Switch Theme:

Confederate Flag issue  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




Confedrate Flag = teddy bear for people whose ancestors were not capable of winning a war for secession and slavery, with a thinly veiled dash of "it's not over yet".

No way the US or State governments should be waving this flag anywhere. The flag of North Korea would be more acceptable.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 jasper76 wrote:
The flag of North Korea would be more acceptable.


Do you really think so? A flag of a nation currently enslaving and starving the majority of its people and threatening one of our allies with nukes is more acceptable than a confederate battle flag? How do your come to that conclusion?


Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in au
Incorporating Wet-Blending






Australia

When some idiot starts arguing that Germany's gakky censorship laws are something to be emulated, then you can start worrying about that. Until then, I'm happy saying that the Confederates and their war are undeserving of the respect shown to them by flying their flag on a government flagpole.

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
-C.S. Lewis 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 AlexHolker wrote:
When some idiot starts arguing that Germany's gakky censorship laws are something to be emulated, then you can start worrying about that. Until then, I'm happy saying that the Confederates and their war are undeserving of the respect shown to them by flying their flag on a government flagpole.


You mean calls for laws like this one:

California is looking to bar the “Stars and Bars.”

A bill sits on Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk to ban California from displaying or selling the Confederate flag or objects with images of it. The state’s Legislature passed the bill nearly unanimously last week.

Assemblyman Isadore Hall III, D-Compton, introduced the legislation after his mother discovered the Capitol gift shop sold a replica of Confederate money that contained a picture of the flag, according to the L.A. Times.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/27/california-looks-to-ban-confederate-flag/

Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in us
Missionary On A Mission





 Asherian Command wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
 Asherian Command wrote:
 Hordini wrote:
 Wyrmalla wrote:
(Custer was originally going to lead the Union, but his home was in the South.).



Are you referring to Lee? Because Custer was from Ohio (a northern state) and fought for the Union.


^^^^

Yeah Custer wasn't even a great general, like most north generals as well who are all basically screwed up until Chamerblin and another general started to lead the north.


Chamberlain was a COL at Gettysburg, and was never a general who 'led the North'. He got a Division command, no higher.

As for the flag issue, at what point will folks be happy? Do we need to outlaw it so that even having accurate confederate flags for miniature war game units is illegal (much like you cant have accurate WW2 German markings on model aircraft/ships and so on sold in Germany?)


I think they won't be. I mean right now there is an ultra sensitivity thing going on.

But Germans are quite sensitive on the Nazi's but I think there is a big difference between the confederacy and the Nazi Regime. One committed genocide one was doing something that was considered an old tradition. A horrible horrible tradition. But I don't think that it sshould be flown over a government building whether people have the confederate flag and fly it on their own personal property. That is completely fine thats their right. Its offensive but it is their right.

Slavery has been apart of history for thousands of years. I mean the word slave comes from the Word Slav. Aka Slavic peoples became slaves for others to use.

Also thanks for the correction its been a long time since I read civil war history.


I think people are forgetting how bad American Style slavery was. And it's lasting influence on this country. As many posters have said, in the Confederacy's founding documents, the secessionists cause was to the right to maintain and expand a horrible institution that tortured, raped, and killed millions of people over its long American history. American slavery was really bad. Not a "tradition."

I see no reason for the US government to celebrate (by flying a symbol of the Confederacy) a organization that took arms against America to expand such a process.
   
Made in us
Legendary Master of the Chapter





Chicago, Illinois

 CptJake wrote:
 AlexHolker wrote:
When some idiot starts arguing that Germany's gakky censorship laws are something to be emulated, then you can start worrying about that. Until then, I'm happy saying that the Confederates and their war are undeserving of the respect shown to them by flying their flag on a government flagpole.


You mean calls for laws like this one:

California is looking to bar the “Stars and Bars.”

A bill sits on Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk to ban California from displaying or selling the Confederate flag or objects with images of it. The state’s Legislature passed the bill nearly unanimously last week.

Assemblyman Isadore Hall III, D-Compton, introduced the legislation after his mother discovered the Capitol gift shop sold a replica of Confederate money that contained a picture of the flag, according to the L.A. Times.



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/27/california-looks-to-ban-confederate-flag/

Thats kind of screwed up.

I think people are forgetting how bad American Style slavery was. And it's lasting influence on this country. As many posters have said, in the Confederacy's founding documents, the secessionists cause was to the right to maintain and expand a horrible institution that tortured, raped, and killed millions of people over its long American history. American slavery was really bad. Not a "tradition."

