The racist history of the confederate flag

[Statistikhengst]

You are misrepresenting the meaning of "fighting under...". A company of soldiers or more accurately, an individual or group of soldiers pulling out a flag and displaying it on the battlefield after the battle is not anything like fighting under the banner of flag.
Crews of individual APC's and even Huey's or other vehicles or aircraft in Vietnam sometimes displayed flags or even affixed decals or art depicting the confederate flag. No one complained, but that is not the same as a unit fighting under the flag.

In any case, the photo of the confederate flag at Shuri appears to be a photo shop. An older photo shows the soldier displaying an American flag. The whole story came from someone relating a story told by a officer killed shortly after the incident. A murky story to say the least.

you are quibbling over semantics.

these american soldiers and sailors fought and fought bravely, and they flew the flag of their regional homeland, which has for their entire lives been part of the greater whole of the us.

they were member of the us army and navy, and proud of their southern roots and heritage.

Odd that they would be stupid enough to think their heritage is wrapped up in a flag representing only 4 years...and 4 years of loser treason against the U.S. at that. That Southern education of the time, I guess.

your bigoted spin on the issue is not the point. that fact that you disagree with them is not the point.

they were members of the us army and navy and proud of their southern roots and heritage.

A flag that represents 4 years of treachery and LOSING is supposed to be an important Southern heritage?

Stick with your Dukes of Hazzard argument. It was better.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

that is your spin on the issue.

do you really think that us soldiers fighting in okinowa were treasonous?

You need lots of attention, now don't you. Are you an orphan?

It's already been proven that the confederate flag did not fly at Okinawa, turdball.

 

[rightwinger]

LOL! Is someone arguing that the con flag is cool because the Dukes of Hazzard????????????????????????????????????????????????

link to where i said that.

Well gee, how many times have you posted about the Dukes of Hazzard, numbnut?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

my point about the dukes was clearly not that the confederate flag is cool because of the dukes of hazzard.

does it seem odd to you that you have to lie in order to even pretend to yourself that you have scored a "point" against me?

what with you being so smart and all...

The Dukes of Hazard is a TV show...entertainment

They are free to display the Rebel Flag in a depiction of southern boys as much as any other TV show is free to display the Nazi Flag in a depiction of 1940s Germany, or a burning cross in a depiction of the KKK

 

[Correll]

care to explain why you think that?

A few flew the flag. On erected one on a battle field and after three days it was ordered taken down. By the end of the war it no longer in evidence.

Wtf does any of that have to do with what the con flag symbolizes?

those american fighting men flew the flag as a symbol of regional pride.

not as a symbol of treason or hatred.

that's what it has to do with it.

Sez you. No matter what their reasoning, they were deluded and shouldn't have been allowed to fly them the traitors.

"traitors"?

they were fighting the enemy of the usa in as bloody a battle a war as the world has ever seen.

that is the exact opposite of traitors.

it is not what i sez.

it is documented historical fact.

for you to try to dishonor their memory by calling them traitors is incredible.

Oh, but they absolutely were traitors to the Union. Just as so many fucked-up cons are traitors to our present Union.

Gee, I am so surprised.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

they were fighting and winning against the enemies of our nation.

that is exactly the opposite of being a traitor.

your assumption, that the flag can only mean what you want it to mean, is the issue here.

the idea that soldiers fighting for the united states were raising that flag to show that they hated the united states makes no sense.

the idea that soldiers fighting for the united states were raising that flag to honor their homes and fathers, as a regional part of the united states makes complete sense.

 

[Correll]

you are quibbling over semantics.

these american soldiers and sailors fought and fought bravely, and they flew the flag of their regional homeland, which has for their entire lives been part of the greater whole of the us.

they were member of the us army and navy, and proud of their southern roots and heritage.

Odd that they would be stupid enough to think their heritage is wrapped up in a flag representing only 4 years...and 4 years of loser treason against the U.S. at that. That Southern education of the time, I guess.

your bigoted spin on the issue is not the point. that fact that you disagree with them is not the point.

they were members of the us army and navy and proud of their southern roots and heritage.

