The Confederate battle flag

[MERIZoC]

In fact, every flag that exists should be banned.

I concur. Our new national symbols will be hieroglyph-inscribed obelisks.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I see. My response to your points would be as follows:

So fucking what? We're not debating whether or not slavery exists elsewhere in the world, and no one was claiming it as an evil confined to American shores. What's your point?

You want to see the confederate war flag banned?
Do you even understand the confederacy at all?
But if you want the confederate flag banned, take half of asia with it.
In fact, every flag that exists should be banned.

Kindly point out exactly where I stated that it should be banned...or where anyone did so. That's the worst strawman so far.

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

In fact, every flag that exists should be banned.

I concur. Our new national symbols will be hieroglyph-inscribed obelisks.

Actually I'd go for that in a heartbeat.

[Nervium]

I concur. Our new national symbols will be hieroglyph-inscribed obelisks.

Actually I'd go for that in a heartbeat.

Kind of though to raise or lower an obelisk for national holidays/mourning, although most sociologists and psychologists would have a field day with all these new phallus-symbols popping up everywhere.

[MERIZoC]

Actually I'd go for that in a heartbeat.

Kind of though to raise or lower an obelisk for national holidays/mourning.

That's the beauty of it. You don't raise or lower it. You just leave it there.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Actually I'd go for that in a heartbeat.

Kind of though to raise or lower an obelisk for national holidays/mourning, although most sociologists and psychologists would have a field day with all these new phallus-symbols popping up everywhere.

You'd think they'd be used to it by now.

[Llamalandia]

Exactly what taxes were these? Please show how they were harming the Southern economy, and exactly how they were forced upon the South without representation.

I know what he's talking about. He's mainly talking about the Tariff of 1828, which by no means was forced upon the South without representation. Hell, when the South dissented in a way that normal people do via political means, a compromise tariff was reached.
The only forcing was done when South Carolina went full on Special Snowflake, which ended in yet another compromise in the South's favor.

True but as I've clearly show. The CSA was ahead of the curve on tax fairness and the elimination of tarriffs as the center of fiscal and trade policy as well as ahead of the curve on presidential term limits. Sure they got the slavery question very very very wrong, but one issue doesn't defined a country (or even a failed attempt at one)

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

I know what he's talking about. He's mainly talking about the Tariff of 1828, which by no means was forced upon the South without representation. Hell, when the South dissented in a way that normal people do via political means, a compromise tariff was reached.
The only forcing was done when South Carolina went full on Special Snowflake, which ended in yet another compromise in the South's favor.

True but as I've clearly show. The CSA was ahead of the curve on tax fairness and the elimination of tarriffs as the center of fiscal and trade policy as well as ahead of the curve on presidential term limits. Sure they got the slavery question very very very wrong, but one issue doesn't defined a country (or even a failed attempt at one)

It wouldn't define the country if the country hadn't chosen to define itself by that one issue.

[Gauthier]

It doesn't represent hate so much as it represents pride in armed secession. That many of the secessionists are also racists is just coincidental.

[Dyakovo]

I see. My response to your points would be as follows:

So fucking what? We're not debating whether or not slavery exists elsewhere in the world, and no one was claiming it as an evil confined to American shores. What's your point?

You want to see the confederate war flag banned?
Do you even understand the confederacy at all?
But if you want the confederate flag banned, take half of asia with it.
In fact, every flag that exists should be banned.

No.
Yes.
N/A
What?

[Norstal]

I see. My response to your points would be as follows:

So fucking what? We're not debating whether or not slavery exists elsewhere in the world, and no one was claiming it as an evil confined to American shores. What's your point?

You want to see the confederate war flag banned?
Do you even understand the confederacy at all?
But if you want the confederate flag banned, take half of asia with it.
In fact, every flag that exists should be banned.

I am offended != I want to ban this.

