USA Politics
- Thread starter Genghis Khan
- Start date
The most common argument is "I see it as a symbol of southern heritage/pride" etc. The problem with that definition is that it's entirely insular and doesn't represent what others think of it. Yes, it can be ignorance - some of it is willing ignorance.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
Unless it's a take completely ignorant of the context of the Civil War, all that argument suggests is that the person espousing it thinks of slavery as part of southern heritage/pride. That can either mean an active support for racial discrimination against people of African descent, or that one's idea of local/ethnic/national heritage is an embrace of everything associated with it, without regard for the (just or unjust) reasons of its origin or its real impact. That's essentially the main ingredient of chauvinism.
Last edited:
chaosapiant
Ancient Marinade
There's an answer in-between. I'm sure there's folks completely ignorant of the Civil War, but the most common "argument" I've seen is that the Civil War was fought for reasons outside of slavery, such as taxes, or land, etc. It's not complete Civil War ignorance, but it's enough to be harmful. But at the end of the day, no matter how you slice it, it is a symbol that is absolutely tied to hate.
Pretty well, yes.
That's belief in the Lost Cause cryptohistoriography that was created in the aftermath of the Civil War to justify, postbellum, the secession of southern states for a new America. Anyone who says that is either an idiot or lying.
To get back to present day:
www.politico.com
Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland has changed his testimony to Congress to confirm that he told a senior Ukraine official that aid to Ukraine would likely be held up unless Ukraine committed to political investigations.
Sondland reverses himself on Ukraine, confirming quid pro quo
A key figure in the Ukraine saga revised his testimony for impeachment investigators.
www.politico.com
Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland has changed his testimony to Congress to confirm that he told a senior Ukraine official that aid to Ukraine would likely be held up unless Ukraine committed to political investigations.
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
The Confederate states fought the Civil War for the preservation of slavery. The main (albeit not the only) motivator behind that was indeed the economy, as the economies of the Southern states were largely dependent on agriculture and agricultural production relied on slave labor. Factors like taxes, land, etc. were not significant enough to cause a secession attempt, it was always about slavery. As LC mentioned, pushing the secondary factors to the forefront was a feature of the movement that romanticized the Confederation and embraced it as Southern heritage. You also have other people who romanticize the Confederation for different reasons, defense of states' rights being a prominent one, but that's not the angle a Confederate flag waving Southerner comes from.
I'd challenge that. I really believe that the architects of the Confederacy believed they had a divine right to rule who they considered to be lesser humans. Consider the Cornerstone Speech:
Alexander Stephens said:
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
Our orange friend said on Monday that the media would say he suffered the greatest defeat in world history, if the Republicans lost the governor election in Kentucky.
I doubt that the media would write this. Unlike Trump, most journalists have heard about Napoleon's and Hitler's attempts to take Russia, just to name a couple of famous defeats ...
I doubt that the media would write this. Unlike Trump, most journalists have heard about Napoleon's and Hitler's attempts to take Russia, just to name a couple of famous defeats ...
The media isn't really blaming Trump. They are pointing out that Trump certainly didn't help, but Matt Bevin ran an incredibly poor campaign.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
Bevin pretty much pissed off everyone in his 1st term ... this was about him. Look at the other statewide races. Republicans won them all handily.
In good election news, an amendment passed in Texas that would make it nearly impossible to enact a personal state income tax ... it was hard before, but now requires 2/3rds vote in the legislature, then 50%+1 vote with the general public. Before it was 50% +1 in the legislature and 50% +1 with the general public
In good election news, an amendment passed in Texas that would make it nearly impossible to enact a personal state income tax ... it was hard before, but now requires 2/3rds vote in the legislature, then 50%+1 vote with the general public. Before it was 50% +1 in the legislature and 50% +1 with the general public
Texas is fine today. When, in the future, they turn out to need additional revenue, this might not be a good thing. Look at California.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
California is it's own worst enemy on the spending side and over regulation ... yet really is not in any better shape (mostly in worse shape) with basic functions of government than Texas (roads, power lines, schools, etc).
In any case, if the state really needed more revenue, there is sales tax, property taxes, corporate tax, bonds, and some other misc revenue sources it can pull from ... and by remaining at least somewhat fiscally responsible.
chaosapiant
Ancient Marinade
I had not read that before, in school or otherwise. Holy shit that is absolutely disgusting. It actually gave me chills reading it, and i'm pretty damn jaded regarding human cruelty.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
The Confederate Flag has meant different things (to the public at large) over time. Southern pride (good, bad, and indifferent), used in counter culture as a sign of rebellion/anti-authority ... similar to the Nazi-chic stuff in the 70s, it has a different meaning now and probably will have a different one in the future. I'm not a mind reader and try not to judge based on what I think they are thinking
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
I think it's clear that that was a factor, for some members of the Confederacy more than others. I'd still speculate that the relevance of slave labor to the local economy gave them an incentive to defend a racial supremacist line. In other words, I think they wouldn't be as steadfast in their fight to preserve slavery if it had no relevance outside of it supposedly being Africans' "natural and normal condition".
Onhell
Infinite Dreamer
Since we are somewhat on the subject, a friend posted an article a while back regarding prison strikes by the prisoners refusing to work calling it slavery. I countered that labor, both necessary (laundry, cooking, farming, etc) and voluntary (fighting fires) is part of their punishment. He said it was in the constitution of several, mostly southern, states. I looked it up, sure enough, slavery is illegal EXCEPT when it came to prisoners. This 8s one of many contributing factors to the disproportionate of minorities in prisons, but they're not slaves, at least not chattel slaves. I see slavery as a permanent condition. Both indentured servants and prisoners have the possibility of freedom.
I feel it's one of those old laws like it's ilegal to keep ice cream in your back pocket, still there, no longer enforced. What do you guys think?
I feel it's one of those old laws like it's ilegal to keep ice cream in your back pocket, still there, no longer enforced. What do you guys think?
Oh, absolutely. In fact, when you dig into the origins of the Union in the 1770s, you see lots of Southern Founding Fathers who support the retention of slavery on economic grounds. But as we both know, when a political line is repeated over generations without critical thought it becomes a mantra. We only have the words of the elites in power, and many of them are using political speech to inspire the white majority to fight to maintain a system that was economically advantageous to only a handful. It would be really interesting to take a time machine and interview people from that era to see what they believed!