NationStates

Uelvan wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Of course you have a flag to unify you.

Not really. That's inclusive to all of America. That's not exactly the same thing as being proud of living in the south.

For an American patriot, that's all the flag you need. You can be proud of living in the South without wrapping yourself in a symbol of slavery, which is what the Confederate flag is. In fact, being proud of the South ought to include doing away with exactly that kind of symbol.

Farnhamia wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
Not really. That's inclusive to all of America. That's not exactly the same thing as being proud of living in the south.

For an American patriot, that's all the flag you need. You can be proud of living in the South without wrapping yourself in a symbol of slavery, which is what the Confederate flag is. In fact, being proud of the South ought to include doing away with exactly that kind of symbol.

I think local, state flags would also make the same point without implying racism.

Farnhamia wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
Not really. That's inclusive to all of America. That's not exactly the same thing as being proud of living in the south.

For an American patriot, that's all the flag you need. You can be proud of living in the South without wrapping yourself in a symbol of slavery, which is what the Confederate flag is. In fact, being proud of the South ought to include doing away with exactly that kind of symbol.

Well again, that's not the point. It's like a Scotsman waving a Scottish flag, because he's proud of his chunk of the nation rather than waving the Union Jack (which I don't know if other nationalities fetishize flag waving as much as Americans now that I think about it). Southerners do not have anything else to hang on their flagpoles and say "I'm proud of the South."

Uelvan wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:For an American patriot, that's all the flag you need. You can be proud of living in the South without wrapping yourself in a symbol of slavery, which is what the Confederate flag is. In fact, being proud of the South ought to include doing away with exactly that kind of symbol.

Well again, that's not the point. It's like a Scotsman waving a Scottish flag, because he's proud of his chunk of the nation rather than waving the Union Jack (which I don't know if other nationalities fetishize flag waving as much as Americans now that I think about it). Southerners do not have anything else to hang on their flagpoles and say "I'm proud of the South."

Except that Scotland has a different status in relation to the U.K. than the South does with the rest of the United States. Also, I admit to not being completely familiar with the history of the clashes between Scotland and the other nations in the region, but I don't think that they ever fought to maintain slavery, meaning that they can fly the flag without racist implications.

No, but it's a symbol of ignorance.

TheTechnically Insane wrote:Got a Rebel flag hanging above my bed and a Rebel flag belt buckle. It's not racist and I'm not racist. I'm proud to be an American, Southerner, and most importantly a Texan. The flag isn't about racism or slavery, it's about heritage and pride, if you're too ignorant to see that than you really need to retake US History.

I was taking college level history courses as a sophomore in high-school. While I dare-say there may be heritage in it (I current have a confederate (not battle) flag that was present at one of my ancestors who was a confederate veteran, funeral), the association with it is towards the CSA, and there is little argument that the core reason for the secession was connected to slavery. As such the flag presents that as a reputation. Mine is heritage as it represents a specific ancestor. However I have little pride in that cloth. I'm proud of my ancestor in the sense of knowing they made a touch choice at the time (I don't vilify soldiers on either side, those were tough decisions to make at the time) I am glad my ancestors here in the south lost. And while I have the flag because of heritage and history.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Kington Langley wrote:
But surely, in 1776, the United States was an illegitimate treasonous state that sought to uphold the institution of slavery?

More like an illegitimate treasonous state (until the Treaty of Paris) that was somewhat conflicted about the institution of slavery. Either way, at the time, there was no reason to think that His Majesty's government sought to end the slave trade, so it wasn't a cause for rebellion.

Indeed, in fact at the time some American colonial legislatures were more opposed to the slave-trade than His Majesty's government.

I noted earlier about how early drafts of the DoI even included talk about that issue, but were removed by the Continental Congress before it was finally signed. The Colonial Revolution leadership had an opportunity to make slavery a component issue (albeit in opposition to the slave trade) at the time, and chose (by intent, even) to make no statement on it at all.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
Well again, that's not the point. It's like a Scotsman waving a Scottish flag, because he's proud of his chunk of the nation rather than waving the Union Jack (which I don't know if other nationalities fetishize flag waving as much as Americans now that I think about it). Southerners do not have anything else to hang on their flagpoles and say "I'm proud of the South."