A flag that represents 4 years of treachery and LOSING is supposed to be an important Southern heritage?

Stick with your Dukes of Hazzard argument. It was better.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

that is your spin on the issue.

do you really think that us soldiers fighting in okinowa were treasonous?

You need lots of attention, now don't you. Are you an orphan?

It's already been proven that the confederate flag did not fly at Okinawa, turdball.

you have the reading comprehension of a monkey. and not one of the smarter monkeys.

what did the new england officer ask to have taken down?

 

[Camp]

At least be honest enough to tell the story or myth the way it is told. An New England officer from another unit complained and the General agreed to take it down. But it is more myth than real history. The small flag in question was attached to a broom stick sized branch and implanted not at the top, but on the side of a pile of rubble. Because the photo has shown up as an American flag, the photo is considered a photo shop. No known photo of the confederate flag flying at Shuri exist.
Correll can't even give evidence of the one case he is trying to use.

link?

criticalpast.com./video/65675052753_1st-Marine-Division_Marine-climbs-hill_American-flag-raised_Shuri-Castle

a video?

i generally dont watch linked videos. and it didn't load anyways.

Here it is on youtube

youtube.com/watch?v=HTUuDFh6sls

It is obvious that the confederate flag photo is taken from this film, especially at the end. It is the same Marine in the same location in the same pose.

what reason did the new england officer give for complaining?

It is an alleged story aboot LTG Buckner who was killed in action a few days after Shuri. The video I posted indicates the whole story is a made up version of events. In the story it is alleged that the New England officer asked if they were now expected to sing Dixie after seeing the flag go up, but again, the video indicates the event never took place. It appears obvious that the photo of the Marine displaying the confederate flag is a photo shop of a frame taken from the film of the same Marine raising the American flag. There is no photo that shows the confederate flag flying over Shuri. Hard to believe that with all the film crews and photographers there at the time, none of them took a picture of the odd situation of a confederate flag flying on Okinawa. Remember, this was after the flag raising at Iwo Jima and would have been a big story and an important photo at the time. What makes far more sense is that the flag LTG Buckner carried with him was returned by a fellow Marine on his staff to his family with nice story.
You really are being a jerk by trying to mix up soldiers fighting in the Civil War with soldiers fighting in WWII.

 

[Correll]

LOL! Is someone arguing that the con flag is cool because the Dukes of Hazzard????????????????????????????????????????????????

link to where i said that.

Well gee, how many times have you posted about the Dukes of Hazzard, numbnut?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

my point about the dukes was clearly not that the confederate flag is cool because of the dukes of hazzard.

does it seem odd to you that you have to lie in order to even pretend to yourself that you have scored a "point" against me?

what with you being so smart and all...

The Dukes of Hazard is a TV show...entertainment

They are free to display the Rebel Flag in a depiction of southern boys as much as any other TV show is free to display the Nazi Flag in a depiction of 1940s Germany, or a burning cross in a depiction of the KKK

rw, we have gone over this repeatedly.

my point is that the nation wide acceptance of the presentation of the flag as a harmless symbol of regional pride, disproves your claim that the flag has always been seen as a symbol of treason, racism and hatred.


you have responded appropriately to that point several times.

you have tried to argue what has changed since then, ie the "Sharp rise" in hate groups, david duke specifically.


i have pointed out that they are still tiny and that david duke was humiliated in the presidential election.


moving forward,

your view of the flag as a symbol that can ONLY mean treason, hatred and racism, has been disproven.


would you like to present another rationalization for your hatred?

 

[rightwinger]

LOL! Is someone arguing that the con flag is cool because the Dukes of Hazzard????????????????????????????????????????????????

link to where i said that.

Well gee, how many times have you posted about the Dukes of Hazzard, numbnut?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

my point about the dukes was clearly not that the confederate flag is cool because of the dukes of hazzard.

does it seem odd to you that you have to lie in order to even pretend to yourself that you have scored a "point" against me?

what with you being so smart and all...

