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.

 LordofHats wrote:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
A swastika was also a peaceful symbol used in eastern countries before the nazis began to use it.

Meanings change.

Actually, if memory serves me, it still is used. I remember a japanese pokemon card had it but an english one didn't actually.

In an interview with ABC News this weekend, Holder was asked about how he and President Obama have been treated, and Holder said, without mentioning race, “There’s a certain level of vehemence, it seems to me, that’s directed at me, directed at the president. You know, people talking about taking their country back.”

Only then does ABC’s Pierre Thomas ask Holder if he thinks this is due to race, to which Holder replied, “There’s a certain racial component to this for some people. I don’t think this is the thing that is a main driver, but for some there’s a racial animus.

"Take back our country" it seems comes from a racist individuals so eventually its might turn into a racist term. Someone else mention "Monarch" to. People in powerful position can influence the general public perception over time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
A swastika was also a peaceful symbol used in eastern countries before the nazis began to use it.

Meanings change.

Actually, if memory serves me, it still is used. I remember a japanese pokemon card had it but an english one didn't actually.

Used in South Korea to. It like a monastic religion I think. Also can be seen around strong military presence areas.

 StarTrotter wrote:
I remember a japanese pokemon card had it but an english one didn't actually.

Thats because as I said, meaning changes. What something means in 1920 Europe isn't really relevant to what it means in Europe today. What it means in Korea, Japan, or India, isn't really relevant to what it means to us either. For over 100 years the Confederate flag has been flown by racist organizations and used to symbolized a spirit of rebellion that was heavily driven by the desire to protect slavery.

If people want it on their license plates, they can have it. I don't have an issue with that, but the heritage it supposedly supports is a rather nebulous one, so don't be shocked when you get called a racist.

 LordofHats wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
I remember a japanese pokemon card had it but an english one didn't actually.

Thats because as I said, meaning changes. What something means in 1920 Europe isn't really relevant to what it means in Europe today. What it means in Korea, Japan, or India, isn't really relevant to what it means to us either. For over 100 years the Confederate flag has been flown by racist organizations and used to symbolized a spirit of rebellion that was heavily driven by the desire to protect slavery.

If people want it on their license plates, they can have it. I don't have an issue with that, but the heritage it supposedly supports is a rather nebulous one, so don't be shocked when you get called a racist.

Meanings don't change. People associate things with what they think the meaning is but ignorance and closed-mindedness does not mean the meaning changes. All it means is that an individual only sees one thing and it's is on them that the misunderstood without taking the time to look it up or even bother asking the people themselves. If someone calls me a racist for flying a Confederate flag, I'll call them a stereotypical bigot right back for assuming something about me when they judge me on my appearance or association.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
I remember a japanese pokemon card had it but an english one didn't actually.

Thats because as I said, meaning changes. What something means in 1920 Europe isn't really relevant to what it means in Europe today. What it means in Korea, Japan, or India, isn't really relevant to what it means to us either. For over 100 years the Confederate flag has been flown by racist organizations and used to symbolized a spirit of rebellion that was heavily driven by the desire to protect slavery.

If people want it on their license plates, they can have it. I don't have an issue with that, but the heritage it supposedly supports is a rather nebulous one, so don't be shocked when you get called a racist.

Meanings don't change. People associate things with what they think the meaning is but ignorance and closed-mindedness does not mean the meaning changes. All it means is that an individual only sees one thing and it's is on them that the misunderstood without taking the time to look it up or even bother asking the people themselves. If someone calls me a racist for flying a Confederate flag, I'll call them a stereotypical bigot right back for assuming something about me when they judge me on my appearance or association.

Your confirming their view of individuals who fly the Confederate Flag if you reply like that to them. Granted they do not sign your paycheck and/or impact you in anyway.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
People associate things with what they think the meaning is but ignorance and closed-mindedness does not mean the meaning changes.

The sheer fact people think that the Confederate flag can symbolize something other than slavery and racism, is a rather glaring example that meanings change.