Except that Scotland has a different status in relation to the U.K. than the South does with the rest of the United States. Also, I admit to not being completely familiar with the history of the clashes between Scotland and the other nations in the region, but I don't think that they ever fought to maintain slavery, meaning that they can fly the flag without racist implications.

That's not really the point though. The south has no other flag to fly that says "I'm proud of being a Southerner." There are lots of people who are that way. Without any other flag to wave that displays their pride, they default to the Confederate Flag.

When such a flag does come about then I'll agree those who wave that old one are just being racists.

Pacific Independence wrote:

Avenio wrote:
The institution of slavery was not the cause nor the driving force behind the Revolutionary War, though. People on both sides owned slaves.

The weird thing was that the British operated somewhat like the the Union during the Civil War, promising freedom for soldiers.

That's called buying help...... "Fight for us and you can be free". A sound tactical move when bringing re-inforcing manpower from home to fight presents logistical issues (ie sailing ships and 2000 miles of ocean).

Tekania wrote:

Pacific Independence wrote:
The weird thing was that the British operated somewhat like the the Union during the Civil War, promising freedom for soldiers.

That's called buying help...... "Fight for us and you can be free". A sound tactical move when bringing re-inforcing manpower from home to fight presents logistical issues (ie sailing ships and 2000 miles of ocean).

Indeed. The British and French were very successful in this regard by recruiting the natives to fight each other. The Spanish did as well, getting aid from the natives to kill the other natives.

Uelvan wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Of course you have a flag to unify you.

Not really. That's inclusive to all of America. That's not exactly the same thing as being proud of living in the south.

It's like waving a Scottish flag in Scotland. While you're apart of the UK, you're expressing pride in your slice of the nation.

Then use your State flag. That would be more in line with the general idea of patriotism prevalent in the south at the time. That is patriotism is loyalty to ones state, and then my extension the larger federation to which it belongs.

Tekania wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
Not really. That's inclusive to all of America. That's not exactly the same thing as being proud of living in the south.

It's like waving a Scottish flag in Scotland. While you're apart of the UK, you're expressing pride in your slice of the nation.

Then use your State flag. That would be more in line with the general idea of patriotism prevalent in the south at the time. That is patriotism is loyalty to ones state, and then my extension the larger federation to which it belongs.

And states' rights! Because 'Murrica!!!

Tekania wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
Not really. That's inclusive to all of America. That's not exactly the same thing as being proud of living in the south.

It's like waving a Scottish flag in Scotland. While you're apart of the UK, you're expressing pride in your slice of the nation.

Then use your State flag. That would be more in line with the general idea of patriotism prevalent in the south at the time. That is patriotism is loyalty to ones state, and then my extension the larger federation to which it belongs.

Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, since they're not displaying pride to their state with such a symbol either. It's the south as a whole. I don't see why that's a hard concept...

Ixzara wrote:

Tekania wrote:
Then use your State flag. That would be more in line with the general idea of patriotism prevalent in the south at the time. That is patriotism is loyalty to ones state, and then my extension the larger federation to which it belongs.

And states' rights! Because 'Murrica!!!

Indeed, many are states rights people, so you would think it would make sense. If your so proud of where you're from and so ardent in an assertion of supremacy of your state.... wave your state flag around.... not some limp flag from a failed state which engaged in horrid levels of social and military mismanagement in its short dismal life.

Uelvan wrote:

Tekania wrote:
Then use your State flag. That would be more in line with the general idea of patriotism prevalent in the south at the time. That is patriotism is loyalty to ones state, and then my extension the larger federation to which it belongs.

Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, since they're not displaying pride to their state with such a symbol either. It's the south as a whole. I don't see why that's a hard concept...

There was never a "south as a whole" and as such I have no inclination to those who think there is or was.

Tekania wrote:

Ixzara wrote:And states' rights! Because 'Murrica!!!

Indeed, many are states rights people, so you would think it would make sense. If your so proud of where you're from and so ardent in an assertion of supremacy of your state.... wave your state flag around.... not some limp flag from a failed state which engaged in horrid levels of social and military mismanagement in its short dismal life.

I suppose one could wave the Bonnie Blue Flag if states' rights and secession were their desired motif.

