NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, you may or may not be suprised, but people who fly this flag:
http://www.researchonline.net/gacw/images/scross.gif
And claim that it is "the flag of the Confederacy", are in fact, wrong.
The people on the other side are wrong as well.
This is, in fact, the Confederate battle flag.

http://www.researchonline.net/gacw/images/1stnatl.gif
Offended yet?
This is the original Confederate flag, approved on March 4,1861.

http://www.researchonline.net/gacw/images/2ndnatl.gif
Second flag, offended now?
Adopted on May 1, 1863.

http://www.researchonline.net/gacw/images/3rdnatl.gif
Third flag, adopted because the second might be mistaken for a truce-flag.
March 4, 1865

So, next time you see the first flag up there, you can laugh to yourself and feel slightly superior.

Anyway, thats the end of my rant :P

Hahaha, nice.

*carts you a box of cookies*

I am 26% more offended by the third flag as opposed to the first. The second flag only registers mild disgust - but no offensiveness. The fourth flag, however, I find strangely erotic.

Heh

I knew this but very good of you to share it with the rest. Good job. :)

I am 26% more offended by the third flag as opposed to the first. The second flag only registers mild disgust - but no offensiveness. The fourth flag, however, I find strangely erotic.
I dont think Ive ever heard of somebody being turned on by a Confederate flag...

There's an anthology by Perival Everett called Damned If I Do. In it is an essay entitled "On the Appropriation of Cultures". This stroy describes the ingenious and subtle movement that helped get the Confederate Battle Flag off the South Carolina state capitol building.

It seems Percival was looking for a used truck to do some hauling back in late 1999. He didn't need it for more than a few months, so he was looking for something old and on its last legs but that could still be useful. He scoured the want ads and found what he needed. He called up the seller and arranged to meet him at the truck's location. When he gets there, with his wife, he discovers that he's in, for lack of a better way to put it, Confederacy central. Signs of White trash suburbia are everywhere. Percival, undaunted, strides up to the mobile home and rings the bell. Apparently, Percival had sounded White on the phone, for the look on the seller's face was one of surprise.

Percival asks if he and the seller can test-drive it, and they do. Upon reaching the truck, Percival notices a sizeable Confederate battle flag decal on the rear window, but says nothing. Percival's wife can see the unease with which the seeler is looking to the decal and surreptitiously back to Percival. They get in the truck and test-drive it. When they get back, Percival decides to buy it without so much as trying to talk the seller down. Surprised by this, the seller, upon retrieving the title for the truck, says, "I'll get a razor blade and take that decal off the back window for you." But Percival, instead of agreeing, says, "What decal? Oh! You mean the Black Power flag? Nah, that's fine, leave it on."

The seller at first acts as though he's just avoided a little scraping work, but then freezes. "The what flag?" he asks, not offended or irked, but confused. "The Black Power flag. You can leave that on, it's okay," says Percival in a voice that betrays no hint of sarcasm or subterfuge. He pays the seller, who signs the title; they shake hands and Percival and his wife drive away.

Later that week, while hauling some things in the truck, Percival pulls in to a convenience store for gas and some water. Out front are a group of Black teenagers and coming out of the store is an older Black man. As Percival approaches the entrance, the boys notice the flag decal and immediately raise a hue and cry.

"What the hell are you doin' with that thing on your truck?" and several other such comments are hurled in a kind of confused but potentially irritated unison. The exiting man pauses on hearing this, glances at the decal and then at Percival -- not wanting to exacerbate the situation, but very curious to hear the answer to the same question in his own head.

"What -- you mean the Black Power flag?" Percival said as he gestured toward the truck, and giving a knowing, subversive look to the older man. Amid choruses of "What?" and "Man, you crazy!" and whatnot, the older man exiting the store walks over and and, having recognized an underground movement when he's seen one, says, "Oh yes, the Black Power flag. Right on, brother." Percival inwardly sighed in relief and looked back over to the group of young men, raising his eyebrows. The apparent leader of this troupe catches on and settles his boys down by saying, "Oh-- oh yeah! You know, fellas, the Black Power flag!" They all get it, and nod to one another and to Percival appreciatively.

Within a week, Percival begins to notice Confederate battle flags on more and more cars, trucks and even minivans piloted by Black drivers. No arguments, no yelling, no shouting -- just a dramatic increase in the frequency of the flag's appearance all over the city of Columbia. In fact, the flag began coming off the vehicles of some White drivers.

On April 12, 2000, the South Carolina state senate finally passed a bill to remove the flag by a majority of 36-7. The bill specified that a more traditional version of the battle flag (square shaped as opposed to the rectangular flag now flying above the statehouse) would be flown in front of the Capitol next to a monument honoring fallen Confederate soldiers. The bill then went to the House, where it encountered some difficulty. But on May 18, 2000, after the bill was modified to ensure that the height of the flag's new pole would be 30 feet, it was passed by a majority of 66 to 43, and Governor Jim Hodges signed the bill five days later. On July 1, the flag was removed from the South Carolina statehouse.

Now I'm not saying that Percival alone did this (Kweisi Mfume and the NAACP had much to do with it), but similar subtle usurpations and appropriations across the state helped remove that flag. To me, that kind of subtlety and chutzpah is brilliant.

I dont think Ive ever heard of somebody being turned on by a Confederate flag...

You obviously don't live deep enough in the south.

Well, you may or may not be suprised, but people who fly this flag:
http://www.researchonline.net/gacw/images/scross.gif
And claim that it is "the flag of the Confederacy", are in fact, wrong.
The people on the other side are wrong as well.
This is, in fact, the Confederate battle flag.

http://www.researchonline.net/gacw/images/1stnatl.gif
Offended yet?
This is the original Confederate flag, approved on March 4,1861.

http://www.researchonline.net/gacw/images/2ndnatl.gif
Second flag, offended now?
Adopted on May 1, 1863.

http://www.researchonline.net/gacw/images/3rdnatl.gif
Third flag, adopted because the second might be mistaken for a truce-flag.
March 4, 1865

So, next time you see the first flag up there, you can laugh to yourself and feel slightly superior.

Anyway, thats the end of my rant :P

It was also called Stars & Bars as compared to the Stars & Stripes of the Yankees.

But don't be surprised. There are Neonazis who fly the flag of the German Emperor's Navy from the Great War instead of the Nazi "Reichskriegsflagge". Makes you wonder about their intelligence.

You obviously don't live deep enough in the south.
I live just about as far south as you can get (In the US anyway), its a place called Arizona, in a town about 20 miles from the Mexican border ;)
Anyway, I lived in Alabama with my grandparents for some time, a number of my relatives live in Texas.
All of them are good people, although my grandfather doesnt like Japanese people, I think he can be excused for that because he was tourtured in WWII.

