Article: Here

[gigantes]

fffffuuuuuuuuuccccckkkk the "confederacy"
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/09/05/3699034/confederate-flag-rally-capitol-hill/


http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/05140825/confrontation-816x567.jpg
Ron Feathers going off

in this case i LIKED that classic media move of picking the biggest dipshit in the crowd to speak for the movement. :applause:

[UK2K]

Crazy, on our way to see Ft Sumter today, we passed the church that the kid shot up.

On the trip to the fort, I saw not one, not two, but 10 black people! 10! I was shocked. Somebody must have forced them to buy tickets, right?

Then when we pulled up to the fort and saw the Confederate flag, I thought for sure they would demand it be taken down. Imagine my surprise when they walked right past it.

Every group has nut jobs. The BLM is full of racist pieces of shit. A Democrat congressman in the 2000's (i believe 2008) was a former Klan member. It doesn't mean all BLM supporters are racist, or that all Democrat congressmen are Klan members.

Slanted reporting is just that, slanted. They found one racist holding a flag and tried to make everyone seem the same way.

The writer is being as divisive and immature as the racist he's talking about.

[gigantes]

quite possibly... but the fact remains that if you think the confederate battle flag represents a cultural heritage more than it does slavery, then you are by the letter of the definition, stuck in ignorance.

OTOH if you simply want what you want and don't really give a shit about facts that matter, you're somewhere further south of "harmlessly ignorant."


whatever your reasoning is... if you're holding up a confederate flag then i think you're already making a pretty sorry statement about yourself.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Confederate flag = American Swastika

[UK2K]

quite possibly... but the fact remains that if you think the confederate battle flag represents a cultural heritage more than it does slavery, then you are by the letter of the definition, stuck in ignorance.

OTOH if you simply want what you want and don't really give a shit about facts that matter, you're somewhere further south of "harmlessly ignorant."


whatever your reasoning is... if you're holding up a confederate flag then i think you're already making a pretty sorry statement about yourself.
There are a lot of ignorant blacks then, in your view.

You should tell them they are ignorant and what they think the flag means (cultural heritage) isn't correct, because you say it means slavery.

[sweggeh]

There are a lot of ignorant blacks then, in your view.

You should tell them they are ignorant and what they think the flag means (cultural heritage) isn't correct, because you say it means slavery.

They are ignorant.

Or more likely they are worried and just want to go along their day as normal citizens without bringing up the issue and getting jumped by a bunch of racists.

[NumberSix]

quite possibly... but the fact remains that if you think the confederate battle flag represents a cultural heritage more than it does slavery, then you are by the letter of the definition, stuck in ignorance.

OTOH if you simply want what you want and don't really give a shit about facts that matter, you're somewhere further south of "harmlessly ignorant."


whatever your reasoning is... if you're holding up a confederate flag then i think you're already making a pretty sorry statement about yourself.
Look, whether you like it or not, these people aren't going to disassociate themselves from their cultural identity. The vast majority of people who insist on that flag "representing" slavery are poeple who simply want to project that onto people that want to demonize for their own reasons.

If I saw some Turkish American flying a Turkish flag, I wouldn't be like "I deem that your flag represents the genocides committed by the Ottoman Empire, therefore, you flying that flag means you advocate genocide". This is how a retard thinks.

The vast majority of people flying the rebel flag aren't doing it to say "fcuk blacks. Slavery rules". I know that and you know that too. A flag like any other symbol can be interpreted in many ways. I don't know why some obsessed people are on a mission to project only the worst possible interpretation onto people that they know nothing about.

[gigantes]

we're ALL ignorant upon all kinds of stuff. that's normal.

in life we're also faced with the choice of which battles to pick. that's the difference in this case. do you get that part?

you don't have black people descending on flag-waving southerners and shooting them up AFAIK. on the other hand, you sometimes have the reverse. this is what was so upsetting for so many people in the s.carolina shooting.

i mean, at least #blacklivesmatter has a point. we have a large body of evidence that suggests that many cops really do give black americans a rough deal. granted, i don't condone the blowback violence against cops, but at least you can see what inflames it. well, on both sides, too.

and yeah... we have a body of scholars who find that the #1 cause for succession was in fact "slavery" across the confederate articles, for reasons which were far more important than any cultural heritage thing... i.e., economics. this is not me making BS up, this is the best analysis we have.

this is the part that got whitewashed by history, and this is why you can't have your rallies AND have a bunch of people in a house of worship get shot up by someone attaching that whitewashed flag to the process.

is this surprising...?

[gigantes]

you know what would have really impressed me and made this whole situation feel very different?

it would be if the "cultural heritage" folks had responded with some fundraising, events and petitions as a show of support and sympathy for the victims of the church shooting. that would have been perfect.

then they could STILL have these current rallies expressing disgruntlement with their flag being taken down, and it would have gotten a hell of a lot more sympathy from folks.

instead it's the good ol' conservative 'doubling-down on a lost cause' approach. so tough.

[NumberSix]

we're ALL ignorant upon all kinds of stuff. that's normal.

in life we're also faced with the choice of which battles to pick. that's the difference in this case. do you get that part?

you don't have black people descending on flag-waving southerners and shooting them up AFAIK. on the other hand, you sometimes have the reverse. this is what was so upsetting for so many people in the s.carolina shooting.
Sometimes? You mean, one time?

