Do you consider the Confederate flag to be racist

[Ixzara]

Additionally, you can watch this video from the Daily Show with Judge Napolitano making the same arguments that you are while he gets schooled by 3 University Professors.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/uhvdt ... napolitano

Whoops, forgot the part with the professors.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/0lmlu ... st-lincoln

[The Padelas Empire]

Where are the primary documents from the secession papers? This is a second hand spruce from a guy who is obviously biased. While he does point out things, does he show the whole document? There were the ideas of tariffs involved, political imbalance, etc. and you know that most people in the confederate army didn't fight over slaves right?

South Carolina
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp

Mississippi
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_missec.asp

Texas
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_texsec.asp

Georgia
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_geosec.asp

Alexander H. Stephens' Cornerstone Speech
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornerstone_Speech

First off, Thank you for providing the sources they are well balanced and credible.
However all of them state the lack of judicial doing in northern states as a reason for secession through the lack of upholding the fugitive slave act. Georgia and Stephen's speech both list economic rights in the state as a reason and then all of them list political inequality as a reason as well.

[Ixzara]

South Carolina
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp

Mississippi
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_missec.asp

Texas
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_texsec.asp

Georgia
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_geosec.asp

Alexander H. Stephens' Cornerstone Speech
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornerstone_Speech

First off, Thank you for providing the sources they are well balanced and credible.
However all of them state the lack of judicial doing in northern states as a reason for secession through the lack of upholding the fugitive slave act. Georgia and Stephen's speech both list economic rights in the state as a reason and then all of them list political inequality as a reason as well.

Those are not the Primary Cause. All the sources list Slavery as the primary cause.

[Scholmeria]

Were all Slave owner white? No.
Were all slaves black? No.

So, why is the slavery issue connected with the race issue?
There is a quote from president Lincoln which prooves that a person could in fact be racist and a abolitionist at the same time.

[The Padelas Empire]

First off, Thank you for providing the sources they are well balanced and credible.
However all of them state the lack of judicial doing in northern states as a reason for secession through the lack of upholding the fugitive slave act. Georgia and Stephen's speech both list economic rights in the state as a reason and then all of them list political inequality as a reason as well.

Those are not the Primary Cause. All the sources list Slavery as the primary cause.

I did not get slavery as the primary cause. The two things mentioned in all four was the political inequality occurring, and then in the states secession statements they all listed the births refusal to uphold the fugitive slave act.

[Ixzara]

Those are not the Primary Cause. All the sources list Slavery as the primary cause.

I did not get slavery as the primary cause. The two things mentioned in all four was the political inequality occurring, and then in the states secession statements they all listed the births refusal to uphold the fugitive slave act.

Ergo, slavery was the primary reason for the secession. Texas mentioned it 21 times.

[Lemanrussland]

Were all Slave owner white? No.
Were all slaves black? No.

So, why is the slavery issue connected with the race issue?
There is a quote from president Lincoln which prooves that a person could in fact be racist and a abolitionist at the same time.

Because they were linked. The vast majority of slaves in the US during that time were African. Racism was used as a justification of slavery.

I'm not saying the civil war was primarily or even secondarily about racism, it was not. You cannot seriously deny the role of race in slavery, as practiced in the United States, can you?

[Ixzara]

Were all Slave owner white? No.
Were all slaves black? No.

So, why is the slavery issue connected with the race issue?
There is a quote from president Lincoln which prooves that a person could in fact be racist and a abolitionist at the same time.

I've read that quote. Indeed, that's not something that I believe is a point of contention among the differing views of the Civil War period.

[Scholmeria]

Were all Slave owner white? No.
Were all slaves black? No.

So, why is the slavery issue connected with the race issue?
There is a quote from president Lincoln which prooves that a person could in fact be racist and a abolitionist at the same time.

Because they were linked. The vast majority of slaves in the US during that time were African. Racism was used as a justification of slavery.

I'm not saying the civil war was primarily or even secondarily about racism, it was not. You cannot seriously deny the role of race in slavery, as practiced in the United States, can you?

race had a minor role in slavery. You know the European got mostly slaves from African slave traders, who happened to be also black. So, when slaves were imported in the US they did not care what they race was, only were they were slaves or not.

Do explain how come that the first registered slave owner in the US was a black person? How can slavery be a race issue? Did you saw Lincolns quote?

[Ixzara]

Because they were linked. The vast majority of slaves in the US during that time were African. Racism was used as a justification of slavery.

I'm not saying the civil war was primarily or even secondarily about racism, it was not. You cannot seriously deny the role of race in slavery, as practiced in the United States, can you?

race had a minor role in slavery. You know the European got mostly slaves from African slave traders, who happened to be also black. So, when slaves were imported in the US they did not care what they race was, only were they were slaves or not.

Do explain how come that the first registered slave owner in the US was a black person? How can slavery be a race issue? Did you saw Lincolns quote?