There's an anthology by Perival Everett called Damned If I Do. In it is an essay entitled "On the Appropriation of Cultures". This stroy describes the ingenious and subtle movement that helped get the Confederate Battle Flag off the South Carolina state capitol building.
It seems Percival was looking for a used truck to do some hauling back in late 1999. He didn't need it for more than a few months, so he was looking for something old and on its last legs but that could still be useful. He scoured the want ads and found what he needed. He called up the seller and arranged to meet him at the truck's location. When he gets there, with his wife, he discovers that he's in, for lack of a better way to put it, Confederacy central. Signs of White trash suburbia are everywhere. Percival, undaunted, strides up to the mobile home and rings the bell. Apparently, Percival had sounded White on the phone, for the look on the seller's face was one of surprise.
Percival asks if he and the seller can test-drive it, and they do. Upon reaching the truck, Percival notices a sizeable Confederate battle flag decal on the rear window, but says nothing. Percival's wife can see the unease with which the seeler is looking to the decal and surreptitiously back to Percival. They get in the truck and test-drive it. When they get back, Percival decides to buy it without so much as trying to talk the seller down. Surprised by this, the seller, upon retrieving the title for the truck, says, "I'll get a razor blade and take that decal off the back window for you." But Percival, instead of agreeing, says, "What decal? Oh! You mean the Black Power flag? Nah, that's fine, leave it on."
The seller at first acts as though he's just avoided a little scraping work, but then freezes. "The what flag?" he asks, not offended or irked, but confused. "The Black Power flag. You can leave that on, it's okay," says Percival in a voice that betrays no hint of sarcasm or subterfuge. He pays the seller, who signs the title; they shake hands and Percival and his wife drive away.
Later that week, while hauling some things in the truck, Percival pulls in to a convenience store for gas and some water. Out front are a group of Black teenagers and coming out of the store is an older Black man. As Percival approaches the entrance, the boys notice the flag decal and immediately raise a hue and cry.
"What the hell are you doin' with that thing on your truck?" and several other such comments are hurled in a kind of confused but potentially irritated unison. The exiting man pauses on hearing this, glances at the decal and then at Percival -- not wanting to exacerbate the situation, but very curious to hear the answer to the same question in his own head.
"What -- you mean the Black Power flag?" Percival said as he gestured toward the truck, and giving a knowing, subversive look to the older man. Amid choruses of "What?" and "Man, you crazy!" and whatnot, the older man exiting the store walks over and and, having recognized an underground movement when he's seen one, says, "Oh yes, the Black Power flag. Right on, brother." Percival inwardly sighed in relief and looked back over to the group of young men, raising his eyebrows. The apparent leader of this troupe catches on and settles his boys down by saying, "Oh-- oh yeah! You know, fellas, the Black Power flag!" They all get it, and nod to one another and to Percival appreciatively.
Within a week, Percival begins to notice Confederate battle flags on more and more cars, trucks and even minivans piloted by Black drivers. No arguments, no yelling, no shouting -- just a dramatic increase in the frequency of the flag's appearance all over the city of Columbia. In fact, the flag began coming off the vehicles of some White drivers.
On April 12, 2000, the South Carolina state senate finally passed a bill to remove the flag by a majority of 36-7. The bill specified that a more traditional version of the battle flag (square shaped as opposed to the rectangular flag now flying above the statehouse) would be flown in front of the Capitol next to a monument honoring fallen Confederate soldiers. The bill then went to the House, where it encountered some difficulty. But on May 18, 2000, after the bill was modified to ensure that the height of the flag's new pole would be 30 feet, it was passed by a majority of 66 to 43, and Governor Jim Hodges signed the bill five days later. On July 1, the flag was removed from the South Carolina statehouse.
Now I'm not saying that Percival alone did this (Kweisi Mfume and the NAACP had much to do with it), but similar subtle usurpations and appropriations across the state helped remove that flag. To me, that kind of subtlety and chutzpah is brilliant.

What a big steaming load of shit. :rolleyes:

What a big steaming load of shit. :rolleyes:

Take it up with Percival Everett. :p

well first, like it or not the flag is american history of a conflict which change the U. S. nation it self. the flag is a union of states that wish to pull away form the greater union. If you had ask the soldiers why they was fighting, it was not for the black man nor slavely nor other issues. you can asked one rebel soldier, he wanted to be allowed to catch rats... the war was about $$$money$$$ and local rights against a centerial goverment.

The south was so short on troops that was thinking of mading a free negro corp. to fight the north as well.

It was about the money, the banking and the taxes raised.

about uncle tom cabin... are you about to beat something that cost you over 200,000 $ in todays cash? think not....

for the others that wish is say that the flag means anything else?

just tell me of uneducated they truly are.

remember, the jim crow laws was enacted after the war had ended. > about 10 years after under the state and stripps.... which was over a hundred years ago. look when the other laws of equaly right had gone effect. over 100 years after the war ended.

Please also note the slave revolt of St. Johns, in the virgin islands which the new freed slaves was enslaving there exmasters...

we need to remember the ones that fight for what they believed in to the point that they give there live in it. In the civil war and other wars as well.

study your history and learn. Freedom is not free its very expencive, and you may repeat it.

If the Confederate Flag means nothing to you....... then fine...

But to some it sign of hate, and past Sins.

I'm from Georgia and see nothing wrong with Flag, but I understand why people say, and feel the way we do. So I believed it was right to remove it from our state flag. I just think that if people could try and see the world threw others points of view.. we all could get along!

Take it up with Percival Everett. :p

Id love too, Ive never heard so much sanctimonius one sided bullcrap in my life.

I am 26% more offended by the third flag as opposed to the first. The second flag only registers mild disgust - but no offensiveness. The fourth flag, however, I find strangely erotic.

And you need to see a doctor. :D

Id love too, Ive never heard so much sanctimonius one sided bullcrap in my life.

Try reading your own posts! :)

And you need to see a doctor. :D

I make appointments, but my doctor won't see me. He always says something about a "scheduling conflict" and then immediately flees the room. It's ok, though... helpful security guys always escort me to my car - very thoughtful.

Try reading your own posts! :)
Looks like another trip to moderation for Gartref :rolleyes:
You just wont learn will you sonny.

You obviously don't live deep enough in the south.
That reminded me of Little Nicky.

But the battle flag is so much prettier... I'd say it's prettier than the Stars and Stripes. How do we get the flag of the Union altered to the Confederate Battle Flag with fifty stars instead of just thirteen?

What's that? We can't? Well, that's no fun.

But the battle flag is so much prettier... I'd say it's prettier than the Stars and Stripes. How do we get the flag of the Union altered to the Confederate Battle Flag with fifty stars instead of just thirteen?

What's that? We can't? Well, that's no fun.
Yes, make the Europeans hate us even more...
(although most of them supported the CSA :P)

I /am/ European, and I support the CSA by default. If they'd won, the Union would be a lot weaker, and I'd be a lot happier. Superpowers make me twitch.

And yes, I /do/ have something of an obsession with editing flags. I'm trying to think of something to do to the Union Jack to symbolise the current government, but the only thing I can think of -- the red and black rose that the Labour Party use -- doesn't really fit.

And yes, I /do/ have something of an obsession with editing flags. I'm trying to think of something to do to the Union Jack to symbolise the current government, but the only thing I can think of -- the red and black rose that the Labour Party use -- doesn't really fit.

Odd. I have an obsession w/ changing borders on maps. Especially alternate-history ones. Like seeing Ottoman colonies in Peru or somthing like that...

Doesn't have to be the battle flag to be a confederate flag....

YOU MONSTER!!!

Looks like another trip to moderation for Gartref :rolleyes:
You just wont learn will you sonny.
Someone's very defensive. Now, why would that be, I wonder?

Someone's very defensive. Now, why would that be, I wonder?
It was a blatent flame DH, he should know better.
Hes was just warned yesterday.

I /am/ European, and I support the CSA by default. If they'd won, the Union would be a lot weaker, and I'd be a lot happier. Superpowers make me twitch.
<snip>


You're kidding right? Suppose that had there been a USA and a CSA dividing the American continent?

* WW1 would likely have been won by the Germans, had one the USA or CSA stayed out of it (or, worse, one joined the Central Powers!)

* WW2? Same thing. Worse, since the "ersatz" USA/CSA would have been EXTREMELY unlikely to have had it's manufacturing & farming capabilities it had in real life, almost assuring an Axis victory.

* Even if the west had won BOTH wars, it'd almost certainly have lost against the USSR.

...so, would you rather live in a totally different world (likely totalitarian), where slavery is OK, or twitch with having to deal with a single superpower?

Call me loopy, I'll take the superpower. :)

What you see now-a-days, skin heads in cammo shouting about nazism and shit like that, holding german and southern flags. Thats all a bunch of shit which would make all the soldiers who died in the civil war role in their graves.

Most of you those who are in this forum are not from the Southern United States. So, I, a guy who lives on the "right side of the Masin Dixie Line" in the illustrious state of Arkansas, will tell you what that flag means.

The South wasn't fighting for taxes or money or any other shit you come up with. We were fighting for the ideals set down by the Founding Fathers. Freedom and Liberty. The orginal reason for the colonies to rebel was to gain freedom, and after they won each state ruled itself accordingly until several of them decided that to remain strong and free from Great Britain they should unite.

The South simply wanted to have their own government and have individual rights as States. Why do you think the states have so much power themselves now? It was made that way so after the civil war, it could never happen again.

So when you see that stars and bars next time, remeber that to those who carried it in battle, it was more than a flag, it was an ideal of freedom. One which all those past were willing to sacrifice their lives for. And while you may say, how could they think this and still have slaves? I cannot defend those who are death and past for I do not know them. And neither can you judge them as you have the gift of hindsight whereas they did not. The past is the past. It cannot be altered. It can only be a teaching for the future.

