i know better that you do" shit and grow up.

Have you EVER been wrong about Anything? check yourself.

Last warning: making your point and move the fuck on. Any more of this petty sniping bullshit and you're gone. I'm fucking tired of your bullshit and inability to make a point without personal attacks.

Don't like it? Then fuck off.

As for the rest of your "dissertation," I'll address that later.

You've told Len to fuck off and you've told Shades to fuck off.

Shouldn't you follow the rules that you tell others to follow?

I'm sure you will tell me to fuck off and threaten to ban me now. But maybe you need to sit back and chill a little bit. And ask yourself if it is fair to have a double standard of the way you run this forum. You and people that you agree with are allowed to mock others and to tell people to fuck off if you disagree with them. Shouldn't you and those who disagree with you be held to the same standards as the rest of us?????

You own the place so you can so whatever you want. But You don't treat all posters equally......which kind of goes against the way you portray yourself in terms of the core values that make up who you are.

You are an extremely smart guy. And used to be one of the posters on here that I respected the most. Top five, no doubt. But you have really changed man.

I don't think Downzy has done anything out of line. How has he changed? The forum runs better than ever now, has had some great changes, and he hasn't changed things much from Subs. We all tell people to fuck off on here. Len is tough, I'm sure he isn't offended.

[downzy]

More reading material for those interested:

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/27/theyre_still_fighting_the_civil_war_and_still_lying_about_the_confederate_flag/

... At least three starting points can easily be identified, however. The first came from Ta-Nehisi Coates. Honing in on the underlying claim that Roof’s views did not reflect those of South Carolinians more broadly, Coates quickly weighed in to say:

"If the [south Carolina] governor meant that very few of the flag’s supporters believe in mass murder, she is surely right. But on the question of whose view of the Confederate Flag is more twisted, she is almost certainly wrong.

Roof’s belief that black life had no purpose beyond subjugation is “sick and twisted” in the exact same manner as the beliefs of those who created the Confederate flag were “sick and twisted.” The Confederate flag is directly tied to the Confederate cause, and the Confederate cause was white supremacy."

This is the plain historical reality, and Coates goes on to rolls out stanza after stanza in an impressive historical litany of authoritative voices repeatedly underscoring the point, beginning with the Confederate states’ own explanations for war, starting with South Carolina, then Mississippi (which was particularly blunt: “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world.”), Louisiana, Alabama (“the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than … an open declaration of war”) and Texas.

He then goes on to quote notable individuals, such as Jefferson Davis, not only affirming the centrality of slavery to the Southern cause, but elaborating on their desire to extend slaveholding into Cuba, Mexico and elsewhere, as well as propounding their belief that the equality of white men was founded on the slavery of blacks, and thus would be irrevocably lost if slavery were to be abolished. Thus, white supremacy for the South was not simply an isolated belief in the inherent superiority of whites as a race, it was the foundation for an aggressive and self-styled “progressive” worldview, a whole self-contained system of thought. The flag is inextricably linked to all of that.

As a second starting point it’s also true that the Confederate battle flag was largely a relic until it was revived in response to the Civil Rights Movement — first with Strom Thurmond’s “States Rights Party” in 1948, then with Georgia adopting a version in protest of Brown v. Board of Education in 1956, and South Carolina six years later — though, tellingly, the flag went up a year before the act authorizing it. For almost a hundred years, the South got on just fine celebrating its heritage without benefit of the flag. Indeed, the flag was raised over South Carolina as a result of the Civil War centennial celebration. This revival of interest in the flag was clearly all about renewed defiance of the federal government, which was finally being prodded into making good on the Civil War Amendments, and ensuring the full citizenship of African-Americans. Hence, today, the “heritage” the flag actually stands for is that of the 1960s, not the 1860s. Good luck with that.

A third, related point, made by Jeet Heer at the New Republic, is that the flag matters tremendously as exertion of raw power. Its reintroduction in response to the Civil Rights movement sent a clear message: “The feds might try to help you, but remember who is the boss down here. We still rule.” Flying everywhere throughout the South, it sends the constant message to black Southerners, that they are not safe, they are not in control of their own personal security, much less anything else. Whatever other stories Southern whites might tell themselves and others about the flag, this basic fact remains. Indeed, the rhetorical act of denying the flag’s white supremacist meaning only demonstrates further how completely whites control things.

[White Supremacy] originally expressed itself in terms of slavery, then segregation and now largely in terms of what sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva described as “colorblind racism” in his book “Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America.” Third, is the way in which white supremacy naturalizes, normalizes and moralizes itself, so as to render itself difficult to clearly identify, much less name, and fight against. Bonilla-Silva’s book has a great deal to say about this as well. Furthermore, the pretense that the battle flag represents Civil War-era heritage rather than Civil Rights-era hatred is a telling example of how this process unfolds. Fourth, is the way in which white supremacy usurps otherwise noble ideals, such bringing people together, establishing peace and harmony, promoting tolerance, etc. Haley leaned very heavily on this aspect of white supremacy in the process of pretending to reject it.