I'm an Army Brat, but if I'm from anywhere specific its the South. I lived at Bragg for 8 years. I've seen people flying the flag and I don't assume they're racist (though on more than a few occasions it wasn't surprising that they were). But you can't take a symbol that's been used like this;



And then whine and moan when people seeing you for the first time draw an assumption based on their previous experience. People do judge the book by its cover. Always have always will. That's not going to change.

I remember US Military one can be a passive extremist member. Then we had the racial killing on Yadkin Rd mid 90's. Freaking asshats in 505 I think. Nazi tattoo's and all


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:
I remember US Military one can be a passive extremist member. Then we had the racial killing on Yadkin Rd mid 90's. Freaking asshats in 505 I think. Nazi tattoo's and all

Edit

"Gecko" at that time was a extremist symbol for a Hawaiian Separatists

Just because you can pull an image of a symbol being used the wrong way does not mean that it's the only use. Again, just because a bad group takes a symbol doesn't mean that the symbol only means that now. You talk about 'judging a book by it's cover' but please, tell me what the difference between that and racism is. Judging a person by their appearance. What isn't going to change is that people are bigoted against things and while you try to defend racial equality, you stereotype against other things that don't agree with your way of thinking. That's not how it works. That's a double standard. Bigotry is bigotry whether you look at a black man and have racist thoughts or look at a flag and have 'all those people are racists'. It's is still hate being put on someone you know nothing about based on a single and possibly innocent visual cue. And before you say 'it's assumed the people in that picture are racists because of visual cues,' yes, they showing allegiance to a racist group, but if they flew american flags, would the flag be a racial symbol now? If they flew the flag of the UK or the flag of any other nation past or present, would that be a racist flag now? No. The Confederate flag was the flag of a nation, no matter how people use it now.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:


Just because you can pull an image of a symbol being used the wrong way does not mean that it's the only use. Again, just because a bad group takes a symbol doesn't mean that the symbol only means that now. You talk about 'judging a book by it's cover' but please, tell me what the difference between that and racism is. Judging a person by their appearance. What isn't going to change is that people are bigoted against things and while you try to defend racial equality, you stereotype against other things that don't agree with your way of thinking. That's not how it works. That's a double standard. Bigotry is bigotry whether you look at a black man and have racist thoughts or look at a flag and have 'all those people are racists'. It's is still hate being put on someone you know nothing about based on a single and possibly innocent visual cue. And before you say 'it's assumed the people in that picture are racists because of visual cues,' yes, they showing allegiance to a racist group, but if they flew american flags, would the flag be a racial symbol now? If they flew the flag of the UK or the flag of any other nation past or present, would that be a racist flag now? No. The Confederate flag was the flag of a nation, no matter how people use it now.

Seeing an Confederate flag and immediately thinking "racist redneck" is, indeed, bigotry.

Bigotry and inducing stereotypes is also Human nature, so too bad. Whether you like it or not, the confederate flag represents a pseudo-country who went to war to defend their ignorant, slaver ways of life. They made that design their mascot- it is now ingrained in Society that the flag represents ignorance, racism and a dislike for the rest of America.

You can be upset by that, but expecting otherwise is to to simply not understand people.

edit- Also, the idea that "meanings don't change" is ridiculous. 100 years ago, "gay" meant happy. No one uses the word to describe joyousness now- because the meaning of the word has changed. Meanings change all the time.

Even scale models reflects on the "Lee"

 SharkoutofWata wrote:


Just because you can pull an image of a symbol being used the wrong way does not mean that it's the only use. Again, just because a bad group takes a symbol doesn't mean that the symbol only means that now. You talk about 'judging a book by it's cover' but please, tell me what the difference between that and racism is. Judging a person by their appearance. What isn't going to change is that people are bigoted against things and while you try to defend racial equality, you stereotype against other things that don't agree with your way of thinking. That's not how it works. That's a double standard. Bigotry is bigotry whether you look at a black man and have racist thoughts or look at a flag and have 'all those people are racists'. It's is still hate being put on someone you know nothing about based on a single and possibly innocent visual cue. And before you say 'it's assumed the people in that picture are racists because of visual cues,' yes, they showing allegiance to a racist group, but if they flew american flags, would the flag be a racial symbol now? If they flew the flag of the UK or the flag of any other nation past or present, would that be a racist flag now? No. The Confederate flag was the flag of a nation, no matter how people use it now.

