Confederate Battle Flag

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it okay if I go out and wipe my ass with the Amurican flag before setting it on fire? After all it's just a piece of cloth without symbolic meaning, right?

You could wear it as a poncho.

Is it okay that the American flag was carried by those who slaughtered Native Americans?

This memory with flag thing has so many variables.

It is not that complicated. The flag represents our history, all of it, good and bad, including slavery. We fly it with that knowledge. The Confederate Flag is a flag made to represent the fight of the South to preserve slavery. If we had an "Indian Extermination" flag and chose to fly that over the Oklahoma capitol, you would have a point. Even if some Oklahoma citizens thought of it as part of their "heritage".

Stop trying to use the tragedy of the Indian to establish some sort of moral equivalence regarding slavery. It is pathetic. Slavery stands on its own, as an evil, and finding another evil does not reduce its meaning.

What is pathetic is your assumptive leap.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:I propose that if states want to recognize their heritage by flying the Confederate flag, they should also fly the flags of other ruling states. For instance, Florida and California could hoist the Spanish flag, Texas can proudly fly the Mexican flag, Louisiana can raise the banner of France, Alaska could actually see Russian flags from their flag poles, etc. Anything less would be whitewashing history.

Ever been to Six Flags over Texas? They don't fly the Stars and Bars in Austin as it wasn't a Confederate Flag.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I propose that if states want to recognize their heritage by flying the Confederate flag, they should also fly the flags of other ruling states. For instance, Florida and California could hoist the Spanish flag, Texas can proudly fly the Mexican flag, Louisiana can raise the banner of France, Alaska could actually see Russian flags from their flag poles, etc. Anything less would be whitewashing history.

Ever been to Six Flags over Texas? They don't fly the Stars and Bars in Austin as it wasn't a Confederate Flag.

Apparently they use a different Confederate flag.

[Anonymous]

Even if the claim is that it's about "heritage" - that doesn't wash either.

Did we erect memorials all across the US to Benedict Arnold? No.

Did the families of former British loyalists get together 100 years after the Revolutionary War to raise the British Union Jack everywhere across the US to celebrate British heritage? No.

Do descendants of British loyalists parade up and down the streets in jacked-up 4x4 Minis flying Union Jack banners to celebrate "heritage" in defiance of Americans who fought against them? No.

And it makes even less sense to fly the Confederate flag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it okay if I go out and wipe my ass with the Amurican flag before setting it on fire? After all it's just a piece of cloth without symbolic meaning, right?

You could wear it as a poncho.

Is it okay that the American flag was carried by those who slaughtered Native Americans?

This memory with flag thing has so many variables.

It is not that complicated. The flag represents our history, all of it, good and bad, including slavery. We fly it with that knowledge. The Confederate Flag is a flag made to represent the fight of the South to preserve slavery. If we had an "Indian Extermination" flag and chose to fly that over the Oklahoma capitol, you would have a point. Even if some Oklahoma citizens thought of it as part of their "heritage".

Stop trying to use the tragedy of the Indian to establish some sort of moral equivalence regarding slavery. It is pathetic. Slavery stands on its own, as an evil, and finding another evil does not reduce its meaning.

What is pathetic is your assumptive leap.

If your point was something else, I'm all ears.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think Andrew Duncomb makes a good point:

“They’re blaming the racist problems on the flag and not on the real problems of America. Through the race lies the people who carry and harbor the hate inside,” Duncomb says.

I actually don't understand what "Through the race lies the people who carry and harbor the hate inside" means. But, can you please explain, as succinctly as possible, what message people in Oklahoma would be trying to send to Obama by waving a Confederate Battle Flag?

What Duncomb is saying is the Confederate battle flag is not to blame; it's people who harbor hate. Your animosity towards an inanimate object is blinding you. We can burn every confederate flag and some people would still be racist. What's next? Are you willing to incarcerate someone for saying something you consider racist? Force them into psychological care?

