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.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

If this take this issue to its logical conclusion, then the British flag should be next...

I don't mean to burst your bubble, but no one is clamouring about the British flag in the US, because no one cares about it here. It's not a symbol of British oppression, it's a symbol of your neighbors fun vacation to London.

I know what your saying but from what I've been reading, all the talk is of 'symbols of oppression.' What could be more oppressing than the nation that tried to kill the USA in its infancy?

You'll just have to take my word, Americans generally don't view the British flag as a symbol of oppression, but simply as the flag of one of our closest allies. I'm sure there are some nutjobs sitting at home in their underwear licking peanut butter off the floor and throwing darts at an effigy of the tyrant King George, but it just doesn't register as an offensive symbol to the vast majority of Americans, and most Americans are probably fond of it.

 jasper76 wrote:

You'll just have to take my word, Americans generally don't view the British flag as a symbol of oppression, but simply as the flag of one of our closest allies. I'm sure there are some nutjobs sitting at home in their underwear licking peanut butter off the floor and throwing darts at an effigy of the tyrant King George, but it just doesn't register as an offensive symbol to the vast majority of Americans, and most Americans are probably find of it.

I know more people who only seem to know the "union jack" (yeah yeah... we know) as a symbol of punk rock.... No idea where they'd get that idea though

Generally speaking, Americans are very fond of British pop culture and we love your royal family most of all.

Frazzle would reply, "Grant versus Lee, Appomattox Courthouse, 1865" shows that states cannot secede.

Indeed. unfortunately too many internet warriors have not read up on the case.

Just re-read the wiki on Antietam. Terrible absolutely terrible conflict. Some historians are now thinking casualties were much higher overall at 750,000 for the war for soldiers alone. Given the population size thats massive. Then you realize that most of the casualties occurred in Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Tennessee, and its gets twitchy.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

Exactly, show anyone the swastika and ask them what it means? hindu peace or nazi?

That greatly depends on the person's education level, honestly.

Because for myself, and many people here who have some higher education, the orientation of the swastika is going to play a role in how I personally answer that question.

Worth noting here that the swastika is found world wide, and that the Nazi swastika has close connection to a symbol of Thor commonly found on Viking/Norse shields. Logically this makes sense given all the other crap those nazi donkey caves stole from my faith.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
It's just a flag. It doesn't make anybody be or do anything.

People behaved differently, had different standards, morals, beliefs and knowledge in different eras. The Confederate flag shouldn't be flown over state and federal buildings because it's not longer a flag that represents a state or the nation. Private citizens can fly whatever flags they want for any reason they want. The mere symbol itself holds no meaning beyond what an individual ascribes to it.

The Dukes of Hazzard wasn't an evil bigotted racist tv show just because Bo and Luke painted the battle flag on the roof of their car.

If we're going to get outraged over flags that were flown by people whose beliefs and actions we now find unacceptable we need to be upset over most of the flags that exist.

Japan committed horrible racist genocidal atrocities against civilians during WWII and evil war crimes against POWs. Should I be offended by Japan's flag? Does anyone who chooses to wear or fly that flag automatically give his/her tacit approval to the crimes committed under the auspices of that flag?

A lot of Koreans and Chinese are offended by the Japanese flag, especially the rising sun version. Similar to the CSA flag it has got an association with right wing extremist nationalists.

That's my point, most flags can be associated with horrors committed against others and have a group or groups of people who despise it or are offended by it. Yet, they're still just symbols on cloth, they hold no sway over people and don't need to be censored. There's no need to be myopic and get outraged over one particular flag while ignoring all the others.

I understand your point, however the thing is a lot of people genuinely for good historical reasons find the CSA flag disturbing and offensive. If you want them to change their minds it will take a lot more effort than just saying they ought not to be myopic.

An African-American who is upset by the CSA flag doesn't have to give a feth about the Japanese IN battle flag to legitimately be upset about the CSA flag. It would be a bit silly to try to make things like that a condition of social intercourse.

