CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
While I agree with all the heritage-voters on the issue of why the Civil War was fought, the question pertains to the flag as it is used today. Having grown up in South Carolina, a state that flew the flag atop our state house for most of my life (and later on the state house grounds, in front of Main St.), I knew many people who were on the side of heritage. All of those people were, without a doubt, prejudiced. They used the flag as a slap in the face, a way to get away with racism under a different name.
Even if you don't believe that the flag is racist, I hope we can agree that it is traitorous. It is, afterall, the flag of a nation that no longer exists.
Although i agree with you that some people use the flag as a means to be racist, I disagree that that makes it racist. The kkk wore pillow sheets over their heads, but that doesn't not mean I'm going to stop using it as it's real purpose. People use flag for racism: not the real purpose. THe real purpose of the flag is for heritage.
This is strictly speaking of what it stands for now. Not the past.
The real purpose of the flag is to honor a country that did not pan out.
I'm certainly not opposed to honoring those that fought in the Civil War, even if they were fighting for secession from the country I love. But the flag itself is merely a symbol of that failed attempt. There are far better ways of honoring our heritage than flying a flag that many consider to be a symbol of racism.
And why do we need to honor the Civil War heritage separately? Shouldn't the American flag be the ultimate symbol of that heritage, as the North won the war and kept our nation intact?
While I would agree it is racist it does have its roots in the southern world of the confederate states. It has come to symbolize hatred of mankind, typically African-American blacks. We must not allow that flag to fly anywhere in the USA. It belongs in a museam not masted and flown.
That's a point I didn't address in the above arguements.
You are correct that it should certainly be allowed,
just as a nazi flag should be allowed if one chooses,
a Mexican flag,
two gays kissing in public,
the crazy guy on the corner rattling off about the world's end,
the jesus freaks,
The question though was not whether it should be allowed, but whether or not it is racist, which it most certainly is, which I argue very well about 3 responses up, and 2 or 3 replies deep.
If you don't understand why, please reply to that arguement, and you can prove me wrong, or maybe I can persuade you.
I agree that it would violate free speech to not allow the flag to be flown. On the other hand, states should not be flying it on their state house or have it embedded within their state flags.
While I understand your point locke, how would it be if Germany would fly the NAZI flag underneath their own? It would conjur up images of a world gone to hell and back. Usually a nation flys their present day flag and not one from eons ago...and especially one that has such deep meaning in the negative.
" I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands....etc." If you want that other flag, you have that RIGHT! WE, the people, have the RIGHT to object to those who wish to fly another flag in OUR country and THAT is OUR first amendment RIGHT! The votes are in, WE want only OUR flag.
I was in N.C. last summer and saw BOTH the American and Confederate flags flying. The "Stars and Bars" was flying ABOVE the American flag! That was an ABUSE of the first amendment. Luckily, this IS a free country, you can fly any flag you want LOWER than ours, but, any state government that insists on flying another "country's" flag as a statement of "pride" doesn't deserve the protection of the Constitution!
1. yes it is, racists use the heritage arguement (valid or not) to validate their wanting to wave a symbol of racism in everyone's face.
2. the south tried to secede, had they been successful who knows how long they would have kept slaves, maybe even until today, so the idea that that heritage is somehow worthy of fond rememberance is basically mentally retarded.
3. everyone on earth who does not have their own confederate flag hanging in their trailer home or truck equates it with racism, so what on earth possess these people to have it other than wanting to identify themselves as a racist, while at the same time being able to maintain the lame excuse of heritage? I say nothing, show me someone with a confederate flag, and I'll bet I can trick them into a conversation about how blacks are ruining the country.
4. Pretend Santa is real, and confederate flag weilding hillbillies aren't racist. The south declared that war, and it was the bloodiest battle in history. And as a result of the N. winning, we became the most powerful nation in the world, and ended slavery in the South. wtf are those a-holes celebrating exactly?
Would you wear that shirt if you were going to a grocery store in NYC?
No, because you know black people may see it and get offended.
You know it offends people, you know what people think of it,
it's akin to telling a joke that you have to look around to make sure there are no minorities around to tell, you probably just shouldn't tell the joke.
Anyway, the heritage line is complete bs, because they weren't running around with that flag before they decided to secede,
and weren't you one of the people pissed about Mexicans waiving Mexican flags in the US? So what's the difference? There is none, it's hypocricy, and the rebel flag stands for slavery and secession.
You can't answer that. Because you don't know him personally.
Would you wear an american flag shirt in another country that has people that hate us?
If not then why sport anything with an American flag on it here in the U.S.?
The American flag in front of my house is obviously there to stick it to other countries because I hate them and not because I'm proud of my country or anything. [sarcasm]
1. It is possible that one could be misinformed about the rebel flag, and not be a racist hillbilly.
I obviously mispoke. It was a dumb statement and I was wrong to have said it in such a way. But I was looking for attention and a reply, or maybe I'm just an a-hole, that's possible too, anyway,
2. To make it clear, it is impossible for one not to both understand what the general meaning of a rebel flag is, and at the same time, be OK with flying it. Unless they really are "racist hillbillies."
This isn't fair either though, as there are unfortunately people who know racism is wrong and dumb and bad for humanity in general, yet use it (and dumb people) to aquire power for themselves - and at the same time encourage it. Actually if anything "racist hillbilly" is assuming one is dumb instead of evil. I for one think dumb is better than evil, but that is debatable.
So, basically I would submit as a hypothesis, that one who waives a rebel flag is either racist at heart, or they do not understand the meaning of a rebel flag.
I'm not discounting that you, pyg, or myself are not racist at heart, as it has been imbred in the American experience for generations now. Maybe pyg is for having a confedarate flag t-shirt, maybe I am on some level. In fact if pressed and tested, I probably on some level have been indoctrinated with racism. I am of a race, born before around 1990, and live in the US, so in spite of my best efforts, I am probably racist.
(For the record, I'm not backtracking or trying to be friendly here, just telling the truth. I really think some of pyg's opinions are dumb. However, he in general, I find acceptionally bright, which is why I did hesitate and wait for a reply instead of just coming out and saying "yes" to the question at hand. Same aplies to you Jake, for the most part. Fact is, we're all infected with racism on some level, it's like a cancer and started spreading generations ago, and is just now in this country being reigned in.)
But specifically about this, it's really simple in spite of the long build-up.
3. Which is the defining characteristic of a symbol? What the majority feels the symbol represents, or what a few feel the symbol represents?
Unlike a typical noun, a symbol does not have an inherent meaning. ex: a tree is a tree, and it makes no difference what you and I may or may not think of a tree.
I would argue, vehemently, that anything created by man to mean something, then means what most people feel it is meant to mean.
a further example. Long before there was any such thing as a nazi (no I'm not sinking so low as to compare anything here to nazis, just talking about a symbol) there is some branch of budhism which had used something very similar to a swaztica to mean peace and love. It was a swaztica, but with the points facing the other way.
Would you be comfortable driving around Israel with this symbol? You shouldn't be, because it is easily mistaken for somehting that symbolizes millions of Jews being killed for 0 reason.
Well guess what a confederate flag symbolizes to millions of black Americans?
Yet it's OK because it's about heritage?
No.
Regardless of the intent of one displaying the rebel flag, the fact remains,
we americans, who often vainly and occassionally successfully aspire (as any nation should) to be a becon to the world, have a dark, dark past of enslaving a people based strictly on outward appearance.
We also have a past of simply killing off those who were here first.
The rebel flag attempts to ignore a dark past, and in many cases, ignore the lessons that are still to this day being learned from it.
Today still, one race, only one, not hispanic, not asian, not the few natives we left, are more than 9 times as likely to be imprisnoned, more than 2 times as likely to commit a crime, more than 10 times as likely to be born into poverty.
Life, Liberty, and Happiness for all?
We thus far, in spite of a president of mixed race, have still fallen woefully short.
This has nothing to do with, (we know through science, genetics, social experiments, real life examples,) any one or other race's inherent abilities.
Yet these differences remain.
This is a social problem. It is the way one group is treated compared to another, it is the way one group is raised compared to another. Both societies' fault, and yes very much so as our President stated in his NAACP speach, the fault of individuals who have not raised their children right.
The rebel flag is a social symbol. Nothing else. symbols mean nothing but that meaning we give it.