The Dukes of Hazard is a TV show...entertainment

They are free to display the Rebel Flag in a depiction of southern boys as much as any other TV show is free to display the Nazi Flag in a depiction of 1940s Germany, or a burning cross in a depiction of the KKK

rw, we have gone over this repeatedly.

my point is that the nation wide acceptance of the presentation of the flag as a harmless symbol of regional pride, disproves your claim that the flag has always been seen as a symbol of treason, racism and hatred.


you have responded appropriately to that point several times.

you have tried to argue what has changed since then, ie the "Sharp rise" in hate groups, david duke specifically.


i have pointed out that they are still tiny and that david duke was humiliated in the presidential election.


moving forward,

your view of the flag as a symbol that can ONLY mean treason, hatred and racism, has been disproven.


would you like to present another rationalization for your hatred?

I do not believe I have presented the view that the Rebel Flag is ONLY a symbol of racism. That is not the case
The flag has a rightful place in historical contest as a symbol of the Confederacy. I have no issues with its display at battlefields, monuments or even private residences, businesses or pickup trucks

My point has been that the flag has evolved from a battle flag to a symbol of racism. Whether that is fair or not cannot be helped...the flag was pulled out as a banner for segregation and racist hate

I think South Carolina has do defense in their use of that flag. The fact is that they only chose to fly it proudly from their statehouse in 1962 as a direct insult to those fighting against segregation and for voting rights

That they now claim the flag has other meanings is not relevant

 

[Correll]

It is not a flag of southern heritage...but a flag of hate and subjugation

The surprisingly uncomplicated racist history of the Confederate flag

First sewn in 1861 — there were about 120 created for the war — the flag was flown by the cavalry of P.G.T. Beauregard, the Confederacy's first duly appointed general, after he took Manassas, Virginia, in the first Battle of Bull Run.
After the Civil War, the flag saw limited (and quite appropriate) use at first: It commemorated the sons of the South who died during the war.
But never did the flag represent some amorphous concept of Southern heritage, or Southern pride, or a legacy that somehow includes everything good anyone ever did south of the Mason-Dixon line, slavery excluded.
Fast-forward about 100 years, past thousands of lynchings in the South, past Jim Crow and Plessy v. Ferguson, past the state-sanctioned economic and political subjugation of black people, and beyond the New Deal that all too often gave privileges to the white working class to the specific exclusion of black people.
In 1948, Strom Thurmond's States' Rights Party adopted the Battle Flag of Northern Virginia as a symbol of defiance against the federal government. What precisely required such defiance? The president's powers to enforce civil rights laws in the South, as represented by the Democratic Party's somewhat progressive platform on civil rights.
Georgia adopted its version of the flag design in 1956 to protest the Supreme Court's ruling against segregated schools, in Brown v. Board of Education.
The flag first flew over the state capitol in South Carolina in 1962, a year after George Wallace raised it over the grounds of the legislature in Alabama, quite specifically to link more aggressive efforts to integrate the South with the trigger of secession 100 years before — namely, the storming of occupied Fort Sumter by federal troops. Fort Sumter, you might recall, is located at the mouth of Charleston Harbor.
Opposition to civil rights legislation, to integration, to miscegenation, to social equality for black people — these are the major plot points that make up the flag's recent history.




..

Do you feel the same way about the southern states as you do about a piece of cloth? If not, I'd suggest you get your priorities straight.

A flag isn't the problem.

Obviously it is

It's obvious it's been co-opted by racists. That's not the same thing, nor grounds for punitive measures against it.

If the South wanted to make a flag specificly to express racist ideology it'd be like that South Park one with white people and a hanging black man on a gallows.

As it is, it's only as racist as the observer makes it. They're nothing whatsoever intrinsically racist about it.

What is intrinsically racist is it represents a country that was formed to ensure the institution of slavery is preserved

BINGO.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

the america of 1979 to 1985 disagreed.

can you explain that?

 

[Correll]

Unsurprisingly we aren't surprised. The Confederacy was all about states rights, and those rights were about preserving the rich white land owners's right to own other people. Not a nobel cause. Given that a lot of slave owning southerners years earlier signed their names to the Constitution. "All men are created equal" wasn't taken literally.

