Why the Confederate flag still flies in South Carolina

I'm not from the south but this all sounds like people putting their noses where they don't belong. Let the south decide how they feel about their flag. It's not yours, quit trying to change others. If the flag is outlawed the north will still call the southerners bigots.

 

Sedition is the act of inciting rebellion; treason is doing it. I'd say they 're part of the same equation.

The so-called "South" was composed of states where slavery was legal and they wanted to not only keep that, but to expand it across the country, despite all efforts to mollify them, first in the drafting of the Constitution and later legislation. Like the petulant little children that they were (and some might argue, still are), they reneged on their agreement and started a war. Which they lost and why we now have a UNITED States of America composed of fifty states. You can offer any rationalizations you like, but it was about slavery, as many of those slave states were quite clear about when they seceded.

 

I obviously won't accept your first comparison as I have stated it is not even close to an equal comparison.

As to your point about the usurpation of the Constitution again I take strong argument against that contention. It was not the north that usurped the Constitution. The particular point you are trying to raise on the north somehow preventing slavery in new territories was and agreement by both northern and southern senators in the Senate and was passed into law. That law was not deemed unconstitutional in 1857. At which point another compromise was meted out for Kansas and all new territories that they should decide for themselves whether to be slave or free but it would not affect the territories in which had already been admitted as slave or free based on the previous compromise laws. The boiling point only came after the legal election of Republican President that many in south did not like. There whole basis for secession was on what the new Republican government MIGHT do not what WAS DONE. They could not accept the legal election of the President so wanted to go home and take their ball with them. There secession itself, as I have explained before, was the true usurpation of the Constitution.

 

That flag was the flag that so many ancestors of the south went to war under, and many times dying under. It is a tribute to the memory of the brave men fighting what they viewed as northern agression and tyranny. I'm from Maine, with ancestors that fought in the 16th Maine Regiment, and Col. Joshua Chamberlain of the 20th Maine is a hero of mine, so I'm not part of the south will rise again crew. I'm a soldier that recognizes the importance of remembering our fallen heroes. Ancestors of today's Americans came from both sides, so both flags should be able to be flown. The only requirement should be that the American flag always flies higher.

 

Slavery started under the stars and strips, so which flag is worse? Get rid of them both then.

 

I agree, but it was under the Stars and Stripes that it was abolished. The Confederate Flag will always be a symbol of racism to Black folks in America.

 

I would think it would be doubly important for you not to hide it then so the events are not forgotten. In the meantime, there are more than just black folks to consider. Lots of valiant soldiers fought and died under that flag, and should always be honored for their sacrifices to their cause. These are ancestors of today's Americans and should not be dishonored by removing the flag.

 

Except it does not represent bigotry to those that want to keep it. It stands for something else, to these people. It stands for their home, their area of the USA, and it honors their ancestors who died in a war, most of which did not own slaves at all, but were fighting off the invading forces that destroyed their crops and homes, and molested their women, and even raped them.

That flag is not representing slavery, or racism, to southerners, only to the liberals who have turned against free speech, which they used to defend. As Kirsten Power's books lays out, and she is a liberal. She calls these liberals who no longer defend free speech as "illiberals" and she is absolutely right about that. I say that today's modern liberal is not liberal at all, in the sense of FDR liberalism, which defended working people. Instead, they are these social fascists, who only want their own speech protected. I wish I could (*)(*)(*)(*) on them, but I really would not (*)(*)(*)(*) in their mouths, even if their guts were on fire. I will not tolerate fascist behavior from conservatives and especially not from these modern liberals, who are one fry short of a happy meal.

The American flag today is representing nothing but this American oligarchy, for the republic is basically dead, if the way our nation operates means anything. Yet, for me, it still represents something else. The Confederate flag is no different, in that it represents other values, not racism and slavery. I lost several ancestors in the civil war who were fighting for their land and people, not to keep people enslaved for we owned none, as most people in the south did not in that era. And so that flag honors these non plantation owners who were just farmers, trying to survive and prosper, without slaves.

So that flag is only racist because illiberals say that it is. They have worked hard to manufacture consent on this. What should happen is blacks should start wearing t shirts and car tags with this flag on it, which would work better to get it off of flagpoles than the current tactics.

 

Slavery ended under the stars and stripes. It stands for equal treatment under the law, the right to vote, and one nation.