[Edlichbury]

I know what he's talking about. He's mainly talking about the Tariff of 1828, which by no means was forced upon the South without representation. Hell, when the South dissented in a way that normal people do via political means, a compromise tariff was reached.
The only forcing was done when South Carolina went full on Special Snowflake, which ended in yet another compromise in the South's favor.

True but as I've clearly show. The CSA was ahead of the curve on tax fairness and the elimination of tarriffs as the center of fiscal and trade policy as well as ahead of the curve on presidential term limits. Sure they got the slavery question very very very wrong, but one issue doesn't defined a country (or even a failed attempt at one)

Don't tell that to Confederacy's Vice President Alexander Stephens:
"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition."

[Llamalandia]

True but as I've clearly show. The CSA was ahead of the curve on tax fairness and the elimination of tarriffs as the center of fiscal and trade policy as well as ahead of the curve on presidential term limits. Sure they got the slavery question very very very wrong, but one issue doesn't defined a country (or even a failed attempt at one)

It wouldn't define the country if the country hadn't chosen to define itself by that one issue.

So if slavery is the one defining feature of the CSA then what would you say is the defining feature of the USA? Free speech? Gun rights? Bombing the Mideast? Policing the world? It's to easy to be overly reductive in my opinion.

[United States of The One Percent]

of Civil War generals, try these on for size.

One Civil War general believed minorities were every bit as human and as valuable as whites. He welcomed them into his family circle, prayed with them and taught them to read and write in defiance of the laws of his time.

Another Civil War general believed minorities were barely human savages who needed either to be kept under white tutelage or exterminated. He dedicated his career, during and especially after the Civil War, to putting his racist theories into practice.

If you know the story of these two men, you should be able to see why what a particular Civil War general, colonel, captain, lieutenant, sergeant, corporal, private or cadet (or the equivalent naval rating) thought or what he did has precisely zero bearing on the question posed in the OP. If you don't know, erm, try reading a book...

Yes yes Robert E. Lee was a saint and a shining beacon of freedom and US Grant was drunken racist /sarcasm, how does that have anything to do with the question at hand?

BZZT. Wrong and wrong. Try again. Hint: you got the sides right anyway.

[Condunum]

Actually I'd go for that in a heartbeat.

Kind of though to raise or lower an obelisk for national holidays/mourning, although most sociologists and psychologists would have a field day with all these new phallus-symbols popping up everywhere.

Phallus symbolism is largely psychoanalysis and not very popular in the other schools.

[Mormak]

True but as I've clearly show. The CSA was ahead of the curve on tax fairness and the elimination of tarriffs as the center of fiscal and trade policy as well as ahead of the curve on presidential term limits. Sure they got the slavery question very very very wrong, but one issue doesn't defined a country (or even a failed attempt at one)

Don't tell that to Confederacy's Vice President Alexander Stephens:
"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition."

Hard to speak ill of their bread and butter though, obviously Slavery is important to the CSA but there were several notable people within it who also did if not speak against Slavery as alternatives to it, Such as Secretaries of State Robert Hunter. Former House of representatives member, turned Confederate senator and later Sec of state. Who also pushed for modernization of the South, in favor of slave labor. He also didn't own any slaves, making quite notable for not being pro slavery as much as pro southern Independence.

Odd man out, but notable for his rank and position despite not being of the mind that Slavery while profitable was going not to be a non ending labor source, Hence his induction of the tariff of 1857. Course men forget about Mr.Hunter and recall folks like Mr. Stephans.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Don't tell that to Confederacy's Vice President Alexander Stephens:
"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition."

Hard to speak ill of their bread and butter though, obviously Slavery is important to the CSA but there were several notable people within it who also did if not speak against Slavery as alternatives to it, Such as Secretaries of State Robert Hunter. Former House of representatives member, turned Confederate senator and later Sec of state. Who also pushed for modernization of the South, in favor of slave labor. He also didn't own any slaves, making quite notable for not being pro slavery as much as pro southern Independence.

