Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

most offensive thing is how completely ignorant people are about the fraking thing. The Confederacy didn't have a flag. The Stars and Bars was a battle flag. Dumb ass southerners should be flying their state flag. Dumb ass everyone else should L2History. Nothing to do with morality or slavery. Heck, if Lincoln could have won the war without freeing the slaves, he would have. It was a political move, not a moral one.

He has the right to be an assclown if he wants.

I think we all agree that it comes down to context. After all a pickup truck painted with the nazi symbol would be pretty dumb. However a completly restored WW2 ADGZ with those symbols on would be perfectly acceptable.

Symbols with lots of meaning good or bad shouldn't be hidden away in fear of offending someone but they should be used in the proper situation.

But the best part about someone painting Mussolini Marines is you know to avoid them.

Everything past the 1st page is tl;dr, however a valid point whichmost seem to be ignorant of is:

Nazi swastika is not the original form, it is actually a reverse/mirror image of a symbol for peace from either Hindu or Seikh religions.

Hitler was quite an ignorant bugger...

Here in AUS, the Confederate flag is used by one of the more violent bikie gangs.

fullybakedbear wrote:most offensive thing is how completely ignorant people are about the fraking thing. The Confederacy didn't have a flag. The Stars and Bars was a battle flag. Dumb ass southerners should be flying their state flag. Dumb ass everyone else should L2History. Nothing to do with morality or slavery. Heck, if Lincoln could have won the war without freeing the slaves, he would have. It was a political move, not a moral one.

He has the right to be an assclown if he wants.

Here's a quick hint: don't accuse others of not understanding history, and then make a number of factual errors.

The confederacy had several national flags, in fact the term Stars and Bars refers to one of them, not to the popular conferderate battle flag. The modern rectangular version was used by some units, but the Army of Northern Virginia preferred the square battle flag that was also the ensign in several later confederate national flags.

ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_flag

Interesting bit of irony: the original design for what became the battle flag actually had a latin cross, but several Jewish southerners objected to religious imagry in the national emblems, and the designer switched to a saltire, or St. Andrew's cross. So in some ways, the CSA was more religiously tolerant than the north (which wouldn't even allow Jewish chaplains).

FM Ninja 048 wrote:I don't see ant problem with it, it's still the Alabama state flag,

If you feel you might offend somebody switch the colors around, a blue background with red cross.

No it isn't. Stop being ignorant. A quick google search would show you that isn't true!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mordian wrote:Now I have finished an army of confederates which is based on the film Gettysburg and a few other random things which you can see in my gallery. I have had both positive and some negative feedback about the army and I just wanted to know if and why you find the confederate flag offensive.

I think you would be better off having used one of the confederate battle flags and not the actual confederate flag which really has no place in 40k. I can see why people would be offended by it in this case. Personally I don't find it offensive but I am a white male so I understand how other people would see it from a different perspective. If you really want to pay homage to the confederate soldier you should build a historical American Civil War Army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Scott-S6 wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:and there isn't anything to get offended about by the Stars and Bars. the Civil War was over a states rights issue. something that is still talked about today.

This.

I find it interesting that the civil war has been retconned to be all about slavery.

Not retconned my friend. It was about slavery........ the south was worried that the north was going to take away their "right" to own other human beings. So yes slavery was the underlying issue that led to the Civil War. Savvy politicians wrapped it up in states rights to get the vast majority of poor whites in the south to sign up for the cause.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

agnosto wrote:I suppose I'll have to disagree. I'll never create such a force for several reasons (primarily because I'm not a good painter or modeler) but I wouldn't become upset if someone else had one.

In my mind, it's similar to saying the Ultra Marines are Crips and the Blood Angels are Bloods and we shouldn't paint them those colors because of all the terrible things those gangs have done.


We're talking about little army men, not actually becoming one of those malcontents that espouses the ideology behind the symbolism (which would be the only reason that I can think of for actually carrying a flag around with you). On that note, why don't you take an American flag and walk around baghdad.