[Dazey]

More reading material for those interested:

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/27/theyre_still_fighting_the_civil_war_and_still_lying_about_the_confederate_flag/

... At least three starting points can easily be identified, however. The first came from Ta-Nehisi Coates. Honing in on the underlying claim that Roofs views did not reflect those of South Carolinians more broadly, Coates quickly weighed in to say:

"If the [south Carolina] governor meant that very few of the flags supporters believe in mass murder, she is surely right. But on the question of whose view of the Confederate Flag is more twisted, she is almost certainly wrong.

Roofs belief that black life had no purpose beyond subjugation is sick and twisted in the exact same manner as the beliefs of those who created the Confederate flag were sick and twisted. The Confederate flag is directly tied to the Confederate cause, and the Confederate cause was white supremacy."

This is the plain historical reality, and Coates goes on to rolls out stanza after stanza in an impressive historical litany of authoritative voices repeatedly underscoring the point, beginning with the Confederate states own explanations for war, starting with South Carolina, then Mississippi (which was particularly blunt: Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery the greatest material interest of the world.), Louisiana, Alabama (the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than an open declaration of war) and Texas.

He then goes on to quote notable individuals, such as Jefferson Davis, not only affirming the centrality of slavery to the Southern cause, but elaborating on their desire to extend slaveholding into Cuba, Mexico and elsewhere, as well as propounding their belief that the equality of white men was founded on the slavery of blacks, and thus would be irrevocably lost if slavery were to be abolished. Thus, white supremacy for the South was not simply an isolated belief in the inherent superiority of whites as a race, it was the foundation for an aggressive and self-styled progressive worldview, a whole self-contained system of thought. The flag is inextricably linked to all of that.

As a second starting point its also true that the Confederate battle flag was largely a relic until it was revived in response to the Civil Rights Movement first with Strom Thurmonds States Rights Party in 1948, then with Georgia adopting a version in protest of Brown v. Board of Education in 1956, and South Carolina six years later though, tellingly, the flag went up a year before the act authorizing it. For almost a hundred years, the South got on just fine celebrating its heritage without benefit of the flag. Indeed, the flag was raised over South Carolina as a result of the Civil War centennial celebration. This revival of interest in the flag was clearly all about renewed defiance of the federal government, which was finally being prodded into making good on the Civil War Amendments, and ensuring the full citizenship of African-Americans. Hence, today, the heritage the flag actually stands for is that of the 1960s, not the 1860s. Good luck with that.

A third, related point, made by Jeet Heer at the New Republic, is that the flag matters tremendously as exertion of raw power. Its reintroduction in response to the Civil Rights movement sent a clear message: The feds might try to help you, but remember who is the boss down here. We still rule. Flying everywhere throughout the South, it sends the constant message to black Southerners, that they are not safe, they are not in control of their own personal security, much less anything else. Whatever other stories Southern whites might tell themselves and others about the flag, this basic fact remains. Indeed, the rhetorical act of denying the flags white supremacist meaning only demonstrates further how completely whites control things.

[White Supremacy] originally expressed itself in terms of slavery, then segregation and now largely in terms of what sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva described as colorblind racism in his book Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America. Third, is the way in which white supremacy naturalizes, normalizes and moralizes itself, so as to render itself difficult to clearly identify, much less name, and fight against. Bonilla-Silvas book has a great deal to say about this as well. Furthermore, the pretense that the battle flag represents Civil War-era heritage rather than Civil Rights-era hatred is a telling example of how this process unfolds. Fourth, is the way in which white supremacy usurps otherwise noble ideals, such bringing people together, establishing peace and harmony, promoting tolerance, etc. Haley leaned very heavily on this aspect of white supremacy in the process of pretending to reject it.

Well looky here at Mr Google giving it some with all those facts again! We don't want to hear about it Downzy! I mean really? Backing up an argument with supporting evidence? Who do you think you are eh?

Now if you'll excuse me I need to go fuck my sister.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Dazey

[shades]

And there you have it, liberals stand for nothing, again.

Grabbing onto any and every trinket of contention to further their political agenda.

liberals don't care that a flag offends someone, if they did they would have been on board long ago with removing it.

Suddenly moving into an important election cycle they find another divider rod to wave over their heads.

"Bad white cops everywhere I'm telling you they will take over the country if we liberals don't ban together"

"Them darn republicans hate them blacks, vote for me and I'll give you more stuff, just give me a list."

And if I was a black person I would be insulted at the audacity to treat me that stupid.'

Getting rid of the confederate flag is stupid, or should I say hiding it is stupid because that's all you're doing.

Any liberal evr thought of the fact that we have 10 US military bases around the country named after Confederate battle officers.

Fort Bragg, Fort Lee, Fort Hood, Fort Pickett, Fort Benning, etc.? Wheres the revolution to have them all renamed?

You'd think if liberals really cared of what they preached there would be some sort of movement, or at least a mention.

why, because they don't really care that's why. just more ridiculousness.

And I'm sorry Zoso rose that you are too slow to follow along a thought other than your own.