Odd man out, but notable for his rank and position despite not being of the mind that Slavery while profitable was going not to be a non ending labor source, Hence his induction of the tariff of 1857. Course men forget about Mr.Hunter and recall folks like Mr. Stephans.

People tend to remember the rule over the exception to it.

[Mormak]

Hard to speak ill of their bread and butter though, obviously Slavery is important to the CSA but there were several notable people within it who also did if not speak against Slavery as alternatives to it, Such as Secretaries of State Robert Hunter. Former House of representatives member, turned Confederate senator and later Sec of state. Who also pushed for modernization of the South, in favor of slave labor. He also didn't own any slaves, making quite notable for not being pro slavery as much as pro southern Independence.

Odd man out, but notable for his rank and position despite not being of the mind that Slavery while profitable was going not to be a non ending labor source, Hence his induction of the tariff of 1857. Course men forget about Mr.Hunter and recall folks like Mr. Stephans.

People tend to remember the rule over the exception to it.

What they assume to be the rule of a given subject anyway.

It's like i said on Caligula, of the six historical accounting that portray and or mention, it is in negative spectrum and thus the history of the man is negative.

When you have a concept of victories history in a given subject; the actual reality of it is often lost to fiction. My point on that.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

People tend to remember the rule over the exception to it.

What they assume to be the rule of a given subject anyway.

It's like i said on Caligula, of the six historical accounting that portray and or mention, it is in negative spectrum and thus the history of the man is negative.

When you have a concept of victories history in a given subject; the actual reality of it is often lost to fiction. My point on that.

Sorry, but when you break away from a nation and state outright that it's because you want to ensure your ability to maintain slavery, then everyone who supports this break will be tainted with the same brush.

[Mormak]

What they assume to be the rule of a given subject anyway.

It's like i said on Caligula, of the six historical accounting that portray and or mention, it is in negative spectrum and thus the history of the man is negative.

When you have a concept of victories history in a given subject; the actual reality of it is often lost to fiction. My point on that.

Sorry, but when you break away from a nation and state outright that it's because you want to ensure your ability to maintain slavery, then everyone who supports this break will be tainted with the same brush.

Glad to hear your opinion on it.

Doesn't change my own though, Was and still am against Federalism.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Sorry, but when you break away from a nation and state outright that it's because you want to ensure your ability to maintain slavery, then everyone who supports this break will be tainted with the same brush.

Glad to hear your opinion on it.

Doesn't change my own though, Was and still am against Federalism.

That's nice. Doesn't mean you have to defend slavers and rapists, though.

[Shie]

Sorry, but when you break away from a nation and state outright that it's because you want to ensure your ability to maintain slavery, then everyone who supports this break will be tainted with the same brush.

Glad to hear your opinion on it.

Doesn't change my own though, Was and still am against Federalism.

That's a blatantly racist train of thought, don't you dare argue for confederacy.

[Scholmeria]

Gosh, that's a funny thing to believe. A funny and very illogical thing at that. The flag of the Confederacy was not sewn together to solely say, "fuck niggers! yeehaw," but it was to defend their rights as men in the south to live their lives the way their fathers and their grandfathers lived. They fought for States' Rights most of all, and slavery was a secondary goal that wished to maintain as it was what made their economy function.

The only right the Confederacy was fighting for was the right to own other people as property. "States rights" didn't come into it until late in the war when a desperate Jefferson Davis tried to convince the French and British that slavery wasn't an issue and that the Confederacy would meet any conditions if they could only get international recognition.

In that case the Union would not abolished slavery 2 years after the war has started. So yes, it was fought about states rights and not slavery.

[Mormak]

Glad to hear your opinion on it.

Doesn't change my own though, Was and still am against Federalism.

That's a blatantly racist train of thought, don't you dare argue for confederacy.

I do believe I will dare.

[The Re-Frisivisiaing]

Yes. The Confederate Battle Flag is representative of a vile organization and a violent seperatist movement that only formed to protect its wealthy white constituents' right to own other people so long as they had dark skin. That's bad.