The Japanese committed atrocities against Americans under that flag, I have relatives and friends' relatives that wre maimed and killed by them. The US govt locked up Americans of Japanese heritage in internment camps and confiscated their property. Yet after the war we managed to move on and didn't need to use public shaming and peer pressure to dissuade anyone from owning or displaying a Japanese flag.

There is no need to ban or limit anything or everything that some people might find offensive or upsetting. The Confederacy didn't invent slavery, it's been around for the entirety of human history. It's been utilized by and socially accepted by both Ancient and Western Civilizations until recent modern times. Pretty much everyone alive today can trace back their ancestry far enough to get to a time when their ancestors were either owning slaves, being enslaved or both. Slavery was part of the foundation of the Southern economy and culture and when the Southern states realized that the free states were going to hold a majority in congress and use that majority to pressure the South to end slavery, they felt that form tyranny of the majority was inconsistent with their interpreation of the inherent values and ideals of the representative republic and system of federalism the country was founded in. Therefore those states chose to voluntarily leave the country they had previously voluntarily joined. Rather than let them leave the free states decided it was better to fight a civil war to preserve the union of states as it was. Consequently we had the bloodiest conflict in our nation's history with the highest death toll of any war we've fought. The Southerners fought to preserve their way of life and their political ideals and the fact that they lost and that those ideals and that way of life are no longer acceptable to today's society doesn't mean that they fought with less passion or courage than other American soldier. They won't evil subhuman monsters, they were ordinary people just like us, but born in a diferent time, into a different culture and they held different beliefs. Therefore, it is no wonder that there are monuments in the south to the fallen Confederate soldiers and it is entirely logical that those monuments would include the flag under which those soldiers fought.

What is the point of removing the flag from a memorial to Confederate soldiers while leaving the memorial standing? Does the elimination of the flag somehow remove the fact that there is a large memorial to soldiers that died fighting to preserve slavery prominently displayed on state grounds in the capital? Does not flying the flag anymore change that history or make it any less known and obvious?

Nobody has to buy a Confederate flag or fly a confederate flag and it certainly isn't appropriate to fly it over state or federal buildings but you can't just get rid of it. There are Civil War memorials all over the country from the Mason Dixon Line down to the Gulf Coast, should they all be demolished so that nobody ever has to be offended by a memorial to a time when the country embraced white supremacy and slavery?

A flag is just a piece of cloth. It doesn't make anyone do anything or believe in anything. People can hold racist beliefs and commit racist crimes under whatever symbol or justification they want. It serves no practical purpose to assign some sort of evil thought crime to the mere possession or display of a flag.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

You'll just have to take my word, Americans generally don't view the British flag as a symbol of oppression, but simply as the flag of one of our closest allies. I'm sure there are some nutjobs sitting at home in their underwear licking peanut butter off the floor and throwing darts at an effigy of the tyrant King George, but it just doesn't register as an offensive symbol to the vast majority of Americans, and most Americans are probably find of it.

I know more people who only seem to know the "union jack" (yeah yeah... we know) as a symbol of punk rock.... No idea where they'd get that idea though

Sex Pistols maybe?

Whenever I see the British Flag, I think of Iron Maiden before I think of Great Britain

 Manchu wrote:
Generally speaking, Americans are very fond of British pop culture and we love your royal family most of all.

Yeup.

We feel like we got each other's back in the global stage.

My whole take on the situation: the confederate flag I got while I was visiting North Carolina just became quite a conversation piece

I have a small flag collection, I'm thinking might want to fill it out with a few more controversial ones; the old Imperialist Japanese flag is high on the list

 jasper76 wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

You'll just have to take my word, Americans generally don't view the British flag as a symbol of oppression, but simply as the flag of one of our closest allies. I'm sure there are some nutjobs sitting at home in their underwear licking peanut butter off the floor and throwing darts at an effigy of the tyrant King George, but it just doesn't register as an offensive symbol to the vast majority of Americans, and most Americans are probably find of it.

I know more people who only seem to know the "union jack" (yeah yeah... we know) as a symbol of punk rock.... No idea where they'd get that idea though

Sex Pistols maybe?