I see no reason for the US government to celebrate (by flying a symbol of the Confederacy) a organization that took arms against America to expand such a process.


It was technically a tradition they brought over from other countries.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/23 14:32:29


From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

No. Again it says "California" again thats the state. THE STATE should not be in the business of doing so.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 AdeptSister wrote:


I see no reason for the US government to celebrate (by flying a symbol of the Confederacy) a organization that took arms against America to expand such a process.


Not sure the Fed gov't does fly a confederate battle flag except maybe at some battlefield sites which are national parks.

Can I assume you are in the camp that thinks we need to rename all the military bases (and streets on federal installations and so on) named after confederate troops/officers?

Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 CptJake wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
The flag of North Korea would be more acceptable.


Do you really think so? A flag of a nation currently enslaving and starving the majority of its people and threatening one of our allies with nukes is more acceptable than a confederate battle flag? How do your come to that conclusion?



Bit of hyperbole, I admit. But the North Korean government was not formed by US citizens actively engaged in acts of open treason against the United States.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/23 14:35:53


 
   
Made in us
Legendary Master of the Chapter





Chicago, Illinois

 CptJake wrote:
 AdeptSister wrote:


I see no reason for the US government to celebrate (by flying a symbol of the Confederacy) a organization that took arms against America to expand such a process.


Not sure the Fed gov't does fly a confederate battle flag except maybe at some battlefield sites which are national parks.

Can I assume you are in the camp that thinks we need to rename all the military bases (and streets on federal installations and so on) named after confederate troops/officers?


What why? why would we change the names of sites that were named after confederate troops? The troops and soldiers didn't do anything terrible there are american soldiers but who cares. Most of them were veterans.

From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 Frazzled wrote:
No. Again it says "California" again thats the state. THE STATE should not be in the business of doing so.


The legislators in that state voted almost unanimously to outlaw 'items displaying' the confederate flag. A state with 55 electoral college votes, and one sending 2 senators and 53 representatives to congress (including one who was the Speaker of the House and is still the minority leader).

I do believe it is their right to make that law, I also believe if it can happen in that state, in the current emotionally charged environment it can happen in other places. And we know the fed DoJ LOVES to get involved in gak like this, and I bet we seem some representative or senator propose a similar bill in the federal congress.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Asherian Command wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
 AdeptSister wrote:


I see no reason for the US government to celebrate (by flying a symbol of the Confederacy) a organization that took arms against America to expand such a process.


Not sure the Fed gov't does fly a confederate battle flag except maybe at some battlefield sites which are national parks.

Can I assume you are in the camp that thinks we need to rename all the military bases (and streets on federal installations and so on) named after confederate troops/officers?


What why? why would we change the names of sites that were named after confederate troops? The troops and soldiers didn't do anything terrible there are american soldiers but who cares. Most of them were veterans.


General Lee lead the confederate army in defense of slavery. Is it good and proper to have Ft Lee?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/23 14:40:44


Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 CptJake wrote:
A flag of a nation currently enslaving and starving the majority of its people and threatening one of our allies with nukes is more acceptable than a confederate battle flag? How do your come to that conclusion?

Well, who killed more U.S. soldiers? The Confederate states, or North Korea? Wikipedia says it was the Confederate states. Not to mention that the Confederate states did threaten the United states very existence in a way North Korea never could. And here we are not even talking about the flag of a nation, but the flag of an army whose very purpose was destroying the United states. In this regard, I think even ISIS flag seems more appropriate to me, but what do I know.
Bringing up slavery and starvation as a defense for the Confederate states is an interesting idea though.

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 CptJake wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
No. Again it says "California" again thats the state. THE STATE should not be in the business of doing so.


The legislators in that state voted almost unanimously to outlaw 'items displaying' the confederate flag. A state with 55 electoral college votes, and one sending 2 senators and 53 representatives to congress (including one who was the Speaker of the House and is still the minority leader).

I do believe it is their right to make that law, I also believe if it can happen in that state, in the current emotionally charged environment it can happen in other places. And we know the fed DoJ LOVES to get involved in gak like this, and I bet we seem some representative or senator propose a similar bill in the federal congress.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Asherian Command wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
 AdeptSister wrote:


I see no reason for the US government to celebrate (by flying a symbol of the Confederacy) a organization that took arms against America to expand such a process.


Not sure the Fed gov't does fly a confederate battle flag except maybe at some battlefield sites which are national parks.

Can I assume you are in the camp that thinks we need to rename all the military bases (and streets on federal installations and so on) named after confederate troops/officers?


