SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   The Confederate Flag Controversy (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=220901)

Sailor Steve 07-02-15 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolferz (Post 2325739)
Ok, I'll concede that point but, let's take a brief look at the racist nature of Abraham Lincoln...

And Thomas Jefferson felt the same. The question is whether that was racism or an honest belief that the two could not co-exist in the same country. I've never argued that Lincoln was perfect, or even right. The problem is that the "racism" argument is a diversion, meant to direct the discussion away from The South. Any and all of Lincoln's foibles do not change the fact that he said he didn't want war with them, but only to preserve the Union, and that they started the war and have been blaming it on him ever since.

Quote:

Let's not stray too far off topic.
Then don't make claims that have nothing to do with the thread, and then cry "off-topic" when somebody answers them.

VipertheSniper 07-02-15 11:35 AM

I read that on another forum a week ago or so...

Quote:

Originally Posted by from another forum I frequent
the one thing i wish is that, with everyone covering this, that someone (and i'm really disappointed in PBS here) would make reference to the _original_ documents from the beginning of the civil war. because all this nonsense about "it's not about racism, it's just that some people have chosen to misappropriate it, it's just about our history and culture."
bull
****.

the history and culture that flag represents is all _about_ racism. the Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union - it was about slavery:

Quote:
Quote:

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.
the only state's right they cared about was their right to own slaves. they didn't even like the idea that _other_ states "permitted establishment of societies" opposed to slavery - what, other states allow people to exercise their rights of free speech and assembly, if they did so to criticize the south?

and of course, there is the "cornerstone speech", in which the vice-president of the newly-formed CSA, Alexander Stephens, went on about how much better the CSA was than the USA: (sorry, long quote but it's truly amazing - i bolded the most important bits)

Quote:

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

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.
there it is, in all it's glory - the core of the confederacy. they, alone, got it right, that blacks were inferior to whites and it was _natural_ for them to be slaves.

if you want to insist that you want to use the flag that represented that government as a critical part of your heritage and history, fine - but then you own all of that. you are owning that your heritage and history is, indeed, founded on racism, celebrates racism, was created solely for the furtherance of racism.

you are right, Sen. Graham - that _is_ who you are.


eddie 07-02-15 12:07 PM

I favor that it shouldn't be displayed on Govt buildings. What people do with it in their own homes, is their business. I have a small one, but don't display it outside. I am a Civil War buff of sorts, mainly interested in the military side of it. I have a small display on my wall in an office in my home, along with a small American flag. Part of a display with pictures of famous Generals from that period, and a collection of books covering the campaigns during the war. Hardly see anything wrong with that. Only way people could see it is if they entered that room. So I have no problem having it like that. Not taking it down either. I respect the views of those who get upset displaying it in public, and I don't do it to upset anyone, but its in MY home, not outside.

Sailor Steve 07-02-15 03:01 PM

I have a reverse observation: Here in Utah everyone flies the American flag on the Fourth of July, just like everywhere else. I sometimes make the point that Utah was founded by a group of people who came here to get away from the United States. Once they were here Prophet, Seer, Revelator and Governor Brigham Young spent the next thirty years trying to get Utah made a state, which was refused because of the practice of polygamy. It took another twenty after Brother Brigham's passing to get the practice outlawed here and for Utah to finally become a state. Now, thanks to the recent Supreme Court ruling, I expect the practice to be reconsidered. I'm sure most Utahans will be against it, but we'll see.

What goes around does indeed come around. :sunny:

vienna 07-02-15 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yubba (Post 2325644)
Well exuuuuuussse me I thought I picked up on that a couple of posts back my mistake but that dosen't let you off the hook,, an easier task is to ask you point blank where you stand with the constitution,, see I too have never had any party affiliation ever,, though I leaned to Obama in 2008 figured him out in his inaugural speech,, redistrabution of wealth,, what a commie..,,and what a let down,, so here's your moment of truth,,are you,, for or against the constitution and the founding of this great nation.??? and that crack about living in didnity I have probably done more good with one finger than you'll ever muster in a thousand life times.

It is interesting how, when unable to defend you stance as it relates to the subject of a thread, you resort to puffed-up patriotic posturing as a means of diverting note of your paucity of logic or rationale. So, let's see: the rule is, when you've run out of arguments you run up the flag...

...Samuel Johnson once made the statement that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. I really do hope you, sir, are not a scoundrel...

As for my stand on the Constitution, as with many of my beliefs it is my own; I will say, if I had to choose between the true word of the Constitution and the gross misrepresentations of those of all political stripes, I have and always will go back to the word as writ and not the word as twisted...

BTW, I was prepared to vote for John McCain, a person I highly respect, in 2008, until the Far Right wingnuts saddled him with that albatross named Palin...


<O>

vienna 07-02-15 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torplexed (Post 2325645)
One can only go by the example Lee set in his remaining time on earth until his death in 1870. He distanced himself from divisive symbols of a Civil War that his side lost.

