Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10
Results 181 to 186 of 186
  1. #181
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    6,441
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Confederate Flag?

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    No, I didn't miss that.. that is why I quoted the portion that supported your position as well. I wasn't trying to paint the war as being not related to slavery at all.
    However I am the one forwarding and supporting that the motivations were complex, where as the opposition has boiled it down to slavery, and racism.

    So that you think I missed the point I'm making.. I got to wonder.


    I would say in many ways.
    First, we generally burned the Nazi symbol after the war, where as the confederate soldiers were buried in theirs with full honors. Secondly we have a hundred years of continued use with a morphing cultural meaning that goes with it. Namely the dropping of slavery, people used it to honor the dead brave warriors (even now) not to campaign for slavery. Basically the moment the war ended, and Lincoln played the confederate song to celebrate, was an indication that the symbols of the south was to be incorporated into a new meaning, one compatible with the union and brotherhood. No such event or efforts ever occurred with the Nazi symbol. Do I consider them ignorant? Yes, because they ignore the vast majority of the culture over the past hundred years, opting to focus on the racist uses of the flag by the KKK (ignoring the KKK"s use of the american flag in the process), and not taking into account the changes that occurred during reconstruction. Commonly mistaking the battle flag for the national flag, when the 2 have very different meanings, the former being much more personal as explained.


    Well, at some point the population needs to get educated, before the engage in a holy war against a straw-man. I don't really disagree with last part, the people don't deserve a gov to be a symbol of slavery.. but the sad truth is, the american flag (current one) has much more of that in it's history than the confederate flag, and people's opinions being driven on propaganda and race baiting is something that we should be very cautious of, as it is dangerous to our country.

    I mean, if we ignore the history of America during and after the civil war, wouldn't you agree that the American flag could easily suffer the same opinion of the population? Certainly the people could vote to change the flag U.S. flag design, but shouldn't that be based in an accurate and contextual understanding? More over, shouldn't we vote on it? As opposed to responding to an ad campaign by the media?

    I don't mind the outcome, the process is flawed. The national discussion is being driven by the wrong motivators, I mean.. they took the Dukes of Hazard off the air man. there was nothing racist about that show and is as much a part of our culture as Andy Griffin (well, maybe not that much). It's all just emotional backlash driven by ignorance and mindless sheeple.
    You don't have to ignore the history of the Confederacy in order to tie it to slavery. Really, though, isn't history always shaped by the winners? Had the South won, no doubt, history would be viewed quite differently.

    Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
    George Orwell - 1984




    So, it is only natural that the symbols of the Confederacy should draw negative emotions. In your opinion the national discussion is being driven by the wrong motivators. Have some people taken it too far? Arguably, yes. If we lose Dukes of Hazard, but manage to finally turn the page on that chapter of our history, then I'd say its a worthwhile trade. I mean, here we are 150 years after the civil war ended and slavery is still a topic of discussion. We are still at a point where segments of the black population feel isolated and disadvantaged. I think symbols like the Confederate flag don't help us heal as a nation, but only serve to remind us of our divisions.

    First said by founding father John Dickinson and later repeated by Patrick Henry, "United we stand, divided we fall."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ivided_we_fall
    The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

  2. #182
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    9,174
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Confederate Flag?

    Quote Originally Posted by IBELSD
    You don't have to ignore the history of the Confederacy in order to tie it to slavery. Really, though, isn't history always shaped by the winners? Had the South won, no doubt, history would be viewed quite differently.
    So, do you agree that the same can be said for the U.S. flag?
    I think as long as the opinion requires hearkening back 150 years to derive the symbols meaning, then history is being ignored.
    It seems an undeniable fact that the flag on top of the Hazards car, did not carry the same exact meaning as when it was carried at the front of Pickets Charge.

    And your right about the winners defining history, I quoted a Southern leader addressing that point. Apparently he recognized that the Souther cause would be chalked up to slavery and Racism and wrongfully so.

    But to say that the winners get to define it, is to say that that souther leader had no say in why he personally faught, that the winner gets to tell him why hew as fighting and he has no right to disagree.