Dude, when I was playing Chromehounds, I had a tactical command Mech painted orange with a Confederate flag decal on the added armor shields. The sad part was that no one in Chromehounds had apparently ever heard of the Dukes of Hazard.

I miss chromehounds. I loved that game so much

 BlaxicanX wrote:


Seeing an Confederate flag and immediately thinking "racist redneck" is, indeed, bigotry.

Bigotry and inducing stereotypes is also Human nature, so too bad. Whether you like it or not, the confederate flag represents a pseudo-country who went to war to defend their ignorant, slaver ways of life. They made that design their mascot- it is now ingrained in Society that the flag represents ignorance, racism and a dislike for the rest of America.

You can be upset by that, but expecting otherwise is to to simply not understand people.

edit- Also, the idea that "meanings don't change" is ridiculous. 100 years ago, "gay" meant happy. No one uses the word to describe joyousness now- because the meaning of the word has changed. Meanings change all the time.

I don't agree with your statement at all. Bigotry happens, but that doesn't mean that it's okay to just let it happen. That's why racism itself was so common. 'Everyone else hates black people so it must be okay.' Don't just accept the issue and shrug it off. Make the effort to change something or at the very least make effort to change yourself if you recognize yourself as being bigoted.

To counter your edit point, a cigarette (wow, Dakka changes that to cigarette immediately in anticipation. I'm impressed) is a cigarette in certain places. Just because it means something else to other people doesn't mean that's the only meaning. Common use doesn't make it correct. 'I could care less' is still the wrong way to use the expression no matter how many people say it.

On an unrelated note, you wouldn't believe how difficult it was to find a decent General Lee picture with the flag in view. Something like three pages of images seem a little silly before one shows the car off properly. There were so many modern versions, even a modern Mustang.... So sad.

 LordofHats wrote:

Dude, when I was playing Chromehounds, I had a tactical command Mech painted orange with a Confederate flag decal on the added armor shields. The sad part was that no one in Chromehounds had apparently ever heard of the Dukes of Hazard.

What? Was everyone you played with from Russia or China

 Grey Templar wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

Dude, when I was playing Chromehounds, I had a tactical command Mech painted orange with a Confederate flag decal on the added armor shields. The sad part was that no one in Chromehounds had apparently ever heard of the Dukes of Hazard.

What? Was everyone you played with from Russia or China

idk. The weird part was that the movie from a couple years ago had just come out so it's not like I'm referencing something no one has seen in 20 years XD

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
Just because it means something else to other people doesn't mean that's the only meaning.

You specifically said:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:

Meanings don't change.

So, maybe it is time to pull your foot out of your mouth?

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
If they flew the flag of the UK or the flag of any other nation past or present, would that be a racist flag now? No.

Actually the flag of England, St. George's Cross, is commonly associated with far right nationalists and flying it will make people think you are a racist. There is an exception around sporting events though.

The only people in Germany flying the flag of the German Empire and the North German Confederation...this one...



...are NPD party members and other more-or-less closeted Nazis. You COULD argue that this flag was used pre-WW-I around a time where Germany was not yet associated with Nazism, the Holocaust and a wish of global domination and refer back to the famous Otto von Bismarck and some other "heritage" mumbo jumbo...but, yeah, people here are still going to think you're a Nazi.

It's similiar with many ancient flags and symbols around the world, I think. If you are flying a historic flag with dubious, perhaps multiple meanings and ideologies behind it, it's safe to assume that most people will go with the worse assumption - because, quite often, they'll find they are right, in my experience.

 dogma wrote:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
Just because it means something else to other people doesn't mean that's the only meaning.

You specifically said:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:

Meanings don't change.

So, maybe it is time to pull your foot out of your mouth?