Whenever I see the British Flag, I think of Iron Maiden before I think of Great Britain

Hey, it's not our fault that we make the best music

For the record, I'm trying to break away from Britain (Scottish independence) so technically, I'm a rebel to the crown, like you damn Yankees

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

You'll just have to take my word, Americans generally don't view the British flag as a symbol of oppression, but simply as the flag of one of our closest allies. I'm sure there are some nutjobs sitting at home in their underwear licking peanut butter off the floor and throwing darts at an effigy of the tyrant King George, but it just doesn't register as an offensive symbol to the vast majority of Americans, and most Americans are probably find of it.

I know more people who only seem to know the "union jack" (yeah yeah... we know) as a symbol of punk rock.... No idea where they'd get that idea though

Sex Pistols maybe?

Whenever I see the British Flag, I think of Iron Maiden before I think of Great Britain

Hey, it's not our fault that we make the best music

You made the best music.

It's been a while since Iron Maiden came out, you know...

Oasis, Spice Girls, Lady Soveriegn...you guys are slipping.

 jasper76 wrote:


You made the best music.

It's been a while since Iron Maiden came out, you know...

Last I checked they're still going

And hey, Oasis were good. Though admittedly since then we've got stuck in an indie-rock (I hate that term, they're all on big labels and their sound is hardly independent) rut interspersped with the latest X-Factor winner at christmas who promptly disappears after one album...

whembly wrote:

 Sienisoturi wrote:
1) What is the standard practice for flying other than the national flag in govermental buildings?

Usually, it just need to be below the American / State flag.

2) Do states have the right to seccede, and if not, then why?

No... because... treason.

Vermont and Texas may have a different answer.

Kilkrazy wrote:You are not alone, but you are not on the side of the angels I am afraid.

Why not fly a Nazi flag? That also is freedom of speech.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sienisoturi wrote:
1) What is the standard practice for flying other than the national flag in govermental buildings?

2) Do states have the right to seccede, and if not, then why?

Frazzle would reply, "Grant versus Lee, Appomattox Courthouse, 1865" shows that states cannot secede.

The question then becomes that why can't states seccede? Isn't it per definition tyrannical to force people under your rule?

They can't secede because several hundred thousand troops say they can't secede, plus now it would be economic suicide for most of the states.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
You are not alone, but you are not on the side of the angels I am afraid.

Why not fly a Nazi flag? That also is freedom of speech.

I wouldn't fly one myself, but I would have no objection to somebody else flying one.

Even idiots and racists have first amendment rights...

I feel revolutionary zeal coming over me, and I put this down the fact that I've been reading the federalist papers again.

On mainland Europe it is thoroughly banned. Its banned a political symbol and the UK has had a ban on political uniforms since the 30's. However due to our firm and undeniable 'allied' status in the UK, we can fly one in the UK in some conditions, historical reenactment is one of them, making films is another, its also acceptable to own them. Though Gordon Brown was looking at trying to make mileage by stopping all that.

In Germany and some other European countries it cant be recreated for any purpose, including historical and educational, though existing iconography may be preserved, but in some cases only by authorised persons.

In most nordic countries it is legal to go around waving any flag you want. I recommend checking that before though, as it varies.

 Sienisoturi wrote:
The question then becomes that why can't states seccede? Isn't it per definition tyrannical to force people under your rule?

In which case every single system where someone's not 100% pleased with every decision made becomes tyrannical. It reduces the concept of tyranny to pointlessness.

 Frazzled wrote:
They can't secede because several hundred thousand troops say they can't secede, plus now it would be economic suicide for most of the states.

I recall that that modern day CSA could have a stable economy.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Am I the only one getting the urge to fly the Confederacy flag?

For me, this is turning into a massive freedom of speech issue. I have zero connection with the south, but defenders of liberty, which is the bedrock of America, should be concerned at this attack on a integral part of the nation's history. All sorts of people are jumping on the bandwagon, and band wagons have a habit of spiralling out of control.

Let's not forget. The flag didn't shoot those poor victims...