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

[Lemanrussland]

Because they were linked. The vast majority of slaves in the US during that time were African. Racism was used as a justification of slavery.

I'm not saying the civil war was primarily or even secondarily about racism, it was not. You cannot seriously deny the role of race in slavery, as practiced in the United States, can you?

race had a minor role in slavery. You know the European got mostly slaves from African slave traders, who happened to be also black. So, when slaves were imported in the US they did not care what they race was, only were they were slaves or not.

Do explain how come that the first registered slave owner in the US was a black person? How can slavery be a race issue? Did you saw Lincolns quote?

Two main questions.

1) Are you even an American? If not, do you have an elementary understanding of American culture or society?
2) Have you studied American history (specially the colonial, early national, antebellum, and reconstruction periods) in depth?

Slavery, as practiced in the US, basically developed into a race-based caste system, sort of like the Spanish colonial society in Mexico. Yes, there were freedmen. Yes, Africans did own slaves. However, those were exceptions rather than rules, especially in the South, who's whole economy and society was based around race and slavery. Those exceptions don't nullify the overall societal structure.

The only people who argue otherwise are either ignorant (which is forgivable), or closeted racists who like to cherry pick history to suit their agenda.

[Scholmeria]

race had a minor role in slavery. You know the European got mostly slaves from African slave traders, who happened to be also black. So, when slaves were imported in the US they did not care what they race was, only were they were slaves or not.

Do explain how come that the first registered slave owner in the US was a black person? How can slavery be a race issue? Did you saw Lincolns quote?

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

Thank you, that is the quote that I had on mind. I think also there is a great misconcenption that the abolition wanted to abolish slavery because they though they were humans. Maybe many of them wanted to have cheap labour fron second hand citizens.

An interesting philosophical question would be was every slave owner a racist? hmmm...

[Ixzara]

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

Thank you, that is the quote that I had on mind. I think also there is a great misconcenption that the abolition wanted to abolish slavery because they though they were humans. Maybe many of them wanted to have cheap labour fron second hand citizens.

An interesting philosophical question would be was every slave owner a racist? hmmm...

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that the general consensus among the abolitionists were to free the slaves, but not as equals to white men. Rather, they wanted to have tiered citizenship status, with whites being at the top.

As for the philosophical question, that has many factors that would need to be considered. For one, what was education like during those times? Not the school type, but rather the cultural perception of what was moral and what was not.

[The Padelas Empire]

Additionally, you can watch this video from the Daily Show with Judge Napolitano making the same arguments that you are while he gets schooled by 3 University Professors.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/uhvdt ... napolitano

Whoops, forgot the part with the professors.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/0lmlu ... st-lincoln

We're these directed towards my argument?

[Ixzara]

Additionally, you can watch this video from the Daily Show with Judge Napolitano making the same arguments that you are while he gets schooled by 3 University Professors.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/uhvdt ... napolitano

Whoops, forgot the part with the professors.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/0lmlu ... st-lincoln

We're these directed towards my argument?

Yes, sir.

[Scholmeria]

Two main questions.

1) Are you even an American? If not, do you have an elementary understanding of American culture or society?
2) Have you studied American history (specially the colonial, early national, antebellum, and reconstruction periods) in depth?

Those exceptions don't nullify the overall societal structure.

1. Yes, I have some basic understanding of American culture. And also, you are also probably not a American
2. Yes, I have studied American history.

Slavery, as practiced in the US, basically developed into a race-based caste system, sort of like the Spanish colonial society in Mexico.

There was class divide also between "white" southern system, and in practically every living civilisation. The South was not an exception, it did not have to do with the race as it did with their social status (poor vs. rich). But than again, the member of the elite were also blacks and some non-whites. There were free black citizens as part of the middle class and had more rights than most poor whites. There was also non-black slaves. Why is that so hard for you to ackonwledge?

Yes, there were freedmen. Yes, Africans did own slaves. However, those were exceptions rather than rules, especially in the South, who's whole economy and society was based around race and slavery.

No, let us not generalise and make some false axioms about that. According to that logic the modern-day US is a white country because the majority of people are white and there is hardly any powerfull black people in this country? According to you that is true.

The only people who argue otherwise are either ignorant (which is forgivable), or closeted racists who like to cherry pick history to suit their agenda.

[Scholmeria]

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that the general consensus among the abolitionists were to free the slaves, but not as equals to white men. Rather, they wanted to have tiered citizenship status, with whites being at the top.

As for the philosophical question, that has many factors that would need to be considered. For one, what was education like during those times? Not the school type, but rather the cultural perception of what was moral and what was not.

True. Slavery was back than not considered something immoral back than. There was even Aristotles work where he defens slavery (race in his theory has nothing to do). Since he was part of every school curriculum I would not wonder if there was such perception of slavery.

[The Padelas Empire]

We're these directed towards my argument?

Yes, sir.

Interesting videos, they didn't address my argument though.

