The Confederate Flag

[Trans Fat 41g]

I did an essay back in the tenth grade over the Confederates flag to make up for lost exam credits. I was called a racist because of a few quotes regarding the confederacy were used to support the relevant material.

Privileged asshole kids are our schools downfall. :/

 

[PantsOfDesire]

On a personal level, I don't give a shit about the Confederate battle flag, it's just a piece of cloth. Sure, it represents something, but that's why flags exist. Apart from that, I don't understand what the big deal is about people revering the symbol of a failed country that's been defunct for about 150 years, but that's just me.

As far as the flag on the SC Capitol goes, it's a naval jack. What is the flag of a defunct country's armed forces doing on the civil government building of a state in the first place? Just put it in a museum or something at this point. I dunno.

And above all else, this flag debate is a distraction from things that actually will bring about real, positive change. But hey, if it feels good, I don't blame anyone.

It's not important that the flag represents a failed state. What's relevant now is how people identify with it. I really don't care much for the flag because for me it's that funny flag the Duke boys had on the roof of their car. I don't think it should be flown on government buildings. I'm fine with people flying the flag themselves for whatever it represents to them. I have friends in the south. One comes to mind as having a confederate flag decal on his car, and for him it's just part of his identity as a southerner. He's not racist, and would readily condemn slavery and modern-day racism. I'm sure there are plenty more there and there's no good reason to turn this in to a witch-hunt on the assumption that it represents slavery. Islamic and Christian symbols carry a great deal of unpleasant baggage, of racism, sexism, conquest, and homophobia – among other things. Yet we don't condemn private displays of crosses and crescents because we know that it doesn't necessarily represent the bad shit that happened under those banners.

It needs to go from state buildings and be left where people use it personally for whatever their reasons may be, and I'm pretty sure a sizeable majority of people with these flags and images of it aren't hankering for the times when they could have a black guy chained in the shed.

 

[HG 400]

aren't hankering for the times when they could have a black guy chained in the shed.

You can still have that if you know how to craigslist.

 

[I Am Do Big Fard Retard]

With everything going on people are complaining about having the Confederate flag scrubbed of the face of the Earth. I feel like people should be able to fly that flag, it has deep roots in culture to this country, especially to the south, and people's ancestors died under fighting for their beliefs. Now I'm not saying I agree with slavery, but there was more to the civil war than just that. If people want the Confederate flag gone because of the negative history associated with it, shouldn't we just remove every flag then? Each flag has it's own culture and history associated with it whether it be good or bad, so why should one flag be banned (or whatever they want) because of the history of it and the fact that some crazies hijacked it. Am I wrong for thinking this? Am I crazy?

Good, honest, innocent boys died fighting for Confederate soil. Good, honest innocent boys also died fighting for the United States of America. Both should be honored because of the pain they went through during that horrible, horrible war. I'm saying this as someone fascinated with the Civil War and with family who fought on both sides of it.

Also very important to realize the Confederate flag was a battle flag, not a standard for the Confederate States of America. I hate it when people compare it to the swastika, or place it alongside the swastika, because it's more like the Iron Cross.

 

[*Asterisk*]

It's disturbing to think about, but war service is more often about geography than personal feelings. There were Unionists like McClellan who were utterly wretched figures, and Confederates like Lee who had actual morals. Admiral Stockdale in Vietnam withstood unthinkable torture at the hands of the Vietcong for the sake of protecting his men, and meanwhile his own homeland was bombing civilians by the hundreds of thousands and spraying enough chemical toxins to ensure a century of birth defects to the children of those caught in the dust. Even in World War II, there were men who fought for the Axis that were themselves honorable and heroic,* and men who fought for the Allies who were complete sociopaths who'd have enthusiastically set up their own gas chambers had they been born in a different country.* *

None of this reflects moral equivalency. It's just how the World winds up.

All most can really do in a war is to stick to a worthwhile moral compass, and whenever you're given power in any way, take the moral path when you make your decision. Grunts have no say in where or why they fight, but the how's still their own.

* Marshal Rommel.

* * General Patton.

 

[I-chi]

You reserve the right to fly the flag if you so choose, if it's really that important to you, at least in this country.

But don't be surprised when anybody perceives you as an enormous tool for it for putting that much worth in a strip of cloth.

Additionally, the KKK and Black Panthers were always just a double-sided coin of edgelord.

 

[Marvin]

Also very important to realize the Confederate flag was a battle flag, not a standard for the Confederate States of America. I hate it when people compare it to the swastika, or place it alongside the swastika, because it's more like the Iron Cross.