I have to argue with some of your logic here. Your analogy about Blood Angels and Ultrmarines is poor because it would only hold if you modeled them with bandanas around their heads and holding their guns gangster style. No one is arguing that the colors are wrong just that it is a little nonsensical to take something that is a sign of racism to MILLIONS of people and insert it into a game that has absolutely no connection with that symbol.

If their is no connection between the symbol and the game you are playing what reason would you have for using it? That is what people are going to ask themselves and a good number of them will come to the conclusion that you are racist. If you don't have a problem with that feel free to continue.

Someone, somewhere, will get offended. Its inevitable in today's day and age.

Hell I recall 5+ years ago a guy pulled off the nazi bloodaxe army. *shrug* someone is bound to take offense.

I think its fine.

Hell, you could get a distinctly WW II Soviet feel from some of the design cues in the IG (commisars, anyone?) and they werent exactly choir boys and girls, were they? No need for comparing relative atrocities, the point is that it is already there.

I really would say impression is what is key. Although I am against judging a person by their appearance, if I see your army, then look up at you and see your shaven head and braces, then I may be thinking, ''wait a second..''.

If you are not a skinhead, white supermist, then I say there really isn't much to be mad about. Do whatever you want nonetheless, but always be ready to back up yourself when someone has a problem with what you are doing. (I have learned to keep this in mind with alot of what I do)

Historical Context aside (on however everyone views the War Between the States), the Confederacy (represented however anyone wants to or does) looks like the Pope compared to the grmdarkness of 40k. You're talking about a game filled with a mentality of "if it doesen't look like you, kill it, enslave it, tourture or tourment it, steal from it, or violate it". They're little plastic men, they are completely incapable of firing on your garrisons or burning crosses in your yard.

Who cares if the Confederacy isn't in the fluff? Why shouldn't it be? We have Romanesque space marines, along with several other early European Civilizations. There's influence from a bunch of nations through different periods too.

If the OP wants to make such an army then let him do it. Though the General Lee land speeder is confusing, it's clearly a reference to the Dukes of Hazzard(A show which doesen't really have any offensive content, also purley awesome in my opinion).

I'm really not liking the term "redneck" being thrown into this conversation like it's a 1 ply piece of toliet paper. The history of the term has absolutely nothing to do with the oppression and destruction of non-white race, nor does it connotate trashiness and a lack of education. I proudly consider myself a redneck, for my hard work ethic and dedication to everything I do. If this offends you, mabe that's what's wrong with the United States right now.

Also, the Alabama remarks really irritated me. I'm looking to move there for school, and on a visit down there, I saw NOT ONE confederate flag flown. Instead, I saw more US Flags than there are here in DC. Sit back and think about that one.

Frazzld, that awesome cross thing you mentioned is called a Maltese Cross. It is indeed awesome.

fullybakedbear wrote:most offensive thing is how completely ignorant people are about the fraking thing. The Confederacy didn't have a flag. The Stars and Bars was a battle flag. Dumb ass southerners should be flying their state flag. Dumb ass everyone else should L2History. Nothing to do with morality or slavery. Heck, if Lincoln could have won the war without freeing the slaves, he would have. It was a political move, not a moral one.

He has the right to be an assclown if he wants.

Modquisition on.
Outside of Nazis, communists, and people disparaging the greatness of weiner dog world uber domination, disparaging groups of people are not permitted on Dakka.
Private warnings are being given. Firther posts of this nature will be dealt with via temporary or permanent suspensions.

fullybakedbear wrote:Dumb ass everyone else should L2History. Nothing to do with morality or slavery. Heck, if Lincoln could have won the war without freeing the slaves, he would have. It was a political move, not a moral one.

For someone lecturing others on their understanding of history, you've adopted an extremely simplistic approach there yourself. You are right that Lincoln and the North in general didn't fight to free the slaves, their concern was with maintaining the union. But you've used that to assume that therefore the South didn't secede over slavery. Which is nonsense - the constitution of the Confederacy was almost identical to the constitution of the US, with the addition that the Confederacy couldn't stop any state from maintaining slavery if they so pleased. They were terrified the North was going to take their slaves off of them, and this was a big enough deal they went to war. That the North was very unlikely to actually enforce taking their slaves makes the whole thing more tragic, but it doesn't for one second change the motivations of the South.

