The Confederate Flag controversy

Read what I said. For the North the war was not about slavery. For the Southern States it very much was the primary reason stated for supporting Secession. Instead of posturing and spreading falsehoods based on ignorance why don't you actually read the declarations of secession. If you actually read the documents you will see that it is very evident that slavery is the most cited reason for secession. Also I should point out that although all Confederate States issued their own declarations, only 4 issued actual in-depth declarations of their reasoning (Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, and South Carolina). All four of these mentioned the Northern States opposition of slavery and fear of abolition as the most prominent reasoning for secession.

You say that "slavery hadn't been outlawed yet" as a reason that secession couldn't have been about slavery. It was FEAR OF slavery being abolished, or anger over the Northern states being anti-slavery that is cited in their reasoning.

Let's look at this gem. "We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."

That doesn't sound racist at all...

The designer of the flag says otherwise.

"We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the *forms* [emphasis in the original] of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety."

I think it's fair to say that it was about slavery.

Oh and then there is this one....

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery"

@cable_extreme: @static_shock: @lunacyde: @dbvse7:

The flag is a symbol of hatred but everyone has the right to hate as long as it doesn't involve slander, libel, incitement of violence, or perjury.

I don't disagree. I'm not against people having a right to own and fly it. I believe they have that right, and I'll defend that right to the day I die. I simply am not down with people trying to rewrite their own sugarcoated version of history. That is demeaning to people who were there. It is demeaning to tens of thousands of black men women and children who were subjugated under the oppression of slavery. It does nobody a service to try and color the past in rosy strokes. The Confederacy was built by men who were racists, who considered African Americans sub-human, with no rights. This is indisputable. That flag flew over the battlefield for a group of men who were among other things fighting for their "nation"s right to own other people. Their intentions were made very clear by their own words. Wishful thinking doesn't make it any less so.

@static_shock said:

@penguindust said:

Let's not forget that a lot of people are confusing what the "Confederate Flag" actually is. The one most people seem to believe is the Confederate flag is actually the battle flag of the army of Northern Virginia and a variation was used for the army of Tennessee. The actual flag of the Confederate States of America looks a lot like the original flag of the the United States.

The flag that everyone is in uproar about is the second national Confederate flag, designed by WIlliam Tappen Thompson, who said that the flag was to represent "the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the White man over the colored race." This flag or that flag, doesn't matter. Both are still Confederate.

Yes, and I am not defending those who want to keep the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia flying, my curiosity is in the design of the flag itself. The one many people misinterpret as the Confederate flag has a more aesthetic design and elements of it have wound up in other state flags most notably Mississippi, Alabama and Florida while Georgia seems to have adopted a design based more off the actual Confederate flag. It's all semantics, but I wonder why those who defend their flag as a piece of Southern culture don't choose the actual Confederate flag. I believe because its design is rather boring and uninspired. As I stated in my original post, it was meant to draw comparison to the original US flag since the states seceding imagined themselves like those original thirteen colonies declaring their independence from Great Britain. I just find the choice of what became the symbol of the "new" South fascinating even if I do not support the views that made it so.

This is interesting. What do you mean?

From William Tappan Thompson himself, the designer of the flag.

Co-f#cking-signed.

@static_shock: Um no. Thompson did not design the Confederate battle flag. Claiming that just makes your argument laughable. William Miles created the flag at General Beauregard's request. because the Stars and Bars and the Union flag were too similar and confusing soldiers during battle. So Beauregard took the flag designed by Miles, which had the Cross of St. Andrews (same as Scottish flag) to use as a battle flag for his soldiers. It's a soldiers flag, nothing else.

So, Thompson didn't design this flag right here?

Many Southerners rightfully point out that they should not be lumped in or judged by the the racist history of the Southern States; and that it's a steryotype. Yet if it's a steryotype, why support a flag which historically represents pro-slavery sentiment? The flag is not something to be proud of.

@cable_extreme

the flag isn't a symbol of hatred, it is a symbol of southern unity to unite agaisnt the Union. It didn't really have anything to do with racism, anymore so than everywhere else in America. Minus well say the American flag is a sign of racism since it was around at the time of slaves.

The Confederate flag symbolised Southern unity, yes - that Southern unity included the desire to keep slavery. It is a symbol of racism.

@static_shock: My apologies, I thought you were saying Thompson created the Confederate battle flag.

@frozen Nope. The South did not go to war to preserve slavery,because slavery was NOT being threatened. Lincoln said so himself and even offered an amendment to forever protect it.

