I don't see any reason to, should people be offended by the american flag because they once tried to ethnically cleanse the native indians, should I be ashamed of the british flag bacause of the now dead british empire.
Do you find the Confederate Flag offensive?
- Thread starter CRAVE CASE 55
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I think it can be offensive or not depending on how you use it.
It's pretty much that way with every flag. I don't think anyone finds the norwegian flag offensive (exept maybe the danish since we just added an extre colour to theirs), but when the Norwegian Defence Force (A racist, anti-imigrational movement) use it, it offends everybody.
Same thing counts for the confederat flag I reccond.
It's pretty much that way with every flag. I don't think anyone finds the norwegian flag offensive (exept maybe the danish since we just added an extre colour to theirs), but when the Norwegian Defence Force (A racist, anti-imigrational movement) use it, it offends everybody.
Same thing counts for the confederat flag I reccond.
Honestly, its your choice. It doesnt bother me in the least if you hang it in your room.
The only possible reason I would have for it bothering me would be if you decided to take it to Wollongong, wave it around my house and proclaim "the south shall rise again!" or something of that nature.
The only possible reason I would have for it bothering me would be if you decided to take it to Wollongong, wave it around my house and proclaim "the south shall rise again!" or something of that nature.
Flying your homestate flag is showing pride of your heritage. Flying a Confederate flag is showing support to an alliance formed to defend your rights to treat people of a different skincolor as property.
As far as I'm concerned the Confederate flag has about as much business being a popular memorabilia as the Hakenkreuz.
As far as I'm concerned the Confederate flag has about as much business being a popular memorabilia as the Hakenkreuz.
I am sorry but I think you need to study history not read school books that leave out many details. It is an over simplification to say the war was over slavery. It was over this country being ripped in two and slavery wasn't even brought into it until Lincoln's arms were twisted. By Republicans mind you.
* When Lincoln assumed office, he was entirely willing to allow slavery to continue. Lincoln even supported a constitutional amendment that would have given additional legal protection to slavery. When Lincoln issued his famous Emancipation Proclamation about two years later, he did so largely because he was under intense pressure from abolitionist Republicans in Congress, who were threatening to cut off funds from the army if Lincoln didn't issue some kind of emancipation statement. One only has to read the Emancipation Proclamation itself to see that it was a war measure that only applied to slaves who were in Confederate territory; it did not apply to any slaves who were in Union-controlled territory, not even to slaves who were in the four Union slave states. In addition, Bennett presents evidence that Lincoln himself tried to undermine the proclamation soon after he issued it, and that he issued it unwillingly (Forced Into Glory, pp. 22-29, 411-508). For that matter, Lincoln only began to consider issuing the proclamation after the Union war effort continued to falter (Klingaman, Abraham Lincoln and the Road to Emancipation, pp. 134-139; Robert Divine et al, America Past and Present, p. 460.)
* To be sure, some members of the Republican Party did believe the war should be waged for the purpose of abolishing slavery. Those who belonged to this faction of the party were commonly known as "Radical Republicans."
* Precious few textbooks mention the fact that by 1864 key Confederate leaders, including Jefferson Davis, were prepared to abolish slavery. As early as 1862 some Confederate leaders supported various forms of emancipation. In 1864 Jefferson Davis officially recommended that slaves who performed faithful service in non-combat positions in the Confederate army should be freed. Robert E. Lee and many other Confederate generals favored emancipating slaves who served in the Confederate army. In fact, Lee had long favored the abolition of slavery and had called the institution a "moral and political evil" years before the war (McPherson, The Battle Cry of Freedom, New York: Ballantine Books, 1988, p. 281; Recollections and Letters of Robert E. Lee, New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 2003, reprint, pp. 231-232). By late 1864, Davis was prepared to abolish slavery in order to gain European diplomatic recognition and thus save the Confederacy. Duncan Kenner, one of the biggest slaveholders in the South and the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee of the Confederate House of Representatives, strongly supported this proposal. So did the Confederate Secretary of State, Judah Benjamin. Davis informed congressional leaders of his intentions, and then sent Kenner to Europe to make the proposal. Davis even made Kenner a minister plenipotentiary so as to ensure he could make the proposal to the British and French governments and that it would be taken seriously.