I love to death how it's wrong to disparage minorities but it's open season on rednecks. Really, I do. Can you feel the sarcasm drippin from that comment?

fullybakedbear wrote:most offensive thing is how completely ignorant people are about the fraking thing. The Confederacy didn't have a flag. The Stars and Bars was a battle flag. Dumb ass southerners should be flying their state flag. Dumb ass everyone else should L2History. Nothing to do with morality or slavery. Heck, if Lincoln could have won the war without freeing the slaves, he would have. It was a political move, not a moral one.

He has the right to be an assclown if he wants.

The abolition of slavery would most likely have occurred within a decade or two regardless of the outcome of the war. Remember that the British passed an abolition act in 1833 three decades before the war began and spain even prior to that eventually, even had the confederacy maintained its secession, they would have had to cede to international pressure eventually.

IMHO the war had everything to do with morality and slavery, it was the last gasp of a dying and barbaric practice. Thats the tragedy, the south was fighting to maintain a way of life that was immoral, unsustainable and doomed.

EDIT: I'm not saying that the south was "evil" or that southerners were any more racist than anyone else (i am aware that most were too poor to own slaves). that said however you can be a bigot and still see that building an entire economy on human suffering its pretty fethed up. Many people in the 1800s considered slavery an evil practice, and even among those who did not i doubt you could find many who could justify it with a straight face. all this "everyone was racist back then, slavery was the flavor of the month" crap is pretty stupid.

Maledictus wrote:

fullybakedbear wrote:most offensive thing is how completely ignorant people are about the fraking thing. The Confederacy didn't have a flag. The Stars and Bars was a battle flag. Dumb ass southerners should be flying their state flag. Dumb ass everyone else should L2History. Nothing to do with morality or slavery. Heck, if Lincoln could have won the war without freeing the slaves, he would have. It was a political move, not a moral one.

He has the right to be an assclown if he wants.

The abolition of slavery would most likely have occurred within a decade or two regardless of the outcome of the war. Remember that the British passed an abolition act in 1833 three decades before the war began and spain even prior to that eventually, even had the confederacy maintained its secession, they would have had to cede to international pressure eventually.

IMHO the war had everything to do with morality and slavery, it was the last gasp of a dying and barbaric practice. Thats the tragedy, the south was fighting to maintain a way of life that was immoral, unsustainable and doomed.

Thats a little one dimensional way of looking at it. Considering that the South was being honest about their barbaric and inhumane practices (unlike their Northern rivals, who, when presenting the Emancipation Proclaimation, WITHELD the right to keep slaves in "Union territory"), and more worried about being left in the dust and all.

Lets face it, wars are never caused by one factor. This is because a nation's government needs a "burden of proof" which far exceedes a simple disagreement to sent their military into a meat grinder. You can look at the American Revolution, you can look at the War Between the States, or even modern 20th Century conficts. All conficts and wars are the result of multiple problems.

brother_zach wrote:

Maledictus wrote:

fullybakedbear wrote:most offensive thing is how completely ignorant people are about the fraking thing. The Confederacy didn't have a flag. The Stars and Bars was a battle flag. Dumb ass southerners should be flying their state flag. Dumb ass everyone else should L2History. Nothing to do with morality or slavery. Heck, if Lincoln could have won the war without freeing the slaves, he would have. It was a political move, not a moral one.

He has the right to be an assclown if he wants.

The abolition of slavery would most likely have occurred within a decade or two regardless of the outcome of the war. Remember that the British passed an abolition act in 1833 three decades before the war began and spain even prior to that eventually, even had the confederacy maintained its secession, they would have had to cede to international pressure eventually.

IMHO the war had everything to do with morality and slavery, it was the last gasp of a dying and barbaric practice. Thats the tragedy, the south was fighting to maintain a way of life that was immoral, unsustainable and doomed.

Thats a little one dimensional way of looking at it. Considering that the South was being honest about their barbaric and inhumane practices (unlike their Northern rivals, who, when presenting the Emancipation Proclaimation, WITHELD the right to keep slaves in "Union territory"), and more worried about being left in the dust and all.