And people complained of the way Madison ran this place?

Edited June 29, 2015 by shades

[downzy]

Any liberal evr thought of the fact that we have 10 US military bases around the country named after Confederate battle officers.

Fort Bragg, Fort Lee, Fort Hood, Fort Pickett, Fort Benning, etc.? Wheres the revolution to have them all renamed?

You'd think if liberals really cared of what they preached there would be some sort of movement, or at least a mention.

why, because they don't really care that's why. just more ridiculousness.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/randy-hall/2015/06/26/al-sharpton-demands-military-remove-all-remnants-confederacy

In addition to calling for General Lee Avenue to be renamed, Foy said the NAN is pushing for the military to change the names of the 10 bases that honor Confederate figures. "Military bases are on federally owned land that is outside of local jurisdiction.”

Foy added:

We will be presenting an official letter to the commander of this base and then sending it up the chain, asking that they remove all the remnants of the Confederacy.

Taxpayer dollars are supporting a U.S. military that honors the Confederacy.

[Len Cnut]

More reading material for those interested:

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/27/theyre_still_fighting_the_civil_war_and_still_lying_about_the_confederate_flag/

... At least three starting points can easily be identified, however. The first came from Ta-Nehisi Coates. Honing in on the underlying claim that Roofs views did not reflect those of South Carolinians more broadly, Coates quickly weighed in to say:

"If the [south Carolina] governor meant that very few of the flags supporters believe in mass murder, she is surely right. But on the question of whose view of the Confederate Flag is more twisted, she is almost certainly wrong.

Roofs belief that black life had no purpose beyond subjugation is sick and twisted in the exact same manner as the beliefs of those who created the Confederate flag were sick and twisted. The Confederate flag is directly tied to the Confederate cause, and the Confederate cause was white supremacy."

This is the plain historical reality, and Coates goes on to rolls out stanza after stanza in an impressive historical litany of authoritative voices repeatedly underscoring the point, beginning with the Confederate states own explanations for war, starting with South Carolina, then Mississippi (which was particularly blunt: Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery the greatest material interest of the world.), Louisiana, Alabama (the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than an open declaration of war) and Texas.

He then goes on to quote notable individuals, such as Jefferson Davis, not only affirming the centrality of slavery to the Southern cause, but elaborating on their desire to extend slaveholding into Cuba, Mexico and elsewhere, as well as propounding their belief that the equality of white men was founded on the slavery of blacks, and thus would be irrevocably lost if slavery were to be abolished. Thus, white supremacy for the South was not simply an isolated belief in the inherent superiority of whites as a race, it was the foundation for an aggressive and self-styled progressive worldview, a whole self-contained system of thought. The flag is inextricably linked to all of that.

As a second starting point its also true that the Confederate battle flag was largely a relic until it was revived in response to the Civil Rights Movement first with Strom Thurmonds States Rights Party in 1948, then with Georgia adopting a version in protest of Brown v. Board of Education in 1956, and South Carolina six years later though, tellingly, the flag went up a year before the act authorizing it. For almost a hundred years, the South got on just fine celebrating its heritage without benefit of the flag. Indeed, the flag was raised over South Carolina as a result of the Civil War centennial celebration. This revival of interest in the flag was clearly all about renewed defiance of the federal government, which was finally being prodded into making good on the Civil War Amendments, and ensuring the full citizenship of African-Americans. Hence, today, the heritage the flag actually stands for is that of the 1960s, not the 1860s. Good luck with that.

A third, related point, made by Jeet Heer at the New Republic, is that the flag matters tremendously as exertion of raw power. Its reintroduction in response to the Civil Rights movement sent a clear message: The feds might try to help you, but remember who is the boss down here. We still rule. Flying everywhere throughout the South, it sends the constant message to black Southerners, that they are not safe, they are not in control of their own personal security, much less anything else. Whatever other stories Southern whites might tell themselves and others about the flag, this basic fact remains. Indeed, the rhetorical act of denying the flags white supremacist meaning only demonstrates further how completely whites control things.

[White Supremacy] originally expressed itself in terms of slavery, then segregation and now largely in terms of what sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva described as colorblind racism in his book Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America. Third, is the way in which white supremacy naturalizes, normalizes and moralizes itself, so as to render itself difficult to clearly identify, much less name, and fight against. Bonilla-Silvas book has a great deal to say about this as well. Furthermore, the pretense that the battle flag represents Civil War-era heritage rather than Civil Rights-era hatred is a telling example of how this process unfolds. Fourth, is the way in which white supremacy usurps otherwise noble ideals, such bringing people together, establishing peace and harmony, promoting tolerance, etc. Haley leaned very heavily on this aspect of white supremacy in the process of pretending to reject it.

Well looky here at Mr Google giving it some with all those facts again! We don't want to hear about it Downzy! I mean really? Backing up an argument with supporting evidence? Who do you think you are eh?

Now if you'll excuse me I need to go fuck my sister.

Oi, dont disrespect your sister, how many times do you i have to tell you? (you can tell some of that muslim honour stuff has rubbed off on me eh? )