How is what he said contradictory? Symbols can be adopted by new groups as time goes on.

That the swastica (for example) was co-opted by the National Socialists didn't mean people using it as a symbol of luck could no longer use it as such.

If tomorrow the platypus became a symbol for the adult babies community, would that make you an adult baby?

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:

How is what he said contradictory? Symbols can be adopted by new groups as time goes on.

Which indicates that meanings change. A thing he specifically said does not happen while also stating that meanings can vary between groups; something which also indicates the presence of change regarding meanings.

 Frazzled wrote:
Stars and Bars to represent...traitors. No thanks.

Frazzled's family goes back to then. I've visiting the grave of at last one Frazzled who died in the war at Shiloh. Yet, this Frazzled would have shot that Frazzled in the face for treason, potentially with his own freaking cap n ball pistol. Bitch.

Death to traitors. Death to those who worship traitors. Sorry but you know, suck it. The Great Wienie does not suffer the traitor to live.

I know I shouldn't, seeing who posted this, but I find this post to be incredibly offensive. I had a few relatives that fought for North Carolina in the Civil war. While they are a few generations removed, they were all young men when they fought, one was only 19 years old in 1861. Most of the people that fought for the south were fighting to protect their homes and family from invasion. Regardless of the politics of the Ante Bellum movement, and/or the Confederacy. They most certainly were not traitors.

You need to be more sensitive about these kind of things before you post, sir.

GG

 Chongara wrote:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
Right, because the Confederates were ONLY about slavery, right? No, seperating from the Union was a move made because the Government forced a large, country-wide ban on something, and likely many somethings, that were incredibly important to the stability of businesses and lifestyles in places very far away from where the law was created.

Slavery was awful and forced servitude is something I can not understand because I was born in this time where values are very different. People that still have intense racial hatred are very antiquated and too often the Confederate flag is associated with these racists, but that wasn't the main focus. It was about the political moves of what was essentially another world in the North changing the South that they knew nothing about.

Yes it's a good thing Slavery was abolished, but that flag is not a symbol of Slavery or slave owners or even racists. It's about the Independence of social, political and cultural views from a country too large to actually care about the 5% when it has to think of the whole.

It's a shame that people think all Southerners or Confederate Flag fliers are racists. It's even more of a shame that the people that do it can't recognize that they're being just as stereotypical as any racist in the world saying that a person is a certain way because of a flag they fly for reasons they only assume to be true.

Oh. That's so interesting. I'd really never looked that way. You've really presented a new argument I haven't heard before. It's like all intelligent and stuff, and you should totally continue with this line of thinking and elaborate. I really think it's really going to make you look like wicked smart and everybody's going to jealous of brain-powers of brainy brain brain and I think you'll change their minds too. So yeah, I think we need more of this of this.. gotta.. yeah please more. Please.

I'm torn. This is the first time I've ever agreed with Chongara, but at the same time Chongara's being a meanie again. What to do, what to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 generalgrog wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Stars and Bars to represent...traitors. No thanks.

Frazzled's family goes back to then. I've visiting the grave of at last one Frazzled who died in the war at Shiloh. Yet, this Frazzled would have shot that Frazzled in the face for treason, potentially with his own freaking cap n ball pistol. Bitch.

Death to traitors. Death to those who worship traitors. Sorry but you know, suck it. The Great Wienie does not suffer the traitor to live.

I know I shouldn't, seeing who posted this, but I find this post to be incredibly offensive. I had a few relatives that fought for North Carolina in the Civil war. While they are a few generations removed, they were all young men when they fought, one was only 19 years old in 1861. Most of the people that fought for the south were fighting to protect their homes and family from invasion. Regardless of the politics of the Ante Bellum movement, and/or the Confederacy. They most certainly were not traitors.

You need to be more sensitive about these kind of things before you post, sir.

GG

I had relatives fight for Texas and Louisiana in the war. They were traitors. If you don't like traitors, don't hang around traitors. What you should find offensive is half assed rednecks who cling to war they lost AND SHOULD HAVE LOST because they were on the side trying to keep fellow humans in cruel bondage.