The original reason for the south wanting independence were numerous but up until two years into it, slavery wasn't the issue. History is always written by the winners and naturally everything gets made good and bad to simplify it. It is a shame that we cannot just teach truth and educate kids on some of the gray areas they will come across in life because life is not black and white or good and bad. Maybe an understanding of both sides would allow us to move past things and motivate us to understand both sides before taking a stance.
That is all of my history lesson. I always thought history was boring but have read enough about parts to realize why what they teach is so boring.
captcha... history untact
* When Lincoln assumed office, he was entirely willing to allow slavery to continue. Lincoln even supported a constitutional amendment that would have given additional legal protection to slavery. When Lincoln issued his famous Emancipation Proclamation about two years later, he did so largely because he was under intense pressure from abolitionist Republicans in Congress, who were threatening to cut off funds from the army if Lincoln didn't issue some kind of emancipation statement. One only has to read the Emancipation Proclamation itself to see that it was a war measure that only applied to slaves who were in Confederate territory; it did not apply to any slaves who were in Union-controlled territory, not even to slaves who were in the four Union slave states. In addition, Bennett presents evidence that Lincoln himself tried to undermine the proclamation soon after he issued it, and that he issued it unwillingly (Forced Into Glory, pp. 22-29, 411-508). For that matter, Lincoln only began to consider issuing the proclamation after the Union war effort continued to falter (Klingaman, Abraham Lincoln and the Road to Emancipation, pp. 134-139; Robert Divine et al, America Past and Present, p. 460.)
* To be sure, some members of the Republican Party did believe the war should be waged for the purpose of abolishing slavery. Those who belonged to this faction of the party were commonly known as "Radical Republicans."
* Precious few textbooks mention the fact that by 1864 key Confederate leaders, including Jefferson Davis, were prepared to abolish slavery. As early as 1862 some Confederate leaders supported various forms of emancipation. In 1864 Jefferson Davis officially recommended that slaves who performed faithful service in non-combat positions in the Confederate army should be freed. Robert E. Lee and many other Confederate generals favored emancipating slaves who served in the Confederate army. In fact, Lee had long favored the abolition of slavery and had called the institution a "moral and political evil" years before the war (McPherson, The Battle Cry of Freedom, New York: Ballantine Books, 1988, p. 281; Recollections and Letters of Robert E. Lee, New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 2003, reprint, pp. 231-232). By late 1864, Davis was prepared to abolish slavery in order to gain European diplomatic recognition and thus save the Confederacy. Duncan Kenner, one of the biggest slaveholders in the South and the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee of the Confederate House of Representatives, strongly supported this proposal. So did the Confederate Secretary of State, Judah Benjamin. Davis informed congressional leaders of his intentions, and then sent Kenner to Europe to make the proposal. Davis even made Kenner a minister plenipotentiary so as to ensure he could make the proposal to the British and French governments and that it would be taken seriously.
The original reason for the south wanting independence were numerous but up until two years into it, slavery wasn't the issue. History is always written by the winners and naturally everything gets made good and bad to simplify it. It is a shame that we cannot just teach truth and educate kids on some of the gray areas they will come across in life because life is not black and white or good and bad. Maybe an understanding of both sides would allow us to move past things and motivate us to understand both sides before taking a stance.
That is all of my history lesson. I always thought history was boring but have read enough about parts to realize why what they teach is so boring.
captcha... history untact
i have family in the south too, and we almost universally agree that "southern" memorabilia attached to the civil war is an absolute desecration of all that has ever been good about the south. it's a free country, i'd never tell you that you can't decorate your room however you'd like. but if people think you're ignorant and racist because of it, you pretty much have to suck it up and deal with that because they're the ones who are technically in the right. because of why that flag was created and what it still means to those who truly consider this nation a "united" states, it is not a symbol of anything today's southerners should be proud of. it's a symbol of a war started in the south, by the south that killed more americans than any other this country has been a part of, for reasons that could have easily been talked out in the existing legislature. so as i said, fly your banner. but if you really wish to honor the war deaths of your american ancestors, the stars and stripes is the only one that does that.
