Why are only uneducated people offended by the Confederate flag?

[Anonymous]

Now, before you go thinking 'Here we go again, another racist troll post!' please hear me out. For the love of God, I am a White Southern man and the Confederate flag does not mean racism to me.

But, being a Southern gentleman, I'm willing to be patient. It's just a matter of educating people to understand what the flag really means, and how it should be an inspiration to all.

What it means to us in the South is, when the Feds act like tyrants, it's your right and duty as an American to stick it to them and say 'Hey we're not going to bow down slavishly to you. We're going to form our own country.'

Do you honestly think 1/4 million white guys lost their lives to preserve racism? They were defending their country against a tyrant. Now that you know the facts, please stop twisting the meaning and giving power to tyrants.

Updates

+1 y

Ok, I wasn't going to address this, but since YOU STARTED IT, as usual. The South are the winners with regard to what you people call a "Civil War." This history books record that Robert E Lee surrendered, on April 9 as the "beginning of the end." Yet the war was not actually over and on April 15, the Confederate Secret Service shot Abe Lincoln in a theater. New State laws then ensured our success. The South now contributes 33% of the GDP and has the #1 schools. All the world is a stage, Abe.

Updates

+1 y

Just observe how these mindless nitwits have mechanical reactions to the flag. It's like reading a George Orwell novel:
https://youtu.be/3A-p1jcMSoM

[AviatorTom]

I'm not a Southern Gentleman, but I do study history, and you are correct... I agree with you. It's unfortunate that the mostly liberal media and educators keep making the American Civil War only about slavery. Yes, slavery is part of it, but more importantly, it's about states' rights and about how the North did its best to kill the Southern economy.

[Esperdragon]

where the hell are you getting your history from?

[AviatorTom]

@Esperdragon lots of places other than the liberal media and those "historians" who had an axe to grind

[Esperdragon]

lemme ask you this: states' rights to do what?

[AviatorTom]

@Esperdragon For one, the right of a state to determine the prices for its products, not by some Northern businessmen who don't like the competition.

[Esperdragon]

go on? I think there's something you're leaving out

[Asker]

@Esperdragon here's another one. The right not to have their lives dictated by a senile old dumbass like Joe Biden. LOL.

[Twalli]

If you have ever read the CSA Constitution is SPECIFICALLY mentions slavery. It was literally the state's rights to OWN slaves. So their rights, but for one specific thing. I admit that having to pay people to work for you would put a strain on your income and therefore the state's ability to produce what it did, but there were no wage laws in place then.

[AviatorTom]

@Twalli The US Constitution (as originally written an approved by the 13 states) also mentions slavery, that a slave is worth 3/5 of a person when it comes to counting people in a state to determine its representation in Congress. All I'm saying is the the Civil War was about more than just slavery, yet many people don't know that, which is sad.

[Twalli]

It was't designed to maintian slavery the CSA's Constituion was. It was about more than slavery, I am not denying that. It was about unitiing the Union so states know that they can secede just because their choice for president didn't pan out. The CSA's goal was to give states the power to decide on slavery by themselves, in other words, the states have power over the federal government.

[jshm2]

You clearly missed an education.

The so called "confederate flag" was a losers flag, and only held by a small section of the South.

It was only much later it became a racist and White supremacist symbol that had nothing to do with the redneck image of the flag itself.

[Asker]

Well, we're "losers" if you're naive, but you're from the U. K. so I understand. The history books say the South surrendered, fine. But two days later the Confederate Secret Service shot Abe Lincoln while he was attending a play. Read between the lines.

[goaded]

Sore losers, then.

[Asker]

@goaded I might be offended were it not for the fact that America has lived in our world since Abe got his head shot off.

[goaded]

So there's still legal slavery?

[Twalli]

You're actually true, when it was revived it was revivled with the slogan "segregation now, segregation forever". A war hasn't been fought over that, at least not one that left the legal system.

[Lucy68]

I'm a black female born and raised in the south and all my closest guy friends and a few girls had Confederate flag stuff. At one point I actually had a Lynyrd Skynyrd band tee with the Confederate flag on it. To us in my hometown it's known as a southern pride flag not a racist flag

[HippieVeganJewslim]

Same how the thirteen stars flag wasn’t racist, although slavery was permitted back then.

[Twalli]

Again, it isn't offensive to YOU. By that logic, you can do it because it doesn't offend you, I could call you a n** bitch, because it doesn't offend ME. FYI, it actually does offend me, and I would never call anyone either one, but if it didn't, using the logic: "I can do it because I am not offended by it" is bullshit. It matters how others view it.

[Twalli]

by the way, G@G added stars for -igger

[HippieVeganJewslim]

@Twalli as pretty much every country has some unfair laws, their flag can be flown for the unfair laws or not. Many fly the Ukrainian flag, although not because they support the unfair Ukrainian laws.

[Twalli]

@HippieVeganJewslim People in the US fly it because we support Ukraine in the war, which was a collosal fuck-up for Russia.