Lets face it, wars are never caused by one factor. This is because a nation's government needs a "burden of proof" which far exceedes a simple disagreement to sent their military into a meat grinder. You can look at the American Revolution, you can look at the War Between the States, or even modern 20th Century conficts. All conficts and wars are the result of multiple problems.

Uh...sorry no...the civil war was about slavery whether you like it or not. You say that wars never have just one factor, true, but what can you offer up that eclipses slavery as a cause for the civil war? And please dont give me all this "states rights", revisionist history, garbage.

Maledictus wrote:uh...sorry no...the civil war was about slavery whether you like it or not. what can you offer up that eclipses slavery as a cause for the civil war? and dont give me all this "states rights", revisionist history, garbage.

You are so adamantly wrong. "States Rights" is the correct answer, regardless of your limited ability to understand it. Economic and social differences between the North and South played their parts, and you might want to familiarize yourself with the word nullification. It was a pretty big deal to people like John C. Calhoun.

Slavery was a reason, not the reason..

Maledictus wrote:

brother_zach wrote:

Maledictus wrote:

fullybakedbear wrote:most offensive thing is how completely ignorant people are about the fraking thing. The Confederacy didn't have a flag. The Stars and Bars was a battle flag. Dumb ass southerners should be flying their state flag. Dumb ass everyone else should L2History. Nothing to do with morality or slavery. Heck, if Lincoln could have won the war without freeing the slaves, he would have. It was a political move, not a moral one.

He has the right to be an assclown if he wants.

The abolition of slavery would most likely have occurred within a decade or two regardless of the outcome of the war. Remember that the British passed an abolition act in 1833 three decades before the war began and spain even prior to that eventually, even had the confederacy maintained its secession, they would have had to cede to international pressure eventually.

IMHO the war had everything to do with morality and slavery, it was the last gasp of a dying and barbaric practice. Thats the tragedy, the south was fighting to maintain a way of life that was immoral, unsustainable and doomed.

Thats a little one dimensional way of looking at it. Considering that the South was being honest about their barbaric and inhumane practices (unlike their Northern rivals, who, when presenting the Emancipation Proclaimation, WITHELD the right to keep slaves in "Union territory"), and more worried about being left in the dust and all.


Lets face it, wars are never caused by one factor. This is because a nation's government needs a "burden of proof" which far exceedes a simple disagreement to sent their military into a meat grinder. You can look at the American Revolution, you can look at the War Between the States, or even modern 20th Century conficts. All conficts and wars are the result of multiple problems.

uh...sorry no...the civil war was about slavery whether you like it or not. what can you offer up that eclipses slavery as a cause for the civil war? and dont give me all this "states rights", revisionist history, garbage.

I never said slavery wasn't(or can't be) a reason the War Between the States started. Rather, you can't tack it as the sole reason it started. There are simply way too many primary sources from notorious peope from both the Union and Confederacy which blow this idea out of the water.

Regardless if you like it or not, State's rights was an issue in this time period. Expanding on this, one could say that Big Brother type Federal government was also a cause. A fear of being bullied from a national government is still commonly found in the American Southeast.

brother_zach wrote:

I never said slavery wasn't(or can't be) a reason the War Between the States started. Rather, you can't tack it as the sole reason it started. There are simply way too many primary sources from notorious peope from both the Union and Confederacy which blow this idea out of the water.

Regardless if you like it or not, State's rights was an issue in this time period. Expanding on this, one could say that Big Brother type Federal government was also a cause. A fear of being bullied from a national government is still commonly found in the American Southeast.

Wow..States rights huh..like the right to um..own slaves? "big brother federal government" what are you a teabagger? being bullied...what? i asked you to give examples of causes for the civil war that eclipsed slavery, not spout empty rhetoric about the "big bad fed'rals". i never said slavery was the only cause, just the largest. you have yet to prove me wrong.

EDIT: if you really have so many "primary sources" weighing in on your side lets hear them

This is silly and so I am locking it. Feel free to continue via PM.

I had wondered if this thread would survive in Dakka Discussion longer than OT.