Oh, this is very incorrect.

Symbols, like words, are defined by their usage. The swastika isn't seen as a hate symbol because of some law establishing it as the flag of Germany. It's a hate symbol because of how it was used.

The confederate flag is absolutely on par with the Nazi flag because it's used as a hate symbol.

 

[Fat Cat Represent]

I say let the dumb assholes who want to fly it fly it, that's part of their freedom of speech, which I support even if they're racist tards.

But it shouldn't be allowed on any sort of government building or flag.

 

[Mecha-Lenin]

It is a symbol of oppression and slavery. Anyone who denies this is flat-out a moron.

...

I don't care if some feces-for-brains racist wants to put in on their car. Let them, it's their right and allows me to identify them as an idiot.

But it should not be allowed on government property. I really hope I need not explain why.

 

[Yellow Yam Scam]

Oh, this is very incorrect.

Symbols, like words, are defined by their usage. The swastika isn't seen as a hate symbol because of some law establishing it as the flag of Germany. It's a hate symbol because of how it was used.

The confederate flag is absolutely on par with the Nazi flag because it's used as a hate symbol.

The exact same argument can be used to say that the confederate flag is harmless since 99% of the time that it is worn or flown by 99% of the people that do so, it is meant without any racist (or otherwise political) connotations.

 

[Mecha-Lenin]

The exact same argument can be used to say that the confederate flag is harmless since 99% of the time that it is worn or flown by 99% of the people that do so, it is meant without any racist (or otherwise political) connotations.

But symbols are not just who uses them, but what they mean to others.

I am 100% certain that 99.999% of people who do fly the confederate flag are white.

My point, is that even though your white neighbor 'Bob' fly's a confederate flag and means no harm, if you are a black person that is bound to be hurtful or unnerving in some way.

Now what happens when a government building does that? What does that say about your government's awareness of past human-rights crimes? It does not say anything great.

 

[Puppet Pal Clem]

It is a symbol of oppression and slavery.

It's a symbol of people standing up and fighting for what they think is right.
An ideology not too dissimilar from that which founded the USA itself.

The Union wasn't fighting for the explicit abolition of slavery but to maintain a cohesive national identity and enforce federal powers.
The conflict was indeed largely inflamed over the abolitionist movement, but was truthfully about whether or not it was reasonable for populous northern states to undermine the industry of Southern states for the sake of anti-slavery ideology which was far from popular at the time with the common folk.
There is maybe some reasonable argument to the idea that this wasn't fair political representation.

The idea of the South as a racist boogeyman, is historically fatuous.
If we're going to hold it accountable to modern standards of slavery and racial equality, why then isn't the entirety of pre-abolition human history equivalently accountable in this.
How long was the American flag itself complicit with slavery?
They weren't fighting to keep a people down, but to defend their own way of life.

Simply because some people might use it as a symbol of racial hatred, or that others may interpret it as such, doesn't mean it should be banned or suppressed for obvious reasons (freedom of speech).
Even from the political perspective of treachery or sedition, the very nature of a democratic and representative government mandates that all political perspectives be allowed free expression.
It isn't the idea or motivations of rebellion that should be punished, but the act, especially considering the rebellious origins of the state itself.
What right did the Union respectively have to deny the agency of people who felt unrepresented by their government?

It is realistically a grayer ideological conflict than more people are comfortable admitting, and still reflected in modern political discussion Big Government(Federal Power)/Small Government(State Power).

The historicity of the flag, and its political symbolism dramatically outweigh anybody's personal feelings in the matter.
That said, you know, I wouldn't fly it over any currently officially active government bodies, considering the matter was politically resolved even if it ideologically wasn't.
We can't enforce any form of law if people aren't willing to participate in a unified society.
You can and always will be allowed to fly it anywhere you want though.

 

[Mecha-Lenin]

It's a symbol of people standing up and fighting for what they think is right.

Which included slavery.

I don't think you give the conflict over slavery enough weight. Nobody denies that slavery was not the only motivation, you are correct that there were other motivating factors. Yet, slavery was not only a central part of the conflict, but it's abolition became the historical result of that conflict, arguably the most important one.

The wealth and power slave-owning class of the south depended on slavery. It is undeniable that maintaining the institution of slavery was on their agenda.

The war was a significant enough of a historical turning point, in fact, that many suspect slavery would have continued for a time if the South had won.

 

[Puppet Pal Clem]

The wealth and power slave-owning class of the south depended on slavery. It is undeniable that maintaining the institution of slavery was on their agenda.