[Ixzara]

Yes, sir.

Interesting videos, they didn't address my argument though.

I'm not saying Slavery was the only cause. Namely, the primary one.

[Lemanrussland]

1. Yes, I have some basic understanding of American culture. And also, you are also probably not a American
2. Yes, I have studied American history.

1. I am an American. Also, you didn't answer my question, American or not? You may think you understand American culture, but you obviously do not.
2. Then why do you have such shitty, ignorant opinions about American history? You're like a person who claims race did not play a great role in the Holocaust, yet claims to be an expert on Nazi Germany. It does not make any sense.

There was class divide also between "white" southern system, and in practically every living civilisation. The South was not an exception, it did not have to do with the race as it did with their social status (poor vs. rich). But than again, the member of the elite were also blacks and some non-whites. There were free black citizens as part of the middle class and had more rights than most poor whites. There was also non-black slaves. Why is that so hard for you to ackonwledge?

It did have everything to do with race. Originally it didn't. White indentured servants worked Chesapeake tobacco farms during the colonial period. This began to change during the later colonial years, with more and more African slaves replacing indentured servants. The replacement of indentured servants with African slaves partially came about because of a string of uprisings by disgruntled indentured servants. Have you ever heard of Bacon's Rebellion? By solidifying the relationship between race and slavery, southern elites were able to divide poor whites and black slaves, and thus diffuse social tension.

No, let us not generalise and make some false axioms about that. According to that logic the modern-day US is a white country because the majority of people are white and there is hardly any powerfull black people in this country? According to you that is true.

No, according to your strawman, not according to me.

(Image)

Please, take your 4chan image macros and shove them up your ass.

[Farnhamia]

Please, take your 4chan image macros and shove them up your ass.

Knock it off.

[Juggalo world]

No, is a flag representing southern pride and the old confederacy. It's also a sign of traitors to the U.S so anyone flying that flag should be put on trial for being a traitor.

[Lemanrussland]

Please, take your 4chan image macros and shove them up your ass.

Knock it off.

I apologize. It's just a bit aggravating to deal with a post like that, and entertaining racist, ignorant arguments (or at least racist apologetic).

I realize he is entitled to his opinion, and I shouldn't insult him, but god damn is it offensive, especially for someone who has African-American family members.

Again, not calling for any censorship or anything, just venting my frustrations a bit.

[The Padelas Empire]

Interesting videos, they didn't address my argument though.

I'm not saying Slavery was the only cause. Namely, the primary one.

I still didn't get that from it. But I don't think we will end up with the same conclusion.

[Lemanrussland]

Two main questions.

1) Are you even an American? If not, do you have an elementary understanding of American culture or society?
2) Have you studied American history (specially the colonial, early national, antebellum, and reconstruction periods) in depth?

Those exceptions don't nullify the overall societal structure.

1. Yes, I have some basic understanding of American culture. And also, you are also probably not a American
2. Yes, I have studied American history.

Slavery, as practiced in the US, basically developed into a race-based caste system, sort of like the Spanish colonial society in Mexico.

There was class divide also between "white" southern system, and in practically every living civilisation. The South was not an exception, it did not have to do with the race as it did with their social status (poor vs. rich). But than again, the member of the elite were also blacks and some non-whites. There were free black citizens as part of the middle class and had more rights than most poor whites. There was also non-black slaves. Why is that so hard for you to ackonwledge?

Yes, there were freedmen. Yes, Africans did own slaves. However, those were exceptions rather than rules, especially in the South, who's whole economy and society was based around race and slavery.

No, let us not generalise and make some false axioms about that. According to that logic the modern-day US is a white country because the majority of people are white and there is hardly any powerfull black people in this country? According to you that is true.

The only people who argue otherwise are either ignorant (which is forgivable), or closeted racists who like to cherry pick history to suit their agenda.

Again, I apologize for using strong language, directly to you this time.

The idea you really need to understand, or at least entertain is that slavery was predicated and justified by racism and white supremacy. "Negroes" were viewed as an uncivilized, sub-human race -- owning them was viewed like owning livestock.

After the Civil War, Southern states established "Black Codes" (basically, sets of laws which specifically targeted freed Blacks, by race) in order to maintain the class system which had developed under slavery by limiting the political and economic participation of blacks in post-slavery society. Poor southern whites were not targeted in this way, and poor southern whites were not viewed as sub-humans or inherently inferior. Slavery was based on race, not on economic class. Slaves were imported from Africa in large numbers, and slavery was passed down matrilineally in most southern states, which basically locked most blacks into the slave system. You didn't end up being a slave because you were poor. Slavery of this type never really existed on a large scale for whites. You had indentured servitude, but that was voluntary (even though it was exploitative) and fell out of style with the availability of African slaves.

Your arguments would make sense if you were describing the America of the 1600s (before the decline of indentured servitude), but it makes little sense if you're trying to describe the America of the late 1700s and 1800s.