Seven other state flags with confederate symbolism .

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Greathouse
We must of got off on the wrong foot this time. Because I echo your opinion.

It happens all the time. I think I throw people off sometimes. I don't mean to.

I do feel that South Carolina's hand was forced by people outside of the state and in the media . They had tried to reach a compromise one other time by moving it off the capital Dome.

That happens in a society of people trying to make progress. Not everyone is going to agree, but this is one way change happens. "The people" make a lot of noise and something changes. I don't have a problem with that. Moving the flag is not going to take away racism, but at least it won't seemingly be sanctioned by the state of SC.

And this isn't an new issue, by any means. At least Mississippi's flag has been in the spotlight for a while. It will eventually change. It's in the cards.

But I agreed with removing it because it brought so much biased negativity to the issue . What I am worried about with this thread is that we are going down a slippery slope .

If all seven states decided to change their flags (which they won't), it's not going to hurt ANYONE. I don't see a slippery slope in any of the 50 states changing their flags' design for whatever reason they choose, including public opinion.

I think your concern is the "political correctness" of the issue of some of these flags resembling what SOME determine to be racist. If I'm wrong, let me know.

The way I see it, political correctness is rampant by both political "teams" and both of them will take ANY issue they can and make it into a political issue in order to get votes in the upcoming election. That's what it's all about, IMO. It's the game. That's why I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of a political party. I refuse to join a team, because I don't agree with either of them. And this has been a perfect issue to polarize people on. But I refuse. I support the freedom of the states to vote and choose, even if I disagree with their reasons or if they are "forced" by public opinion.

Yep as we both said repeatedly everyone has a right to their opinion. But in order to get a correct opinion you need to be informed of the whole story. That has not happened since the end of the Civil War .

I've heard some calls for removal of these other states flag's symbols. Seems there's quite bit of confusion about the symbolism as a whole on the flags.
For example when there's no recorded evidence that the current Florida flag's symbols have reference to the Confederate flag:

originally posted by: SgtHamsandwich
The Alabama and Florida flags are based on the Spanish Cross of Burgundy and are representations of the cross of St. Andrew.

They were created due to the history of the Spanish hertiage in the area back in the day.

Florida belonged to the Viceroyalty of New Spain.

Removal of the flag's cross removes the historical symbolism.

To those who are unfamiliar,

“If you show the Florida flag to most people, I would be very, very surprised if many would see any similarity between the Confederate battle flag (which has a blue cross) and the Florida state flag,” Brunday said. “The only design element they share is a cross. It could be that the cross was intended to invoke/evoke the Lost Cause, but if so, we might wonder why white Floridians didn’t incorporate a more explicit reference to it.

cont...

“They all believed it was, but even then, it was a little unclear why,” Brown said. “I’ve seen no specific evidence linking this flag to the Confederate one.”

Historians differ on whether Florida flag echoes Confederate banner

Comment directed to earlier discussion about the flag being made in China:
A question of flying corporatism/ industry outsourced to other countries instead of true symbolism?

Most all Confederate flags I've come upon were made in the US. Wish I could say the same for US flags.

The US flag was used by everyone. I would think that when the Civil war started, things got a little confusing when in "battle". So, create a battle flag that represents the cause. (and you know who you are shooting at) When the world started to get a tiny bit sane about being human to each other, (1949-ish through to the 60's) the Battle flag was raised as a middle finger. School integration, civil rights etc.

Raising that Battle Flag was a way to protest brown and black people rights.

Now in many States the Confederate battle flag is raised in honor of those who died during the war. They are in the North if you can believe it. Raised one day over the graves of those who died in Northern States. They may have died from their wounds, illness or while in battle.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

Flags are not racist, people are

It's not a state flag obviously, but don't forget the Russian Navy Jack

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: DelMarvel

No. The heritage it represents is white people subjugating black people.

Only because you steadfastly refuse to look at any other explanation for the Civil War . You have blinders on and ignore all other information given to you no matter how historically accurate it is.

What information have you given me? A reference to the Nullification crisis? Which even Calhoun wrote was actually about slavery. I notice you never responded to that. The "blinders" accusation can go both ways.

EDIT: Look at the declaration of causes of secession from Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina , Texas and Virginia:

www.civilwar.org...

"Slave" or "Slavery" mentions in total: 83 times.

Mentions of "tariff": Zero.

a reply to: DelMarvel



Here you go I did a thread on it. The mods have warned everyone about personal attacks in this thread. So if your next reply is not discussing the issues you will receive no further communication from me .


So here you go I did a thread on it .



The conspiracy that started the US federal government.