You may as well call George Washington and Thomas Jefferson traitors,both rebelled against their country(England). Both of them slave holders until they died.

The point.. is you use your rhetoric as a sledge hammer, and you should tone it down.

My great great great great great grandfather was a 19 year old young person caught up in the unfortunate politics of the time. Do you really think that most southerners would just pack up and leave their farms, families and all of their generational ties over political decisions that their state politicians made. Regardless of whether or not they agreed with the basis of the confederacy, they were not traitors. And stop trying to be dakkas "shock jock" with your Howard stern tendency to insult people.


GG

 generalgrog wrote:
You may as well call George Washington and Thomas Jefferson traitors,both rebelled against their country(England). Both of them slave holders until they died.

The point.. is you use your rhetoric as a sledge hammer, and you should tone it down.

My great great great great great grandfather was a 19 year old young person caught up in the unfortunate politics of the time. Do you really think that most southerners would just pack up and leave their farms, families and all of their generational ties over political decisions that their state politicians made. Regardless of whether or not they agreed with the basis of the confederacy, they were not traitors. And stop trying to be dakkas "shock jock" with your Howard stern tendency to insult people.


GG

They were traitors, but they won.
They weren't defending slavery. Thats what the Confederacy was about. If you can't reconcile that, its your problem not mine.

 Frazzled wrote:


My great great great great great grandfather was a 19 year old young person caught up in the unfortunate politics of the time. Do you really think that most southerners would just pack up and leave their farms, families and all of their generational ties over political decisions that their state politicians made. Regardless of whether or not they agreed with the basis of the confederacy, they were not traitors. And stop trying to be dakkas "shock jock" with your Howard stern tendency to insult people.

The answer is a resounding yes.

Slavery was a big part of the Confederacy and by extension the whole war, but the vast majority of citizens of the CSA were not slaveowners.

The Confederate army had between 500,000- 1,500,000 enlisted (numbers fudged as many records at the time were either poorly kept as mechanisms of government eroded, destroyed against advancing armies, or double and even triple enlistments). The total white population of the Confederacy was between 5.5 and 6 million, halve that for population distribution divided almost evenly between men and women, and then chop that by about 30 percent to account for children who will never serve in the war (assume 4 years of growing up, some children do enlist in the war when they become young adults).

Out of 2 million potential white male adults, even if we go with the lower end number of 500,000 enlisted, 25% of the Confederate males served in the armed forces (of which 3/5 would be dead by the end of the war one way or another).

Many Southerners relished a fight with the Yankees in more ways then one. You can attribute it to a superiority/inferiority complex, defense of the home, defense of state's rights (a more popular political decision than a practical one), friction between different ways of living, change, ect. The social pressure to contribute to the cause in areas of the South that were pro-Confederate made it dangerous to be a supporter of the Union. Conversely, the encouragement to fight was acute for most people. You only look towards the social expectations of race and see that the nightmare of many Confederates was a Haitian style revolution or mingling of the freed slaves with the white population as considered at the time.

Mind you, there were people lukewarm to the Confederacy or outright hostile. West Virgina, East Tennessee, certain elements of Texas (Sam Houston would oppose secession, arguing for independence instead) all had parts of the state that opposed the separation of the USA.

I think you misunderstood my point. Of course they would pack up and fight to defend their homes. But Frazzled is implying that doing so makes them traitors. So in order to satisfy his narrow view of patriotism, all southerners should have left families, property, generational ties and joined the union.
Any rational person knows that would happen quite rarely.

By the way frazzled makes the term traitor meaningless the way he is using it.

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were patriots not traitors. Much like Robert e lee.

They pretty much were traitors.

 generalgrog wrote:


George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were patriots not traitors. Much like Robert e lee.

You can be both a patriot and a traitor.

I find it amusing that the idea is all traitors are automatically bad.

Frankly if someone betrayed Hitler, they would be a traitor. Wouldn't make them a bad person in my eyes.

YOU sir, are a Benedict Arnold!