The Confederate Flag and NASCAR

[rah]

I'll agree that some of the reason was about state rights, but the right they were hottest over was slavery.
Without slavery the arguements about rights would probably never have been as intense.

Any other declaration was just white wash.


When I see a confederate flag, I assign it some negative connotations. I've known some racists that flew the flag to proclaim their racism. I also had a lot of college buds that flew it to show they were rebels and it looked cool. I've seen it more used by self declared racists so thats the first impression I get.

So unless you're going to go out of your way to show that you're flying the flag for different reasons. (like Lynyrd Skynyrd), then you have to expect that people might think you're being a racist.

[Arrian]

Cali,

I'm arguing about why the southern states seceeded. Lincoln's reaction is, to me, another matter.

It *was* about slavery for the south. For the north is was more complicated, but for the most part was indeed about power, not freeing slaves (only the lunatic fringe abolitionists wanted to free slaves ).

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

Lincoln had no right to deny the southern states who wanted to secede.

Obviously plenty of people disagreed .

The southern slaves were used by him in an attempt to bring the south into line.

Uh... he never used the issue of slavery until midway through the war. His call was for the Union, and you don't really 'use' southern slaves for that.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Arrian
Cali,

I'm arguing about why the southern states seceeded. Lincoln's reaction is, to me, another matter.

It *was* about slavery for the south. For the north is was more complicated, but for the most part was indeed about power, not freeing slaves (only the lunatic fringe abolitionists wanted to free slaves ).

-Arrian

They seceded because they wanted to be independent of northern interference with regard to tariffs and slavery. Yes, some wanted to keep their slaves, others just wanted to be free of burdensome tariffs. I see the slavery issue as a component, not the main reason.

[Arrian]

And I see it as the primary driver of the whole thing. I just don't see the tarriff issue as nearing the importance of the slavery issue... and was under the impression that the historical record is pretty clear on that.

-Arrian

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Obviously plenty of people disagreed .

Funny how 'they' (northern republicans) changed their tune so suddenly when the southern states announced their plans for low tariffs.

Tariffs aside, I believe any group of people should have the right of self-determination. This is in line with the ideals that the United States was founded on - that the powers of government flow from the people.

Uh... he never used the issue of slavery until midway through the war. His call was for the Union, and you don't really 'use' southern slaves for that.

I believe his intention was to weaken the south by encouraging the slaves to revolt.

[Arrian]

Tariffs aside, I believe any group of people should have the right of self-determination. This is in line with the ideals that the United States was founded on - that the powers of government flow from the people.

Indeed. But that argument implodes spectacularly when you consider that in this specific case, the South's "self-determination" was primarily about owning other human beings. I just can't work up much sympathy for those horribly oppressed southerners.

Our nation has been an ethical mess since the beginning. Lovely principles... not-so-lovely reality.

-Arrian

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Arrian
And I see it as the primary driver of the whole thing. I just don't see the tarriff issue as nearing the importance of the slavery issue... and was under the impression that the historical record is pretty clear on that.

-Arrian

If you read the Declarations of Causes of Secession and the Ordinances of Secession that were issued by the first seven states of the Confederacy, you'll find that there were several reasons these states wanted to be independent, some of which had nothing to do with slavery. I think the case can be made that slavery was a larger issue than any other, but it certainly is debatable. My opinion is that other issues were as big, if not bigger.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Arrian
Indeed. But that argument implodes spectacularly when you consider that in this specific case, the South's "self-determination" was primarily about owning other human beings. I just can't work up much sympathy for those horribly oppressed southerners.

Again, I don't think that was the primary reason. Slavery for the sake of slavery, that is.

Our nation has been an ethical mess since the beginning. Lovely principles... not-so-lovely reality.

-Arrian

Agreed.

[flash9286]

Originally posted by MrFun



There were Jews who collaborated with the Nazis during World War II. Does that mean that the Holocaust was not so bad after all?

Not to mention that maybe something like less than one percent of Southern blacks actually fought for the Confederacy out of their own free will.

For the first thing the Holocaust was a action not a symbol. I didn't say a black man flying the flag made the civil war any less despicable. I just merely pointed out, by use of example, that symbols has different meanings to different people. Every person that fly the confederate flag isn't a racist some of them are but some of them aren't.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by flash9286


, Some KKK rally pictures I have seen they were just caring a plain cross along with the American flag, confederate flag, and some other flag. I know the official symbol is some weird cross, but a lot of the people were just caring regular crosses.

They wait to burn them until they put them down. It works better that way.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Caligastia
The north did not attack the south because they were motivated by altruism towards slaves. It was about money and power. Look no further than the emancipation proclaimation for proof of this. It only emancipated slaves in the states that seceded - northern slaves were not affected.

The north didn't attacke the south. Confederate forces fired upon Federal troops at Ft. Sumpter, only then did the United States declare war.

[flash9286]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


They wait to burn them until they put them down. It works better that way.

These weren't meant to be burned they were to small . I don't think they were walking with the crosses they were going to burn, they already had those in place.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
[Q] Originally posted by SlowwHand

Most of the people who owned slaves owned less than 30. Hardley denoating an aristocracy.

Slaves were worth approximately $2000 each, so if someone owned 10 of them 150 years ago I'd say he was doing pretty damned well.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The only good indian is a dead indian.

redskin
wetback
******

All those words are nothing but symbols. I guess people shouldn't be offended by them. Hell, I guess no one should ever be offended by anything, because apparently no symbol has any meaning whatsoever?

They are simply symbols and are nearly meaningless without context. Thus your post above where they are used didactically invokes no negative emotional response from me. I wouldn't even get particularly upset if you called me those names, but I can see where some people might. I feel the same way about the Confederate flag or the Nazi flag. Someone might have one and fly it for reasons other than those commonly assumed here. You can't simply fly off the handle at every perceived slight in life without doing more damage than good. Go up and ask the guy if he is a racist before you kick his ass.