Uelvan wrote:

Tekania wrote:
Then use your State flag. That would be more in line with the general idea of patriotism prevalent in the south at the time. That is patriotism is loyalty to ones state, and then my extension the larger federation to which it belongs.

Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, since they're not displaying pride to their state with such a symbol either. It's the south as a whole. I don't see why that's a hard concept...

The South, during the Civil War, were just a bunch of independent states circlejerking and arguing about who was taking the lead in the war and could never agree on anything. If anything, the Civil War went on to demonstrate why too much States' Rights was just as bad as not enough.

Tekania wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, since they're not displaying pride to their state with such a symbol either. It's the south as a whole. I don't see why that's a hard concept...

There was never a "south as a whole" and as such I have no inclination to those who think there is or was.

There is no south as a whole? Then what is southern culture? Non-existent? Because if you're telling me there's not a culture or at least subculture associated with being a Southerner, then you might need to take a trip down to Georgia sometime and meet the locals.

Ixzara wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, since they're not displaying pride to their state with such a symbol either. It's the south as a whole. I don't see why that's a hard concept...

The South, during the Civil War, were just a bunch of independent states circlejerking and arguing about who was taking the lead in the war and could never agree on anything. If anything, the Civil War went on to demonstrate why too much States' Rights was just as bad as not enough.

Not really relevant. The politics of 150 years ago are not the same of the south today.

Tekania wrote:

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:
More like an illegitimate treasonous state (until the Treaty of Paris) that was somewhat conflicted about the institution of slavery. Either way, at the time, there was no reason to think that His Majesty's government sought to end the slave trade, so it wasn't a cause for rebellion.

Indeed, in fact at the time some American colonial legislatures were more opposed to the slave-trade than His Majesty's government.

I noted earlier about how early drafts of the DoI even included talk about that issue, but were removed by the Continental Congress before it was finally signed. The Colonial Revolution leadership had an opportunity to make slavery a component issue (albeit in opposition to the slave trade) at the time, and chose (by intent, even) to make no statement on it at all.

And that was a fascinating historical tidbit that I'd previously been unaware of, so thank you for the lesson.

Uelvan wrote:

Ixzara wrote:The South, during the Civil War, were just a bunch of independent states circlejerking and arguing about who was taking the lead in the war and could never agree on anything. If anything, the Civil War went on to demonstrate why too much States' Rights was just as bad as not enough.

Not really relevant. The politics of 150 years ago are not the same of the south today.

Then why use a symbol that is so reminiscent of the politics of the south of 150 years ago?

Uelvan wrote:

Tekania wrote:
There was never a "south as a whole" and as such I have no inclination to those who think there is or was.

There is no south as a whole? Then what is southern culture? Non-existent? Because if you're telling me there's not a culture or at least subculture associated with being a Southerner, then you might need to take a trip down to Georgia sometime and meet the locals.

So by that definition, we should also have Flags for the Southwest, Northeast, and the Midwest.

Yumyumsuppertime wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
Not really relevant. The politics of 150 years ago are not the same of the south today.

Then why use a symbol that is so reminiscent of the politics of the south of 150 years ago?

Because as I stated numerous times, there is no other flag that represents the south as a whole. There are people who are proud of being under the blanket term "Southerner." And want to display it. They have no other flag they can wave.

Ixzara wrote:

Uelvan wrote:
There is no south as a whole? Then what is southern culture? Non-existent? Because if you're telling me there's not a culture or at least subculture associated with being a Southerner, then you might need to take a trip down to Georgia sometime and meet the locals.

So by that definition, we should also have Flags for the Southwest, Northeast, and the Midwest.

If you guys want to, sure.

Uelvan wrote:

Tekania wrote:
There was never a "south as a whole" and as such I have no inclination to those who think there is or was.

There is no south as a whole? Then what is southern culture? Non-existent? Because if you're telling me there's not a culture or at least subculture associated with being a Southerner, then you might need to take a trip down to Georgia sometime and meet the locals.

That you can find a culture in Georgia, is not indicative of "South as a whole". There is no "south as a whole" there never fucking was. I live and was in fact born in a state south of the Mason-Dixon line, that was in the CSA and in fact had its Capitol for a period, still live there as a matter of fact.... the fact that you have to tell me to travel to Georgia to make your point just indicates that the only point you've made was to prove mine.