    The winners do define the past as a matter of fact, that does not make them correct.


    Quote Originally Posted by IBELSD
    So, it is only natural that the symbols of the Confederacy should draw negative emotions
    Maybe at the time, I don't think there is anything "natural" about the current national feelings on the matter, it is manufactored more than anything else.

    I don't need an ad campaigne to give me emotions about the nazi symbole. However, as I gave an example before, many people had no feelings of the Confederate flag untill they were told to be offended.
    Probably because the major context that they saw it in was harmlessly flying over some state building, and occasionally flying over the graves of Soldiers.
    The non racist instances of the Flag are numerous, and the instances of visible racism is almost non existant.
    Every year hundreds of thousands of those flags fly to honor bravery, and SPECIFICALLY states rights and the right to local gov (per the description on the grave stones and memorials... errected by the winners).

    Some guy waves it about as he acts out his racism, and people form their opinion around that instead.

    Quote Originally Posted by IBELSD
    In your opinion the national discussion is being driven by the wrong motivators. Have some people taken it too far? Arguably, yes. If we lose Dukes of Hazard, but manage to finally turn the page on that chapter of our history, then I'd say its a worthwhile trade. I mean, here we are 150 years after the civil war ended and slavery is still a topic of discussion. We are still at a point where segments of the black population feel isolated and disadvantaged. I think symbols like the Confederate flag don't help us heal as a nation, but only serve to remind us of our divisions.
    First, if we were actually talking about that kind of trade, then I would agree. Last I heard electing a Black president was supposed to do the trick. I mean if some flag quietly flying at various places in the U.S. is what is keeping blacks from getting over slavery... they have bigger problems than the flag.
    Second, Last I checked, the biggest reminder of our differances is Our President and the politics of Division that insist on hyphinating every american. The self Identification of "African-Amercian" does more to seperate Americans than anything else because it defines them not only as Americans, but something else as well.


    Third, there is another quote about people being ignrant of the past are destined to repeat it. (or some such).
    That is the case here as well. If we forget that the fight was as much about the sturggle of power between the federal and the local/state then we are doomed to have another bloody fight over it.
    The actual fight in politics that is still going on is that dynamics, the issues may have changed to abortion, marriage and land confiscation instead of slavery, tariffs and others.


    Finally, the fact that blacks vote overwhelmingly for the party that once fought for their enslavement, should indicate that our nation has moved past slavery, and that to the extent that idea is thrown about, it is a red-herring to cover other issues.
    To serve man.

  3. #183
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,626
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Confederate Flag?

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    The racist/classist depiction of Southernerns as ignorant hayseed rednecks is still popular, even in pop culture. If these sorts of depictions of Japanese were still popular in America, I would tend to support a stronger assertion of Japanese culture, especially by Japanese-Americans.
    Okay, let's work with this hypothetical.

    Let's suppose that currently, Americans are very racist towards the Japanese in particular. In fact, let's suppose that one reason (perhaps even a small one) why Americans are becoming anti-Japanese is because Japan has just gotten it's military back, and it's starting to do Russia-style invasions of bordering countries, during which many people have been murdered and raped in the process by Japanese troops.

    So, in response to this increasingly vulgar, racist, and ethnocentric depictions of the Japanese, they start putting up flags all around their houses of the Japanese flag and the current Japanese military flag (probably the Rising Sun). Now, some of these very right-wing Japanese people actually create, promote, and attend rallies and marches that glorify and idealize the murders and rapes done by the Japanese troops. The other Japanese-Americans simply attend rallies to point out that the depictions are racist, they get famous Japanese-Americans on TV to discuss the depictions of their culture and race, and so on.


    Okay, which one of these groups is engaging in productive, useful, sensible behavior?


    The long and the short of it for me is that if the South wants to not be seen as continuing to fall into Northern/Westcoast stereotypes of them, then they might consider not raising a flag that has an undisputed history of racism. There's about a thousand better options to promote Southern pride, to try to dispel bigotry towards Southern culture, etc. Part of the Southern culture not being respected by the rest of the US has a good bit to do with their prevalence of racism, the blind adherence to rather extreme religious views, the common dismissal of science, and the fact that for 150 years now, they've done little to dispel these aspects of their culture but instead usually have done nothing but embrace it more strongly.