Obviously flags have symbolic meanings. They represent something. Otherwise, why would we pledge allegiance to a flag? Why do people demonstrate their patriotism with flags? Why is a flag lapel pin so important for every politician to wear? If a flag was simply an "inanimate object", why would people go to the trouble of buying one, bringing it to a demonstration, and waving it around? Can you explain what message those who took those steps were trying to convey when they waved the flag in front of Obama? Why didn't they choose a Nazi flag, for instance, or an ISIS flag? Or, if they are only waving an "inanimate object", why not a piece of cardboard? What was special about the Confederate Battle Flag that caused them to choose to wave it and what message were they trying to send?

The message they were trying to send is that the flag itself is not responsible for racism. That it's ridiculous to ascribe that much power to a flag, as if destroying it or striking it from history will change history, or the future. Or people's hearts. Flags to have symbolic meaning; you see it one way, Duncomb sees it another. The problem is, is that progressives seem to want it their way or the highway. So again, after the flag is banned/destroyed, what's next?

If this is the case, would you agree that the protesters urgently need a class in effective communication? If you or they believe that an almost entirely white group of people waving a flag while protesting a black man is an effective means of communicating that "the flag itself is not responsible for racism", I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

BTW, would you feel the same way about Nazi flags carried by protestors at synagogues? Would that be an effective means of communicating that "the flag itself is not responsible for anti-Semitism"?

It's not my place to judge them in that manner, nor to educate them, in communication or otherwise. In a free society, they are allowed to protest in any way they see fit, so long as its not violent.

Yes, I feel the same way about Nazi flags/protestors. They have a right to protest non-violently. Nor would I consider the flag responsible for anti-semitism. The people are. The flag is simply cloth.

But, if people were protesting at a synagogue and waving a Nazi flag -- which according to you is just a piece of cloth with no meaning -- why would you think they were anti-Semites? Why would you assume that people simply trying to send the message that the flag itself is not responsible for anti-Semitism are anti-Semites? Wouldn't you want to join them in sending their message that flags aren't the problem, people are the problem?

I didn't say the people were. I said the flag was not responsible for what happened in Nazi Germany. People were.

Would I join them? No, because I'm not the 'protester' type in this fashion. But I would not condemn anyone who does. I would encourage anyone who finds offense in their behavior to stage their own counter-protest. Consider the Westboro Baptist Church, military funerals and the motorcycle groups that rev their engines to drown out the protester's shouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, sure, and when an ISIS flag is spotted in your town, I'll remind you "it's just a meaningless piece of cloth"

The flag won't be the thing that kills - the individual will.

The problem you still don't seem to understand is that with the addition of a flag or other symbol, it's no longer about *individuals* - it's about *groups*. A group is far more dangerous than any individual can ever be. Dylann Roof didn't formulate his ideas and ideology in a vacuum. He is not the only person to hold the beliefs he held. He got it from the groupthink of others who have built up their ideology and mindset. The language in his manifesto is echoed by hundreds of other people in dozens of other racist sites, like Stormfront.org. It's no different than the ISIS terrorist who blows himself up in a market and kills a dozen innocents - the threat to society doesn't end when that individual blows himself up, because there are 20 more just like him rallying behind that flag and ideology.

Ask the young black men who ran Anthony Hervey off the road and killed him. Hervey was a black man himself, and a supporter of the Confederate flag. Is that 'justice' to y'all? Did Hervey deserve it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it okay if I go out and wipe my ass with the Amurican flag before setting it on fire? After all it's just a piece of cloth without symbolic meaning, right?

Sure it's OK, but it does define you as a pig.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:I propose that if states want to recognize their heritage by flying the Confederate flag, they should also fly the flags of other ruling states. For instance, Florida and California could hoist the Spanish flag, Texas can proudly fly the Mexican flag, Louisiana can raise the banner of France, Alaska could actually see Russian flags from their flag poles, etc. Anything less would be whitewashing history.

I would say they can if they want to. But should seems to imply that you want that forced on them as a consequence of flying the Confederate flag.

A conservative would want choice.
A liberal seems to want force.

No surprise there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it okay if I go out and wipe my ass with the Amurican flag before setting it on fire? After all it's just a piece of cloth without symbolic meaning, right?

Sure it's OK, but it does define you as a pig.