Oh yes, I forgot. We're supposed to pretend there is an epidemic of white on black violence. Even though over 80% of interracial violence in America is committed by blacks against non-blacks. Facts are racist though, so let's continue to pretend that blacks are the victims of interracial violence, not the perpetrators.


i mean, at least #blacklivesmatter has a point. we have a large body of evidence that suggests that many cops really do give black americans a rough deal. granted, i don't condone the blowback violence against cops, but at least you can see what inflames it. well, on both sides, too.
Do we? All I have seen is cherry picked cases of anecdotal evidence. I'm not saying it isn't true. Maybe it is. I hope not.

and yeah... we have a body of scholars who find that the #1 cause for succession was in fact "slavery" across the confederate articles, for reasons which were far more important than any cultural heritage thing... i.e., economics. this is not me making BS up, this is the best analysis we have.
Yeah, this is not news. We also know the main purpose of the British Empire was to conquer land, control trade routes and exploit other people for Britain's financial gain. Knowing this to be true, we manage to not harbour an irrational grudge against the Union Jack.

[Mike Armstrong]

Confederate flag = American Swastika

Yarp.

[Coach Eddie]

I would be totally fine with a repeal of the first amendment. Germany banned the Nazi flag, time for America to ban this racist flag hidden behind the guise of "heritage."

[Dresta]

quite possibly... but the fact remains that if you think the confederate battle flag represents a cultural heritage more than it does slavery, then you are by the letter of the definition, stuck in ignorance.

OTOH if you simply want what you want and don't really give a shit about facts that matter, you're somewhere further south of "harmlessly ignorant."


whatever your reasoning is... if you're holding up a confederate flag then i think you're already making a pretty sorry statement about yourself.
I don't get this view where people think they can monopolise historical meaning and deny everyone else a right to their own interpretation. The Confederate battle flag easily has as much of a claim to be a symbol of rebellion and resistance to the yoke of Federal (and Northern industrial/banking) domination, the abolition of the rights of states, and the lost heritage of the original confederacy of states, as outlined in the 1788 Constitution, and which was effectively ended by the war, which cemented Federal and Northern domination over the Union.

Much of the backwardness of the South, its Ku-Kluxery and other stupidities, were the inevitable result of the chaos created by an incredibly destructive war, and a folly-filled period of Reconstruction. Northerners rarely properly acknowledge the destruction and misery they rained upon the South, and how little it really had to do with any kind of morality. And you forget: allegiance in these times, was first to state, and then to country - most who fought and died on both sides were conscripts, fighting against their will, or defending their own states from foreign invasion.

It is not for you to determine something's sole meaning and purpose, as this only represents you and those like you, not the many who think differently, and have plenty of justification for doing so. It is foolish to say their views are ignorant and not conforming to the facts, when the flag can easily be shown to represent either slavery, or the resistance to the centralisation of power, depending on which part of history one decides to airbrush away. The reality is that it can represent both, and this is fully conforming to whatever 'facts' you think state otherwise. Just like for some, the United States flag is the biggest symbol of terrorism and violence in the world, with some justification too. Just like others have to pretend the American Civil War was a noble war, fought to end slavery, and not simply to force a large segment of the population in to subordination and compliance with the wants of its northern counterparts (and, of course, to secure the rest of the continent). This is how people tell themselves that brutalities such as those led by Sherman are justified: the enemy was evil and deserved to suffer; same arguments are used to justify the RAF incineration of German civilians in ww2; neither excuse what are and remain heinous crimes.

Say, why is the US flag not a symbol of slavery also? I mean, the nation was founded upon a compromise over slavery, and most of its founders owned slaves themselves. I guess it's because that one single thing is not permitted to define something that could represent so many different things, to so many different people...




and yeah... we have a body of scholars who find that the #1 cause for succession was in fact "slavery" across the confederate articles, for reasons which were far more important than any cultural heritage thing... i.e., economics. this is not me making BS up, this is the best analysis we have.

this is the part that got whitewashed by history, and this is why you can't have your rallies AND have a bunch of people in a house of worship get shot up by someone attaching that whitewashed flag to the process.

is this surprising...?
Different economic systems are an aspect of cultural heritage. That is why the slavery divide had nothing to do with morality, and everything to do with the industrialised North (where slavery was unprofitable), and agrarian South (where it still was profitable), fighting (in Congress or in Kansas) to carve out greater power and influence for their section - this intense sectionalism could only lead to war (and it was flamed by both abolitionists and southern hardliners). Most Americans were in favour of ending slavery, just on economic, rather than moral grounds. The abolitionists (the moralists of the time), for the most part, were religious fanatics like John Brown, with a penchant for bloodshed and war (Seward: 'There is a higher authority than the Constitution, and God disapproves of slavery' - these were the arguments used, because to all intents and purposes, slavery was legal, and constitutionally protected).

The whole Free Soil movement had nothing to do with blacks, and everything to do with northern labourers not wanting to compete with slave labour in newly acquired territories. It was about economics, but the economic divide was derived from cultural differences. Abolitionists were a disliked minority with a single and impracticable obsession.