The confederate battle flag was used as a banner of the segregationists and hate groups after being the banner of those attempting to divide our union through war. It was flown proudly by the KKK as they carried out their murder, intimidation, and repression. It stands for opposition to the rule of law, a basic tenet of our nation.

That banner gets no sympathy from me. It stands for far too much that is vile. Any attempt to make it stand for something good simply failed - a sad fact for some, perhaps, but not a fact in question.

 

Unfortunately for some, any good in that flag was not defended in the 20th century.

Flags have been coopted throughout history. Even the swastika was once used by good people in various times.

 

One would hope at some point southerners would get some class and put it in a museum. you have to consider the thought process of people that hang on to a looser like the confederacy as suspect in the least.

 

Here is where you lost your flag:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...lient=tablet-android-samsung&ved=0CB4QMygAMAA

 

so its been highjacked by a few extremist and thats represents the whole of us?

 

Who said you were the one who gets to determine that for which it stands? Are you a Southern? And go learn what is treason, your statement is totally fallacious.

 

I posted the definitions of both sedition and treason earlier on this thread. You may look them up yourself if you prefer. I also prefer to deal in facts and to have my opinions based on said facts. My opinions are also subject to change if I learn that they differ from the facts. I moved to Virginia in 1960, and was disgusted by the blatant, overt racism that was evident. I didn't like it then; I don't like it today, and I've lived here in Georgia for over 40 years, so I'm more than familiar with what went on in certain circles (and probably still does). 'course, after a while, I was no longer invited to those parties. Guess my sheets didn't have the correct number of holes in them or something.

 

I am actually in the process of reading her book right now (On chapter 5 I think currently), but yes I agree with her in this respect. Liberalism has completely transformed into a completely disingenuous and indignant ideology. Which is very regretable because throughout much of Americas history, liberals were fantastic embodiments for the common man. That looked for avenues to debate and let themselves be heard... but much like it is laid out in her book, modern liberals or "illiberals" as she calls them are not interested in debate, only stifling productive conversations and injecting their own rhetoric in an attempt to silence the critics. They seem to either forget or not realize that America is great because of the ability to debate great things not in spite of it.

 

You have your opinions and views, I have mine. The difference between us is I do not try to force my political views on you.

 

Why is it still flying? Because Lincoln didnt murder every southerner.

 

I think northerners would do themselves well not to speak of things of which they do not know and we appreciate your avoidance.

- - - Updated - - -

It helps us avoid ignorance from the north.

 

`
Like I said, keep the flag. It has some uses.

 

When did that flag ever officially fly over Southern soil or which state ever claimed to be a part of Nazi Germany.

You really should try to bone up on some history.

- - - Updated - - -

You do know legal slavery existed in the United States after the Civil War ended don't you. That any slave who looked up at the official flag on the day after the war ended saw the Stars and Stripes just as he would have for the entire existence of the United States up to that point.

 

It's the flag of the United States and the flag of the state that is flown at half mast, not ceremonial flags necessarily.

- - - Updated - - -

How long did slavery exist under the Stars and Stripes?

 

Lots of valiant soldiers died fighting for AQ in Iraq. 150 years from now, should the Iraqi government fly an AQ flag at govt buildings? I think that if any govt is interested in preventing renewed conflict after a war, that govt should not fly the flag of the defeated forces. Peace treaties or armistices don't end the ideas that started wars. Only when those ideas seem futile to pursue does the war end. And that confederate flag on govt property today leaves hope in some that the old Civil War conflict will resume. "The South will rise again!" I have heard those words on the lips of many people throughout my life, including my own family. That flag flying on govt property is a small part of what inspires them to say such things.

 

No, the MAIN point of contention was that the Northern states and the federal government were not requiring people to send slaves back to the south which is a DIRECT rejection of the constitution:

Article 4 Section 2: No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

They were not following the constitution. The NORTH was engaging in unconstitutional behavior. Not the South. The South was attempting to keep the constitution the way it was or at least force the North to go through constitutional methods to change it.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong, but you seem to believe that the majority of Confederates disagreed. And that they either didn't speak up, weren't heard (meaning none of them held political power . . . a little problematic when we are trying to establish the motives of a political institution), or they weren't remembered. Out of the millions of Confederates who supposedly disagreed, not a single one spoke out, held power or managed to express their views in a way that could be preserved? I'm sorry, but that would require conspiracy, not coincidence.