"I think it wiser moreover not to keep open the sores of war," he wrote in a letter, declining an invitation by the Gettysburg Battlefield Memorial Association, and there were no flags flown at his funeral, Confederate or otherwise.

During the dark days of the Confederacy prior to Appomattox, Lee cut off all talk of guerrilla warfare. He was a professional soldier. He had seen more than enough of governors who would be commanders, and he had no respect for ragtag partisans. He told Col. Edward Porter Alexander, his artillery commander, . . . the men would become mere bands of marauders, and the enemy’s cavalry would pursue them and overrun many wide sections they may never have occasion to visit. We would bring on a state of affairs it would take the country years to recover from.”

“And, as for myself, you young fellows might go to bushwhacking, but the only dignified course for me would be, to go to Gen. Grant and surrender myself and take the consequences.” Which is what he did at a farmhouse in the village of Appomattox Court House, wearing a fulldress uniform and carrying a borrowed ceremonial sword which he did not surrender.

Even without the scourge of guerrilla warfare this country is still recovering to this day.

There was a time when there was a term "Southern Gentleman"; Lee was certainly a prime example of the term. I have long admired his intelligence, skill, and humanity as he exhibited in his professional and political life. One can only wonder what could have been done if Lincoln, with his mercy and compassion towards the defeated South, had lived and been able to work with the likes of Lee. It is very probable the South today would be a far better place...


Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 2325664)
No worries, thanks for the reply. I was curious about your perception of the makeup of the forum participants. I have not done a sampling in quite a while. I think you're right about the subject and nature. As for political leanings, I think we have a diverse group. If I remember, the last time the GT regulars did one of those "where do you fall on the political spectrum" 3rd party surveys, over 2/3 were left of center.

I am a little bit surprised about the extent of the left of center leanings. Perhaps it is like with a lot of such things: there is a tendency for those whose views are strongly opposed to the main's leaning to more vocally express their dissatisfaction and for the appearance to be that those so vocal tend to speak for the majority. I now stand corrected (or seated corrected to be honest)...

If it appears I take aim primarily at the Right, it is not at the Right in general but the very Far Right who, I feel, are actively destroying the GOP. If it appears I am not taking swings at the Far Left, let's be honest, there aren't a lot of Far Lefties posting here; point me towards one and I assure you I have ample munitions to score a few well-placed hits...

One good thing about a lot of the GT posters is there are a great many knowledgeable and thoughtful persons here and they have done well in pricking the balloons of those who try to put one over. I do try to stay as firmly center as possible, but I am not averse being a bit of a prick... :D


<O>

Oberon 07-02-15 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vienna (Post 2325842)
there aren't a lot of Far Lefties posting here; point me towards one and I assure you I have ample munitions to score a few well-placed hits...

According to some I'm left of Marx. :O:

vienna 07-02-15 05:19 PM

Karl or Groucho?


http://img.youtube.com/vi/sCzgdF_WjOg/hqdefault.jpg



<O>

Rockstar 07-02-15 05:20 PM

A radicalized Marxist extremist eh?

http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/...709bb8974c.jpg

Onkel Neal 07-02-15 05:41 PM

Needs more submarines and Harleys :shucks:

Oberon 07-02-15 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar (Post 2325856)
A radicalized Marxist extremist eh?

The freedom

The democracy

The hamburgers...

I...I can't take it...I...

Aaaaaaaargh

https://clementsgame.files.wordpress...a3083f39_z.jpg


Quote:

Originally Posted by vienna (Post 2325855)
Karl or Groucho?

<O>

Depends on the day, some days both. :haha:

Kptlt. Neuerburg 07-02-15 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 2325872)
The freedom

The democracy

The hamburgers...

I...I can't take it...I...

Aaaaaaaargh

https://clementsgame.files.wordpress...a3083f39_z.jpg




Depends on the day, some days both. :haha:

http://s6.postimg.org/vnosuty4h/Grou...kevectores.png
Anyways, I'd go with the remove the Stars and Bars from government buildings and if a person has in on their lawn or window or car then that's fine by me.

vienna 07-02-15 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon (Post 2325872)
The freedom

The democracy

The hamburgers...

I...I can't take it...I...

Aaaaaaaargh


Can we supersize that for you and do you want fries with that...


<O>

Torplexed 07-02-15 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vienna (Post 2325876)
Can we supersize that for you and do you want fries with that...


<O>

http://pyxis.homestead.com/Odd_Bodkins.jpg

AngusJS 07-02-15 09:49 PM

Yes. Tear it down from all government property (except war cemeteries and museums). It has no business being flown by the SC state government, and it's just going to have to come off the Mississippi flag.

Don't ban it. People can sell it, buy it and fly it if they want.

But those who sell or fly the flag shouldn't come crying when their choices come back to bite them in the form of boycotts, being ostracized, etc.

And for god's sake, bring the Dukes of Hazard back, keep the Gettysburg game up, etc. You have to look at the context of how the flag is used. My grandpa and I used to watch the Dukes of Hazard, and us liberal Yankees were definitely not white supremacists who yearned for the days of Jim Crow or worse.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.