The problem you and I are having is I am an honest man. I will freely admit that the Civil War was fought about slavery. But apparently your position is so weak and your beliefs aren't strong enough to give 1 mm and admit that there is a underlying issue .

I'm going to give you another chance and see if you actually talk about the issues. If not we'll go back to ........

Potato .


Edit;

Read link me to your Calhoun statement I will look into it .

originally posted by: Greathouse
Yep as we both said repeatedly everyone has a right to their opinion. But in order to get a correct opinion you need to be informed of the whole story.

Opinions are neither correct nor incorrect. They are not the same as facts. We can have different opinions and both be correct.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Greathouse
Yep as we both said repeatedly everyone has a right to their opinion. But in order to get a correct opinion you need to be informed of the whole story.

Opinions are neither correct nor incorrect. They are not the same as facts. We can have different opinions and both be correct.

If that's the way you feel substitute the word correct for informed . Because personally I do not want to hear anyone's opinion unless they are fully informed on the situation .

a reply to: Greathouse

I think the civil war was more about the southern states leaving the
union rather than slavery.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: Greathouse

Where did you answer my question, dont change man its easy to see coming you from a mille , nothing got banned, you still own your guns, no fema camps for you, now be a proud american and go buy your flag made in china, ill wait for your pics and show us your new flags lol.

1. I wonder how long we will have our guns since about every liberal and their mother
wants to disarm the American citizens?All dictators from our past disarmed their citizens.
2.Fema/re-educational camps seem to be popping up around the country for some reason.
3.Proud American Mama!
4.We have plenty of materials,plenty of empty factories, we can make our own flags!

originally posted by: Greathouse
I do not want to hear anyone's opinion unless they are fully informed on the situation .

And, of course, YOU are "fully informed" and those who disagree with you are not. If you don't want to hear others' opinions unless they agree with yours, I'm not sure why you'd start a thread specifically asking for others' opinions... but that's your choice.

I'm not interested in discussing an issue with someone who considers my opinion uninformed, simply because I may disagree. So, have a nice thread.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

And, of course, YOU are "fully informed" and those who disagree with you are not.

Apparently you skipped almost every reply I made in this thread. I agree that the civil war was over slavery as nearly everyone has stated. The problem arises that no one acknowledges there were more factors involved than slavery in the Civil War.

Here I posted this thread earlier. I even agreed with everyone's opinion in this just gave them more information. Apparently the shoe you are placing on my foot better fits in your mouth .

my other ATS thread

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: DelMarvel

Here you go I did a thread on it. The mods have warned everyone about personal attacks in this thread. .

Where the heck did I engage in a personal attack???? You accused me of having "blinders on" and I simply said that charge could go both ways. If that constitutes a personal attack then you started it.

The Calhoun quote:

I consider the tariff act as the occasion, rather than the real cause of the present unhappy state of things. The truth can no longer be disguised, that the peculiar domestick [sic] institution of the Southern States [slavery] and the consequent direction which that and her soil have given to her industry, has placed them in regard to taxation and appropriations in opposite relation to the majority of the Union,

a reply to: DelMarvel

Show me a source so I can read the entire statement and we will discuss it . Apparently you have no input on the thread I linked?


Edit ;


Never mind I looked into it myself. You expressed a small portion of John C Calhoun's feelings on the issue . This is a better in-depth look at his position .

By the late 1820's, the north was becoming increasingly industrialized, and the south was remaining predominately agricultural.

In 1828, Congress passed a high protective tariff that infuriated the southern states because they felt it only benefited the industrialized north. For example, a high TARIFF on imports increased the cost of British TEXTILES. This tariff benefited American producers of cloth — mostly in the north. But it shrunk English demand for southern raw cotton and increased the final cost of finished goods to American buyers. The southerners looked to Vice President John C. Calhoun from South Carolina for leadership against what they labeled the "TARIFF OF ABOMINATIONS."


The Ordinance of Nullification issued by South Carolina in 1832 foreshadowed the state's announcement of secession nearly 30 years later.
Calhoun had supported the Tariff of 1816, but he realized that if he were to have a political future in South Carolina, he would need to rethink his position. Some felt that this issue was reason enough for dissolution of the Union. Calhoun argued for a less drastic solution — the doctrine of "NULLIFICATION." According to Calhoun, the federal government only existed at the will of the states. Therefore, if a state found a federal law unconstitutional and detrimental to its sovereign interests, it would have the right to "nullify" that law within its borders. Calhoun advanced the position that a state could declare a national law void.

source


The reason I include my sources is to be fair and honest in my opinion and not pick and choose from someone's position .