And this specific symbol, fair or not, means support for a continuation of the practices of a dark past, one we must remember yes, but one we must move away from with all expediency.
So yes.
The rebel flag is racist, and it is dumb, and Pyg should get rid of that shirt.
I agree and understand just about everything except for:
it is impossible for one not to both understand what the general meaning of a rebel flag is, and at the same time, be OK with flying it. Unless they really are "racist hillbillies."
Don't get me wrong I'm not a big fan of the confederate flag. But I don't think that the flag should be directly linked to racism and slavery. The south where not the only racist ones. More racist yes.
I don't know if you read my post on the other side but I used the U.S. flag as an example. The U.S. has dealt with a lot of racism and discrimination. Does that make it symbolize racism? Maybe.
See, it can symbolize whatever you want it to. To many of us Americans the U.S. flag symbolizes freedom and prosperity and lots of other positive things.
For somebody that had ancestors die fighting for the south the confederate flag could represent their sacrifice.
I'm not going to tell that select few what to do. It's their freedom and choice. And funeral if they do choose to go to new york. (+
At this point I think that it's to late.
It's already been so associated with racism that the majority directly thinks of racism and slavery when they see it.
The reason I'm not a big fan is: 1. that /\. and 2. It reminds me of a bad time when we where not united as one. That's why I wear a shirt with a U.S. flag on it. (((=
I did see your point on the other side, and it was a very good one.
However, my arguement has never been whether one should be allowed to have one, but whether or not it is racist.
Well, one can certainly in their mind not believe the flag is racist.
I submit that while our flag does have a terrible history or racism, that is not what people see. I do not believe that is the case with a confederate flag at all. Actually though, I'm not even the best person to answer that I suppose, I think I got more caught up in winning the debate, than something I think is that important.
Actually, the swastika is still displayed by Buddhists and other religious cultures. They didn't decide to cast out their beliefs because Nazis fucked shit up for them.
Please correct me if I'm wrong (American history obviously isn't my strong point), but weren't the confederate states formed because of disagreements between the north and south in how to maintain and expand the slave trade? To that regard, the confederate flag has its roots firmly planted in racist beginnings. This is entirely different to the swastika symbol, which was used for thousands of years to represent things such as Eastern gods, eternal life, etc. Hardly a valid comparison, is it?
But I do remember a few people while there were the protests by Mexicans about immigration or something, complaining about them waiving Mexican instead of American flags.
Nothing to do with racism I think pyg would back up, infact I agree, they should have been waiving American flags, that would have been much smarter on their part.
I was making the connection, that we have a perfectly good flag no matter what part of the country you're from, including the South, and that a Rebel flag appears to me at least to me in direct opposition to that.
But whoever it was arguing against them waiving a Mexican flag (whom I agreed with) should see a correlation between their reply that "it's heritage" and the rebel flag reply that "it's heritage."
Well to answer for myself I wear mine as I would anyother shirt. Maybe the black people you mention in New York have no clue as they are not from the south.
What about when the black people wore Malcolm X shirts (even more of a racest statement) most whites could have cared less. No disrespect to anyone or group but if a person lives outside of the South they probably have been brain washed into a certain point of view. Granted there are some racest people who have made the flag have a bad feel to some people but where I live blacks and white get along great (yes in the deep south) Why because we respect each other and know that a flag cant define who or what a person really is
I would wear a shirt with a confederate flag on it anywhere in the north, because I don't care what any yankees think about me. I'm sick and tired of them acting like they are better than everyone else, because they aren't. As far as the black people go, who cares what they think about it? If they don't like it, then they just need to suck it up and deal with it. Just because they were kept down for years and years doesn't give them the excuse to act like they are racist against white people, or better than them. And it might be a hell of a lot easier to find a job in this country if the Mexicans didn't take the jobs, and I don't have a problem with them having jobs, it's the fact that they are here illegally and don't pay taxes on anything. It is okay to show your southern pride, I do it everyday, and I don't care who has a problem with it, because they can go the hell back where they came from.
I would wear a shirt with a confederate flag on it anywhere in the north, because I don't care what any yankees think about me. I'm sick and tired of them acting like they are better than everyone else, because they aren't.
Ah, inferiority complex.
As far as the black people go, who cares what they think about it? If they don't like it, then they just need to suck it up and deal with it. Just because they were kept down for years and years doesn't give them the excuse to act like they are racist against white people, or better than them.
And more of your inferiority complex.
And it might be a hell of a lot easier to find a job in this country if the Mexicans didn't take the jobs, and I don't have a problem with them having jobs, it's the fact that they are here illegally and don't pay taxes on anything.
Sales tax. And it's corporations and large businesses that do the hiring who are to blame. If (I'm assuming you live in a trailer and have 5 teeth) Mexico were to offer you a job making a whopping 15/hour plus fix your teeth, you'd hop the border in a second I'd imagine.
It is okay to show your southern pride, I do it everyday, and I don't care who has a problem with it, because they can go the hell back where they came from.
Uh huh, and proud of what precisely? Or is it a vague sense of pride you've not bothered to pinpoint?
You Seriously have your head in your ass. HOW can you condemn the whole GOD damn SOUTHERN nation?! Every Southerner is Racist because they have that flag oh lord, You need help. I would wear my flag everywhere because I'm proud of it. If i see another flag it think they are proud of where they come from nothing more so it seems to me you are racist against southerns which puts your fingers pointed straight back at you. Hypocrite.
There is no southern nation. There are southern states within the United States however, and I do not condemn any of them. The confederate flag represents a failed coup, one which was sold as State's rights to an undereducated population, but which really represented defending the right of an elite few to continue to enslave a group of people. Waving a confederate flag in the United States is no more patriotic nor representative of a heritage than if one were to waive a Nazi flag, or a Soviet flag while yelling communism will rise again!
Southern states by average have the lowest standard of living of any geographic area in the U.S., the biggest gap in between rich and poor, the most cases of racial, ethnic, sexual, and religious discrimination, and are the most likely to reject any effort within the various states to turn any of these statistics around because any politician, activist, or religious leader who does bring attention to these very real problems more common in the south than anywhere else in the nation, will be labeled as not appreciating southern "heritage" -- a modern carpet bagger whether liberal, libertarian, or moderate conservative. That silly flag represents that today, and there is a direct line from the failed coup of 1861 and the "state's rights" branding the elite put on the underlying racism, and the "heritage" branding which covers the combination of racism, classism, and anti-progression which continues to hold back those various geographic areas.
People liking that silly flag affects me no more than misguided neo-nazis wearing swastikas. If a skin head tells me that they don't hate, they just think "races" should be separated, it sounds no more enlightened to me than when someone tries to explain "the confederate flag isn't racist it's just pride in the southern heritage."
Actually, it is a rational assumption because an assumption is a proposition that is taken for granted, as if it were true based upon presupposition without preponderance of the facts. (Ex: Mike like blueberries, he also likes pie, therefore he likes Blueberry Pie.) It is rational to say that do to the fact the you have a swazstika on your profile picture that you PROBABLY are racist. which is just an assumption, i'm not saying that you are indeed a racist.
considering the fact that ur profile says u are agnostic, i very much doubt that u are either Buddhist or Hindu. In which case, coming to the conclusion that u r probably racist is a viable assumption.
I can understand the heritage point of view, coupled with state freedoms. But MAN...why use the ACTUAL nazi flag as your avatar. I mean shit....i'd consider you a racist.
Since when has it been the case that heritage and racism are mutually exclusive terms? The Southern States that seceded from the union were trying to defend their way of life and their sovereignty, which was largely underpinned by chattel slavery. So while the former was certainly a reason to go to war, it was founded on a longstanding regime of slavery and racism. As far as I'm concerned, the flag represents both.
How can a flag be a sign of slavery? Slavery was just one of the many reasons for the civil war. What next ban all white sheets from being sold. Just like Muslims there are people that us their religion as a tool for evil,just as some people did bad things behind the confederate flag, same as the Knights Templar carried their flag and so on
Do you realize the American flag also represented the United States when it legalized the slavery of blacks for almost a century? Britain also used slaves. Should we be offended by their flag too? As a matter of fact, just about every civilization in the world at one time or another has used slavery. Why should the confederacy be singled out for ridicule?
How can't a person call the Confederate Flag racist? Although the Confederacy wasn't formed because of slavery and racism, its flag is still used by racist organizations like the KKK or the Neo-Nazis.
The KKK use and used the Stars and Stripes more often and before they used the Confederate Flag and Neo Nazi's use the flag of their country more often than they use the Confederate Flag so by your logic all Flags are racist because of some of the people that use them
"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 in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding States."
"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin."
"an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution."
"The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor."
"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."
To all of you who think the confederate flag is racist.......
First of all, a racist is a person, a THING; it's a ideology, a belief! So NO would be the "correct" answer. No, a FLAG cannot be racist - it is a lifeless object - it has no feelings and cannot have an opinion. It's the person behind the flag and their purpose for hanging the flag. PEOPLE are racists... FLAGS are part of our American history and Southern heritage. And I suppose you think guns kill people, too, don't you?
Your argument only goes to the grammatical deficiency of the debate creator (who also created the positions: "Yes its racest" and "No its heratege", so it's taking a bit of the easy way out).
Would you like to address the question as to whether people who fly the confederate flag today and are so enamored with that particular part of American heritage derive any of their admiration from the racial stratification of the civil war era?
The confederate flag is something to be resented in this country plain and simple! Who would want to hold up a flag known for defending slavery only a true and genuine racist would.
I am a white man who has been born and raised in South Carolina, as such i believe we have more of a right to claim heritage on the flag then any other state in the United states. I think the flag represents ignorance, hatred, and discord. Everyone knows the red neck white trash people running around with their Dixie shirts, proudly toting the Stars and Bars. It is disgraceful, we can all agree it may not have started out as raciest, it most certainty become about racism. It truly disgust me when a shameful act of betrayal of the united states is relished by us southerners. In my life i have never seen such a disgraceful display.
not only is it the BATTLE flag of traitors, but it has since come to SYMBOLIZE white supremacy and racial hatred.
it has no place on display in any public place where government dollars are at work.
you want to put it up over your fireplace to show ppl when they come to dinner, fine.... that way they can know where you are coming from and walk out, if they have any sense.
The war wasn't actually started over slavery. Abraham actually threw that in mid-war to further piss off the Confederates since most of the Confederate states were big farm country, and a lot of the farms had slaves.
In any case, the 'rebel flag' isn't a racist flag at all, but since it's tied to that war which lead to the 'end' of slavery, most people tie the flag to some racist or slavery-based stigma. I'm not defending the Confederates, but the truth is, the flag itself has absolutely nothing to do with slavery or racism.
Yes, the war was largely about protecting the institution of slavery - see my posts on the other side for the reasons the Confederate states gave for secession
The south, in general, did not rebel over the slaves being freed- though this didn't stop speakers for both the north and south focusing on it as an issue. The North was not attempting to free slaves, but was rather attempting to limit the expansion of slavery in order to let it die out. The Emancipation Proclamation was in fact put forth during the Civil War, and was applicable only to slaves in the 10 states still in rebellion at the time.
There was certainly talk over ending slavery, but this was primarily due to the shift in industries in the north; slave labor is generally only effective when the required labor is relatively unskilled, and uneducated slaves were relatively to completely ineffective in such a role, unlike in the south where the economy was predominately based on plantations. The method of ending slavery was not freeing extant slaves, however- but were rather geared towards stopping the expansion of slavery and letting it just 'die out' as I noted earlier.
The Emancipation Proclamation was far more an attempt to weaken the south economically and create a dangerous enemy in the middle of their ranks than it was about actually freeing slaves.
The slavery issue was there- no arguing that. But it's overall impact has been greatly exaggerated, the union painted as being 'good guys' far more than they deserved, and the confederacy painted as being 'bad guys' far more than they deserved. I presume this is a case of victors writing the history books- a necessary evil if any sense of unity between the north and south was to be reformed.
It should also be noted that while slavery in the US was primarily slavery of Africans, that was hardly the extent of it; calling the flag a symbol of racism is ridiculous, and I think it's perfectly reasonable for it to be kept as a symbol of ones heritage. And this is coming from a northerner who is descended primarily from Irish slaves / indentured servants and Cherokee.
"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 in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding States."
"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin."
"an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution."
"The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor."
"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."
"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."
"1. The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any state of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property: and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired."
"the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states."
The Emancipation Proclamation was in fact put forth during the Civil War...
I, of course, said nothing to the contrary.
The North was not attempting to free slaves, but was rather attempting to limit the expansion of slavery in order to let it die out.
Lincoln campaigned on eliminating slavery (constitutionally). Upon his election, the south began to secede. Lincoln's then immediate goal was preservation of the Union.
"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." - Lincoln, Letter to Horace Greeley
it's perfectly reasonable for it to be kept as a symbol of ones heritage
it's perfectly reasonable for it to be kept as a symbol of one's racist heritage - fixed that for you...
this is coming from a northerner
And this is coming from a southerner who lived there, has been to re-enactments, and met people who own every different confederate flag there was. Many now will just say they like the idea of Southern Pride (even saw a black guy wearing the confederate flag once), but to deny slavery as THE MAIN factor of the civil war is the true revisionism.
The south, in general, did not rebel over the slaves being freed- though this didn't stop speakers for both the north and south focusing on it as an issue.
I, of course, said nothing to the contrary.
Fair enough- but it is still important to note that the Union had not ended slavery, and even in the middle of the war only ordered an end to slavery in the rebelling states.
Lincoln campaigned on eliminating slavery (constitutionally). Upon his election, the south began to secede. Lincoln's then immediate goal was preservation of the Union.
These same correlation arguments could be made for any number of things, and you know exactly why they're fallacious. Lincolns platform was generally one of limiting the power of both the federal and state governments, which in practice limited states more significantly, resulting in more overall power in the federal government at the end of the day at the expense of state governments. The state rights argument is legitimate- though slavery was still a factor (as I've noted), it has been highly overstated as such in the aftermath of the conflict and ever since.
it's perfectly reasonable for it to be kept as a symbol of one's racist heritage - fixed that for you...
Because no black or mixed-race man ever owned a slave, and because no white people were enslaved or put into indentured servitude. Right.
And this is coming from a southerner who lived there, has been to re-enactments, and met people who own every different confederate flag there was. Many now will just say they like the idea of Southern Pride (even saw a black guy wearing the confederate flag once), but to deny slavery as THE MAIN factor of the civil war is the true revisionism.
No. Denying slavery as being any factor at all in the civil war is revisionism- and people do this. Stating Slavery as The sole factor, or even the main factor of the civil war is also revisionism- and even more people do this. Painting the Union as good guys and the Confederacy as bad guys, because slavery, is further revisionism that persists to this day, and the reasons why have already been explored here. A realistic perspective on the civil war sees the slavery issue as comparable to the taxation without representation issue in the American revolution. Both were very visible, and both were very useful to call for support on either side, but the overall conflict (in both cases) had numerous causes ramping up over generations. Neither was truly the sole or even single largest cause for the conflict, and was at best the 'straw that broke the donkeys back-' at worst, the back was already broken and the donkey wasn't done falling yet.
this didn't stop speakers for both the north and south focusing on it as an issue
The official voted-on state proclamations, made contemporaneously by the people seceding, on why they were doing so cannot seriously be portrayed as people focusing on side issues...
it is still important to note that the Union had not ended slavery
Except it had.
There were a couple states that were still in the process, but nearly every northern state had 0 slaves by 1860 - ref
even in the middle of the war only ordered an end to slavery in the rebelling states.
A) See my statement above about Lincoln's priorities
B) Lincoln's position (and likely a correct one) was that he could not emancipate all slaves without a constitutional amendment. The Emancipation Proclamation only affected combatants because it was justified as a war power.
correlation arguments
Utter silliness. If the states themselves tell you the CAUSE - how can you then claim mere correlation?
Lincolns platform was generally one of limiting the power of both the federal and state governments, ...
The Republican platform of 1860 is completely dominated by slavery, secession, etc. - they were at this point basically pleading to just get back to pre-Dred Scott which was going to make slavery, for all intents and purposes, legal in every state.
Because no black or mixed-race man ever owned a slave, and because no white people were enslaved or put into indentured servitude. Right.
If your argument is that slavery wasn't racially biased - I think you will have a very long way to go to prove that case.