Then that means waving the Confederate flag can define someone. As a racist, or a pig, or a racist pig...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I propose that if states want to recognize their heritage by flying the Confederate flag, they should also fly the flags of other ruling states. For instance, Florida and California could hoist the Spanish flag, Texas can proudly fly the Mexican flag, Louisiana can raise the banner of France, Alaska could actually see Russian flags from their flag poles, etc. Anything less would be whitewashing history.

I would say they can if they want to. But should seems to imply that you want that forced on them as a consequence of flying the Confederate flag.

A conservative would want choice.
A liberal seems to want force.

No surprise there.

False - Conservatives don't want "choice" - they want to be able to enjoy their choices while denying others any choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I propose that if states want to recognize their heritage by flying the Confederate flag, they should also fly the flags of other ruling states. For instance, Florida and California could hoist the Spanish flag, Texas can proudly fly the Mexican flag, Louisiana can raise the banner of France, Alaska could actually see Russian flags from their flag poles, etc. Anything less would be whitewashing history.

I would say they can if they want to. But should seems to imply that you want that forced on them as a consequence of flying the Confederate flag.

A conservative would want choice.
A liberal seems to want force.

No surprise there.

Conservatives don't want choice. They want the government to fly the rebel flag. If it's so important to you, fly it in your own home and stick it on the bumper of your minivan. There's your choice. Don't make all citizens endure state endorsement of slavery or secession or "heritage".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I propose that if states want to recognize their heritage by flying the Confederate flag, they should also fly the flags of other ruling states. For instance, Florida and California could hoist the Spanish flag, Texas can proudly fly the Mexican flag, Louisiana can raise the banner of France, Alaska could actually see Russian flags from their flag poles, etc. Anything less would be whitewashing history.

I would say they can if they want to. But should seems to imply that you want that forced on them as a consequence of flying the Confederate flag.

A conservative would want choice.
A liberal seems to want force.

No surprise there.

Conservatives don't want choice. They want the government to fly the rebel flag. If it's so important to you, fly it in your own home and stick it on the bumper of your minivan. There's your choice. Don't make all citizens endure state endorsement of slavery or secession or "heritage".

All of you partisan people...have any of you heard of the word 'some'...it's definition is "an unspecified amount or number of"

Using the word some....Some conservatives....Some liberals...can make your statement accurate...not using it simply renders your opinion/statement useless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I propose that if states want to recognize their heritage by flying the Confederate flag, they should also fly the flags of other ruling states. For instance, Florida and California could hoist the Spanish flag, Texas can proudly fly the Mexican flag, Louisiana can raise the banner of France, Alaska could actually see Russian flags from their flag poles, etc. Anything less would be whitewashing history.

I would say they can if they want to. But should seems to imply that you want that forced on them as a consequence of flying the Confederate flag.

A conservative would want choice.
A liberal seems to want force.

No surprise there.

Conservatives don't want choice. They want the government to fly the rebel flag. If it's so important to you, fly it in your own home and stick it on the bumper of your minivan. There's your choice. Don't make all citizens endure state endorsement of slavery or secession or "heritage".

All of you partisan people...have any of you heard of the word 'some'...it's definition is "an unspecified amount or number of"

Using the word some....Some conservatives....Some liberals...can make your statement accurate...not using it simply renders your opinion/statement useless.

Conservatives already have their spokespeople out there front and center doing all the talking for you... If you want "some" then you need to get out there front and center expressing your divergent opinion.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:So, what are your opinions about the Confederate Battle Flag?

Honestly, if the Battle Flag had remained just a symbol of fun-loving good ol' boys down on the farm a la "The Dukes of Hazzard," I wouldn't find it objectionable (and I think the decision to remove that show from the air because of it is just silly). Also, TBH, it's actually a really cool design from a strictly graphic design POV. I can totally understand why it remains popular based on that alone.

But its history as a symbol of armed treason against the duly constituted government of the United States, and later as a symbol of resistance against civil rights, is deeply offensive, and flying that flag on public property/at publicly-sponsored events should be banned because of that history.

BTW, the whole "Heritage not hate" POV is disingenuous to the point of being outright delusional, and people who seriously make that argument really should have their mouths duct-taped shut before they lower the collective IQ of the room even further.