Not just "other people".

Black people.

Indentured servitude of non-blacks was long a thing of the past.

good catch staat!

can't have mary thinking of slaves as "people".

it is very important to remember that they were "black people".


can you explain why?

 

[Ravi]

Unsurprisingly we aren't surprised. The Confederacy was all about states rights, and those rights were about preserving the rich white land owners's right to own other people. Not a nobel cause. Given that a lot of slave owning southerners years earlier signed their names to the Constitution. "All men are created equal" wasn't taken literally.

Not just "other people".

Black people.

Indentured servitude of non-blacks was long a thing of the past.

good catch staat!

can't have mary thinking of slaves as "people".

it is very important to remember that they were "black people".


can you explain why?

It was only legal for black people to be slaves in the USA.

 

[rightwinger]

Do you feel the same way about the southern states as you do about a piece of cloth? If not, I'd suggest you get your priorities straight.

A flag isn't the problem.

Obviously it is

It's obvious it's been co-opted by racists. That's not the same thing, nor grounds for punitive measures against it.

If the South wanted to make a flag specificly to express racist ideology it'd be like that South Park one with white people and a hanging black man on a gallows.

As it is, it's only as racist as the observer makes it. They're nothing whatsoever intrinsically racist about it.

What is intrinsically racist is it represents a country that was formed to ensure the institution of slavery is preserved

BINGO.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

the america of 1979 to 1985 disagreed.

can you explain that?

I can

Blacks in 1979 and 1985 were offended by that flag and urged it to be taken down. Their objections were ignored

Mr Dylann Root came along and once again proudly used that flag as well as the flags of South Africa and Rhodesia as a symbol of his racist leanings

We are now taking the objections of the black community seriously

 

[Correll]

link to where i said that.

Well gee, how many times have you posted about the Dukes of Hazzard, numbnut?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

my point about the dukes was clearly not that the confederate flag is cool because of the dukes of hazzard.

does it seem odd to you that you have to lie in order to even pretend to yourself that you have scored a "point" against me?

what with you being so smart and all...

The Dukes of Hazard is a TV show...entertainment

They are free to display the Rebel Flag in a depiction of southern boys as much as any other TV show is free to display the Nazi Flag in a depiction of 1940s Germany, or a burning cross in a depiction of the KKK

rw, we have gone over this repeatedly.

my point is that the nation wide acceptance of the presentation of the flag as a harmless symbol of regional pride, disproves your claim that the flag has always been seen as a symbol of treason, racism and hatred.


you have responded appropriately to that point several times.

you have tried to argue what has changed since then, ie the "Sharp rise" in hate groups, david duke specifically.


i have pointed out that they are still tiny and that david duke was humiliated in the presidential election.


moving forward,

your view of the flag as a symbol that can ONLY mean treason, hatred and racism, has been disproven.


would you like to present another rationalization for your hatred?

I do not believe I have presented the view that the Rebel Flag is ONLY a symbol of racism. That is not the case
The flag has a rightful place in historical contest as a symbol of the Confederacy. I have no issues with its display at battlefields, monuments or even private residences, businesses or pickup trucks

My point has been that the flag has evolved from a battle flag to a symbol of racism. Whether that is fair or not cannot be helped...the flag was pulled out as a banner for segregation and racist hate

I think South Carolina has do defense in their use of that flag. The fact is that they only chose to fly it proudly from their statehouse in 1962 as a direct insult to those fighting against segregation and for voting rights

That they now claim the flag has other meanings is not relevant

you are certainly claiming now that it has only one meaning now.


teh dukes of hazzard ran AFTER the time period is which you believe the flag "evolved" into a symbol of racism.

the acceptance of the presentation of the flag in the 80s shows that that nation as a whole thought those other meanings were the primary, if not only meaning.

the "evolution" of the view of the flag by the left, occurred long after the battles against segregation and voting rights were won.

this anger and hatred from the left for the south, and their pride in their heritage has nothing to do with that.