In fact, it is one of the vectors of attack Lincoln used against it. Some people used the existence of slavery in the Bible as evidence that it was acceptable and Lincoln's argument was that the Biblical version of slavery was not based on race, so Biblical slavery would allow for white slaves:
"In Kentucky, perhaps, in many of the Slave States certainly," said Lincoln, "you are trying to establish the rightfulness of Slavery by reference to the Bible. You are trying to show that slavery existed in the Bible times by Divine ordinance. Now Douglas is wiser than you, for your own benefit, upon that subject. Douglas knows that whenever you establish that Slavery was right by the Bible, it will occur that that Slavery was the Slavery of the white man—of men without reference to color—and he knows very well that you may entertain that idea in Kentucky as much as you please, but you will never win any Northern support upon it." - ref
Stating Slavery as The sole factor, or even the main factor of the civil war is also revisionism
Do you know the causes better than the states themselves? or the soldiers? Can you name any factor that superseded race? Kansas/Nebraska Act, Bleeding Kansas, John Brown, Harper's Ferry, Missouri Compromise, the Fugitive Slave Act, Dred Scott, etc. etc. etc. - nearly every source of tension underlying the war had slavery as its underpinning.
The official voted-on state proclamations, made contemporaneously by the people seceding, on why they were doing so cannot seriously be portrayed as people focusing on side issues...
They can when they are official proclamations of a minority of the states in rebellion, and don't represent anywhere close to a unanimous position in the states in question.
Except it had.
There were a couple states that were still in the process, but nearly every northern state had 0 slaves by 1860
AFTER secession had begun and militarization had already started. Nevermind the fact that there is a difference between slavery being banned and 0 people owning slaves. Nobody in my neighborhood owns a tractor, but tractors are perfectly legal. Would you care to link me to a legislative ban on slavery in the US prior to the emancipation proclamation?
A) See my statement above about Lincoln's priorities
B) Lincoln's position (and likely a correct one) was that he could not emancipate all slaves without a constitutional amendment. The Emancipation Proclamation only affected combatants because it was justified as a war power.
Speculation that seems to be premised on placing former politicians on a pedestal, when everything we know historically and presently about individuals with power suggests that we should not. We will never know Lincoln's actual motivations- only the sanitized versions he announced publically after significant time spent with advisors.
Utter silliness. If the states themselves tell you the CAUSE - how can you then claim mere correlation?
Easy- because It wasn't "the states themselves tell[ing] [the Union] the cause," but rather representatives of a minority of the states in rebellion noted it as one of the causes.
The Republican platform of 1860 is completely dominated by slavery, secession, etc. - they were at this point basically pleading to just get back to pre-Dred Scott which was going to make slavery, for all intents and purposes, legal in every state.
For all intents and purposes, extra-jurisdictional recognition of slaves as property would not make the entire north slave states, if only because the land in the north was predominately unsuited for large-scale farming as it was in the south, and the primary labor jobs in the north weren't suitable for completely uneducated, unskilled labor. It had far more to do with expansion into the West than boosting slavery in the north. Never mind the fact that when the first state seceded, there were still slaves in nearly every northern state anyway.
If your argument is that slavery wasn't racially biased - I think you will have a very long way to go to prove that case.
Slavery came before the resulting racism; the first slaves in the americas were white, and the african slave trade, once established, resulted in a much larger supply of slaves at a cheaper cost than elsewhere. The predominance of black slaves was essentially one of supply and demand. Racist attitudes in respect to slavery arose after the fact. Much modern racism directed towards black people, I conject would be directed towards latinos instead, were we sourcing slaves from the americas.
In fact, it is one of the vectors of attack Lincoln used against it. Some people used the existence of slavery in the Bible as evidence that it was acceptable and Lincoln's argument was that the Biblical version of slavery was not based on race, so Biblical slavery would allow for white slaves:
Except, there were white slaves, as I've already touched on.
"In Kentucky, perhaps, in many of the Slave States certainly," said Lincoln, "you are trying to establish the rightfulness of Slavery by reference to the Bible. You are trying to show that slavery existed in the Bible times by Divine ordinance. Now Douglas is wiser than you, for your own benefit, upon that subject. Douglas knows that whenever you establish that Slavery was right by the Bible, it will occur that that Slavery was the Slavery of the white man—of men without reference to color—and he knows very well that you may entertain that idea in Kentucky as much as you please, but you will never win any Northern support upon it."
And Lincoln displays his ignorance just as much as any church portraying a caucasian Jesus does. Biblical slavery did not involve 'white' people, but rather individuals from the middle east.
Do you know the causes better than the states themselves? or the soldiers? Can you name any factor that superseded race? Kansas/Nebraska Act, Bleeding Kansas, John Brown, Harper's Ferry, Missouri Compromise, the Fugitive Slave Act, Dred Scott, etc. etc. etc. - nearly every source of tension underlying the war had slavery as its underpinning.
Do you claim to know the causes of the states based off of the words of representatives of a minority of the rebel states that the Union chose to keep records of?
Even if we assume they represented all of the states and not just their own- does the average member of the senate necessarily represent the position of the majority of the individuals from his state?
Do you believe that the rank-and-file soldiers of the confederacy believed they were fighting for slavery, specifically? Or that their officers believed that?
Do you further claim that the Union government was completely transparent, and didn't cover up undesirable information while exaggerating aspects that portrayed the Union in a favorable light? That's a standard that no government I'm aware of has ever lived up to.
Texas - Causes statement - vote was 166 to 8 in favor; Texas also submitted the ordinance the voters - it passed by a vote of 44,317 (77.3%) to 13,020 (22.7%)
Then, these states unanimously adopted the Confederate Constitution which declared that no "law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." and that transit "with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired." and that in any new territory "the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress".
AFTER secession had begun and militarization had already started.
100% incorrect. The census started in June 1860 and was completed before any state had seceded. It was compiled and published just before the attack on Fort Sumter.
Speculation that seems to be premised on placing former politicians on a pedestal
It is based on historical documents with the words of the person themselves (not just Lincoln) - what is the counter position based on?
Acknowledging that the civil war was primarily driven by slavery is not an attempt to say these are the good guys or bad guys or put anyone on a pedestal - it is acceptance of fact - contemporaneously accepted by both sides.
We will never know Lincoln's actual motivations
Whether slavery was the primary cause of the civil war is not dependent on whether Lincoln was lying his entire life in his public and private correspondence and actions.
As to not issuing the proclamation until 2 years after the start of the war: - first, he announced the idea to his Cabinet in mid-1862 and his advisors had him wait for a union victory to make it public which he did in September 1862. Second, he tried several things before that like supporting the Corwin Amendment in his inaugural address, attempting compensated emancipation (not just in 1861, but also in 1837 and 1849), etc.
recognition of slaves as property would not make the entire north slave states
The effect of Dred Scott would have been that after you obtain your slave in a slave state, you could then proceed to move into any state with your slaves.
if only because the land in the north was predominately unsuited for large-scale farming as it was in the south
Determining whether something is legal does not depend on its level of practicality. Also, the north did still have lots of farms just not the same extent as the South. This also seems to exclude other labor like textile mills where the north employed girls as young as 7 - surely slaves could have mustered the sophisticated labor of 7 year old girls, no?
when the first state seceded, there were still slaves in nearly every northern state anyway.
Well - we seem to be finding out why your opinion is so off - it is founded on incorrect information.
South Carolina seceded December 20, 1860 - after the 1860 census (which I linked to above) was complete.
the first slaves in the americas were white
A) Incorrect, the first slaves were the African slaves of San Miguel de Gualdape in the early 1500s - the first white indentured servants came about 100 years later. (See also the case of John Punch for an example of the disparate treatment of the two.)
B) The evolving praxis of slavery has no weight in determining whether slavery was the casus belli of the civil war.
C) I will clarify that my argument is that the slavery fought for by the Confederacy was specifically that of "negro slavery" (as specifically and unanimously stated in the Confederate Constitution).
Biblical slavery did not involve 'white' people
Maybe it doesn't read well - if you look again, you will see that he corrects himself by changing "white men" to "men without reference to color" - I presume he may have done this on purpose to be more clear about the implications, but at minimal point of fact his corrected statement is true.
Do you claim to know the causes of the states based off of the words of representatives of a minority of the rebel states that the Union chose to keep records of?