And yet the slave-owning class was maybe less 1% of the US population.

Did the rest of the South move at the whim at their racial hatred of black people?
They resisted the perceived unjust imposition of power over their livelihood.

And while I absolutely agree that slavery is unmoral, it is undoubtedly ignorant to weigh the value of history or the merits of political argument based upon the assumed morality of the individuals participating in it.
It may be that even you, 200 years from now might be seen as unfathomably evil for not flagellating yourself enough under the hedonism of 20th century western culture. This doesn't invalidate your political perspective.
It doesn't teach us anything to judge the people of the past by the standards we hold ourselves to, but it does teach us to understand their motivations.

The generalize the motivations of half the country as racial hatred or supremacy is utterly asinine.
The politics of slavery were merely the media in which the political conflict arose.

Let see if I can make an appropriate analogy: Slavery is to the Civil War, what Misogyny was to Gamergate.
An obfuscation of the real political discussion regardless of how many racists or misogynists there actually were.

 

[Fat Cat Represent]

Are you seriously comparing a bunch of whiny manchildren who have nothing better to do with their lives than scream about "Ethics in Gaming Journalism" with the Civil War?

 

[Puppet Pal Clem]

Are you seriously comparing a bunch of whiny manchildren who have nothing better to do with their lives than scream about "Ethics in Gaming Journalism" with the Civil War?

That's what an analogy is.
You're confusing the intensity of the two scenarios with their relationship.
I never implied they were of the same scale.
Only that slavery and misogyny played similar roles in distracting discussion.

 

[Mecha-Lenin]

And yet the slave-owning class was maybe less 1% of the US population.

Sure, maybe not all of them were slaveowners or racists. That still does not change the fact that slavery (legitimized by the invented racism of years past) was a huge factor in that society, and was something the rich and powerful (that 1% perhaps? though I don't know the actual numbers) were going to great lengths to protect.

I am not judging all of that society's members or blaming them. People, most times, cannot help the society they live in on their own, even when they want to change it. That takes years of continued struggle and yes it would be foolish to take a random individual from that time and place and accuse them of racism on the spot. I agree with you there.

But I am simply calling the facts.

If we deny that slavery was a major influence... an inertia, in that society, that would have continued under it's name... then we deny ourselves the ability of clearly understanding how to evaluate, confront, and end the injustices we face today in our own society, while treating it's members as the humans they are.

 

[Yellow Yam Scam]

But symbols are not just who uses them, but what they mean to others.

I am 100% certain that 99.999% of people who do fly the confederate flag are white.

My point, is that even though your white neighbor 'Bob' fly's a confederate flag and means no harm, if you are a black person that is bound to be hurtful or unnerving in some way.

Now what happens when a government building does that? What does that say about your government's awareness of past human-rights crimes? It does not say anything great.

To say that the viewer of the symbol's opinion matters more than the person who is actually utilizing it is kind of nihilistic nonsense. That kind of logic is basically a complicated way of saying "nothing means anything."

 

[Mecha-Lenin]

To say that the viewer of the symbol's opinion matters more than the person who is actually utilizing it is kind of nihilistic nonsense. That kind of logic is basically a complicated way of something "nothing means anything."

I just meant that we can't simply look at the flyer of the flag and not the viewer. That is all.

 

[Puppet Pal Clem]

If we deny that slavery was a major influence... an inertia, in that society, that would have continued under it's name... then we deny ourselves the ability of clearly understanding how to evaluate, confront, and end the injustices we face today in our own society, while treating it's members as the humans they are.

Not sure I understand this one.
Nobody is denying that the South engaged in slavery, or even arguing that slavery wasn't wrong.

They created their own state, because they were disillusioned with their representative government, not purely for the purpose of retaining slavery.
Sure slavery was the motivating politic of the time that aggravated the political discussion to the point of war, but the result of the war wasn't specifically abolition, instead it was the enforcement of federal power which took the form of the 13th amendment.
That states were not allowed to leave the Union, and that federal law superseded state powers.

Was the average soldier in the field necessarily dying to uphold political ideology?
No, but he certainly wasn't killing other white men because he hates darkies so much either.
He was fighting to secede from the antagonistic idea of the Union which interfered with his livelihood from far away.

The idea that he was fighting simply to keep a race enslaved is naive.

Why then, must the confederate flag, only be interpreted as a symbol of racial hatred?
If it has political significance beyond the discussion of abolition, why must this be discarded for the sake of an individuals feelings?