 

[Correll]

Obviously it is

It's obvious it's been co-opted by racists. That's not the same thing, nor grounds for punitive measures against it.

If the South wanted to make a flag specificly to express racist ideology it'd be like that South Park one with white people and a hanging black man on a gallows.

As it is, it's only as racist as the observer makes it. They're nothing whatsoever intrinsically racist about it.

What is intrinsically racist is it represents a country that was formed to ensure the institution of slavery is preserved

BINGO.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

the america of 1979 to 1985 disagreed.

can you explain that?

I can

Blacks in 1979 and 1985 were offended by that flag and urged it to be taken down. Their objections were ignored

Mr Dylann Root came along and once again proudly used that flag as well as the flags of South Africa and Rhodesia as a symbol of his racist leanings

We are now taking the objections of the black community seriously

link to show that the blacks of 1979 to 1985 were offended by the flag and demanded it be taken down. it would be especially cool if they could relate to the dukes.

mr roof was a raving madman.

we were taking the black community seriously in the 80s.

 

[rightwinger]

Well gee, how many times have you posted about the Dukes of Hazzard, numbnut?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

my point about the dukes was clearly not that the confederate flag is cool because of the dukes of hazzard.

does it seem odd to you that you have to lie in order to even pretend to yourself that you have scored a "point" against me?

what with you being so smart and all...

The Dukes of Hazard is a TV show...entertainment

They are free to display the Rebel Flag in a depiction of southern boys as much as any other TV show is free to display the Nazi Flag in a depiction of 1940s Germany, or a burning cross in a depiction of the KKK

rw, we have gone over this repeatedly.

my point is that the nation wide acceptance of the presentation of the flag as a harmless symbol of regional pride, disproves your claim that the flag has always been seen as a symbol of treason, racism and hatred.


you have responded appropriately to that point several times.

you have tried to argue what has changed since then, ie the "Sharp rise" in hate groups, david duke specifically.


i have pointed out that they are still tiny and that david duke was humiliated in the presidential election.


moving forward,

your view of the flag as a symbol that can ONLY mean treason, hatred and racism, has been disproven.


would you like to present another rationalization for your hatred?

I do not believe I have presented the view that the Rebel Flag is ONLY a symbol of racism. That is not the case
The flag has a rightful place in historical contest as a symbol of the Confederacy. I have no issues with its display at battlefields, monuments or even private residences, businesses or pickup trucks

My point has been that the flag has evolved from a battle flag to a symbol of racism. Whether that is fair or not cannot be helped...the flag was pulled out as a banner for segregation and racist hate

I think South Carolina has do defense in their use of that flag. The fact is that they only chose to fly it proudly from their statehouse in 1962 as a direct insult to those fighting against segregation and for voting rights

That they now claim the flag has other meanings is not relevant

you are certainly claiming now that it has only one meaning now.


teh dukes of hazzard ran AFTER the time period is which you believe the flag "evolved" into a symbol of racism.

the acceptance of the presentation of the flag in the 80s shows that that nation as a whole thought those other meanings were the primary, if not only meaning.

the "evolution" of the view of the flag by the left, occurred long after the battles against segregation and voting rights were won.

this anger and hatred from the left for the south, and their pride in their heritage has nothing to do with that.

THE DUKES OF HAZARD!

 

[rightwinger]

It's obvious it's been co-opted by racists. That's not the same thing, nor grounds for punitive measures against it.

If the South wanted to make a flag specificly to express racist ideology it'd be like that South Park one with white people and a hanging black man on a gallows.

As it is, it's only as racist as the observer makes it. They're nothing whatsoever intrinsically racist about it.

What is intrinsically racist is it represents a country that was formed to ensure the institution of slavery is preserved

BINGO.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

the america of 1979 to 1985 disagreed.

can you explain that?

I can

Blacks in 1979 and 1985 were offended by that flag and urged it to be taken down. Their objections were ignored

Mr Dylann Root came along and once again proudly used that flag as well as the flags of South Africa and Rhodesia as a symbol of his racist leanings

We are now taking the objections of the black community seriously

link to show that the blacks of 1979 to 1985 were offended by the flag and demanded it be taken down. it would be especially cool if they could relate to the dukes.

mr roof was a raving madman.

we were taking the black community seriously in the 80s.