[HippieVeganJewslim]

@Twalli would you blame people for getting angry at me if I waved the Russian flag, because I’m Russian? Technically, I won’t wave it, but many fellow Russians would. Would you blame others for getting angry at me for waving the Palestinian flag? I support the defence of Palestine in the conflict that they have with Israel 🇮🇱. Similar to people from CSA, they love being citizens of the Confederate States of America.

[Twalli]

@HippieVeganJewslim they aren't. I doesn't exist.

[Twalli]

You are white and it doesn't mean slavery to YOU. So it doesn't offend YOU. Last I checked, people like YOU weren't enslaved in this country due to skin color. The CSA was created to preserve slavery. That's what they fought for. It's in their constitution. Anyone who knows American History knows that. The flag represents the CSA, the CSA supported slavery. It isn't unreasonable to link the two together. They didn't secede because Lincoln wanted to end slavery. That only came later. Slavery was a racist practice, but there has never been a war about racism.

[Twalli]

Update: In no way, shape, or form did The South win the war. One of their goals was to maintain slavery. They failed. As soon as The Emancipation Proclamation went into effect The South had to win to keep slaves. They lost and that is why we are a single country, not two, and also why slavery ended here after that war.

[Asker]

@twalli You're a little brainwashed on this point. When Abe Lincoln was shot, the man who did not get shot was Andrew Johnson, from North Carolina. He allowed the passage of black codes and vetoed everything Congress threw his way. Which is why 100 years later, blacks didn't even know they were free. It was a mind fuck and you are still falling for it 160 years later. www.vice.com/.../blacks-were-enslaved-well-into-the-1960s

[BJP21]

Thank cancel culture. If you understand historical significance it's not offensive. I can look at a Nazi flag and say, it was a symbol of great military power house of the time without going into its representation of supremacy and antisemitism.

It really depends how it triggers the person.

[TheMoralCrusader]

The confederate flag represents southern pride and that is all it represents and the people who appear to be outraged by it well it is fake outrage so they can virtue signal and their opinion means nothing because their minds are programmed and they don't think for themselves at all.

[Astarlessnightsky]

A couple million german died and killed in the WWII definding the Swastika and the third reich, alongside everything it stands for.

So your argument "this many people wouldn't die to defend racism" is not really valid.

[Twalli]

The Swastika doesn't represent Nazi Germany, a lot of Asian countries still use it for what it really represents.

[Astarlessnightsky]

This is true.

However the point i was trying to make, is people will fight and die to defend a racist government which uses flags, like the swastika and the confederate flag and many others

[Anonymous]

Because they know nothing about the Civil War and have a very naive, simplistic view on history.

”South bad! North good!”

That’s about all the nuance you’re going to get. 🙄

[goaded]

South wanted slaves, country didn't. If you feel that that doesn't mean ”South bad! North good!”, there's something wrong with you.

[Twalli]

@goaded The idea to get rid of slavery wasn't the origional goal of The North. Some only entered because to them, you don't secede because you don't like who won the election. Only after seeing what slavery was like a realizing that if they didn't end it, their children would fight a war about slavery did they decide to end it.

[goaded]

@Twalli No, the idea of the North was to keep the country together. The idea of the South was to keep slavery.

[Twalli]

@goaded Origionally, most Northern soldiers were not abolitionists at the start. They changed their minds using the rationale "When we win this war, slavery will still be around and our kids may need to fight a war about that. If we end slavery, our kids won't need to fight that war".

[goaded]

@Twalli Uh, huh. Do you have anything to actually back that up? And if you do, what did the soldiers have to say about it? The country had already decided to abolish slavery, so why would it still be around if the United States won? That sounds a lot like revisionism, to me.

[Twalli]

@goaded 1) I can recommend some books 2) Emancipation Proclomation abolished slavery, that was after the war started.

[Asker]

@goaded See, that's what wrong with you people. You ride around our country on your little high horse thinking you're morally superior and that somehow gives you the right to steal food from Southerners and burn down our houses. Total hypocricy and you support a tyrant.

[Twalli]

It was a war, and the war has been over for over a century.

[goaded]

@Twalli You're right, I apologise. The 1860 election elected the first Republican president, who was only going to stop the expansion of slavery to new states, not abolish it in existing ones. That makes starting the war even more stupid.

(Do you know why Lincoln was not on the ballot in any Southern state?)

[HippieVeganJewslim]

Think that historically, the main difference between CSA and USA is the former allowed slaves. However, before 1861, the USA allowed slaves as well, and many patriotic Yankees still wave the 13 stars and 13 stripes flag. I see no main difference between that flag and the SCA flag.

[goaded]

What does the 13 stars and 13 stripes flag look like? I don't think I've ever seen it.

[HippieVeganJewslim]

@goaded when the stars form a circle, how Betsy Ross designed it. That was when only the original 13 states were in the union.

[goaded]

OK, I think I have seen it. But not at any political rallies or protests, or carried by people trying to break down the doors of the Capitol.

[Snakeyes7]

Because they were the faction that wanted the ability to treat other human beings like property to remain legal and the very idea goes against the foundation of the US that all men are created equal. So yes, they were the bad guys.

[Asker]

Well, slaves were property so the North are the tyrants trying to deprive us of it, in a way that showed no compassion for the slave owners. The moral crusaders did nothing but make things worse for everyone.