    PS: I can see the depiction of Southerners as classist, but I don't see racist. That seems like a sort of bizarre, not-very-well-thought-out interpretation of the abuse thrown at Southerners.
    "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." --Voltaire

  4. Likes Ibelsd liked this post
  5. #184
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Wheaton, IL
    Posts
    13,847
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Confederate Flag?

    Okay, which one of these groups is engaging in productive, useful, sensible behavior?
    Obviously not the people reveling in the Rape of Nanking. But how many people who celebrate Southern identity with a Confederate flag are reveling in slavery? Like it or not, the Confederate flag is a symbol of the South. It doesn't only symbolize the men who fought and died for the South in the Civil War, nor their ideals. It also symbolizes such Southern values as independence, valor, etc. Many Southerners have adopted it to symbolize their cultural identity. Maybe they should have picked a different symbol, but this is the world we're living in.

    It seems patently absurd to tell these people that they're using the "wrong" symbolism, or to tell them what their symbology "really" means. It amounts to a kind of imperialism, or cultural violence, to make such an imposition. It's akin to telling people who speak AAVE that they're speaking English "wrong".

    Part of the Southern culture not being respected by the rest of the US has a good bit to do with their prevalence of racism, the blind adherence to rather extreme religious views, the common dismissal of science, and the fact that for 150 years now, they've done little to dispel these aspects of their culture but instead usually have done nothing but embrace it more strongly.
    Gee, it's almost like it's kinda tough to extract any useful criticism from Northerners spitting in your face for 150 years. I assure you that none of the people making these jokes--Seth MacFarlane, Stephen Colbert, any number of standup comics--give two sh*ts about finding anything of value in Southern culture. There are rich linguistic, culinary, musical, and socio-philosophical traditions in the South, and I don't really think anyone should be instructing Southerners about what meaning they should attach to which expressions.

    Now, if Southerners feel that the flag is an inappropriate symbol, fine; by all means, remove it from every government building below the Mason-Dixon line. But I don't really give two shits what New Yorkers or Midwesterners think about it (although naturally Southerns are free to give as many shits as they like about inter-state perceptions).
    If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe. - Soren Kierkegaard
    **** you, I won't do what you tell me

    HOLY CRAP MY BLOG IS AWESOME

  6. #185
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,626
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Confederate Flag?

    Quote Originally Posted by CliveStaples View Post
    Obviously not the people reveling in the Rape of Nanking. But how many people who celebrate Southern identity with a Confederate flag are reveling in slavery? Like it or not, the Confederate flag is a symbol of the South. It doesn't only symbolize the men who fought and died for the South in the Civil War, nor their ideals. It also symbolizes such Southern values as independence, valor, etc. Many Southerners have adopted it to symbolize their cultural identity. Maybe they should have picked a different symbol, but this is the world we're living in.
    I doubt anyone knows the precise breakdown. I agree that it can symbolize other things, but the Southern attitudes and culture has done little to convince anyone else that the South has entirely gotten over this particular issue. Fine, the South has pride in its flag. Fine, individual Southerners are proud of their Confederate flag and put it on their houses. Fine, many of those Southerners don't feel that it should exclusively been seen as a sigil of Southern racism and slavery, and instead choose to see it as an emblem of Southern culture. Fine, some people (including some black people) are trying to remove the history of racism from the Confederate flag and re-brand it as a symbol of the South's multi-cultural history of Indians, Africans, Scottish, British, and Spanish influences. That's all fine.

    The problem is that the flag is on government property. You seem very intent on reminding the people in this argument of the woes that have befallen Southerners, but let's talk about the Southerners who've gotten it the worst, shall we? Winning by a landslide, that would be African-American Southerners. What about the plight of those Southerners, Clive? And if the state has citizens who've been unquestionably wronged by the flag (And they do, 58% of African-Americans live in the South), and they find the flag to represent racism (and 75% of African-Americans do), then that flag really has no business being on government property. Let's not pretend for an instant that the West coast/Southwest/Midwest/New England sections of America are down on Southerners because they cook with too much butter, because they eat too much fried chicken, because they actually like grits, or because they think banjos sound good.