THE DUKES OF HAZARD!




.

 

[Correll]

What is intrinsically racist is it represents a country that was formed to ensure the institution of slavery is preserved

BINGO.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

the america of 1979 to 1985 disagreed.

can you explain that?

I can

Blacks in 1979 and 1985 were offended by that flag and urged it to be taken down. Their objections were ignored

Mr Dylann Root came along and once again proudly used that flag as well as the flags of South Africa and Rhodesia as a symbol of his racist leanings

We are now taking the objections of the black community seriously

link to show that the blacks of 1979 to 1985 were offended by the flag and demanded it be taken down. it would be especially cool if they could relate to the dukes.

mr roof was a raving madman.

we were taking the black community seriously in the 80s.

THE DUKES OF HAZARD!




.

i see no link supporting your claim.

 

[thanatos144]

Bullshit... It is not a symbol of racism...
If the confederate side won the civil war then we would be having this discussion over the Stars and Stripes. It is still a symbol of our history and has nothing to do with hatred, racism or bigotry. It is our history and like all, good and bad needs to be remembered and embraced for what it is. A flag of our history and nothing else.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is the flag of a racist society

A society formed for the sole purpose of ensuring the right to slavery.

It is a symbol of democrats and their history of being pro slavery, Jim crow laws , segregation and pro KKK. Al Gores own father filibustered the 1964 civil rights act.

Then no one will be sad to see it go.

Oh there are neo confederates who will hate this. I am sure only sad that democrats are trying to erase thier history once more

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[rightwinger]

BINGO.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

the america of 1979 to 1985 disagreed.

can you explain that?

I can

Blacks in 1979 and 1985 were offended by that flag and urged it to be taken down. Their objections were ignored

Mr Dylann Root came along and once again proudly used that flag as well as the flags of South Africa and Rhodesia as a symbol of his racist leanings

We are now taking the objections of the black community seriously

link to show that the blacks of 1979 to 1985 were offended by the flag and demanded it be taken down. it would be especially cool if they could relate to the dukes.

mr roof was a raving madman.

we were taking the black community seriously in the 80s.

THE DUKES OF HAZARD!




.

i see no link supporting your claim.

My claim is this:

Anyone who watches The Dukes of Hazard is a moron
Anyone who admits to liking The Dukes of Hazard is a moron
Anyone who would use The Dukes of Hazard to justify the Confederate Flag is a moron

 

[MaryL]

Unsurprisingly we aren't surprised. The Confederacy was all about states rights, and those rights were about preserving the rich white land owners's right to own other people. Not a nobel cause. Given that a lot of slave owning southerners years earlier signed their names to the Constitution. "All men are created equal" wasn't taken literally.

Not just "other people".

Black people.

Indentured servitude of non-blacks was long a thing of the past.

good catch staat!

can't have mary thinking of slaves as "people".

it is very important to remember that they were "black people".


can you explain why?

Am I missing something? Blacks ARE people. Not a different class, sub set or alternative. I don't understand why some posters are accentuating race in the same way racists do...

 

[Politico]

the america of 1979 to 1985 disagreed.

can you explain that?

I can

Blacks in 1979 and 1985 were offended by that flag and urged it to be taken down. Their objections were ignored

Mr Dylann Root came along and once again proudly used that flag as well as the flags of South Africa and Rhodesia as a symbol of his racist leanings

We are now taking the objections of the black community seriously

link to show that the blacks of 1979 to 1985 were offended by the flag and demanded it be taken down. it would be especially cool if they could relate to the dukes.

mr roof was a raving madman.

we were taking the black community seriously in the 80s.

THE DUKES OF HAZARD!




.

i see no link supporting your claim.

My claim is this:

Anyone who watches The Dukes of Hazard is a moron
Anyone who admits to liking The Dukes of Hazard is a moron
Anyone who would use The Dukes of Hazard to justify the Confederate Flag is a moron

You are a moron.