Yes, I take the word of the states when their representatives vote on causes for something as monumental as secession, especially when done proximally to the election of a president whose party platform is based on the erosion of slavery, and when the electorate is given a chance to vote on the most blatant of said causes passes the same not just by getting more than 50%, but with more than a 50% MARGIN. And, when the soldiers fighting that war acknowledge that it was about slavery - (my 'See also' link from above), and when no other major factors are given.
I cannot continue debating when you're going to cite sources that don't even back your claims. It takes some significant interpretation to interpret all of those as making slavery the primary driver, beyond it simply being the final straw so to speak.
The ONLY valid thing here is the point regarding the census date. That was my mistake, and I concede that much. I reiterate, though, that not having slaves is not the same thing as slaves being banned- they weren't. Negative attitudes towards slavery conveniently arose in the north just as industries shifted in a direction that slave labor wasn't suited for, causing a wealth shift towards the south. Hmm.
I'm bowing out, but not conceding, and leaving the last word to you. I maintain, however, that it is perfectly acceptable as a symbol of ones heritage. Even if i were to concede that said heritage was, in fact, racist (I don't), that doesn't change the fact that it is a symbol of someones heritage, and does not imply any racism in one keeping at as such. Nor is it appropriate to label it a hate symbol, by any stretch.
"We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations [return of slaves], and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof."
"The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: '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."' "
"This stipulation [return of slaves] was so material to the compact, that without it that compact would not have been made."
"an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations"
"enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive [slave] is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution [return of slaves]"
"The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress."
"In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals"
"inciting servile [slave] insurrection in the State of Virginia"
"Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation."
"The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor [runaway slaves]."
"We affirm that these ends [slavery] 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 [slavery]"
"and have denied the rights of property [slavery] 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 [slaves] 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 [slave] insurrection."
"it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government" [election of Lincoln]
"a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself" [likely a reference to the Personal liberty laws enacted after the Prigg ruling]
"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 [Lincoln], whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery."
"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."
"has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons [blacks] 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 [slavery] and safety. "
"On the 4th day of March next, this party [Lincoln] will take possession of the Government."
"It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory [expansion of slave states], that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States."
"The guaranties of the Constitution [return of slaves] will then no longer exist"
"The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy."
"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."
"These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun."
"we do not overstate the dangers to our institution [slavery]"
"The hostility to this institution [slavery] commenced before the adoption of the Constitution"
"It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right [slavery] on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction."
"It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion."
"It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union"
"It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes [slave] insurrection and incendiarism in our midst."
"It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of [slave] emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists."
"It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better."
"It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture [slavery], to prostrate our industrial pursuits [slavery] and to destroy our social system [slavery]."
"We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property [slavery] worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this [slaves] as well as every other species of property."
For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.
"They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations [return of slaves] to us in reference to that property [slaves]"
"A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization [Republican Party] into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia."
"The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party."
"While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose."
"By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state."
"The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the way of the formation of the Constitution."
"While the subordination and the political and social inequality of the African race was fully conceded by all, it was plainly apparent that slavery would soon disappear from what are now the non-slave-holding States of the original thirteen."
"The opposition to slavery was then, as now, general in those States and the Constitution was made with direct reference to that fact."
"But a distinct abolition party was not formed in the United States for more than half a century after the Government went into operation."
"The Constitution delegated no power to Congress to excluded either party from its free enjoyment; therefore our right [slavery] was good under the Constitution."
"Our rights [slavery] were further fortified by the practice of the Government from the beginning."
"Slavery was forbidden in the country northwest of the Ohio River by what is called the ordinance of 1787."
"In all of these acquisitions the policy of the Government was uniform. It opened them to the settlement of all the citizens of all the States of the Union. They emigrated thither with their property of every kind (including slaves)."
"All were equally protected by public authority in their persons and property [slaves] until the inhabitants became sufficiently numerous and otherwise capable of bearing the burdens and performing the duties of self-government, when they were admitted into the Union upon equal terms with the other States"
"In 1820 the North endeavored to overturn this wise and successful policy [with the Missouri Compromise] and demanded that the State of Missouri should not be admitted into the Union unless she first prohibited slavery within her limits by her constitution."
"After a bitter and protracted struggle the North was defeated in her special object [abolition], but her policy and position led to the adoption of a section in the law for the admission of Missouri, prohibiting slavery in all that portion of the territory acquired from France lying North of 36 [degrees] 30 [minutes] north latitude and outside of Missouri."
"Mr. Jefferson condemned the restriction and foresaw its consequences and predicted that it would result in the dissolution of the Union. His prediction is now history."
"The North demanded the application of the principle of prohibition of slavery to all of the territory acquired from Mexico and all other parts of the public domain then and in all future time."
"The claim itself was less arrogant and insulting than the reason with which she supported it. That reason was her fixed purpose to limit, restrain, and finally abolish slavery in the States where it exists."
"The South with great unanimity declared her purpose to resist the principle of prohibition to the last extremity."
"This particular question, in connection with a series of questions affecting the same subject, was finally disposed of by the defeat of prohibitory legislation."
"The Presidential election of 1852 resulted in the total overthrow of the advocates of restriction [of slavery] and their party friends."
"Immediately after this result the anti-slavery portion of the defeated party resolved to unite all the elements in the North opposed to slavery an to stake their future political fortunes upon their hostility to slavery everywhere."
"This is the [Republican] party to whom the people of the North have committed the Government. They raised their standard in 1856 and were barely defeated. They entered the Presidential contest again in 1860 and succeeded."
"The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees it its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers."
"The prohibition of slavery in the Territories is the cardinal principle of this organization."
"The majority of the people of the North in 1860 decided it in their own favor. We refuse to submit to that judgment, and in vindication of our refusal we offer the Constitution of our country and point to the total absence of any express power to exclude us."
"for above twenty years the non-slave-holding States generally have wholly refused to deliver up to us persons charged with crimes affecting slave property."
"Our confederates, with punic faith, shield and give sanctuary to all criminals who seek to deprive us of this property [slaves] or who use it to destroy us."
"This clause of the Constitution [return of slaves] has no other sanction than their good faith; that is withheld from us"
"A similar provision of the Constitution requires them to surrender fugitives from labor [slaves]."
"This provision [return of slaves] and the one last referred to were our main inducements for confederating with the Northern States. Without them it is historically true that we would have rejected the Constitution."
"In the fourth year of the Republic Congress passed a law to give full vigor and efficiency to this important provision [return of slaves]."
"This act [return of slaves] depended to a considerable degree upon the local magistrates in the several States for its efficiency."
"The non-slave-holding States generally repealed all laws intended to aid the execution of that act, and imposed penalties upon those citizens whose loyalty to the Constitution and their oaths might induce them to discharge their duty."
"Congress then passed the act of 1850, providing for the complete execution of this duty by Federal officers."
"This law, which their own bad faith rendered absolutely indispensible for the protection of constitutional rights, was instantly met with ferocious revilings and all conceivable modes of hostility."
"Yet it stands to-day a dead letter for all practicable purposes in every non-slave-holding State in the Union."
"We have their convenants, we have their oaths to keep and observe it [return of slaves], but the unfortunate claimant, even accompanied by a Federal officer with the mandate of the highest judicial authority in his hands, is everywhere met with fraud, with force, and with legislative enactments to elude, to resist, and defeat him."
"In several of our confederate States a citizen cannot travel the highway with his servant [slave] who may voluntarily accompany him, without being declared by law a felon and being subjected to infamous punishments."
"For twenty years past the abolitionists and their allies in the Northern States have been engaged in constant efforts to subvert our institutions and to excite insurrection and servile war among us."
"Some of these efforts have received the public sanction of a majority of the leading men of the Republican party in the national councils, the same men who are now proposed as our rulers."
"These efforts have in one instance led to the actual invasion of one of the slave-holding States, and those of the murderers and incendiaries who escaped public justice by flight have found fraternal protection among our Northern confederates."
"by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property [slaves] in the common territories of the Union"
"put it [slavery] under the ban of the Republic in the States where it exists and out of the protection of Federal law everywhere"
"they give sanctuary to thieves and incendiaries who assail it [slavery] to the whole extent of their power, in spite of their most solemn obligations and covenants"
"their avowed purpose is to subvert our society and subject us not only to the loss of our property [slaves] but the destruction of ourselves, our wives, and our children, and the desolation of our homes, our altars, and our firesides"
"She [Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time."
"Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy."
"The controlling majority of the Federal Government, under various pretences and disguises, has so administered the same as to exclude the citizens of the Southern States, unless under odious and unconstitutional restrictions, from all the immense territory owned in common by all the States on the Pacific Ocean, for the avowed purpose of acquiring sufficient power in the common government to use it as a means of destroying the institutions [slavery] of Texas and her sister slaveholding States."
"By the disloyalty of the Northern States and their citizens and the imbecility of the Federal Government, infamous combinations of incendiaries and outlaws have been permitted in those States and the common territory of Kansas to trample upon the federal laws, to war upon the lives and property of Southern citizens in that territory, and finally, by violence and mob law, to usurp the possession of the same as exclusively the property of the Northern States."
"When we advert to the course of individual non-slave-holding States, and that a majority of their citizens, our grievances assume far greater magnitude."
"deliberately, directly or indirectly violated the 3rd clause of the 2nd section of the 4th article [the fugitive slave clause] [their annotation in this case, not mine] of the federal constitution, and laws passed in pursuance thereof"
"thereby annulling a material provision of the compact [the fugitive slave clause], designed by its framers to perpetuate the amity between the members of the confederacy and to secure the rights of the slave-holding States in their domestic institutions-- a provision [the fugitive slave clause] founded in justice and wisdom, and without the enforcement of which the compact fails to accomplish the object of its creation."
"Some of those States have imposed high fines and degrading penalties upon any of their citizens or officers who may carry out in good faith that provision [the fugitive slave clause] of the compact, or the federal laws enacted in accordance therewith."
"In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party"
"now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery"
"proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color-- a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law"
"They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States."
"For years past this abolition organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding States."
"they have placed the slave-holding States in a hopeless minority in the federal congress, and rendered representation of no avail in protecting Southern rights against their exactions and encroachments"
"They have for years past encouraged and sustained lawless organizations to steal our slaves and prevent their recapture, and have repeatedly murdered Southern citizens while lawfully seeking their rendition."
"They have, through the mails and hired emissaries, sent seditious pamphlets and papers among us to stir up servile [slave] insurrection and bring blood and carnage to our firesides."
"They have sent hired emissaries among us to burn our towns and distribute arms and poison to our slaves for the same purpose."
"They have impoverished the slave-holding States by unequal and partial legislation, thereby enriching themselves by draining our substance."
"They have refused to vote appropriations for protecting Texas against ruthless savages, for the sole reason that she is a slave-holding State."
"by the combined sectional vote of the seventeen non-slave-holding States, they have elected as president and vice-president of the whole confederacy two men whose chief claims to such high positions are their approval of these long continued wrongs, and their pledges to continue them to the final consummation of these schemes for the ruin of the slave-holding States."
"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 in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states."
"By the secession of six of the slave-holding States, and the certainty that others will speedily do likewise, Texas has no alternative but to remain in an isolated connection with the North, or unite her destinies with the South."
"WHEREAS, the election of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin to the offices of President and Vice-President of the United States of America, by a sectional party, avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions [slavery] and to the peace and security of the people of the State of Alabama"
"Every free white person who, after the date aforesaid, may be born within the territory of this State, or may be born outside of that territory, of a father or mother who then was a citizen of this State, shall be a citizen thereof."
"So, also, every person who, by birth or naturalization, was a citizen of the United States of America, or of any slaveholding State of North America, and who, within twelve months after the date of the Ordinance of Secession, shall come to reside in this State"
"But if such person was born in a foreign State or country, or in a non-slaveholding State, he or she shall take the oath of allegiance to this State"
"in no case shall citizenship extend to any person who is not a free white person, except those provided for in the first section of this ordinance." [only free black citizens already in the state are allowed to be citizens in the new state]
"the navigable waters of this State shall remain forever highways, free to the citizens of this State, and of such States as may unite with the State of Alabama in a Southern Slaveholding Confederacy."
"That all vessels built in Alabama or elsewhere, one-third of which shall be owned by a citizen or citizens of Alabama, or of any other slaveholding State of the late Federal Union, and commanded by a citizen thereof, and no other, shall be registered as vessels of Alabama, under the authority of the Collector of the Port aforesaid."
"That this Convention will proceed to elect, by ballot, one Deputy from each Congressional District in this State, and two Deputies from the State at large, at twelve o'clock, meridian, on Friday, the 18th of January instant, who shall be authorized to meet in Convention such Deputies as may be appointed by the other slaveholding States who may secede from the Federal Union"
"The nullification of these laws [return of fugitives and slaves] by the Legislatures of two thirds of the non slaveholding States important as it is in itself is additionally as is furnishing evidence of an open disregard of constitutional obligation, and of the rights and interests of the slaveholding States and of a deep and inveterate hostility to the people of these States."
"By the agency of a large proportion of the members from the non slaveholding States books have been published and circulated amongst us the direct tendency and avowed purpose of which is to excite [slave] insurrection and servile war with all their attendant horrors."
"A President has recently been elected [Lincoln], an obscure and illiterate man without experience in public affairs or any general reputation mainly if not exclusively on account of a settled and often proclaimed hostility to our institutions [slavery] and a fixed purpose to abolish them."
"It is denied that it is the purpose of the party soon to enter into the possession of the powers of the Federal Government to abolish slavery by any direct legislative act."
"This has never been charged by any one. But it has been announced by all the leading men and presses of the party that the ultimate accomplishment of this result [abolishing slavery] is its settled purpose and great central principle."
"That no more slave States shall be admitted into the confederacy and that the slaves from their rapid increase (the highest evidence of the humanity of their owners will become value less."
"What must be the condition of the slaves themselves when their number becomes so large that their labor will be of no value to their owners."
"Their natural tendency every where shown where the race has existed to idleness vagrancy and crime increased by an inability to procure subsistence."
"Can any thing be more impudently false than the pretense that this state of things is to be brought about from considerations of humanity to the slaves."
"It is in so many words saying to you we will not burn you at the stake but we will torture you to death by a slow fire we will not confiscate your property [slaves] and consign you to a residence and equality with the african but that destiny certainly awaits your children – and you must quietly submit or we will force you to submission – men who can hesitate to resist such aggressions are slaves already and deserve their destiny."
"The members of the Republican party has denied that the party will oppose the admission of any new state where slavery shall be tolerated. But on the contrary they declare that on this point they will make no concession or compromise. It is manifest that they will not because to do so would be the dissolution of the party."
"Additional territory is generally only acquired by conquest or purchase. In either case the slaveholding States contribute at least this equal proportion of men or money – we think much more than an equal proportion."
"Last and not least it has been proclaimed that the election of a President is an authoritative approval of all the principles [abolition] avowed by the person elected and by the party convention which nominated him."
CORRECTION: I used the wrong link for Louisiana - it should have pointed here
"She was impelled to this action to preserve her honor, her safety, her property and the free institutions [slavery] so sacred to her people."
"The people of Louisiana were unwilling to endanger their liberties and property [slaves] by submission to the despotism of a single tyrant, or the canting tyranny of pharisaical majorities."
"Louisiana looks to the formation of a Southern confederacy to preserve the blessings of African slavery"
"both States have large areas of fertile, uncultivated lands, peculiarly adapted to slave labor"
"and they are both so deeply interested in African slavery that it may be said to be absolutely necessary to their existence, and is the keystone to the arch of their prosperity."
"The people of Louisiana would consider it a most fatal blow to African slavery, if Texas either did not secede or having seceded should not join her destinies to theirs in a Southern Confederacy."
"If she remains in the union the abolitionists would continue their work of incendiarism and murder."
"with abolition treachery would leave her unprotected frontier to the murderous inroads of hostile savages."
"A professedly friendly federal administration gave Texas no substantial protection against the Indians or abolitionists, and what must she look for from an administration avowedly inimical and supported by no vote within her borders."
"As a separate republic, Louisiana remembers too well the whisperings of European diplomacy for the abolition of slavery in the times of annexation not to be apprehensive of bolder demonstrations from the same quarter and the North in this country."
"The people of the slaveholding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery."
"The isolation of any one of them from the others would make her a theatre for abolition emissaries from the North and from Europe."