    It has to do with the fact that they enslaved a class of human beings for three centuries and they committed treason against the United States in order to keep on owning people (Yes, yes, there were reasons, too, but you'd be delusional if you didn't recognize this as the primary reason). And because after they were told they couldn't own people, they criminalized black lifestyles (e.g. smoking weed), created a cultural stereotype (and it stuck, with continued devastating effect) that all blacks were criminal, and incarcerated them so they worked for free, just like before. And because when blacks had the audacity to do things like try to get rights, to try to stop police brutality towards them, to try to get better paying jobs, to try to date women that they were interested --or really, improve their lives in any fashion-- it became a common practice to beat them or, from time to time, lynch them. That means that a group of white Southerners got together and brutally, ritualistically murdered blacks for pleasure. But again, only for the truly heinous crimes, like looking a white women. And because the South segregated the schools (just to make extra sure that blacks had an even lower probability of succeeding), the businesses, and the public transportation systems (Lord knows you can pay an equal amount, but sure shouldn't be allowed to get an equal amount out). And because they made it unconstutitional in every last goddamn Southern state without exception for blacks to marry whites (In this case fueled equally by sexism and racism), and they maintained these constitutional amendments right up until the day the Supreme Court issued Loving (which, by the way, was not true for a single Northern state other than Delaware). And because, oh, the crimes against black people? Oh no, the South had, and in places continues to have to this day, a policing culture that singles out blacks, but ignores the crimes that white people committed against them. It had, has, and will continue to require the Federal government literally coming into the South, as they had to do in full force throughout the middle of the 20th century, and stopping them from using the government itself to overly abuse blacks. And by the way --for comparison, the North wasn't exactly super friendly to blacks, either. Think of how racist many people in your grandparents generation there are; this is the generation that actually was so concerned about what the South was doing to blacks that they actually bothered to send Federal agents and the FBI to stop the local government from brutalizing and terrorizing black people. That's how f*cking bad it got. And because the South had 100 years to get its **** together after the Civil War before the North got involved in their business again, and they literally refused to do. And when they did each and every single one of these things, starting with the Civil War, they pretty much universally did it under the banner of the Confederate flag.

    You can downplay this all you want, you can talk all you like about all of the prejudices that white Southerners have to face, Clive, and you can blame as many Northern stereotypes as you want, but it doesn't sway the side that my sympathies tilt.


    Quote Originally Posted by Clive
    It seems patently absurd to tell these people that they're using the "wrong" symbolism, or to tell them what their symbology "really" means. It amounts to a kind of imperialism, or cultural violence, to make such an imposition.
    Question: Am I using the wrong symbol for Hinduism right now if I want people to understand my Hindu pride and commitment to well-being?

    Name:  Hindu swastika.png
Views: 58
Size:  1.7 KB

    Now, some Hindus feel that it is worth the effort to teach people the Indian tradition of the swastika, and they do go about wearing the swastika and explaining to as many people as they can the Hindu meaning of it. But the flipside is that they aren't appalled when people assume otherwise, and they aren't going around asking governments with large Jewish populations to display it on public property.


    Quote Originally Posted by Clive
    Now, if Southerners feel that the flag is an inappropriate symbol, fine; by all means, remove it from every government building below the Mason-Dixon line. But I don't really give two shits what New Yorkers or Midwesterners think about it (although naturally Southerns are free to give as many shits as they like about inter-state perceptions).
    You're not from the South, either, doesn't that invalidate your own opinions? Either way, apparently some of them do.
    "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." --Voltaire

  7. #186
    Administrator

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    10,752
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Confederate Flag?