And so I will leave this with a quote:

"Idealism is the heart of a Revolution, and Reality is the knife that slays it in the Government that follows."

-Alexander Kratz

Yeah so which ones the Battle Standard?
thats where the Glory is!

Losing WWI wouldn't have meant that much. Germany didn't intend to occupy all of Europe back then. And WWII? Wouldn't have happened if the Kaiser had won WWI. The only reason Hitler got into power was because the German people were seriously fed up at being opressed by everyone else. Okay, that and the depression, but the depression itself might not have happened without an all-powerful Union in North America.

Incidentally, Markreich, ever read anything by Harry Turtledove? The 'Great War' and 'American Empire' series' deal with pretty much what you suggested -- WWI as CSA-Canada-Britain vs USA-Germany-Austria-Hungary. The Central Powers won. The way you made your point makes me wonder if you've read it...

You're kidding right? Suppose that had there been a USA and a CSA dividing the American continent?

The North America probably would be made up of several different countries. Texas would still be an independent country. The Southwest and California would be either a separate country or part of Mexico. Washington and Oregon along with a couple of the northern states would be a part of Canada, as would Maine and possibly Vermont. The Midwest, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri would be a part of the Confederacy, and Illinois, Ohio, Indiana a part of the United States. Michigan and Wisconsin would be either US or Canada. Alaska would be either an independent country or a part of Russia.

Any corrections or other theories?

The North America probably would be made up of several different countries. Texas would still be an independent country. The Southwest and California would be either a separate country or part of Mexico. Washington and Oregon along with a couple of the northern states would be a part of Canada, as would Maine and possibly Vermont. The Midwest, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri would be a part of the Confederacy, and Illinois, Ohio, Indiana a part of the United States. Michigan and Wisconsin would be either US or Canada. Alaska would be either an independent country or a part of Russia.

Any corrections or other theories?

I'm from Maine... we were part of Massachusettes, not Canada.... >.>

I'm from Maine... we were part of Massachusettes, not Canada.... >.>

Yes, I know that. But I think if the South had won the war, Maine would eventually have succeeded and joined Canada.

well first, like it or not the flag is american history of a conflict which change the U. S. nation it self. the flag is a union of states that wish to pull away form the greater union. If you had ask the soldiers why they was fighting, it was not for the black man nor slavely nor other issues. you can asked one rebel soldier, he wanted to be allowed to catch rats... the war was about $$$money$$$ and local rights against a centerial goverment.

The south was so short on troops that was thinking of mading a free negro corp. to fight the north as well.

It was about the money, the banking and the taxes raised.

about uncle tom cabin... are you about to beat something that cost you over 200,000 $ in todays cash? think not....

for the others that wish is say that the flag means anything else?

just tell me of uneducated they truly are.

remember, the jim crow laws was enacted after the war had ended. > about 10 years after under the state and stripps.... which was over a hundred years ago. look when the other laws of equaly right had gone effect. over 100 years after the war ended.

Please also note the slave revolt of St. Johns, in the virgin islands which the new freed slaves was enslaving there exmasters...

we need to remember the ones that fight for what they believed in to the point that they give there live in it. In the civil war and other wars as well.

study your history and learn. Freedom is not free its very expencive, and you may repeat it.

you are retarded. you're right in that the war wasn't over slavery, but wrong in almost everything else.

A) the south did make 'free negro corps,' promising the black soldiers their freedom in case of victory.

B) once again, you are retarded. slaves have and will always be beaten, often viciously. the raping, killing, and mutilating of slaves has been well documented time and time again. 200,000 dollars? no.

C) what on earth is your point about the jim crowe laws? yeah, they weren't in place before the civil war, but thats because almost every black person in the south was already in slavery and it would be hard for their living conditions to get worse.

D) yeah, right, learn from it. which is totally why bush is salvador-izing iraq.

Yes, I know that. But I think if the South had won the war, Maine would eventually have succeeded and joined Canada.
Maine would have no reason to seceede,

you are retarded. you're right in that the war wasn't over slavery, but wrong in almost everything else.

A) the south did make 'free negro corps,' promising the black soldiers their freedom in case of victory.

B) once again, you are retarded. slaves have and will always be beaten, often viciously. the raping, killing, and mutilating of slaves has been well documented time and time again. 200,000 dollars? no.

C) what on earth is your point about the jim crowe laws? yeah, they weren't in place before the civil war, but thats because almost every black person in the south was already in slavery and it would be hard for their living conditions to get worse.

D) yeah, right, learn from it. which is totally why bush is salvador-izing iraq.

Frist of all, cut out with calling someone "retarded" over and over... it gives the impression that you're no better.

Also, the confederate flag has nothing to do with our current administration or the conflict in Iraq, so save it for another thread.

200,000 per slave? too high, but you can bet they weren't killed on a daily basis. Beating them was common everywhere, but killing them was HIGHLY unprofitable, slaves did -not- come buy cheap. It was actually about 80k in todays currency, PER slave.

Revisionism, revisionism, revisionism.

There is a whole seperate thread about what the Confederate flag(s) symbolize.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8838026&postcount=208

To summarize:

1) Secession was to preserve slavery
2) The Confederacy was organized around the insitution of slavery
3) When slavery was abolished after the war, it was replaced with the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.
4) As a symbol of the Confederacy, the flags are symbols of racism, slavery, and treason.
5) As used since the Civil War, the flags are symbols of racism, segregation, lynchings, etc.

The South need not be ashamed of its history anymore than the United States need be ashamed of its history.

The South was not evil, nor were most Southerns, or most Confederate soldiers. But the Confederacy was based on evil principles. And there should be no pride in flying its symbol. It is appropriate at memorials for Confederate soldiers. It is a matter of free speech for individuals to fly or wear it elsewhere. But do not try to tell me it symbolizes that which it does not and that it does not symbolize the evil for which it stood.

Frist of all, cut out with calling someone "retarded" over and over... it gives the impression that you're no better.

Also, the confederate flag has nothing to do with our current administration or the conflict in Iraq, so save it for another thread.

200,000 per slave? too high, but you can bet they weren't killed on a daily basis. Beating them was common everywhere, but killing them was HIGHLY unprofitable, slaves did -not- come buy cheap. It was actually about 80k in todays currency, PER slave.

i'm recovering from a rather enjoyable night; my lofty skills of high retoric are kinda at a low right now. though he does spell like a spec. edder.

he's talking about learning from history, not specifically the battle flag.

i said killings were documented, not that they were regular. often punishments for trying to run away or just a beating gone too far. the beating, however, was a highly regular occurence.

Personally I don't get why anyone would find a flag to be offensive, it's just a flag, in the end flags like the confederate flag and the swastika and whatever else represents things of the past, and I believe you can't say that any country was evil. Maybe i'm missing something cos i'm not an american :rolleyes:

Revisionism, revisionism, revisionism.

There is a whole seperate thread about what the Confederate flag(s) symbolize.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8838026&postcount=208

To summarize:

1) Secession was to preserve slavery
2) The Confederacy was organized around the insitution of slavery
3) When slavery was abolished after the war, it was replaced with the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.
4) As a symbol of the Confederacy, the flags are symbols of racism, slavery, and treason.
5) As used since the Civil War, the flags are symbols of racism, segregation, lynchings, etc.

The South need not be ashamed of its history anymore than the United States need be ashamed of its history.

The South was not evil, nor were most Southerns, or most Confederate soldiers. But the Confederacy was based on evil principles. And there should be no pride in flying its symbol. It is appropriate at memorials for Confederate soldiers. It is a matter of free speech for individuals to fly or wear it elsewhere. But do not try to tell me it symbolizes that which it does not and that it does not symbolize the evil for which it stood.

God I am so sick of generalizations.
>>1) Secession was to preserve slavery<<
Secession was to preserve States rights. It was about restricting the powers of the Central Goverment over the Independent States. It just so happens that the States wanted to preserve Slavery, however it was the -ABILITY- or Inability to make that decision that brought on the Confederacy.