I just disapprove of flag waving in general. No matter what symbol you are declaring allegiance to, it creates an Us and Them mentality. I feel uncomfortable when I go in someones room and its decked out with something as inconsequential as a rival football teams memorabilia.
Heritage is something that people should be aware of and respect but I think that they should be very careful about taking pride in it. The acts of your ancestors are not something that you can claim any responsibility for, so I think pride can be misplaced somewhat. Again, too much importance placed on heritage can create an Us and Them mentality. Wars have been started because people have been pissed off with each others ancestors.
I would go by the acid test and ask yourself "what would a Northerner think if he was in your house? what about someone who's ancestors were slaves?". In this case I'd say its perhaps acceptable, because you have both flags and are keeping them in your own home, so presumably the only people that are going to see it are those who know you well enough to know that its not because you are some racist hick.
Heritage is something that people should be aware of and respect but I think that they should be very careful about taking pride in it. The acts of your ancestors are not something that you can claim any responsibility for, so I think pride can be misplaced somewhat. Again, too much importance placed on heritage can create an Us and Them mentality. Wars have been started because people have been pissed off with each others ancestors.
I would go by the acid test and ask yourself "what would a Northerner think if he was in your house? what about someone who's ancestors were slaves?". In this case I'd say its perhaps acceptable, because you have both flags and are keeping them in your own home, so presumably the only people that are going to see it are those who know you well enough to know that its not because you are some racist hick.
Nah, I think we have one hung up in out army barracks along with a lot of other weird shit.
Guess I'm just too ignorant
Guess I'm just too ignorant
When seeing a Confederate flag:
1st thought: Ah, the Civil War, reminds me of that time I went to Gettysburg.
2nd thought: Oh yeah, and some people use it as a sign similar to the Nazi flag.
I don't find it offensive, I just find it kind of weak when someone uses it to offend someone else.
1st thought: Ah, the Civil War, reminds me of that time I went to Gettysburg.
2nd thought: Oh yeah, and some people use it as a sign similar to the Nazi flag.
I don't find it offensive, I just find it kind of weak when someone uses it to offend someone else.
I hate you for your avatar I nearly cried listening to that noise.DugMachine said:
OT: I'm not bothered by it, and if i had the confederate flag, and someone was upset. I'd tell them to deal with it.
I find the implications of it unfortunate. Especially talking to the kids around school (high school). I once asked a group of stereotypically redneck guys if they knew what the flag meant. They said it "Teaches them negroes not to mess with us."
I worry about living in the south, sometimes.
I worry about living in the south, sometimes.
You just restated my points but more in depth. I said slavery helped fuel the war but it was not the only cause, as you said. Northerners had slaves too, Lincoln himself did. Or, perhaps, they didn't teach you that in your scool?trooper6 said:
Seriously, tell that white friend (s)he's a fuckwit and dissociate from him/her completely. I can't stand racial apologists so paralysed by their white guilt that they bend over backwards to find things offensive on other peoples' behalves.Angus Young said:
There's nothing offensive about the confederacy. We don't agree with slavery these days, but nor do we agree with crusades and feudalism yet the flag of St George isn't viewed with similar distaste.
Ah good, I was looking for another reason to avoid that unfunny, turgidly populist magazine.Canid117 said:
Insensitive, possibly. Offensive, definitely not. Slavery in and of itself is not evil. Slavery based on theories of racial inferiority is. No one says that the Greeks or Romans were evil because they owned slaves. That's because their slaves were POWs. If America fights a war with say, England, and some British guy gets taken as a POW, and then that same POW is offered to me as a slave, I would feel no regret in taking that. Nor would I feel any regret if that POW was from Mexico, Russia, China, Egypt, Iraq, Ghana, or even if the second American Civil War breaks out and he comes from somewhere other than MA. However, if I were offered a slave based on the fact that I am white, he is not, therefore I am better than him and he deserves servitude at my hand, I say bullshit.