What why? why would we change the names of sites that were named after confederate troops? The troops and soldiers didn't do anything terrible there are american soldiers but who cares. Most of them were veterans.


General Lee lead the confederate army in defense of slavery. Is it good and proper to have Ft Lee?


Again its the state. the state cannot sell or display. this is not hard. The state can do what it wants with its own property.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 jasper76 wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
The flag of North Korea would be more acceptable.


Do you really think so? A flag of a nation currently enslaving and starving the majority of its people and threatening one of our allies with nukes is more acceptable than a confederate battle flag? How do your come to that conclusion?



Bit of hyperbole, I admit. But the North Korean government was not formed by US citizens actively engaged in acts of open treason against the United States.


Are there still confederates actively engaged in acts of open treason against the US? The handful of nutters out there are MUCH less of a threat than the Norks.

Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
The Main Man






Beast Coast

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
And here we are not even talking about the flag of a nation, but the flag of an army whose very purpose was destroying the United states.



The Confederate army wasn't trying to destroy the United States.

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 Frazzled wrote:

Again its the state. the state cannot sell or display. this is not hard. The state can do what it wants with its own property.


And again, I was replying to a post saying 'when laws like that are trying to be passed you can start worrying'. And I pointed out laws like that ARE being passed.

Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 Hordini wrote:
The Confederate army wasn't trying to destroy the United States.

Oh? Just secede then? Would they have stopped the war if they were allowed to secede?

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
The Main Man






Beast Coast

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
 Hordini wrote:
The Confederate army wasn't trying to destroy the United States.

Oh? Just secede then? Would they have stopped the war if they were allowed to secede?



Yes, they were trying to secede and they almost certainly would have stopped the war if they were allowed to secede. The war started because they were not simply just allowed to secede. They weren't trying to take over the North and turn all the northern states into slave states, if that's what you're thinking.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/23 14:49:20


   
Made in us
Thane of Dol Guldur




 CptJake wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
 jasper76 wrote:
The flag of North Korea would be more acceptable.


Do you really think so? A flag of a nation currently enslaving and starving the majority of its people and threatening one of our allies with nukes is more acceptable than a confederate battle flag? How do your come to that conclusion?



Bit of hyperbole, I admit. But the North Korean government was not formed by US citizens actively engaged in acts of open treason against the United States.


Are there still confederates actively engaged in acts of open treason against the US? The handful of nutters out there are MUCH less of a threat than the Norks.


Let's hope not. I really don't care what kind of flag someone decides to wave in their front yard or place as a bumper sticker on a car, or wear as a t-shirt. Freedom of speech is good.

But state governments loyal to the Union? Hell no.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 Frazzled wrote:

Again its the state. the state cannot sell or display. this is not hard. The state can do what it wants with its own property.


And again, I was replying to a post saying 'when laws like that are trying to be passed you can start worrying'. And I pointed out laws like that ARE being passed.

And clearly the 'state can do what it wants with its own property' viewpoint is currently a one way view point. If a state decides to display the confederate flag, not many are coming to their defense with that argument.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/23 14:51:29


Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Hordini wrote:
 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
 Hordini wrote:
The Confederate army wasn't trying to destroy the United States.

Oh? Just secede then? Would they have stopped the war if they were allowed to secede?



Yes, they were trying to secede and they almost certainly would have stopped the war if they were allowed to secede. The war started because they were not simply just allowed to secede. They weren't trying to take over the North and turn all the northern states into slave states, if that's what you're thinking.


The CSA did actually have plans for Mexico and Cuba however.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in au
Incorporating Wet-Blending






Australia

 CptJake wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:

Again its the state. the state cannot sell or display. this is not hard. The state can do what it wants with its own property.

And again, I was replying to a post saying 'when laws like that are trying to be passed you can start worrying'. And I pointed out laws like that ARE being passed.

No, they aren't. The government not selling Confederacy memorabilia is not the same thing as the government forbidding private individuals from producing, displaying, buying or selling Confederacy iconography.

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
-C.S. Lewis 
   
Made in us
Missionary On A Mission





Sorry. I was arguing that state governments were a part of the United States Government (as a whole, not as a part of the federal government. ) But I will back off on that statement.

On the naming convention: What is the justification for celebrating people who took arms against America? Do we at least agree that by naming bases and roads after them is honoring people who fought on the side against the government of the United states?

The CSA was fighting to break up the United States. Is there an argument that breaking up the United States is different from destroying a United American country?
   