[Snakeyes7]

Why should they show compassion? Even if there might be owners who didn't treat them like shit, these slaves are still property and there would be no law against treating them that way because abusing them is legally the same as assaulting a door or any other inanimate object. That was why it was wrong to have them.

[Asker]

In that case, let's declare war on everyone who owns an investment then, since it's obviously abusive to want a return on your money. Oh you own Google stock? Well f* you, it's mine now because you obviously hate women. Where does it end with this woke crap?

[Snakeyes7]

What are you talking about? When you invest in a company, you bet on the success of that company. You own the company not anyone who works there. No one owns anyone there but themselves.

Besides, I have no doubt that the people who work there are paid handsomely for the work they do, if they don't like it then they can leave and I'm sure the benefits Google gives to them are plentiful. These are all things that the slaves could only dream of having.

The two aren't even close to being comparable.

[Asker]

It's a perfectly valid comparison. A slave was an investment, and you are invested in the success of that slave, with regard to their output. So why on Earth would you abuse it unless you liked pissing your money away. You are full of crap if you think its justifable to punish slaveowners on the premise that they are abusive. Google, on the other hand is a company that gives a return based on its output and is known for discrimnating against, harassing, and lowballing women. So you support those activities and you should have your house and land burned to the ground.

[Snakeyes7]

It doesn't matter whether the slave owners are abusive to the slaves or not. The law makes the slaves their property so even if they were abusive, they'd do it with impunity and the slaves couldn't just leave. That's why we made slavery illegal because they are people and not property.

Again, nowadays you are investing in something, you are investing in the profits of a business. You are not owning anyone there, not the CEO, none of the other executives and certainly not their employees. They are not your property so if you go and start attacking them because you aren't satisfied with their performance, you're going to prison whether you are an investor or not.

As far as Google goes, if you actually believe that they make life for women miserable there then don't invest in them, that is a choice you can make.

It utterly baffles and disturbs me how you can't figure out that this is nowhere near the same as holding stocks.

[Asker]

And it utterly baffles me how you think it's justified to take someone's property because you feel you have moral superiority concerning the subject when you are clearly a hypocrite.

[Snakeyes7]

Property? We are talking about slaves here. Like actual human beings who have been deemed property and are legally no different than the toilet you shit in every day.

If you have been thrown into slavery with people who believe wholeheartedly that you are inhuman I have no doubt you'd change your mind.

[Chazmatazz269]

You can’t reason someone out of a position they were never reasoned into in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Because taking offence at the Confederate flag is born of ignorance, and education cures ignorance.

[goaded]

Here we go again, another racist troll post.

[Agagagagaga]

Here we go again with your worthless and painfully stupid comments.

[goaded]

@Agagagagaga He literally asked for it.

[Agagagagaga]

As do you by your very presence. You deserve all the mockery and scorn that comes your way.

In fact you deserve to have a bird take a giant shit on your head. It’d probably be an improvement.

[goaded]

@Agagagagaga You think "Here we go again with your worthless and painfully stupid comments." is mockery and scorn? I think it takes a little more wit than that.

[goaded]

Update: 33% of GDP? Doesn't look like it.

upload.wikimedia.org/.../..._by_U.S._state.svg.png

[Asker]

@goaded Go back to that Wikipedia article and add up the GDP of the Southern states. We contribute 33%, as compared to the rest of the country, which shows how pathetic you are, just like your pathetic attempts at trying to convince us that we lost your make-believe little war.

[Esperdragon]

lost causers spotted

[goaded]

Why don't you just show me the sum. And what's so great about 33%, when that means the rest of the country provides 66% (and without including most of the poorest states).

[Asker]

@goaded There are only 15 states in the South. And yet we contribute 33% of the GDP. That's what's so great. Meanwhile, take a look at the snooty moralists up North like Vermont and Michigan. What do they contribute? On top of that, I might add the fact that we have less GDP per capita only means that we're contributing more in spite of the creatures this country classifies as citizens.

[goaded]

So you didn't do the sums, and 15 states is 30% of the states. So 33% is not really that impressive, is it? But, no, it's great, and you managed to achieve all that without slavery! Woot! (The lack of slaves in the South is a very good indication that the South lost, by the way.)

"... the creatures this country classifies as citizens." Really? There was I thinking you couldn't get any more ugly.

[Asker]

@goaded You really need to study history more if you think the 13th amendment freed anyone.

[Asker]

@goaded Do you really think Abe Lincoln went down to the plantation and read his little amendment to the slaves? Oh wait, no, maybe he called them up. "Hey, Mr. Slave, you're free now." What a laugh.

[Asker]

@goaded And yeah 33% GDP is impressive considering the fact that we're all a bunch of backwards hicks who lost your little "war" because the way the Union was fighting, you would think they'd want us at 0% now wouldn't you?

[goaded]

No slaves: the South lost.

[jon28805]

I'm offended by that flag and I have a Master's degree.

[MiseriaCantareAFI]

I dk, southerners, why do UNEDUCATED PEOPLE, not like the confederate flag

[Anonymous]

It is just a flag to me

[jimmy2]

I hear you