|
fucktoyprincess -> RE: First it was press one for english, now.... (3/1/2014 10:11:48 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961
quote:
ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:
To a Southerner, the Confederate flag doesn't mean what most people think. It isn't always a statement to threaten blacks. Its southern pride, which isn't just about slavery.
Historical revisionism [8|]
Let me explain something to you.
1) Contrary to what you may have been taught in high school, the south seceded from the union over state's rights, not slavery.
You see, while the north condemned slavery, they were not above allowing southern plantation owners to put slaves up as collateral for loans, along with land, shares of the crop at harvest, plus interest.
The southern states felt that the states themselves had the right to deal with the issue of slavery, especially after a bill years earlier introduced would have had the Federal Government use immanent domain and take the slaves, paying the slave owners for their property loss, followed by a ban on slavery.
Of course this was unacceptable to the northern states, especially the banking interests which had the slaves as collateral.
2) Slave owners were the 1% of the early to mid 1800's. 90% of southern land and business owners did not own slaves, and did not fight in the war to save slavery, they fought because they agreed with the state's rights issue and the fact they felt the Federal Government had too much control. (sound familiar?)
3) President Lincoln did not use slavery as an issue until he was desperate to regain support in the North for the war. In case you are not familiar with the outcomes of many of the early battles in the eastern theater of war, the Army of Northern Virginia led by General Robert E. Lee had won a series of battles and put a major case of whoop ass on the Grand Army of the Potomac.
The Northern states were getting a bit tired of the losses and tired of sending their men to fight a war that the Union was losing. Twice before the defeat at Gettysburg, Lee had threatened Washington DC, forcing the Union army into battles they weren't prepared for (you can thank the Union Generals.)
Then after the horrific losses at the battle of Antietam, where 23000 troops died in one day, the general feeling in the north was that the war was futile and not worth it.
Now, while the south did, technically fire the first shots, at Fort Sumpter, this was in response to the fact that the Union continued to supply the fort with munitions, and not just food and non combat related supplies, as originally agreed.
The first invasion of territory was by the Union and was ended with first Manassas, which is why many in the South refer to the war as the war of Northern Aggression.
Strangely enough, the issue of State's Rights has continued to crop up in American politics, and every time it was in respect to what many felt was an overstep of power by the Federal Government.
While some of these issues that were the reason for the argument was justified, civil rights and voters rights being the primary examples, the majority were not.
The issue of state's rights was addressed in "The Federalist Papers" which I highly recommend for anyone to read.
The Confederate flag in question, is not actually the Confederate flag, it is the Confederate Battle Flag, which was flown most prominently at the head of the Army of Northern Virginia columns.
[image]local://upfiles/622970/BCB7174DD52542BF9ED69137056390B2.jpg[/image]
[image]local://upfiles/622970/10513EE95C4D4494928900A83637746F.jpg[/image]
[image]local://upfiles/622970/A5B2ADCBB54C4C8180D2DF7BCDC12500.jpg[/image]
Now that you have seen the truth of the matter concerning the flags, try to also grasp that the battle flag in question was not in support of slavery, nor racism. As pointed out, Black southerners fought for that flag as well, freeman all and not forced into service. Southern Native Americans also fought under that flag, still pissed off at the Federal Government for kicking them off their lands and sending the majority of their people to die on the trail of tears en route to Oklahoma.
The fact that the KKK adopted the flag is beside the point, white supremacists have flown both that flag and the US flag as symbols for the extremist christian belief that whites are a superior race.
The United States flag also flew at the head of US Army columns before and after the civil war in massacres of Native Americans, see Sand Creek and Wabash Creek, among countless others. US soldiers routinely cut the breasts off dead native American women to make tobacco pouches. The practice of scalping was originally started by the French and British in the Colonial Era.
Now if you really want to talk about a symbol of racism, I can make an argument to include the stars and stripes.
Yes, and the Nazi flag was NOT a symbol of racism during WWII - but it has become that. What is different? If a Nazi parade is a show of Aryan pride (historically this is the only way in which it was used) is it not ALSO a symbol of racism and hatred because of the other things that Germany supported during WWII? How do you separate out Aryan pride from hatred/racism when it comes to Nazi symbolism? WWII was not waged in order to rid Europe of non-Aryan people. But Nazi symbolism is TODAY associated with hatred/racism. Of course Aryans are entitled to their pride - but if they choose to show off their Aryan pride with Nazi symbolism, most people would also associate that with hatred/racism even though being pro-Aryan, in and of itself, is not a hateful thing. Is it so hard to see that history can transform a symbol of national/racial pride into something quite insidious? [sm=2cents.gif]
|
|
|
|