Made in fr
Hallowed Canoness





 Hordini wrote:
Yes, they were trying to secede and they almost certainly would have stopped the war if they were allowed to secede. The war started because they were not simply just allowed to secede. They weren't trying to take over the North and turn all the northern states into slave states, if that's what you're thinking.

My bad. I guess it is more like if North Korea was close to annexing half of the US rather than destroying all of it, then .

"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
A flag of a nation currently enslaving and starving the majority of its people and threatening one of our allies with nukes is more acceptable than a confederate battle flag? How do your come to that conclusion?

Well, who killed more U.S. soldiers? The Confederate states, or North Korea? Wikipedia says it was the Confederate states. Not to mention that the Confederate states did threaten the United states very existence in a way North Korea never could. And here we are not even talking about the flag of a nation, but the flag of an army whose very purpose was destroying the United states. In this regard, I think even ISIS flag seems more appropriate to me, but what do I know.
Bringing up slavery and starvation as a defense for the Confederate states is an interesting idea though.


Major difference between 1863 and today. A threat back then that was defeated and is now gone just isn't as scary to me as Lil Kim with nukes right now. DaIsh slaughtering folks and beheading prisoners today is a bit more troublesome than Mosby's raiders are right now. I don't think Mosby and his boys have capped anyone in a couple hundred years. Sorry if you cannot differentiate the two or for some reason honestly feel current enemies are more appropriate than a historical one, especially one like the rebels, who once defeated were very largely integrated back into the union .

Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

Hand on heart, this is a pretty tough issue to resolve, and I speak from experience.

Here in the UK, we have similar problems with the past.

We have streets named after Slave owners, Opium dealers in China, Cecil Rhodes, Viceroys responsible for the death of thousands of people in British India etc etc

We gave Karl Marx a home for years, Lenin stayed in London a while, and if rumours and speculation are to be believed, one A Hitler stayed in Liverpool a while.

Historically, we've done a lot of bad things.


"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 AdeptSister wrote:

On the naming convention: What is the justification for celebrating people who took arms against America? Do we at least agree that by naming bases and roads after them is honoring people who fought on the side against the government of the United states?


Most of those posts have been named for quite a while. Camp Lee (now Ft Lee) was built in 1917. Ft Hood in 1942. Ft Bragg in 1918. I honestly don't know the justification for naming them what they did, and really don't care. I am wondering NOW, if we as a nation are gonna be against all things honoring confederates done by state and federal governments, if we need to rename all these things.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/23 15:14:27


Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in us
Hellacious Havoc



The Bridge

the flag is part of the country's history, should it be flown? honestly i don't know if i have an opinion on that i'm from the nortth and never have really been exposed to southern heritage or their pride. Its kind of a weird issue because it has alot of pride attached to it but also its been tied to alot of hate and bad things. But then again so has alot of other flags in the world...

From what little experience i've had with the flag, it seems to be worn or flown by wannabe hicks or as a symbole of racism.(keep in mind this is in the north, not the south where the flag means pride and heritage to most)

Man fears what he does not understand- Anton LaVey 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






New Orleans, LA

I am 100% fine with not flying the Confederate Flag at a state or national government building.

I see no reason to rename our existing Forts Hood, Lee, or Bragg. This is not an "all or nothing" situation.

I also see no reason to outright ban the confederate flag from private citizens. Everyone has the right to freedom of speech. That makes it easy to know who the donkey-caves are.

DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Hordini wrote:
 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
 Hordini wrote:
The Confederate army wasn't trying to destroy the United States.

Oh? Just secede then? Would they have stopped the war if they were allowed to secede?



Yes, they were trying to secede and they almost certainly would have stopped the war if they were allowed to secede. The war started because they were not simply just allowed to secede. They weren't trying to take over the North and turn all the northern states into slave states, if that's what you're thinking.


Actually, the very act of seceding from the union was a hugely provocative act. There is no way that the United States could have afforded to allow the confederacy to exist. Most people look at it from the perspective of the united states losing 1/2 of it's land mass, and the economic loss that would have entailed the USA.

However what is not always considered is, there is no way the USA could allow a hostile neighbor to exist on a hypothetical USA/CSA border. If the USA simply allowed the CSA to secede, it may have avoided a war in 1860, but most certainly they would have eventually gone to war, as both the USA and the CSA expanded west. There would have been wars fought over western territory, and even possibly Central/South america, and Caribbean islands, as each of them tried to expand their colonial empires. You must also remember that this was during the age of colonialism.

When the CSA seceded, there had to be an armed response by the USA.

GG

   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: