Offended By Confederate Flag

[LilBit]

I don't have a link handy, but I have read reports before of white children who were kidnapped and sold as "mulatto" slaves.

 

[Kulindahr]

Interesting, but the overall impression from this is that these people were legally defined in the laws of the day as "black". This is why I asked the question. The reality is that if you were legally defined as one race you could be legally kept as a slave. If you were legally defined as another race you were not.

The same sorts of racial laws were kept here in Australia (minus the slavery) until the 1960's. These restricted the movement of aboriginal people, and the ability to vote for example. You may have been the equivalent of "mullatto", but in the eyes of the law you were not white, and not able to claim the same rights!

I would imagine this may be the reason so many people, especially black people, find the Confederate flag offensive. It is a symbol of a regime that could, quite legally define your race, despite what you looked like,despite who your father or mother were, despite what race you may or may not identify with. And if that race was "Black" you could legally be kept as a slave....​

Here and in the article an interesting phenomenon is encountered, which relates to a topic in another thread (questions about black history): prior to the mass enslavement of millions of Africans, slavery had not been a racial affair. Italians, Germans, Swedes, Spaniards, Moors, Arabs, and more could be and were bought and sold as slaves. Even in colonial America, slaves of all colors -- American natives added, of course (and not just in America; they were sold back to Europe as well) -- could be found. This had been true clear back into Imperial Rome: a man's race and the status as slave were not related matters.
Yet by the time the "peculiar institution" was becoming a matter threatening the unity of the U.S., the association between race and slavery had become complete. Visitors from Europe who found children in appearance pure white, serving as slaves, were horrified not that children should be enslaved, but that anyone not plainly black should be!
To a great extent that ties in, I'm guessing, to the extensive abuse of the Bible to give not just a religious justification, but a blessing, to slavery. If the matter were justified by ripping allegedly racial items out of the scriptures, then only the enslavement of people due to race could possibly be justified. Ironically, these abusers of religion made a flimsy case for their favored 'institution', while ignoring the matters in that same tome concerning heritage -- yet not that it mattered; if a child of a black mother were to be considered black, as the child of a Jewish mother is considered Jewish, there still would have been 63/64 white people as slaves.​

 

[Kulindahr]

I don't have a link handy, but I have read reports before of white children who were kidnapped and sold as "mulatto" slaves.

That doesn't surprise me at all. I know there were white children with a touch of native blood that gave them a slightly darker appearance, who were passed off as "black" as well.

 

[Kulindahr]

So, yes you are not mudding the waters. Perhaps you could tell me then how many white people were slaves in the pre Civil War days of the United States?

Thousands, actually. But the more that slavery came to be viewed as a racial matter, the numbers declined. I can't find a reference, but in a number of colonies it was legal to have a white slave, but set down clearly that the children of a white slave were not slaves -- that alone tended to keep the numbers down. By the time of the eve of war, the idea of a white as a slave was intolerable.

 

[bighair]

Thousands, actually. But the more that slavery came to be viewed as a racial matter, the numbers declined. I can't find a reference, but in a number of colonies it was legal to have a white slave, but set down clearly that the children of a white slave were not slaves -- that alone tended to keep the numbers down. By the time of the eve of war, the idea of a white as a slave was intolerable.

Which reinforces the reason I bought it up. It was ok to be a Black person and enslaved, but not a White and enslaved. The racial overtones attached to the Confederate regime, flag and the people who defend it by so many people of different races,directly derive from this.

It is much the same as WWII. It was fought initially because of the Nazi regime had a habit of invading other countries. However much of the revulsion of Hitler and co. derives from his racial programme of genocide that left millions dead .

We have issues about the Confederacy not because of states rights. We have issues because of slavery, and its racial component just adds to our revulsion.​

 

[Kurn]

I find "African-American" racist myself. It's certainly segregational in nature.

It's certainly not. All it is is historian's short-hand, a way to refer to a historical/past experience that has distinct qualities.
'African-American' is not racist at all. It is the opposite of segregational. This is because it is a part of an effort to see the whole 'American' experience. In other words, it is far more integrational than segregational.

Do you understand? This arose because historians needed a way to talk about things they read in a very significant number of significant documents.

 

[Kurn]

I see no correlation between the confederate flag and Mexico or Mexicans or Mexican-Americans. I also don't understand what the State of Mississippi is thinking. Why foster something that no longer has a place in the 21st century?

I'm not sure what Cher's correlation is, but since the beginning of the Mexican Republic, Mexican's have viewed themselves as anti-Slavery. That is, a Mexican citizen regards himself as constitutionally anti-Slavery despite whatever human rights abuses might have occurred in Mexico.

For them to join Northern America and then have a Stars-and-Bars flown in their sight feels like the United States is degrading itself.

 

[Kurn]

^No one has suggested anything like that, Cher. Most all here can read fairly well and we're all aware that slavery happened. But we got rid of it. Had quite a war over it, as I recall reading. Over 100,000 Americans from both sides of the Mason Dixon line died.

This is a "true" statistic, Jack. Deaths from the war numbered more than 600,000.
Such things linger on. If you don't encounter the ghosts directly, they will effect displeasure in our lives. Symbolically or metaphysically, I am not saying which; I'm just saying, if you don't deal with bad karma, it will deal with you. Why else do 'ghost stories' persist? I mean besides 'as a tourist attraction.'

If you want to express outrage over slavery, it's still being practiced in Africa. Perhaps you might direct your outrage over that direction.

His outrage is over that flag. But, yes, slavery still happens in Africa. An ancient relic of Arab imperialism.

 

[Kurn]

I kind of had the impression the Confederate flag was a symbol of a South that talked big, but ultimately was not able to ever actually win the war it had pinned its existance on. I honestly can't understand why anyone at all would want to be associated with such a symbol of complete failure?

The association is not with the slavery, but with the community value of inter-woven personal relationships that espoused personal virtue. In other words, personal integrity that one could rely upon from fellow Southerners.

 

[Kulindahr]

Which reinforces the reason I bought it up. It was ok to be a Black person and enslaved, but not a White and enslaved. The racial overtones attached to the Confederate regime, flag and the people who defend it by so many people of different races,directly derive from this.

It is much the same as WWII. It was fought initially because of the Nazi regime had a habit of invading other countries. However much of the revulsion of Hitler and co. derives from his racial programme of genocide that left millions dead .

We have issues about the Confederacy not because of states rights. We have issues because of slavery, and its racial component just adds to our revulsion.​

But it's still not that simple: blacks owned slaves, and blacks fought for their States, as did whites who owned no slaves, along with blacks who were free. Only "blacks" could be owned, but so much as a single African ancestor made a person "black", even if all others of four generations were pale northern Europeans. I don't know if it happened, but it would have been legal for a jet-black Negro to have a dozen slaves who could have passed in the Queen's Court.

His outrage is over that flag. But, yes, slavery still happens in Africa. An ancient relic of Arab imperialism.

There was no slavery in Africa prior to the Arabs? That's an interesting possibility -- any links?

Either way, Cher's outrage might be better put to other goals, yes.

 

[Kulindahr]

The association is not with the slavery, but with the community value of inter-woven personal relationships that espoused personal virtue. In other words, personal integrity that one could rely upon from fellow Southerners.

... which fits with the rednecks I've known, and told Cher about, who sang "Dixie", and would have been offended at the notion of having a slave.

 

[Kurn]

You have the right to fly the confederate flag. I have the right to be offended by it. These rights are given to us by the US constitution.(Freedom of speech....)

Very important grammatical/Consitutional point:

The US Constitution does not "give rights." Personal rights are something that cannot be given nor taken away/ and the Bill of Rights tells the Government that it will not get into the business of trying.
There is much grammatically-based confusion over this point in the media.
Why is it important? Because you can't really understand the Constitution unless you accept this initial premise. It's YOUR Constitution.

 

[Kurn]

Uhm...I'm confused. Racism will only live on as long as people think in terms of color, as you do. "im white", "many black friends", "a black friend of mine", "Rednecks need to move on"...

....

Hey, Rad. You're the one who needs to think things through on these issues, not Cher.

"Colorblindness" is frequently advocated these days. But it is a small-minded virtue. Why? Because you aren't really blind. [I assume so, to be sure] Instead there is a need to appreciate fellow Americans not "in spite of their color" but "because" of it.

Mine is not a popular position. It is, however, the right one. Only when reactionary comments like those vouched in this thread die down will America again be E Pluribus Unum.
The path we need to take is not for the lazy patriot.
But just do it anyway.

White, black, brown, red blood. In Iraq, it all flows. Let's stop pussillanimizing this great country.

 

[Kulindahr]

Very important grammatical/Consitutional point:

The US Constitution does not "give rights." Personal rights are something that cannot be given nor taken away/ and the Bill of Rights tells the Government that it will not get into the business of trying.
There is much grammatically-based confusion over this point in the media.
Why is it important? Because you can't really understand the Constitution unless you accept this initial premise. It's YOUR Constitution.

That premise, and the one behind it: you own yourself.
"We the People" is the extension of that ownership into cooperative action, by which authority is loaned to a government in order to protect the rights which flow from self-ownership. If you're part of the People, it is definitely your Constitution, and you need to realize that it doesn't grant anything to you, it only grants things from you, to the government. The right to free speech, the right to peaceably assemble, the right to keep and bear arms, the right to be free from self-incrimination... these are in the document because they're already yours (along with many not mentioned, e.g. privacy), and the government needs to be reminded to keep the frak off!
The Constitution was a fine effort to write "Don't Tread On Me!" on the heart of every person, a message to the government, to tell them to keep in their place. Tragically, as many of those whose lives, fortunes, and sacred honor were shed so we could even have an opportunity for such a bold experiment warned, those who love power have taught many of us that our rights come from government, not the other way around.

 

[AsianDream]

I was doing online research and it seems that the confederate flag is still being used. This is extremely offensive seeing that I am part Mexican besides being an Italian, being a gay democrat, and that i grew up with many african-american friends and even dated one.

Alot of southerners claim it as part of "Southern Culture" and "Southern Pride." Bullshit. So we can hang swastikas and say its GERMAN PRIDE? People find loopholes for anything.

The state of Mississippi still has the confederate symbol as part of their flag.

Any views on this subject? It may be freedom of speech, but the constitution also states you can NOT scream fire in a crowded theater. Meaning some people might argue your free speech if you were to visit a Jewish/Gay Neighborhood and wave a swastika around.. and you WILL offend people of different cultural and racial backgrounds waving a confederate flag. Anyone can say its southern culture.. it doesn't change what it REALLY is and HOW IT BECAME!

The Confederate flag is just as much a badge of shame as the Nazi Swastika.

Those that promote this symbol of evil and oppression should be recognised for what they are.

As to if this should be displayed - the answer is obvious - any place the Swastika is OK is OK for the confederate flag. So maybe at a fancy dress party

 

[KrisHawkXXX]

I'm not sure what Cher's correlation is, but since the beginning of the Mexican Republic, Mexican's have viewed themselves as anti-Slavery. That is, a Mexican citizen regards himself as constitutionally anti-Slavery despite whatever human rights abuses might have occurred in Mexico.

For them to join Northern America and then have a Stars-and-Bars flown in their sight feels like the United States is degrading itself.

I meant because the KKK hate the hispanic community and that flag is their symbol. They're gone to picket some immigration events.


and asian dream exactly my point. Racism exists today in the back of people's minds and so well embedded and think its not there. Some kid came to school with a swastika Freshmen year in 2003 in high school and said it was german pride.. good god he got suspended so fast! I remember his name too and everything. GERMAN PRIDE MY ASS. The whole 4 years he made fun of alot of minorities and had very few friends. Same way as the confederate flag lovers saying its southern pride? Sounds right to me.

As for the blacks fighting in the civil war.. on the confederate side.... many didn't know what they were doing and were told what to do... some people will do whatever to defend that racist piece of fabric!

Kinda like the boi in my high school that said the holocaust was a hoax?

People who say the civil war was not mainly over slavery... its the same deal! Oh the poor south.. oh poor them.. the big bad north was coming to take their free labor which meant they had to get up and work.. oh no.. work.. and not being able to discriminate on the basis of race.. lets feel sorry for them because thats why they had to stand up for themselves...!

People who deny shit are ignorant

And i know slavery is still in africa.. stay on the topic. I am talking about one flag in one country. Jumping to another area to avoid discussion

 

[MystikWizard]

I meant because the KKK hate the hispanic community and that flag is their symbol. They're gone to picket some immigration events.


and asian dream exactly my point. Racism exists today in the back of people's minds and so well embedded and think its not there. Some kid came to school with a swastika Freshmen year in 2003 in high school and said it was german pride.. good god he got suspended so fast! I remember his name too and everything. GERMAN PRIDE MY ASS. The whole 4 years he made fun of alot of minorities and had very few friends. Same way as the confederate flag lovers saying its southern pride? Sounds right to me.

As for the blacks fighting in the civil war.. on the confederate side.... many didn't know what they were doing and were told what to do... some people will do whatever to defend that racist piece of fabric!

Kinda like the boi in my high school that said the holocaust was a hoax?

People who say the civil war was not mainly over slavery... its the same deal! Oh the poor south.. oh poor them.. the big bad north was coming to take their free labor which meant they had to get up and work.. oh no.. work.. and not being able to discriminate on the basis of race.. lets feel sorry for them because thats why they had to stand up for themselves...!

People who deny shit are ignorant

And i know slavery is still in africa.. stay on the topic. I am talking about one flag in one country. Jumping to another area to avoid discussion

You are going to find as you grow older that the world is not about what you and what you alone think. If other people have a different perspective, then you are going to have to learn to deal with it, because essentially you will just be talking to the wall.

You may feel strongly that this piece of cloth is a symbol of racism, while other people may feel strongly that it is indeed a symbol of history to them. I believe someone else in the thread said that this is a Legislative Issue and is subject to voting by the Majority. If the Vote Majority feels differently than you do, there is nothing you can do except bite the bullet and learn to accept it.

And you still have yet to explain how the flag itself is causing anyone any physical harm. So unless you can present some evidence, I feel that your concern is simply falling on deaf ears as it has for all these years.

Sometimes you don't get everything you want in life. I would have thought you would have learned that by now.

 

[Sammie13]

Sometimes you don't get everything you want in life. I would have thought you would have learned that by now.

He's ONLY 19....and that is clearly evident within the content of his posts. Try telling a teenager something. and you just end up feeling like .


That said, I would be happy to teach our young hate-monger the ways of the South...ya'll welcome to come on down anytime, and in short order, you'll be whistling Dixie .

 

[Kurn]

Nope.
Never give up on John Lennon.

The confederate flag is a souvenir to some.
To others it is a deeply significant object of myth-ritual. "Satanic,"
some would say.

If your relative was lynched bag in '29 or so and you feel nauseous every time you see that cloth, that would be a physical harm.
As a fellow citizen of that nauseated person, I say put that t*** cloth back in the attic and leave it there.
Take a cold shower, thank the Lord you don't live in slavery times and that Lee and Davis didn't win, and MOVE ON! And maybe you won't burn in hell like Stonewall Jackson! YEEE HAW!!!

 

[MrWright]

He's ONLY 19....and that is clearly evident within the content of his posts. Try telling a teenager something. and you just end up feeling like .

I'm sorry but that statement's a tad bit of age discrimination speaking though I won't argue that the writer's opinions are indeed immature. Connecting someone's age with immaturity of opinion assumes that it is the age that makes their opinion immature not the illogical flow of thought. Someone may be very logical and young and as is clear someone may not and also be young.