"Her existence would be one of constant peril to herself and of imminent danger to other neighboring slave-holding communities."
"taking it as the basis of our new government we hope to form a slave-holding confederacy that will secure to us and our remotest posterity the great blessings its authors designed in the Federal Union."
"With the social balance wheel of slavery to regulate its machinery, we may fondly indulge the hope that our Southern government will be perpetual."
"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."
"The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any state of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property: and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired."
"In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states."
Negative attitudes towards slavery conveniently arose in the north just as industries shifted in a direction that slave labor wasn't suited for. Hmm.
Also incorrect - the absence of northern slavery was largely a result of the wars with Britain (including the Earl of Dunmore proclamation) and increasing religious sentiment (e.g. the Quakers)
I reiterate, though, that not having slaves is not the same thing as slaves being banned- they weren't.
Wrong again...
The year each of the northern states abolished slavery (though implementation was at times gradual):
Heard Lincoln's second inaugural again the other day and thought I should put a quote from it here:
"One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it."
Also worth noting that slavery is the specific gravamen in the first address as well... - including: "One section of our country believes slavery is right and ought to be extended, while the other believes it is wrong and ought not to be extended. This is the only substantial dispute."
(thousandin1-You can continue to demur, I certainly have more than proved the case - just wanted to post here so I have my arguments on the subject together so they are easier to find/reference later)
Lincoln said that the Constitution was based on the ideal that: "ALL men are created equal." The Confederate states only considered their "niggers" to be 3/5ths of a person (and THAT was, apparently, a minority opinion)! THAT was against the founding principles of America. Anyone who thinks he should have ignored that, or that "most" of the countries citizens supported it, is blind. The VAST majority of America was against it and the abuse of humanity that went with it! The war WAS about slavery and the greed of those who put profit above our founding principles! Funny, we still seem to have those problems today. profit over principle!
What many people fail to realize is that slavery was not the only major issue behind the Civil War. States versus federal rights was a driving cause as well as the economy.
That being said, the flag symbolizes things other then slavery and while it is somewhat racist it is largely heritage.
That's the worst revisionist bs that has ever come out of the American public school system. The issues of state's rights only came up when the South needed to justify itself after the war. The Confederacy was formed for the simple reason that by electing Abraham Lincoln the majority of Americans had indicated that they weren't going to stand for the expansion of slavery, a policy that would have eventually destroyed the slave based economy of the Deep South, for non-slave holders the war made little sense. The Confederate flag then stands for racism and the idea that slavery is justified if you make a lot of money in the process.
Actually, it is the American public school system that is full of bull. The winners of a war are the ones who write the history, and because of the Union winning they focused on slavery because it was the moral issue that made them the heros. If you read an actual history book then you would find that only 26% of the people who lived in the South owned slaves due to how expensive they were.
In actuality, the election of Lincoln was only the final straw. What really happened was that there was a build up of tensions and that was what led to the Civil War. One of the major issue was the North getting involved in the economy of the South via tariffs in order to protect Northern industrialization. The south would end up paying an unproportional amount of the taxes which would also go to help the North rather than the people actually paying the taxes. So paying taxes to a group of people who wanted to destroy the culture of the South did not make much sense. As for States' Rights vs Federal Rights, it had been going on since Adams and Jefferson so saying that it was an issue created after the war does not make much sense.
If you want to say because of the idea of slavery being behind the Confederate that the flag itself is racist than that is fine, but by the same logic that makes the American flag the most racists symbol ever because behind it is the idea that killing Native Americans is okay, nuking cities that have Japanese civilians is okay, and that declaring war upon peaceful nations is okay.
Warlin really hit the nail on the head. The war had little to do with Slavery. If anything, it had more to do with the compromise of 1850 which took away more State's rights. yet, the North was not following the Federal laws put into power.
The south felt screwed. They were forced to follow Federal law that the North wanted but the North wouldn't follow it.
You can't say it had little to do with slavery, but more to do with the Compromise of 1850 - the Compromise of 1850 was an attempt to deal with slavery....
The U.s. has discriminated against blacks and Indians in the past. Is the U.S. flag racist?
Just a thought.
I will admit that most of the people I have seen with confederate flags ARE somewhat racist and uneducated. Most educated people that are not racist that are proud of their southern heritage don't have a confederate flag in their garage.
I'm not a big fan of the confederate flag. But I don't think it should directly be linked to racism.
I agree with you 100%. I was just about to say that. Your argument can be used in other instances, especially in countries which used to have colonies such as France, UK, Holland, Italy, Belgium (just to name a few).
And you are also right about that most americans who are using the confederate flag to promote some idiotic racist ideology are extremely uneducated and are strong followers of incest inbreeding....oh, and these racist inbreeds were living on this continent before Columbus and Native American Indians too? See, there is more than one reason why incest is wrong....it promotes stupidity.
Again, the arguement isn't a question of someone's right to do something, but of the meaning behind practicing that right.
One has all types of rights around here.
But,
Pretend I'm a proud German who just feels that Germany was really really united under the 3rd reich, I mean, I don't personally have a problem with Jews, so it should be cool for me to wave a nazi flag right? I mean, no one would get the wrong meaning from that right?
comparing a nazi flag to a confederate flag is a very different one. confederate flag was around before and after civil war, nazi flag was around couple of decades. very big difference.
aye, ive been reading alot about what you've had to say about this subject. And i agree 100% wit you bossman. i have a debate on this exact topic. its me and my partner against another two. they are for the confederate flag and me and my partner are of course not. its hard finding info about why the confederate flag is racist becuz i need actual facts to support my arguement from actually experts. i for one, already know the truth behind the flag and what u said to all those other people, u couldnt have said it any better than tht. But how do u know so much about this topic? i could use u as my expert.
Just correct me if I am wrong. Did black men not fight on the side of the evil Confederate Battle Flag waving, evil, southern white man.
Bottom line a Northerner can own slaves at that time and all is good, but a southerner owns a slave at the same time and all things related to that period a racest .
The US changed its position with regard to slavery (with the 13th Amendment, etc.) - that is the difference between a flag that represents a racist nation and a flag that represents a nation with a racist past.
The Confederate flag is a symbol of Southern heritage. I am part of a family that fought in the Civil War. The McCoy family fought for the free rights of the Southern States of America. I would fight for my flag any day and I won't stop till everyone understands what the real meaning of the Confederate flag is. i believe the the flag should not be seen a racism but as a flag of rights.
The flag itself is not a racist symbol when it is used right. However, that hill was used to oppress African Americans a long time ago during the Civil War. So...it isn't a racist symbol, but it does have a racist heritage.
The flag is symbol of southern pride and heritage. Now sure the flag has people behind it that that are racist but that is the only thing that people like to focus on. Another example of this would be the swastika. Now everybody knows it was he symbol of the Nazi party and they killed a bunch of Jews so therefore the swastika has to be evil, well what about before Hitler. People seem to look over the fact that the swastika is also a religious symbol for Buddhism and Hinduism.So if you look at these pieces of information is the flag really racist that would be a no. We just like to make people in America feel comfortable so we do stuff like this. So WHITE POWER and remember that is racist but BLACK POWER is OK with everyone.
The war has come and gone 150 years ago, what does it matter now? It could be construed either way, heritage to the Southern states for a war that they almost won, or a symbol of racism. I choose the former: it is a heritage, though it is not up to me to decide if it is to be forgotten.
Yeah i used to think the confederate flag was racist, but than i looked into what the confederates stand for. They don't stand for slavery or racism. They stand for their heritage and state over governmant. Plus i saw a black man with a confederate flag on his truck soooo.
Ya know what to me its heritage but hell where i grew up we fly that flag with honor and pride and you bet your ass im racist and guess what if someone wants to give me a dirty glare for what i believe in then you can kiss it son cuz thats what the civil war started upon the yanks wanted the south to join their side but thats why its called the rebel flag and as much as anyone says they aint racist and they proudly wave that flag for heritage you aint true to the history and your a pathetic exuse for sucking the bungholes of our nation...Oh Martin Lucifer Jr. what have you done!!! damn you!!!
While i agree that it is some what a sign of racism i think that you should be able to fly a confederate flag ware ever you may please. i consider that it is censorship and i think that is wrong on things like this. flaying a confederate flag is a freedom of speech type thing.