>>4) As a symbol of the Confederacy, the flags are symbols of racism, slavery, and treason.<<
Treason? The declaration itself states that if and when the states believe that the government which has been established to provide freedoms of the people were negligent in their duties, it was the RESPONSIBILITY of the people to rise up against it. Secession is not Treason, it is a call for resolution. The flag may be -Interpretted- as representing such actions and emotions, but it is not the intent. The intent of that flag is to represent the preservation of history, State rights and tradition (even if you do not agree with whatever the traditions were).

To summarize:

1) Secession was to preserve slavery
2) The Confederacy was organized around the insitution of slavery
3) When slavery was abolished after the war, it was replaced with the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.
4) As a symbol of the Confederacy, the flags are symbols of racism, slavery, and treason.
5) As used since the Civil War, the flags are symbols of racism, segregation, lynchings, etc.


Do you actually research this stuff, or do you just spout it because its what your parents told you?

1) The North had no intention of abolishing slavery, and only did so after the war as a punishment for the secessionist (sp?) states. The states in which slavery was legal that hadn't seceded were allowed to keep it legal.

2) The South seceded because it felt it was just being used as a tool of the North for its agricultural productivity, among other things.

3) The Jim Crowe laws were a result of the controversial election of Rutherford B. Hayes. The election was decided by a single point, and as Hayes was the Northern candidate, the South felt they had been cheated. In order to compromise, the Hayes presidency revoked many of the rights of non-Whites in the South.

4) Not according to everything I've written above. The pro-slavery idea is a misinterpretation that is not strictly limited to either side; many of those who so proudly display it are under the impression that it is racist and segregationist. They are, however, wrong. As for treason, every considered if we're just a treasonous colony of Great Britain?

5) Why do all of your points seem to be the same?

i'm recovering from a rather enjoyable night; my lofty skills of high retoric are kinda at a low right now. though he does spell like a spec. edder.

Some of the most intelligent people in the world cannot read and write. And some of the worlds most ignorant are well educated in linguistics and rhetoric.

Food for thought.

Personally I don't get why anyone would find a flag to be offensive, it's just a flag,.... Maybe i'm missing something cos i'm not an american :rolleyes:

What does the flag of your country symbolize? You see a flag, is a symbol of something, it isn't just a piece of cloth that looks pretty. Unfortunately, people don't always agree on what a specific flag symbolizes.

Some of the most intelligent people in the world cannot read and write. And some of the worlds most ignorant are well educated in linguistics and rhetoric.

Food for thought.

Depending on the region, I suppose you could be correct. In various countries in Europe, even the least intelligent of school children are completely competent in their given language, while in various countries in Africa it is hard to gain an education without being rich.

Neither, however, applies to this country.

And trust me, I wouldn't have called him that if his points had any intelligent spark to them.

Depending on the region, I suppose you could be correct. In various countries in Europe, even the least intelligent of school children are completely competent in their given language, while in various countries in Africa it is hard to gain an education without being rich.

Neither, however, applies to this country.

And trust me, I wouldn't have called him that if his points had any intelligent spark to them.

What I'm trying to say is that your use of such words, which were out of context by definition, make you appear less intelligent than the individual you were addressing. Key word: Appear.

God I am so sick of generalizations.
>>1) Secession was to preserve slavery<<
Secession was to preserve States rights. It was about restricting the powers of the Central Goverment over the Independent States. It just so happens that the States wanted to preserve Slavery, however it was the -ABILITY- or Inability to make that decision that brought on the Confederacy.

>>4) As a symbol of the Confederacy, the flags are symbols of racism, slavery, and treason.<<
Treason? The declaration itself states that if and when the states believe that the government which has been established to provide freedoms of the people were negligent in their duties, it was the RESPONSIBILITY of the people to rise up against it. Secession is not Treason, it is a call for resolution. The flag may be -Interpretted- as representing such actions and emotions, but it is not the intent. The intent of that flag is to represent the preservation of history, State rights and tradition (even if you do not agree with whatever the traditions were).


bout time someone speaks some truth, and im from michigan.

Well i'm a brit so to me the british flag just represents a once powerful empire that also stood for freedom, I also see britain as the sole protector of Europe during ww2, but with the nazi flag for example I dont see killing jews and totalitarianism, because as you said there are many different inturpretations, also the swastika was originally some religious symbol or something *excuse ignorance*

Well i'm a brit so to me the british flag just represents a once powerful empire that also stood for freedom, I also see britain as the sole protector of Europe during ww2, but with the nazi flag for example I dont see killing jews and totalitarianism, because as you said there are many different inturpretations, also the swastika was originally some religious symbol or something *excuse ignorance*

Well i'm a brit so to me the british flag just represents a once powerful empire that also stood for freedom, I also see britain as the sole protector of Europe during ww2, but with the nazi flag for example I dont see killing jews and totalitarianism, because as you said there are many different inturpretations, also the swastika was originally some religious symbol or something *excuse ignorance*

God I am so sick of generalizations.
>>1) Secession was to preserve slavery<<
Secession was to preserve States rights. It was about restricting the powers of the Central Goverment over the Independent States. It just so happens that the States wanted to preserve Slavery, however it was the -ABILITY- or Inability to make that decision that brought on the Confederacy.

>>4) As a symbol of the Confederacy, the flags are symbols of racism, slavery, and treason.<<
Treason? The declaration itself states that if and when the states believe that the government which has been established to provide freedoms of the people were negligent in their duties, it was the RESPONSIBILITY of the people to rise up against it. Secession is not Treason, it is a call for resolution. The flag may be -Interpretted- as representing such actions and emotions, but it is not the intent. The intent of that flag is to represent the preservation of history, State rights and tradition (even if you do not agree with whatever the traditions were).

God, I am so sick of revisionism.

The issues are slightly more complicated (as is all history), but my statements are sound.

Read the link.

1. The seceding states themselves and the leaders of the Confederacy wholly identified the cause of the Confederacy with preserving slavery and white supremicism.

Conerstone Speech (http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=76) by Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederacy. ("Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; 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.")

Declaration of Causes of Seceding States (http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html) (e.g., "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."


2. The South seceded primarly between the election of Lincoln and his inaugaration. There was no tyranny to which they were objecting. To the contrary, they were objecting to the loss of their sectional control over the U.S. government and thereby to their inability to further expand slavery into new territories.

Secession was not legal under the Constitution. And levying war against the United States is the very definition of treason.

The intent of the flags at the time they were created were to symbolize the Confederacy, which stood for racism and slavery. Not clear how these symbols magically got transformed into something benign. Was it by their use by the KKK? The Citizen's Councils? Bull Connor and Orval Faubus?

When and how were the stains of blood, slavery, and segregation washed clean?

It is now believed that Hitler was planning on taking over the world. He had his henchmen execute anyone deemed to be his opponents, members of different political parties, non-christians, intellects, homosexuals, disabled people, non-white people, those without blue-eyes and blonde hair, etc. He successfully got his henchmen to execute millions. Many were executed right away. Many were forced into slave labor and those who dies there either:
-died of disease
-literally worked themselves to death
-were executed when they were deemed unable to work
-starved to death
The monsters who did these horrible crimes against humanity are deemed simply nazis. They aren't even Germans. Their symbol, the swatzica, is a symbol of their twisted principles. The symbol symbolizes Hitler's goal of achieving the ultimate race by eliminating everyone else. WWII veterans hate the symbol. Americans generally hate the symbol. Jews hate the symbol. The sad thing is, WWII is being forgotten. Once, Great Brittian, a nation that fought against the axis powers, was trying to find out if WWII really did happen. Many Germans refuse to admit that there really are concentration camps. Come on. The Nazis weren't even real Germans. Even the US, which prides itself as a symbol of democracy, can admit its wrongdoings easily. The US admits that slavery did exist there, segregation was rampant, and that Japanese Americans were forced into small camps during WWII for odvious reasons. France can admit to Napolean and the bloody years after the French revolution. England can even admit that it was never that pure of a country. Japan even sucks it in when it comes to knowing about the war crimes their last true military committed. The swatzica now symbolizes the worst humanity is capable of because of a madman who had global domination on the agenda, people in gas chambers and slave labor camps, and caused the largest, and bloodiest war in history that resulted in the deaths of millions worldwide.

