Well said, however for me as an Australian it mostly represents Bo, Luke, Daisy, Uncle Jesse, and maybe Cooter.MetroidNut said:The Confederate battle flag (the "Confederate flag", not to be mistaken with the actual nation flag of the CSA), in my opinion, was once a symbol of honor and courage in battle. That's what it meant in 1865, and that's what it meant for some time after the Civil War. However, it has since been appropriated by racist groups to symbolize racist ideals. Its meaning has changed. I would now argue that using it as a symbol is fairly inappropriate; even if you're trying to use it to represent its original meaning, people will not interpret it that way.
I hope to God that wasn't a GCSE grade thing, because if it was then I was taught nowhere near that much. I suppose we didn't study it in detail, we were just told the brief summary. Anyway, thanks for the quick history lesson, it was very much appreciated.emeraldrafael said:Snip.
Oka. Sorry, the college course focused on first findings (Conquistador times) to reconstruction era (1865-1877). This semester it was 1878-present, with predominant focus on the change of American foreign policy from Isolationism to what we're doing now. Then next semester you can take up a country's history if you like out of something like 30 different countries (Britain included). I dont know, I just remember that they had abolished it by the time of the Civil War, and that it was a fairly recent move (really less then 20 years isnt that long. Thats like, 5 US presidents, or really just 3).Boundless Apathy said:It was 1833 and was actually used as a way to piss of America after the not so decisive war of 1812, slaves that arrived on British soil where instantly considered to be free men, although yea for a great deal of time we still did use the slave made cotton, but oh well if we didn't someone else would have.emeraldrafael said:(who had at the time abolished slavery... um.. like, less then ten years before I think. I wanna say in 1858). That means that its only a matter of time before Britain decides to throw its weight in the form of troops, boats, etc." because, I guess Britain wasnt above getting goods made from slave labor even though they didnt use slavery anymore or something like that.
Well, no, that was an American college class on US history from discovery (earlier-ish 1500s) to reconstruction (1865-1877). And even then, we really focused on The French and Indian War (Seven Years war to you most likely), American Revolutionary War, War of 1812, and Civil War (though we took a break and went into how Christianity pretty much made America what it is, and I convinced our professor to talk about the Utah Wars). It was a very packed college history class.The Unworthy Gentleman said:I hope to God that wasn't a GCSE grade thing, because if it was then I was taught nowhere near that much. I suppose we didn't study it in detail, we were just told the brief summary. Anyway, thanks for the quick history lesson, it was very much appreciated.emeraldrafael said:Snip.
Lol sorry just realised how much of a dick that made me sound, putting that up. But yea in the grand scheme of things it was not that long and it did not affect Britain in the same way as it would America, as most African slaves where house slaves not so much in the economic areas.emeraldrafael said:Oka. Sorry, the college course focused on first findings (Conquistador times) to reconstruction era (1865-1877). This semester it was 1878-present, with predominant focus on the change of American foreign policy from Isolationism to what we're doing now. Then next semester you can take up a country's history if you like out of something like 30 different countries (Britain included). I dont know, I just remember that they had abolished it by the time of the Civil War, and that it was a fairly recent move (really less then 20 years isnt that long. Thats like, 5 US presidents, or really just 3).
No, no, I understand. I needed the correction, cause as much as I said in that post, I didnt mean to disrespect anyone in Britain/England (I gotta get out of the habit of calling it Britain cause I do know the difference). I mean, yeah, you're right, someone would have, and the Union didnt have a spotless record. And yeah, it was just a different thing. I mean, thats what most Northern Slaves were (house slaves) where in the South it was their economy. You could see that all the way WAY back in founding the colonies when the North was manufacturing and the south cash crop land.Boundless Apathy said:Snip
That's really anachronistic. Back then that wasn't a corrupt moral, because it was a scientific fact that the black men coudldn't take care of themselves. Of course facts change and from our today's view we consider slavery wrong. But we should not jump to the conclusion that there is a huge golden tablet, somwhere in space, that has all morally correct things written on itself.WorldCritic said:To me it represents a nation that had corrupt morals (and before anyone can make a joke about that I mean more corrupt morals than the present day U.S.)
Yay it was already in the OP. I didn't have to say it.Baron Von Evil Satan said:bigotry, and racism.
No no don't stop calling it Britain I am British first, Scottish second and live in England third, I hear it was an interesting period in your history the whole civil war era, we do not learn much about America at that point and with what we see in the news few people want to learn about America more than we already do... don't worry I know that the stereotype is not true.emeraldrafael said:No, no, I understand. I needed the correction, cause as much as I said in that post, I didnt mean to disrespect anyone in Britain/England (I gotta get out of the habit of calling it Britain cause I do know the difference). I mean, yeah, you're right, someone would have, and the Union didnt have a spotless record. And yeah, it was just a different thing. I mean, thats what most Northern Slaves were (house slaves) where in the South it was their economy. You could see that all the way WAY back in founding the colonies when the North was manufacturing and the south cash crop land.