Why is it that the confederate flag wasn't considered racist until the blacks started to find everything whites did, "RACISTS"? but yet they can call one another the "N" word? lmao at them..... Do they know what the word "double standard" means? I think it's just one more right that they try to take away from the whites.. To show us they can get away with anything and everything.. They kill, steal and rape like a bunch of typical Africans. Their own people sold them into slavery. How smart was that? Our country has been belittled by a so called President so much that we look like a third world country. There's another "get away with" anything.. A Muslim running our country to the ground. Its all a ploy to take over our country anyway they can. If you don't like the U.S.A. then get the hell out.
This is the Wiki definition of the Confederate flag "the Confederate Flag does not represent and never has represented racism. It is a symbol of southern heritage, representing freedom, states rights, individual responsibility, and resistance to an out of control federal government.
It may be true that some racists have used the Confederate flag, but racists also wave the American flag. Consider this: No slave ship ever sailed from a Confederate port or under a Confederate flag. On the contrary, virtually every American slave ship was from either New York or one of the New England states and they all sailed under the United States Flag. Also, at the time of the American Civil War, slavery had been practiced in every state and colony in America and was still being practiced in several northern states, under the Stars and Stripes, even during the War Between the States.
Ulysses S. Grant, commanding general of the United States Army during the Civil War was a slave holder. Robert E. Lee, commander of the Confederate Army, was against slavery. The Confederate constitution outlawed the slave trade and Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America, proposed a plan to end slavery altogether. There were more free blacks, and also more abolitionists, in the South than in the North. Also, tens of thousands of black soldiers fought for the Confederate States of America in a war which they considered a second American revolution, "War for Southern Independence."
Unfortunately racist groups have used the Confederate flag in recent years, but those same groups, especially the Ku Klux Klan, have historically used the American flag for a much longer period of time.
The truth is, neither the American Flag nor the Confederate Flag is racist. If people who are racists fly either flag, that does not mean the flag itself represents racism." I think this sums up what the Flag stands for and if it's use by Racists makes it a Racist Flag then so is the Stars and Stripes, The Union Flag and the Flag Of St George
- "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."
- "1. The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states, and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any state of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property: and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired."
- "the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states."
I assume you read my whole post and that it was quoted from Wikipedia if it's incorrect fair enough the main concern for me is that you are also quoting from the same source which makes does not prove either of us right or wrong it just shows that Wikipedia is an unreliable source.
Forgetting the fact that Wikipedia may be unreliable it is not debateable that the North did not feel Blacks were equal to Whites many northerners were involved in the slave trade and what I have always found interesting is that once Northern soldiers had "freed" Black slaves they worked them harder and treated them harsher, also the Confederate army had Blacks fighting side by side with Whites whilst the Northern army kept Blacks and Whites segregated
You paste a large blob of opinion (which no longer exists) from a wikipedia page and somehow that is the same as a wikisource page where you can click and see the original document.
So your telling me there were no slaves owned in the North and when slaves were freed the Northern soldiers treated them with respect and were nice to them, also are you trying to tell me black soldiers were not segregated in the Northern army or that blacks did not fight for the confederacy?
There were Northern generals quoted as saying that if they believed the war was being fought over the right to own slaves they'd switch sides immediately. History is written by the winners and because slavery has become a dirty word the Civil War is now seen as a war over the freedom of the slave with the north portrayed as the gallant slave freeing heroes and the south the evil slave traders, reality is rarely that simple. At the time slavery was not seen as the big issue because of the opposition a lot of people did not think the ban was going to be implemented nationwide. Hence the generals comments about the war not being fought over slavery
As I said here, "Lincoln campaigned on eliminating slavery (constitutionally). Upon his election, the south began to secede. Lincoln's then immediate goal was preservation of the Union."
Re: Lincoln campaigned on eliminating slavery (constitutionally)
See my comments here, here and here for comments from the states as to why they were seceding.
Re: Lincoln's then immediate goal was preservation of the Union
See: Letter to Horace Greeley: "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." - Lincoln,
At the time slavery was not seen as the big issue because of the opposition a lot of people did not think the ban was going to be implemented nationwide.
That is incorrect. Slavery vs abolition was an issue of paramount importance at the time. The north thought the result of the Dred Scott case could end up legalizing slavery nationwide, and the south thought that Lincoln's eventual goal was abolition nationwide.
So your telling me there were no slaves owned in the North and when slaves were freed the Northern soldiers treated them with respect and were nice to them, also are you trying to tell me black soldiers were not segregated in the Northern army or that blacks did not fight for the confederacy?
The flag is an important part of American history and should always be respected.
I would like to know why the majority of people that claim this flag stands for racist beliefs are usually from the North. It is a strange coincidence.
Now i just so happen to be righting a research paper on the history of this flag thats how I came across this website. I'd like to share some of my discoveries.
During the beginnings of the civil war the largest plantation with the most slaves of the CSA just happened to be owned by a free black man.
The majority of black rebel soldiers fought along side white men and were treated equally when it came to food rations, weapons, etc.... While in the Northern Army the black soldiers would try to flee do to their poor treatment. Contrary to what most modern day northerners think back in those times the north had their fair share of slaves as well. Just not the numbers the south did because the northern economy had moved away from an agricultural based to a more industry based economy. So the norths need for slaves was not a great as the Souths.
But like some reviewers have said before "the winners write the history". The Battle flag, which is one of many confederate flags, no more stands for racism than the present day American flag. This skewed belief arose when the KKK started using it to represent themselves with it, but they equally use the American flag as well so why is the Battle Flag labeled with racist connotation? Because the winners write the history. It's as simple as that. I bet out of the 40 some people that voted it as representing racism, 35 or better didn't grow up in the south.
If you truly believe this flag represents racism then you need to go to youtube and look up "blacks and the (rebel, confederate, southern flag)" or whatever else you people want to misname it because you don't know any of the history behind it and see what intelligent southern blacks have to say about our shared history.
Ok I get how some people think it's racist but it's not some African Americans hand rebel flags and they are proud of it some African Americans served for the south and are proud of it so why would they be racist against theirself. Plus didn't the American flag supporters not saying I'm not one. But didn't they push the native Americans out and not like them and they call the confederate flag racest!! I just think that almost every flag in the world has racist in it but nobody says anything about any other flag
are you kidding me.... The confederate flag is not racist yes some racits use it but i love the confedate flag because it symbolizes the past and where my family came from. so i take it very affensive that your calling me a racist. your being hypocrites. is saying the pledge racist i dnt think so.
To say that I am a racist because I have a Confederate flag Bandanna hanging out my back pocket, Is just like me saying some African-American Male/Female sagging his/her pants is a Gang Banger. How are we all quick to judge one another but when we are judged for our trends and loves of something we get defensive and point the finger back? The 'Certain' People had ties to Racism who lived in the south, who bore the Flag. "CERTAIN" People who lived in the south, who bore the flag, HATED racism and didn't understand it at all. A flag is a symbol, a Symbol has a meaning and Meanings can change! The Swastika BEFORE it even was taken over by the German Nazi Party meant Peace Good luck and prosperity. However if you went to a different Country and saw a man with a Swastika symbol on his shirt meditating, you would just judge him right? Say he's a racist and wants to murder millions of Jews? Why? What does this judging give us besides a wall for the person to speak through while you filter what he says instead of hearing his true words. The Rebel/Confederate Flag is not Racist. The Beholder could quite possibly be racist but the flag is not. So dont judge the symbol get to know the Person who is wearing it. Dont judge that book before you read it cover to cover. The flag to me represents a way of life a way of talking shit it represents Sweet Tea Home made wine and Pecan Pie! It is the South, Why do we call the South the South? Because its a whole different place then the West Coast or East Coast. I'm just saying if we could all stop having a temperamental judgement on each-other we can see things differently. #RebelFlagCountryBoy
The flag represents away of life. A war where people fought and died, black and white, or if it makes you feel better blue and gray. Taking down the flag and sticking it in a museum would be equal to taking the flags from any war torn country and not allowing them to fly either. Rebels are born not created, we know who we are and taking down the flag won't change us...and good idea to stop selling the merchandise bearing the flag - that just makes it more valuable.
I do not even know what to say. This topic is not new. I would say she's old as the world. so I can only leave my voice here. I am now looking for a case study writing service. I know that many students are reading these disputes. can you suggest something? I will be very grateful