If this take this issue to its logical conclusion, then the British flag should be next...

Private citizens are free to fly it. That doesn't mean that shops have to sell it to them. If Amazon decides that it doesn't want to sell Confederate flags then that is Amazons decision.

Having the right to fly a flag does not mean others are legally obliged to sell you the flag.

As for government buildings, it should never have been flying above them in the first place after the Confederacy was defeated.

So New Mexico and Oklahoma will have to change their flags, since they represent other nations that were conquered by the USA, correct? Or do you not recognize the Native American tribes as formerly independent nations?

If the entire CSA did, yea. But Texas being dragged down by Mississippii, mmm....no thanks.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
You are not alone, but you are not on the side of the angels I am afraid.

Why not fly a Nazi flag? That also is freedom of speech.

I wouldn't fly one myself, but I would have no objection to somebody else flying one.

Even idiots and racists have first amendment rights...

... ...

If you saw someone flying a Nazi flag, would you consider them a tip-top bloke, or a knobhead?

Either way, as I posted earlier, would you side with Voltaire on the point?

 Sienisoturi wrote:

whembly wrote:

 Sienisoturi wrote:
1) What is the standard practice for flying other than the national flag in govermental buildings?

Usually, it just need to be below the American / State flag.

2) Do states have the right to seccede, and if not, then why?

No... because... treason.

Vermont and Texas may have a different answer.

Kilkrazy wrote:You are not alone, but you are not on the side of the angels I am afraid.

Why not fly a Nazi flag? That also is freedom of speech.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sienisoturi wrote:
1) What is the standard practice for flying other than the national flag in govermental buildings?

2) Do states have the right to seccede, and if not, then why?

Frazzle would reply, "Grant versus Lee, Appomattox Courthouse, 1865" shows that states cannot secede.

The question then becomes that why can't states seccede? Isn't it per definition tyrannical to force people under your rule?

Plenty of tyranny to go around here. What Lincoln did was certainly tyrannical (especially in the case of Maryland) and a flagrant breach of the founding concept of the nation.

Then again, having freaking slaves is pretty tyrannical too. But both sides had slaves, which everyone forgets.

As usual the only really innocent party was Joe Random on the battlefield, getting .58 cal holes blown in him because the top 2% of the Southern Gentry couldn't agree with a bunch of Yankee industrialists. And the flag which South Carolina removed was over a monument commemorating the Confederate dead in the Civil War, IE the conscripted infantry that managed to hold off an American invasion (outnumbering them 9:1) for almost 5 years. It was about the most appropriate possible place in the galaxy to fly a rebel flag. Especially since one of the reasons South Carolina is so beautiful is because the local Confederates defended the state with such tenacity that it was never burninanted by our good pal, Sherman.

Lincoln did what had to be done to preserve the Union and abolish slavery.

He was a mensch.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
You are not alone, but you are not on the side of the angels I am afraid.

Why not fly a Nazi flag? That also is freedom of speech.

I wouldn't fly one myself, but I would have no objection to somebody else flying one.

Even idiots and racists have first amendment rights...

... ...

If you saw someone flying a Nazi flag, would you consider them a tip-top bloke, or a knobhead?

Either way, as I posted earlier, would you side with Voltaire on the point?

That's a hypothetical question. I don't answer hypothetical questions

In all honesty, it's a tough one. Hopefully, my inner Voltaire would take over.

 Manchu wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
No you have a narrow 'understanding'based on how it has been hijacked.

So the term is "evolved" for meanings you do like and "hijacked" for meanings you don't like? I see.

Evolved because it has remained as a cultural symbol for the south since its inception.
So a state can use this as its symbol, that evolution of the symbol.

An ideology is different, taking over the symbol for party political purposes is a hijacking. The KKK has always been a minority activity, a heritage symbol is regional and for everyone, though not everyone likes it or uses it.

 Manchu wrote:

One more time, since you ignored it previously:

I grew up in the capital of the Confederacy. I was raised in houses built on Civil War battlefields. I went to public schools named after Confederate politicians and generals with kids whose whole wardrobe seemed to revolve around the battle flag in a county with an active KKK chapter. Consequently, I know a thing or two about what the flag currently means here in the South.