@biteme_fanboy:

That flag represents hate just as much as the American flag represents hate.\

The American flag represents a much broader spectrum; and it's meaning is constantly changing, whereas the Confederacy represents only 4-5 years of a specific time period, with goals specific to that era.

Proof that the South didn't go to war to protect slavery:

1. Quotes by Lincoln himself

2. The Corwin Amendment

3. Tennessee, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Virginia all refusing to secede up until Lincoln announces his invasion to take the South back by force

4. Jefferson Davis offering to free the slaves in order for England and France to recognize them as a country

5. Blacks actually taking arms and fighting in battles (as said by Frederick Douglass)

6. Many diaries from soldiers and letters written home by soldiers

Now I can't argue that the South didn't secede because of slavery expansion, or that if the South never would have seceded the war would have never happened, but I can argue that the reason they went to war, and all those men and children left home to fight the North was not to protect slavery.

Oh really? Because South Carolina felt the need to make it clear that slavery was a key issue for their secession; “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world,” proclaimed Mississippi in its own secession declaration, passed Jan. 9, 1861. “Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of the commerce of the earth. . . . A blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization.”

In fact, the reasons cited for secession in 1860, leading up to the civil war was highlighting hostility towards slavery -"increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery".

Some states did not even uphold the pro-slavery Fugitive Slave Act, which angered South Carolina. Here is the full declaration, which makes clear how integral slavery is to their cause.

The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.

@frozen: The South did not secede with the intentions of starting a war. Their reasons for seceding and their reasons for taking arms against the North have nothing to do with each other. Lincoln tried to bribe them back into the Union by forever protecting slavery. When he did that, slavery was no longer being threatened and the South had no reason to defend it any longer. Everyone posting the Declarations of Secession as proof of why the South went to war is stupid, and it's the only 'proof' they have to offer.

~MiB

@static_shock:

That's very interesting. So you're saying that it was the Stainless Banner that South Carolina was flying rather than the Virginia Battle Flag? The videos I've seen show the Virginia Battle Flag, so I'm confused.

The South didn't a war - but South Carolina's secession in the build-up of the war makes it clear and strongly emphasizes that there was an increased hostility towards the institution of slavery from other states and thus their ''rights''. They were extremely dissatisfied with other states not properly upholding pro-slavery measures, such as the Fugitive Slave Act. Even if slavery was not under threat, they certainly felt it was under enough threat to make a statement of it.

What Lincoln actually said was:

“If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”

Lincoln did not go to war with the intention of an abolitionist stance (although he was heavily anti-slavery he tried to remove that from his policies), he did however take the chance of abolishing slavery if he had the chance. He wasn't even trying to strictly abolish it in the first place yet the South still felt that the institution was under attack - what Lincoln later said clearly was not convincing enough for the South.

Everyone posting the Declarations of Secession as proof of why the South went to war is stupid, and it's the only 'proof' they have to offer.

That's because it contradicts your beliefs of what you think your ancestors stood for; was slavery the only issue? No, most certainly not. But from the South's point of view, it was most certainly an integral issue, and the bedrock of their industry. They saw slavery as a right under attack. The declaration re-affirms several times that slavery is a key issue which is 'under attack' - it's spelled out ABC.

*Sigh* I could care less if it's a symbol of racism or southern pride, we get so caught up in "racism" nowadays we forget about individuals freedom of speech and expression, if someone want to have a flag let them, as for it flying on a government building its not a official government flag so take it down. What racism is nowadays is what communism was during the Cold War era, we treat it like such a huge evil we forget about those individuals rights and go on witch hunts.

The states of the Confederacy succeeded because they did not want to be united in their decisions with the rest of the states in the union. The Confederacy believed in a state's right to act completely on its own, no just partially. They wanted "states rights", which they thought was the right of a state to do whatever they wanted regardless of what the other states of the United States said about it.

The Confederacy is called "the rebellion" because they wanted to stop being united with the rest of the states in their government decisions and just do their own thing, which included slavery because some states talked about abolishing it and some may have already done so.

The Confederacy wanted to play by their own set of rules and not have a united government. As president Abraham Lincoln stated: "A house divided against itself can not stand".

Yes, they should have the right to express themselves; and banning the flag is stupid. That doesn't change what the flag represents though. I would defend the right of someone to wave around a Nazi flag if he wants, that does not mean I agree with it or that I will not criticize the flag.