That said, the confederate battle flag now symbolizes racism. It is used by klanies and white trash alike. It may have once symbolized freedom, but now is used as a symbol of a crazy war some nutjobs are raging against those they feel are unworthy. I say we lynch the white trash nutjobs. We should put their burning crosses on their lawns. We should probably shain them to our cars and drag them to death. But then again, that would be pretty low of us to go down to their level.

God, I am so sick of revisionism.

The issues are slightly more complicated (as is all history), but my statements are sound.

Read the link.

1. The seceding states themselves and the leaders of the Confederacy wholly identified the cause of the Confederacy with preserving slavery and white supremicism.

Conerstone Speech (http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=76) by Alexander Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederacy. ("Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; 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.")

Declaration of Causes of Seceding States (http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html) (e.g., "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."


2. The South seceded primarly between the election of Lincoln and his inaugaration. There was no tyranny to which they were objecting. To the contrary, they were objecting to the loss of their sectional control over the U.S. government and thereby to their inability to further expand slavery into new territories.

Secession was not legal under the Constitution. And levying war against the United States is the very definition of treason.

The intent of the flags at the time they were created were to symbolize the Confederacy, which stood for racism and slavery. Not clear how these symbols magically got transformed into something benign. Was it by their use by the KKK? The Citizen's Councils? Bull Connor and Orval Faubus?

When and how were the stains of blood, slavery, and segregation washed clean?

If I wasn't so ignorant of history, you'd have me convinced. Unfortunately, I happen to know a little more of the issue. I also know that you're ommiting 80% of what both sides said on the matter. You're also ingoring the key battle which started the war, as well as a few issues that lead up to it. I don't care how many people on here don't know all the facts, but I know enough to know what the flag truly represents.

BTW, I'm a yank from up north, way up north (Maine to be precise), so try not to fit me in that southern-comfort mold. I respect the flag, and its ideals, even though i don't support a particular tradition it sought to protect. I simply think the Central Government is too powerful.

It is now believed that Hitler was planning on taking over the world.

Actually, a few of us anticipated that to be his goal for quite some time. :p


That said, the confederate battle flag now symbolizes racism. It is used by klanies and white trash alike. It may have once symbolized freedom, but now is used as a symbol of a crazy war some nutjobs are raging against those they feel are unworthy. I say we lynch the white trash nutjobs. We should put their burning crosses on their lawns. We should probably shain them to our cars and drag them to death. But then again, that would be pretty low of us to go down to their level.

You're absolutely correct. Whatever noble intention the Confederate States once had will be forever lost to the trials of history and politics. :(

What 80% of what was said on the matter is being omitted from the post?
Which key battle are your referring to concerning the start of the Civil War?

...It is now believed that Hitler was planning on taking over the world...

Well if that's true, then I can no longer support Hitler.

What 80% of what was said on the matter is being omitted from the post?
Which key battle are your referring to concerning the start of the Civil War?

Duty is the sublimest word in our language. Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never wish to do less. - Robert E. Lee

I believe it to be the duty of everyone to unite in the restoration of the country and the reestablishment of peace and harmony. - Robert E. Lee

I can anticipate no greater calamity for the country that the dissolution of the Union. It would be an accumulation of all the evils we complain of, an' I am willing to sacrifice everything >>but honor<< for its preservation. - Robert E. Lee (>>, << added)

hope to live long enough to see my surviving comrades march side by side with the Union veterans along Pennsylvania Avenue, and then I will die happy. - General James Longstreet at a Memorial Day Parade in 1902

Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will . . . -Frederick Douglass

I'm still looking for my old essay which had all my quotes and specific statements readily available, but I can't seem to find it... more to follow upon discovery ^^

"The old flag may not wave much longer, but when it is replaced, it deserves to be taken down for the right reasons, not mercenary ones."

It was a blatent flame DH, he should know better.
Hes was just warned yesterday.

I wasn't criticizing you - just your posts. Besides, I wrote that before the warning so it was technically a freebie. But go tattle if you must. I think, however, we should try to get back on topic:

Q. Why is the Confederate flag so sexy???

A. Because it represents bondage - and bondage is hot.

Discuss.

I wasn't criticizing you - just your posts. Besides, I wrote that before the warning so it was technically a freebie. But go tattle if you must. I think, however, we should try to get back on topic:

Q. Why is the Confederate flag so sexy???

A. Because it represents bondage - and bondage is hot.

Discuss.

I've seen your posts before, and I think that this one ranks up with most as innapropriate, untimely and unnecessary.

I've seen your posts before, and I think that this one ranks up with most as innapropriate, untimely and unnecessary.

The Trifecta!!!!

My post was on topic and perfectly logical:

1. To millions of people, the confederate flag represents bondage.

2. To millions of people, bondage is erotic.

3. Ergo.........

If I wasn't so ignorant of history, you'd have me convinced. Unfortunately, I happen to know a little more of the issue. I also know that you're ommiting 80% of what both sides said on the matter. You're also ingoring the key battle which started the war, as well as a few issues that lead up to it. I don't care how many people on here don't know all the facts, but I know enough to know what the flag truly represents.

BTW, I'm a yank from up north, way up north (Maine to be precise), so try not to fit me in that southern-comfort mold. I respect the flag, and its ideals, even though i don't support a particular tradition it sought to protect. I simply think the Central Government is too powerful.

You mean I didn't include every fact and quotation about the Confederacy or the Civil War in my post! :eek: How dare I. :rolleyes:

I'm rather well-informed about the history of slavery and segregation in this country and with the Confederacy.

I don't think every revisionist is from the South. Some of the ugliest uses of the Confederate flag are by non-Southerners.

Thinking the central government is too powerful is a lame excuse to defend the Confederacy or the Confederate flags. There are better symbols and causes.

I laid out 2 key contemporaneous sets of information -- one set the official Declarations of Secession and the other a key speech by the Vice-President of the Confederacy about its founding. Both are among the best of evidence of the "ideals" for which the Confederacy stood. You might wish to actually address the evidence rather than make vague references to secret evidence.

If you do wish to reveal the secret information that makes you right and superior, good luck to you.

You mean I didn't include every fact and quotation about the Confederacy or the Civil War in my post! :eek: How dare I. :rolleyes:

I'm rather well-informed about the history of slavery and segregation in this country and with the Confederacy.

I don't think every revisionist is from the South. Some of the ugliest uses of the Confederate flag are by non-Southerners.

Thinking the central government is too powerful is a lame excuse to defend the Confederacy or the Confederate flags. There are better symbols and causes.

I laid out 2 key contemporaneous sets of information -- one set the official Declarations of Secession and the other a key speech by the Vice-President of the Confederacy about its founding. Both are among the best of evidence of the "ideals" for which the Confederacy stood. You might wish to actually address the evidence rather than make vague references to secret evidence.

If you do wish to reveal the secret information that makes you right and superior, good luck to you.

Stating every fact is one thing, but stating only those which support your cause is another. "Secret Evidence?" READ! Slavery is plastered everywhere in every document. But if you honestly make an effort to READ beyond that you will see that slavery was not the ONLY reason why there was a secession, which is what you claim. Also, I am not defending the Confederacy with "I don't want a strong Central Government." I am stating that I can understand the idea of revolting if one feels it is the only recourse. I am only -supporting- certain values, while you are actively seeking their destruction. Don't look at the easy picture to determine all your facts.

Duty is the sublimest word in our language. Do your duty in all things. You cannot do more. You should never wish to do less. - Robert E. Lee

I believe it to be the duty of everyone to unite in the restoration of the country and the reestablishment of peace and harmony. - Robert E. Lee

I can anticipate no greater calamity for the country that the dissolution of the Union. It would be an accumulation of all the evils we complain of, an' I am willing to sacrifice everything >>but honor<< for its preservation. - Robert E. Lee (>>, << added)

hope to live long enough to see my surviving comrades march side by side with the Union veterans along Pennsylvania Avenue, and then I will die happy. - General James Longstreet at a Memorial Day Parade in 1902

Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will . . . -Frederick Douglass

I'm still looking for my old essay which had all my quotes and specific statements readily available, but I can't seem to find it... more to follow upon discovery ^^

Wow.

Some people said some things.

Be nice if these were somehow even vaguely connected to the meaning of the Confederate flag or the Confederacy.

Before you cut and past from an old essay, perhaps you would like to be sure you are making sense.

If the Confederate Flag means nothing to you....... then fine...

But to some it sign of hate, and past Sins.

I'm from Georgia and see nothing wrong with Flag, but I understand why people say, and feel the way we do. So I believed it was right to remove it from our state flag. I just think that if people could try and see the world threw others points of view.. we all could get along!


I'm from Tennessee and live in Virginia in both states the Civil War and the Confedracy played a big role boths history. Its said that we cannot celebrate history without someone complaining that they're female genatlia hurt.

You know what offends in the city of Richmond VA you cannot hang a picture of Robert E. Lee

Wow.

Some people said some things.

Be nice if these were somehow even vaguely connected to the meaning of the Confederate flag or the Confederacy.

Before you cut and past from an old essay, perhaps you would like to be sure you are making sense.

The point was that the reasons for revolution against the Union were not cold-hearted quests to preserve slavery, and that even Southerners were humanitarian. I guess I was posting at step 3 without giving you the idea of where i was going in step 2....

:sniper:

I live in Georgia. The Confederate Battle Flag used to be part of the State Flag up until a few years ago. The Govnor (Roy Barnes at the time) changed it to this weird Blue flag. Then, there a controversy about not getting the people's vote on the changing of the flag, but the truth is that throughout the history of the state of georgia, the people have never voted on the state flag, only the General Assembly (the legislature of the state of Georgia).

The truth is, Racism is pretty much dead in Georgia. The Confederate Battle Flag is not reprsentative of racism; just a bunch of idiots that decided to secceed from the Union during the mid-1800s.

The only people that still believe in racism are ignorant, and with the education system in Georgia, only the peanut farmers in the deep south part of Georgia are ignorant... not the people who live anywhere near Atlanta.

The point was that the reasons for revolution against the Union were not cold-hearted quests to preserve slavery, and that even Southerners were humanitarian. I guess I was posting at step 3 without giving you the idea of where i was going in step 2....

<sigh>

You never bothered to read the linked post. You wish to fight a straw man.

I didn't want to repeat myself here. I do not villify every Confederate or Southerner, nor even most of them.

But the reason for secession was to preserve and expand slavery. Were there other reasons as well? Yes. But the overriding and primary reason was slavery. You have yet to point to an single speck of contrary evidence.

I agree whole-heartedly with the following quote from William Scarborough (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4i3095.html),
Professor of History, University of Southern Mississippi at Hattiesburg:
The election of Lincoln came at the end of a 25-year onslaught, increasing in crescendo against the South by outsiders, directed first against slavery, then against slaveholders, then against the South generally. And in every bit of correspondence that I have examined, there is resentment...against the North because of what they perceive as an unfair attack upon their civilization.

The election of Lincoln certainly came as no surprise to many people. I mean, if you looked objectively at the lineup in 1860, it was fairly clear he was going to win. What it means, though, is that you have a sectional President, a person who did not receive a single popular vote in any slave state except Virginia, who is committed to blocking the expansion of slavery. And it is the general belief that he's committed to more than that -- erroneously, as we know. We know that Lincoln was not an abolitionist, at least not at first. But that was the general [view]. "The black Republican President", "the black Republican Party" -- that's the phraseology used in the correspondence and newspaper editorials and so on, of the time.

Southerners had compromised in 1850, when the first crisis occurred. And at that time they had said, "We're going to compromise this time, but this is it. We're not going to yield again if this onslaught against slavery continues." Well, it continued and culminated in the election of a sectional President in 1860. And that was the fact that brought on the Civil War. There's no doubt about that. Southerners don't like to admit today that slavery was the cause of secession, which led in turn to the Civil War. White southerners do not like to admit that. You go to Sons of Confederate Veterans meetings and so on, and they talk about states' rights and economic differences and all that. But that's nonsense. Every scintilla of evidence that can be adduced from the correspondence and the editorials, that's what the issue is: slavery. And that caused secession. That does not mean, however, that Confederate soldiers thought they were fighting for the defense of slavery. Only one white family in four in the South owned slaves; three-fourths of the white families owned no slaves. And the bulk of the Confederate Army is made up of these non-slaveholders. And they're fighting for home and family and country and honor and the same things that soldiers fought for from time immemorial and still fight for, not for slavery. But that's the cause of the war. That's what triggered secession. Secession triggered the war. No doubt about it.

I'm going to have to side with Damaica on this one. It wasn't slavery, it was loss of self-autonomy for the states. In saying that the primary reason for secession was slavery you are desperately confused. The Southern States didn't want to be controlled by an overpowering central government, which they feared would try to infringe upon their slaveholding rights. The main issue for secession was the states' rights to govern themselves and not be controlled by the Federal government. Granted slavery was their biggest concern, it was only a part of their fear of losing all self-governing ability and falling victim to a Nothern-controlled government.

:sniper:

I live in Georgia. The Confederate Battle Flag used to be part of the State Flag up until a few years ago. The Govnor (Roy Barnes at the time) changed it to this weird Blue flag. Then, there a controversy about not getting the people's vote on the changing of the flag, but the truth is that throughout the history of the state of georgia, the people have never voted on the state flag, only the General Assembly (the legislature of the state of Georgia).

The truth is, Racism is pretty much dead in Georgia. The Confederate Battle Flag is not reprsentative of racism; just a bunch of idiots that decided to secceed from the Union during the mid-1800s.

The only people that still believe in racism are ignorant, and with the education system in Georgia, only the peanut farmers in the deep south part of Georgia are ignorant... not the people who live anywhere near Atlanta.

how about those elitist idiots who stayed in the Union and held down the South for 100 years afterwards then wanna move here?

I'm going to have to side with Damaica on this one. It wasn't slavery, it was loss of self-autonomy for the states. In saying that the primary reason for secession was slavery you are desperately confused. The Southern States didn't want to be controlled by an overpowering central government, which they feared would try to infringe upon their slaveholding rights. The main issue for secession was the states' rights to govern themselves and not be controlled by the Federal government. Granted slavery was their biggest concern, it was only a part of their fear of losing all self-governing ability and falling victim to a Nothern-controlled government.


Slavery may have been the most important issue that the south wanted control over, but it was having the SELF-GOVERNING RIGHT to make the decision on such issues which spurred the Civil War.

Thanks for the support, but I am afraid that this will have to be resolved as an agreement to disagree. I can see where he/she comes from, so I am not going to attempt to alienate his/her views, but rather hope we can just let it go.

Slavery may have been the most important issue that the south wanted control over, but it was having the SELF-GOVERNING RIGHT to make the decision on such issues which spurred the Civil War.

Thanks for the support, but I am afraid that this will have to be resolved as an agreement to disagree. I can see where he/she comes from, so I am not going to attempt to alienate his/her views, but rather hope we can just let it go.

are you forgetting transcontinintel railroad the distribution of heavy industry and don't forget tarriffs which could have caused the War in the 1830's not the 60's

i'm sorry you can't agree with realizing other things first

I'm going to have to side with Damaica on this one. It wasn't slavery, it was loss of self-autonomy for the states. In saying that the primary reason for secession was slavery you are desperately confused. The Southern States didn't want to be controlled by an overpowering central government, which they feared would try to infringe upon their slaveholding rights. The main issue for secession was the states' rights to govern themselves and not be controlled by the Federal government. Granted slavery was their biggest concern, it was only a part of their fear of losing all self-governing ability and falling victim to a Nothern-controlled government.

If you keep repeating that over and over and clicking your heels together, perhaps it will come true. :D

Don't bother considering the historical evidence. It only causes confusion. :rolleyes:

are you forgetting transcontinintel railroad the distribution of heavy industry and don't forget tarriffs which could have caused the War in the 1830's not the 60's

i'm sorry you can't agree with realizing other things first

I do realize those things... I simply hold my beliefs and let others hold thiers.

I do realize those things... I simply hold my beliefs and let others hold thiers.

but your holding the same misguided belief that has fooled yankee historians for over a 100 years

All people who fly the Confederate Flag are traitors to the Republic. If you see someone flying the Confederate flag they're probably working with Al Qaeda to destabilize the government, we should expand Gitmo for them.

All people who fly the Confederate Flag are traitors to the Republic. If you see someone flying the Confederate flag they're probably working with Al Qaeda to destabilize the government, we should expand Gitmo for them.
my rebel ass flies the confederate flag and i'm not a traitor in fact i fought against those pussy ass al qaida bitches

before you say that kind of shit you best check yourself
or i will check you faggott

I do realize those things... I simply hold my beliefs and let others hold thiers.but your holding the same misguided belief that has fooled yankee historians for over a 100 years

As much as I love an NS fragging: Damaica agrees with you more than with me.

And, btw, "in the city of Richmond VA you cannot hang a picture of Robert E. Lee"? Bullshit.

Richmand has public monuments (http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/visitor/monumentsmemorials.aspx#lee) to:
General Robert E. Lee
Jefferson Davis
General Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson
General J.E.B. Stuart
and to common Confederate Soldiers & Sailors.

You, sir, are not being truthful.

All people who fly the Confederate Flag are traitors to the Republic. If you see someone flying the Confederate flag they're probably working with Al Qaeda to destabilize the government, we should expand Gitmo for them.

Secession was legal at the time of the Civl War. It's not treason.

"Reminiscences Of The Civil War", (Chapter I)
By John B. Gordon, Maj. Gen. CSA

Slavery was undoubtedly the immediate fomenting cause of the woeful American conflict. It was the great political factor around which the passions of the sections had long been gathered--the tallest pine in the political forest around whose top the fiercest lightnings were to blaze and whose trunk was destined to be shivered in the earthquake shocks of war.

U.S. Constitution

Art. III, Sec. 3, Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them,...


I think that lays it out pretty clearly. Slavery was the main cause of the war, the South committed treason by attacking the Union, and the flag of a fallen, treasonous nation should not be held up as a symbol of state's rights, it should be rightly touted as a symbol of discrimination.

BTW, I think that Gartref actually has a decent point about the bondage thing, although I'm not sur eif he's right when he says millions of people like bondage. Personally, I think it's kinda wierd. But, hey, whatever floats your boat.

my rebel ass flies the confederate flag and i'm not a traitor in fact i fought against those pussy ass al qaida bitches

before you say that kind of shit you best check yourself
or i will check you faggott


Traitor reb.

Secession was legal at the time of the Civl War. It's not treason.

Not true.

Secession was never legal.

Texas v. White (http://laws.findlaw.com/us/74/700.html ), 74 U.S. 700 (1868):

(Note: before you point to the date, the question was whether the secession of Texas was legal the time it occurred.)

Feel free to point to anything in the Constitution that authorized secession.

Secession was legal at the time of the Civl War. It's not treason.

Nice fine line rebel. Your still a traitor. Your either with the Republic or your not. If your not, don't try and act all patriotic when you deserve to hang.

As much as I love an NS fragging: Damaica agrees with you more than with me.

And, btw, "in the city of Richmond VA you cannot hang a picture of Robert E. Lee"? Bullshit.
public monuments (http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/visitor/monumentsmemorials.aspx#lee) to:
General Robert E. Lee
Jefferson Davis
General Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson
General J.E.B. Stuart
and to common Confederate Soldiers & Sailors.

You, sir, are not being truthful.

Yes i am you are reffering to Monument street( which the Richmond City Council has discussed in scraping the monuments 6 times in the last 3 years

Ask about the picture of Robert E. Lee on Riverwalk in Downtown Richmond

I live 60 miles away from there

I'm not quite sure what "historical evidence" you're referring to, but seeing as how my father was a history major and was completely obsessed with the Civil War, I'd say I know a good deal about it, enough to refute the widely accepted and highly incorrect statement that the Civil War and secession were about slavery. They weren't. They were about preserving the Union for the North, and they were about preserving states' rights for the South. There is nothing to argue there, those are the reasons, I just hope you find it within yourself to ascend from your blind ignorance into a position where you are capable of understanding those basic ideas.

"Reminiscences Of The Civil War", (Chapter I)
By John B. Gordon, Maj. Gen. CSA

Slavery was undoubtedly the immediate fomenting cause of the woeful American conflict. It was the great political factor around which the passions of the sections had long been gathered--the tallest pine in the political forest around whose top the fiercest lightnings were to blaze and whose trunk was destined to be shivered in the earthquake shocks of war.

U.S. Constitution

Art. III, Sec. 3, Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them,...


I think that lays it out pretty clearly. Slavery was the main cause of the war, the South committed treason by attacking the Union, and the flag of a fallen, treasonous nation should not be held up as a symbol of state's rights, it should be rightly touted as a symbol of discrimination.

BTW, I think that Gartref actually has a decent point about the bondage thing, although I'm not sur eif he's right when he says millions of people like bondage. Personally, I think it's kinda wierd. But, hey, whatever floats your boat.

10th Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Secession was not prohibited by the Federal Government, therefore it was legal for them to secede.

Not true.

Secession was never legal.

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868):

(Note: before you point to the date, the question was whether the secession of Texas was legal the time it occurred.)

Feel free to point to anything in the Constitution that authorized secession.

So you should be punished for a crime that only becomes illegal in the future? Wow.

Traitor reb.

better to be a traitor reb then yankee any day of the week

10th Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Secession was not prohibited by the Federal Government, therefore it was legal for them to secede.



So you should be punished for a crime that only becomes illegal in the future? Wow.


Seccesion was legal at the time of the Civil War
South Carolina had threatened to secede in the 1830's only way they didn't was under MILITARY not legal force

my rebel ass flies the confederate flag and i'm not a traitor in fact i fought against those pussy ass al qaida bitches

before you say that kind of shit you best check yourself
or i will check you faggott

No, *I* will check you.
One week ban, flaming and threatening.

I hope you realize how retarded and unpatriotic you sound for calling him a "traitor reb". Maybe you should try to push your mind a little farther back in history to something we call the Revolutionary War? Would you rather that the United States not exist at all? Because if you're calling him a "traitor", then call yourself a traitor as well for supporting the existence of our country. Our country is founded on acts of treason, and if you look deeper into the issues that caused both wars, you'll see that they are very similar. Both having to do with self-governing and political rights and freedoms. But I do commend you on showing the world how little intelligence to indeed possess.

Traitor reb.

One week forumban, for flamebaiting as quoted here, http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8838717&postcount=78, and continuing it in the post quoted above.

better to be a traitor reb then yankee any day of the week

Hang all traitor rebs.

So you should be punished for a crime that only becomes illegal in the future? Wow.

Nice try. Not what I -- or the US Supreme Court -- said.

The issue was squarely adjudicated after the fact. That is how the Constitution requires cases work. No advisory opinions. There must be a case or controversy for the judiciary to decide.

When the case was presented, it was firmly decided it had never been legal to secede.

That did not change the law. It stated what the law had always been.

Does such sophistry normally work for you?

One week forumban, for flamebaiting as quoted here, http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8838717&postcount=78, and continuing it in the post quoted above.


Hang all moderators who support traitor rebs.

Nice try. Not what I -- or the US Supreme Court -- said.

The issue was squarely adjudicated after the fact. That is how the Constitution requires cases work. No advisory opinions. There must be a case or controversy for the judiciary to decide.

When the case was presented, it was firmly decided it had never been legal to secede.

That did not change the law. It stated what the law had always been.

Does such sophistry normally work for you?

Yeah, but this wasn't decided during the Civil War. The Constitution was at the very least ambiguous about whether secession was legal. It was only definitevly decided illegal after the Civil War, so the CSA truly believed that they had a right cause because one could get that impression from reading.

God, I am so sick of revisionism.

Yes I am. The primary causes of the war were States Rights and economics, not slavery.

Thank you, finally another person who knows what they are talking about. It wasn't about slavery, it was about the states' right to decide whether they wanted slavery or not.

Yes I am. The primary causes of the war were States Rights and economics, not slavery.

Well, if you say so.

I -- and the Confederate states and their leaders at the time -- must be wrong.

Only 1 person even addressed the actual historical documents. Most just keep repeating the same conclusory statements and insulting those that don't except that dogma.

I'm done arguing this for now.

I say we lynch the white trash nutjobs. We should put their burning crosses on their lawns. We should probably shain them to our cars and drag them to death. But then again, that would be pretty low of us to go down to their level.

Are you a liberal? I thought only conservatives were capable of such hate. :headbang:

The Trifecta!!!!

My post was on topic and perfectly logical:

1. To millions of people, the confederate flag represents bondage.

2. To millions of people, bondage is erotic.

3. Ergo.........

You sir/madam are sick. Go get professional help.

I'm going to have to side with Damaica on this one. It wasn't slavery, it was loss of self-autonomy for the states. In saying that the primary reason for secession was slavery you are desperately confused. The Southern States didn't want to be controlled by an overpowering central government, which they feared would try to infringe upon their slaveholding rights. The main issue for secession was the states' rights to govern themselves and not be controlled by the Federal government. Granted slavery was their biggest concern, it was only a part of their fear of losing all self-governing ability and falling victim to a Nothern-controlled government.

AMEN! There was no single cause and slavery was not the primary cause.

You sir/madam are sick. Go get professional help.

Methinks thou doth protest too much....

Celty, are you saying you don't get a little flushed and bothered every time that magnificent banner is unfurled? Come on... be honest.

Oh... and I'll disregard the personal attack you made about me being sick, but don't you dare call me a Sir/Madam again or it goes straight to moderation!

Just kidding. Attack me as much as you like. I won't tattle.

The thing is people shouldn't view any flag, organisation or whatever with hate, as many of you have demonstrated it's the hate for what the confederate flag represents can be partially blamed for ignorance and history slowly getting watered down into just a story of generalisations, I don't view the swastika with hate because I know that many things created the nazis, like how the Allies treated Germany unfairly after ww1 and so on, if I we all just generalise like that then one day the history books are just goin to say "the nazis were bad.....very bad....very very bad.....and hitler had a moustache...baaad man", same with the confederate flag, and btw many people like the confederate flag because it represents a rebellious spirit and to many it still represents the southern states of America so it's unfair to say that only kkk members and whitetrash bear that flag

The North America probably would be made up of several different countries. Texas would still be an independent country. The Southwest and California would be either a separate country or part of Mexico. Washington and Oregon along with a couple of the northern states would be a part of Canada, as would Maine and possibly Vermont. The Midwest, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri would be a part of the Confederacy, and Illinois, Ohio, Indiana a part of the United States. Michigan and Wisconsin would be either US or Canada. Alaska would be either an independent country or a part of Russia.

Any corrections or other theories?

Well, the main point I was making was that had the CSA survived that the 20th century would have been vastly different.

I doubt Texas would have broken with the CSA, they'd need the help to deal with Mexico, which Napoleon III had just taken over and installed the Austrian Archduke Maximilian (brother to Franz Joseph, the Emperor of Austria-Hungary from 1848-1916) as Emperor of Mexico. Logically, a new Monarchist Mexico (w/o a unified USA to fight it) would try to take back what it lost in the Mexican-American War a generation earlier.

I also don't think that Canada would have gained very much; they were still fairly sparsely populated. Likewise, the USA would probably retain most of it's territory (even with the CSA still around), unless it was a total defeat (HIGHLY unlikley).

That said, Alaska would have probably remained Russian.

Losing WWI wouldn't have meant that much. Germany didn't intend to occupy all of Europe back then. And WWII? Wouldn't have happened if the Kaiser had won WWI. The only reason Hitler got into power was because the German people were seriously fed up at being opressed by everyone else. Okay, that and the depression, but the depression itself might not have happened without an all-powerful Union in North America.

Incidentally, Markreich, ever read anything by Harry Turtledove? The 'Great War' and 'American Empire' series' deal with pretty much what you suggested -- WWI as CSA-Canada-Britain vs USA-Germany-Austria-Hungary. The Central Powers won. The way you made your point makes me wonder if you've read it...

Of course, WW2 would likely not have happened had the Allies lost WW1. I say that while Nazism would not have come about, there would probably have been a new European war, probably against Communism/the new USSR. Failing that, a new Hohenzollern Emperor (the Kaiser was no sping chicken!) might have set his sights on Scandinavia or even Britain. There may have also been a civil war in Austria, since the Empire (though I DO love the Habsburgs so) was near collapse after the first year of the war, and the Hungarians and Serbs were both very nationalistic.

Nope, I consider Turtledove a hack. :) I did read one of his books where the aliens show up during WW2. Even stuck on a plane for 7 hours, I didn't care for it.
Incidentally, my *5th grade teacher* (this is 1984!) used to talk about this, and he mentioned a book that had to do with it, but I've long since forgotten the title.

Well, the main point I was making was that had the CSA survived that the 20th century would have been vastly different.

I doubt Texas would have broken with the CSA, they'd need the help to deal with Mexico, which Napoleon III had just taken over and installed the Austrian Archduke Maximilian (brother to Franz Joseph, the Emperor of Austria-Hungary from 1848-1916) as Emperor of Mexico. Logically, a new Monarchist Mexico (w/o a unified USA to fight it) would try to take back what it lost in the Mexican-American War a generation earlier.

I also don't think that Canada would have gained very much; they were still fairly sparsely populated. Likewise, the USA would probably retain most of it's territory (even with the CSA still around), unless it was a total defeat (HIGHLY unlikley).

That said, Alaska would have probably remained Russian.

Interesting hypthesis, and I agree. Although I doubt the CSA would have opted for total defeat, if a treaty of co-existence were proposed. Although the north was (and myself am, in case I didn't seem to be) against slavery, if they could agree to co-exist, there wouldn't be a problem. I doubt however that the North would be able to agree to said terms, and the civil war would have inevitably continued until one was vanquished. :( Good thing it turned out the way it did.... or at least, partially. :confused:

Interesting hypthesis, and I agree. Although I doubt the CSA would have opted for total defeat, if a treaty of co-existence were proposed. Although the north was (and myself am, in case I didn't seem to be) against slavery, if they could agree to co-exist, there wouldn't be a problem. I doubt however that the North would be able to agree to said terms, and the civil war would have inevitably continued until one was vanquished. :( Good thing it turned out the way it did.... or at least, partially. :confused:

Thanks.

The only way I could see a draw really happening would be if the war dragged on. If it did, the European powers would be only too happy to aid the CSA, as it would put an end to that pesky nation over there competing with them.

Further, the draft riots in the North would likely continue and get worse, while the South would try to build up it's rail and war material manufacturing. Had Sherman's "March to the Sea" (and the subsequent sacking/razing of Atlanta) been stopped, and had Gettysburg turned out differently, this is not an impossible outcome.

I'd bet that they'd declare peace, then go at it again a generation later.

...all that said, I'm *very* grateful it didn't go that way.

Thanks.

The only way I could see a draw really happening would be if the war dragged on. If it did, the European powers would be only too happy to aid the CSA, as it would put an end to that pesky nation over there competing with them.

Further, the draft riots in the North would likely continue and get worse, while the South would try to build up it's rail and war material manufacturing. Had Sherman's "March to the Sea" (and the subsequent sacking/razing of Atlanta) been stopped, and had Gettysburg turned out differently, this is not an impossible outcome.

I'd bet that they'd declare peace, then go at it again a generation later.

...all that said, I'm *very* grateful it didn't go that way.

Hmm... that brings up a possible 3d option. Either One beats the other... a truce... or a conflict with the British!

Possible that the Brits would support the South, but I think it'd be more possible that they would wait and take them both on in confusion. Dressing in American Uniforms to start "unauthorized" raids on civilian towns, confusing military strategists, then overruning the nation when it is at its most confused state of war. This would either result in a rejoining of troops against the british, or defeat. And I think, if the forces rejoined, a term would be that upon victory the seceeded States would be granted Secession without further military action. Hmmmm........

Just kidding. Attack me as much as you like. I won't tattle.

coughs

coughs

Both of you, cut it out, and stop dragging your problems into other threads.
Honestly, you two act so damned childish, you can't stop arguing no matter what. Leave us out of it, please.

Both of you, cut it out, and stop dragging your problems into other threads.
Honestly, you two act so damned childish, you can't stop arguing no matter what. Leave us out of it, please.

Im trying, he just brings out the worst in me on here
Ill stop OK.