Yes I did ignore your appeal to authority, personal experiences are valid evidence in my opinion, but your experience appears to be localised, also it makes sense for Confederate heritage to be strongly represented in Richmond (or Montgomery or Danville).

For good reason, despite your I live there 'credentials' you went full bore on how the stars and bars were a defacto racist white supremacist symbol, and failed, with evidence provided by others here and which you have still not addressed.
Please explain, what type of white supremacist is Barrack Obama? Or Bill Clinton for that matter.

It seems like you have had some bad experiences that have soiled your ability to look at the issue objectively, that might not be your fault. Much further and I may begin to wonder if you have a twitch when you see that flag.

 Manchu wrote:

How's the weather across the pond today?

Too hot for my liking, thanks for asking. I am more a winter person.

Terms like "heritage symbol" are just crypto-racist marketing buzzwords. Because racist symbols make racists twitch, if I can borrow your term to make a slightly different point (evolved or hijacked?), but twitching over white supremacy is (rightfully) shameful so it needs to be rationalized. I've heard this kind of masturbatory, disinformation-based argument applied to the Confederate battle flag all my life because this is something that I (unlike you) have lived with all of my life.

Manchu just used "crypto-racist" in a sentence. Cool!

 Frazzled wrote:
Manchu just used "crypto-racist" in a sentence. Cool!

I'm enjoying this... keep it up.


It's like Scalia's "interpretive jiggery-pokery" dissent to KingVs.Burwell.

Let's not forget when that flag was erected. The 1960s. This wasn't about honoring war dead as much as it was a flying "feth you" to desegregation.

 Manchu wrote:
Terms like "heritage symbol" are just crypto-racist marketing buzzwords. Because racist symbols make racists twitch, if I can borrow your term to make a slightly different point (evolved or hijacked?), but twitching over white supremacy is (rightfully) shameful so it needs to be rationalized. I've heard this kind of masturbatory, disinformation-based argument applied to the Confederate battle flag all my life because this is something that I (unlike you) have lived with all of my life.

Ok, looks like you have a problem.
'Masturbatory' eh. That's .... different.
It helps to develop a rational detachment.
And crypto-racist, is that actually a term?
I found out to my horror it is.
Looked for a definition found this

https://diversitychronicle.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/crypto-racism-on-the-rise/

Crypto racism is on the rise. But what exactly is crypto racism you may ask? According to experts including psychologists, professors, community leaders, teachers and social workers it is racism that remains hidden, shrouded in secrecy by the individual racist. A hatred so vile and so ugly that it dare not speak its name. Because crypto racists go to great lengths to mask and hide their racism it can be very hard to detect even by expert anti-racists and human rights activists.

Your boss, a co-worker, neighbour, friend, or fellow student may in fact be a crypto racist. A racist who has hidden his racism so carefully and cleverly that you have no idea it’s there hidden below the surface. He may manifest his racism publicly however in real ways by voting for candidates promising to cut welfare programs which largely benefit non-whites or occasionally expressing sympathy for those who criticize immigration reform. He may hold traditionalistic and regressive views on social issues.

I had to do a double take to see if its a spoof site. Apparently this is for real.
"Because crypto racists go to great lengths to mask and hide their racism it can be very hard to detect even by expert anti-racists and human rights activists."
So it requires extra finger pointing to combat.
"Your boss, a co-worker, neighbour, friend, or fellow student may in fact be a crypto racist."
Inquisitors needed, look for the signs of right wing heresy lurking in the populace.
It's the Progressive Liberal douche equivalent of the Malleus Malificarum.



.... So sidetrack over, what you are saying Manchu is that you want an excuse to hate the argument presented against you, so you accuse me of being an extremist, on absent evidence, so that you don't have to formulate a rational rebuttal.
Crypto-racist, nice one. Now you don't actually have to look for evidence before finger pointing, just turn up and label away.