@frozen: You can disagree with it and express Your opinion yes that is your right and I agree that flag is very offensive to a lot of people And has a history of racism.... But in today's society we are overly sensitive & we claim everything is racist due to the PC era we live in. However I know a lot of people who aren't racist and have that flag because they are proud of their southern heritage just like I know a lot of people with the North Cali star tattoos but they aren't gangsters, they are just proud.

...I'm a fierce critic of the PC police and outrage/offence taking culture. In fact I've butted heads on this site because of that, but I don't think criticism of the confederate flag, which actually does have solid roots in racist pro-slavery is really comparable to the PC police and SJW's.

@biteme_fanboy: Yet the words of the States themselves refute your argument. The Northern States not supporting the institution of slavery and fear that they would move to abolish it is cited as a primary cause of secession by all 4 states who wrote detailed reasons why they were seceding. Also South Carolina specifically listed the election of a President hostile to the institution of slavery as a reason they chose to secede. I can quote it for you if you like.

Your assertion that the stated reasons why the States left aren't valid is preposterous. These are official documents whose sole purpose was to declare precisely why they sought to secede. Yes, the reason soldiers left home to fight was because they saw the North as an enemy attacking their homeland, but that doesn't mean that the Confederate regime wasn't a racist pro-slavery one. Just like every German soldier wasn't fighting to exterminate Jews, every Confederate soldier wasn't fighting to oppress the African people. This doesn't mean they are exempt for criticism about the racist, bigoted actions and beliefs of their governments in general.

@frozen: Ok so I'll just ask you this, do you think a person who has that flag is racist? Or do you think there is a possibility they are just proud of their heritage? Or both?

They might not be racist themselves, but they are using a symbol which represents pro-slavery sentiment. Being proud of such heritage is within your rights, but it's not free from criticism and it doesn't really change what the flag stood for. Do you think someone who is proud of Nazi heritage should be free from criticism?

I actually agree with both of you on these points. I agree with CGood in that the debate about whether the flag is a sign of racism or of Southern Pride should be secondary to to the preservation of both the letter and the spirit of the First Amendment. There is definitely an element of the PC Police that wants to ban any Confederate Flag through bullying if not actual law, and that's dangerous since we must always strive for a climate where controversial ideas can be discussed civilly, but I agree with Frozen that the controversy about the Confederate flag is not the same as the SJW battles about many other topics since there are legitimate problems with the Confederate flag unlike most SJW causes. You can make a very good case that the Confederate flag is a sign of racism and represents an enemy nation and should therefore receive no public support, and that argument bears consideration whereas most of SJW's causes are based largely upon lies such as the idea that women are underpaid in the workforce or that Muslims get a bad rap in the media.

@frozen: Ha you almost got me debating for the Souther Pride side. If someone waves the Nazi flag then odds are that isn't a nice person, but I'm not going to go over and say what they are doing is wrong and escalate the situation even though we know what they are doing is wrong. Sure someone else can go tell them off they have that right, but I'm not going to, I let people be who they want to be. Everyone has the right to be critized, the problem is we critize those who haven't done anything wrong.

@lunacyde: Dude. No one is saying it isn't racism. You are looking at this as a very cut and dry, literally black and white, issue. I'm not saying that the southern states weren't racist. They were but they also didn't know what they were doing was as wrong as we know it today. It was in the constitution that whites had a right to own slaves. They felt their rights were being stepped on just like the gun debate today. Lincoln even said that whites were a "superior race" when running for office. The south believed that the government was overstepping its bounds by infringing on their constitutional rights. They literally felt like they were victims in this. They were sincere in their beliefs, but sincerely wrong.

@theendgame:

Yes, it was in the Constitution because slave states would not ratify without guarantees to protect slavery. However, just because something is protected in the Constitution does not mean that it is protected in perpetuity. An amendment can be made to the Constitution by a 2/3 majority in a House of Representatives and Senate or a Constitutional convention called for by 2/3 of State Legislatures. This is why they were rushing to have newly formed western states join the pro-slavery side so that they could not be out-voted on the issue.

I feel no sympathy for the argument that they didn't know what they were doing was wrong. Their opinions on the righteousness of their actions matter no more to me than Hitler's conviction that the Jews were ruining Germany or Timothy McVeigh's conviction that bombing a government building was necessary to combat government overreach.

@static_shock: explain, I'll point out he was a co designer, he wasn't the lead designer. The flag initially was made to be the American flag.

@frozen: you do know the American flag was made in a time where America supported slavery.

As I said, the American flag covers a much broader time period. The American flag also represented post-slavery and greater strives towards equality and freedom. What the flag represents is constantly changing.

@frozen: "What the flag represents is constantly changing"

So you are willing to make exceptions for a flag you already adhere to, but not for a flag you do not? The flag initially was intended to be the American flag, which later united the southern states. That unity is what the flag represents. Regaurdless of politics now or at the time, unity between the lower states is what it stands for.

Firstly, I don't adhere to the US flag. I'm not American.

Secondly, you completely ignored my point. The flag of the confederacy represents a specific, relatively short time period which had specific goals contextual to that era. It represented the Southern states for a very short period of time and what the confederacy stood for in the 1860's was symbolised through that flag. The US flag has been around for hundreds of years, with slight tweaks. It's meaning is changing not because I ''adhere'' to it, but because it has symbolised America or a very long time, which is not the case for the confederacy.

You also ignored my points of how South Carolina's secession was by their own admission heavily influenced by the desire to uphold slavery; an institution the South felt under attack.

@lunacyde: Yes, The Confederacy was a 'country' that relied heavily on slavery.Yes it was horrible. But. The South independence and freedom from a central controlled federal government was way more important to the CSA than slavery. Yes it could have been last minute desperation, but it was something they were willing to do. Free the slaves, in order for them to be an independent nation. If everyone condemns the South because they were fighting a war to protect there homes, but also allowed slavery, then America should be condemned just as well. Their atrocities against Native Americans, the war against them, the genocide against them, in my eyes is on par with America's (and the Souths) involvement in slavery. People like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and many other slave owning americans are hailed as heroes in our country, yet Robert E Lee and Thomas Jackson (who both thought slavery was horrible) are considered evil men who only wanted to see black people suffer. Why is America the only country to ever go to war to 'end slavery'? Because the war wasn't about ending slavery.

Picking America as some wonderful country, and then damning the South is stupid. Now my ancestors fought and died because the North was wanting to come to their homes and burn their towns down, rape their women, slaughter their livestock, and burn their food. And when the North got their chance that's just what they did. Defending their homes from that is helluva a noble cause to me. That's why I will always honor my ancestors. Yes it's a dirty stain on the South that they favored slavery, but not every country has its proud moments. And in order to have their indepence the South was willing to end slavery. The flag is a soldiers flag and it represents those soldiers. my ancestors fought and died under that flag and went through things most people nowadays never can imagine. Disease, starvation, harsh winters, no warmth, plenty of things we all can't imagine. And now everyone expects Southerners to spit on their ancestors name and just forget about them? Naw. It is law that Confederate soldiers are American soldiers and deserve the same respect, but they don't. As long as the rest of the country spits on my families names then I will always have that flag flying.

So people are presenting their past relatives who fought for stupid things as a good example to follow. That sounds stupid.

I probably have past relatives who died in great battle over something stupid but I don't point to them as a good example for people to follow.

You don't have to act like past relatives who did shameful things did not exist but don't glorify the stupid things they did. Stop glorifying stupidity. Stupidity has no positive value.

@dum529001: Read my next post after that one. I'm not debating for either side, both sides have too many bigots. Does that flag have a racist history and is a flag used by racists? Yes. Are there PC bigots who want to ban it cause of its history? Yes. See where I'm getting at? That post was to show that even though that flag has history of racism, we shouldn't lump every one who supports it as racists. More people have to be tolerant and open minded.

When people look back on their ancestors they usually talk about the good things, not the bad things. Why would you tell someone to follow someone who is a bad example?

When children are told to look up to their mothers and fathers, they are told to look at the good things done and not the bad stuff. White people in the USA have past relatives other than those who were in the confederacy r the USA. Why don't they look to some of the ancestors they lived in Europe?

@dum529001: Are you trying to debate someone's who not on the side youre trying to debate?

You americans are silly with your flags. I really don't see how a flag changes things one way or another.

@frozen: you assume the flag has stopped being used. And if you are not American and from the south, I can see why you would think what you do now. The media is a powerful force that corrupts many things.

You want to know why the south united? It wasn't because of slavery, it was mainly due to the idea that the north was essentially bullies. Abraham Lincoln didn't sign the emancipation proclaimation to free slaves, it was to hurt the southern economy. The separation between north and south grew and grew basically with the north and south bullying each other. The alliance between the southern states stood mainly due to how the northern states were trying gain control of the government by bringing in more republican states while weakening the democratic states. That tactic ultimately cause the war.

@biteme_fanboy: nicely said. It is hard to get northerners or people from other countries to throw down their media filled biases and look at things from a non-ethnocentric view.

This thread is just a reminder of why I don't have any pride for this country. :P.