So? What does modern voter fatigue have to do with any of this? The Confederate flag was a symbol of the Confederate government, not this proposed silent majority -- which we still have no evidence for.

You seem to think that I'm making claims about the thoughts of the average Southerner. I'm not. I'm talking about the political views of the political institution symbolized by the flag. I'm talking about the Confederacy, not the private thoughts of a bunch of people who contributed nothing to the political motivations of the Confederacy, nothing to the political philosophy of the Confederacy, and nothing that can in any way be identified as a belief system at all.

I'm talking about the Confederacy, not the private thoughts of people who had no voice in the Confederacy.

I'm talking about the Confederates, not any-and-all Southerners. The political leaders of this political institution saw slavery as the biggest defining factor of their government, and had done so even before the war, when they were fighting political battles between the free states and the slave states. Hell, they even referred to themselves as 'the slave states'.

No, you are taking hindsight for granted while also asking me to ignore their own account of themselves. The South was paranoid about losing the political battle of slavery. They constantly fought for a balance between free states and slave states so that they would not lose political power in the Union. They had already seen other states lose the "right" to slavery due to the influence of the Federal government. You can keep asking why they would care, but the simple historical fact is that they did care.

Besides, under your interpretation, there would never have been any reason for the South the secede at all, for any reason. Anything they wanted to do could have been hand-waved away with, "what is the North going to do, invade us?" That's not how it worked. States were already caving to anti-slavery sentiments, and this terrified the slave states of the South.

The Confederacy was a political institution. The words of its founders, its delegates, its founding documents, etc. should matter to anyone trying to view this objectively. If there were any record of any major dissenting population at all, you would have a point. There isn't any such record, and the silence speaks volumes.

Most Southerners weren't willing to risk their life to defend it, until Fort Sumner and the declaration of war. They didn't go around looking for a way to die for slavery. As I've already stated, the war was about secession, but secession was about slavery.

It was essential to the economy of the country they lived in, whether they engaged in it personally or not. It was essential to the way Christianity was preached in the area, and they felt it was essential (and even you acknowledge this later) to their security.

Jefferson also spoke, prior to the Civil War (it was real war, no need to put it in quotes), saying that the Missouri Compromise and the constant division of the south into slave states and north into free states was a perfect set up for a civil war. As the Vice President of the Confederacy pointed out, he was right.

Confederate apologists simply have too many questions to answer that they always want to wave away with evidence-less pet theories instead of pointing to actual history. Even before the war, the South identified as slave states and feared the influence of the free states. Every state that seceded was a slave state and only the border slave states that were already waffling on the issue of slavery refrained from joining the secession -- even then many of their people joined the Confederate cause anyway. Why is that? Every single instance we have of any Confederate official commenting on the specific causes of the war always refer to slavery, and despite the pet theory that there was a majority in the south that disagreed, none of them spoke up -- how are we supposed to take these people, who had no voice and seemed to desire no voice in the Confederacy, to now be the voice of the Confederacy . . . especially since we have no evidence that they even had any words to put to this imaginary voice? How can they represent the Confederacy when they had no representation during the Confederacy?

The only people who had a voice in the Confederacy said it was all about slavery. You propose the existence of a silent population that disagreed, but they had no voice then and there is no reason to suddenly assume without evidence that they existed in any appreciable numbers and there is no reason to start pretending that we should now consider them the voice of the Confederacy. Voices are supposed to say something.

And finally, if slavery wasn't the major cause, what was? I'm not looking for a vague comment about the protection of property (which included slaves) or "states rights" (which were primarily about the right of states to own slaves). I'm asking for a specific major cause. So far the Confederate apologists have produced none, and yet they still expect us to dismiss the cause that we clearly have the most evidence for. This is nothing more than the South's equivalent to political correctness and feel-good historical revisionism. We have a lot to be proud of in the South -- too much to favor a comfortable lie over the obvious truth.

- - - Updated - - -

The Constitution contained a contradiction. It said that people have rights, but did not extend those rights to slaves. So either the slaves weren't people, or they should have had rights. The North chose the correct side of this contradiction. The South chose the side of ignorance and immorality.