    Quote Originally Posted by GP
    Right, but Liberia was never actually really populated, but I digress.
    You mean forcibly? Not really, though quite a few were “strongly encouraged” to emigrate. Regardless, the point was that Lincoln’s position, along with a large section of the abolitionist community, wasn’t about Black rights, it was about Blacks being so inferior as being incapable of living next to whites.


    Quote Originally Posted by GP
    This still doesn't address the fact that Lincoln was on the right side of history. He fought against slavery and ended slavery.
    I’m not sure what side “history” is on, it seems an odd appeal.

    But your assessment of Lincoln is somewhat shallow and certainly not representative of the policies he supported or adopted. The Emancipation Proclamation, for example, didn’t apply to non-Confederate states, and Maryland’s slave owners were tolerated for quite a long period after the war ended. Why? Because it was meant as a military tool, not a tool of racial justice. Lincoln’s goal was to inspire slave revolts in the South, further weakening manpower from Confederate Armies. You’ll notice the absolute dearth of discussion about rights, citizenship, or equality mentioned in the document itself because it wasn’t about that, nor was it ever meant to be about that. http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/fea...ranscript.html


    Quote Originally Posted by GP
    There was no net good and only net harm for America and African-Americans if Robert E. Lee had won the Civil War, but there are several good things that were accomplished by Lincoln winning the Civil War.
    This is a completely unsupported counterfactual. The fact is there are quite a few historians that argue the other way. For example, if the South had won, it would also have freed the slaves within the next 20 years. It would have had to do so for a variety of reasons. The leading candidates for President after Davis were Lee and Longstreet, both were for manumission. The European allies the South would have relied upon would have also insisted upon that act for their long term support and trade with the South. Additionally, slavery was a dying economic system. As has been pointed out here before, it doesn’t help the surrounding economy, it acts as a malinvestment and causes significant economic distortion. It was also hard to support given the technological developments in agriculture of the time. There is a reason the number of actively farming slaves was dropping in the antebellum period.

    This voluntary, internal manumission would likely have occurred with less hostility and internal bitterness. No widespread Klan, and few anti-black groups whose historic roots come from the loss of the war rather than any existing racial issue. This could well have led to fewer or no Jim Crowe laws, which were largely passed on the anti-northern forced integration vote, which wouldn’t have existed.

    There are also a host of variable factors to make any historical fiction author drool. Regardless, it is clearly not a supportable assumption by you that the net difference for Blacks would have been negative had the south won.


    Quote Originally Posted by GP
    I think it's pretty clear that this was just a rationalization for owning people and getting free labor.
    He says with no evidence, nor contemporary opinion that that is the case. Nor does Lincoln make that case in his rebuttal. Nor, to my knowledge, has anyone, ever made that case. If you are going to support that Douglas’s arguments are disingenuous, you’ll need to support that with some kind of evidence. Especially given the intellectual trend of the time being “The White Man’s Burden” to which Douglas was an avid subscriber.


    Quote Originally Posted by GP
    Honestly, I defy you to present an ethical system wherein "It is just that [Group X] is enslaved" is true, rather than false. Pretty much under any moral scheme that I've heard of and that anyone actually operates under in the modern world, this notion is valuated as false.
    Where it is said to be just? Or where GP would find it personally just?

    The first would be the system I mentioned associated with Douglas, the White Man’s Burden, where slavery was seen as a method of civilizing primitive cultures such that they could exist in modern society.


    Quote Originally Posted by GP
    (Other than the fact that this is a glorification of treason; again, this coming from a group of people who typically think that Manning and Snowden are evil incarnate and the definition of treason, and would execute both of them in a second. Again, the irony is palpable.)
    That you would group the two indicates you don’t understand the other side’s arguments. I would support the execution of Manning. His release of data was purely political and resulted in the deaths of US soldiers.

    I would not support a treason charge against Snowden given that I think Snowden’s release was meant to highlight serious civil liberties violations by the NSA, and while harmful to the intelligence community, was generally sterilized to limit individual operator risk.
    "Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire
    "Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions. -G.K. Chesterton
    Also, if you think I've overlooked your post please shoot me a PM, I'm not intentionally ignoring you.


 

 
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •