HairOnFire Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 I have friends of all races who DO NOT want the confederate flag or any monuments to confederate troops removed. That is their right to think that way and it doesn't mean that any of them are racists. If they were racist, I wouldn't have them as a friend. I haven't called them racist. I've called them Confederate apologists who selfishly lack empathy for the views of others. Any defense of Confederate images remaining on statehouse property is rooted in the belief that a persons desire to see such displays trump those of people who are offended. Worse, several here have taken the position that their views trump those of others so completely that no further discussion or debate should be considered at all. It's a non-starter they insist before offering a predictable slippery slope rant made in support of doing nothing. Well that's fucked up for more reasons than I count but primarily because a removal of Confederate symbols from state property doesn't prevent anyone from displaying them in any manner they choose on private property. Vague statements about friends of different races not wanting the flag removed or monuments relocated completely ignore the fact that many people do want those symbols removed and are deeply offended by the way they're currently displayed in statehouses, on uniforms of law enforcement officers, on state flags, etc. I don't agree with them and saw WAY to many examples of "good old boys" waving that flag and committing racist acts when I was stationed in the Deep South especially. I had always equated that flag with abject racism, but experience has proven me wrong. So you've seen way too many examples of the flag being waved while racists acts were committed, and presumably other examples where it wasn't. So which experience informs you more when considering if it's appropriate for that flag to continue flying over the seats of southern power? Apologists insist the Confederate flag isn't a racist flag because they themselves don't use it for racist purposes. But they know others do use it for racist purposes and at the very least they're aware of the outrage that flag sometimes inspires within the black community. Furthermore, in regards to legal standing, how would anyone who supports doing nothing be damaged or harmed by the removal of Confederate symbols from state property? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted July 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 HOF, how is state property defined according to the removal order ? The state as it is, controls a large amount of property that would be affected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted July 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 The government is indeed removing symbology from Federal Cemeteries. It is not simply state property anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 Numbers, I'm not trying to be evasive here but I have to wonder aloud if there is really any substantive disagreement between us. In the very first post in this thread you stated flatly that no flag but the American flag should fly over any state capitol, an opinion shared by everyone who has responded in the pages that followed. And by now it should be clear to everyone, including goofy SF2, that my ire is directed soley at displays on statehouse grounds, the uniforms of law enforcement officers, the logos of the department of justice in numerous states, etc. I simply don't care if a television network has taken the Dukes of Hazzard off the air due to public pressure. Kid Rock can continue to do or say whatever he wants and I'm still not going to give a shit about Kid Rock. Tom Petty doesn't owe me or anyone else an apology for Southern Accents. Furthermore, I don't give two shits about Confederate symbols appearing in cemeteries as IMHO nothing could be more appropriate. My problem isn't with people who want to honor and celebrate past heritage, but rather with those who insist on displaying Confederate symbols in ways that imply the Confederacy lives on within statehouses and institutions of power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USN Bengal Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 HOF, obviously I wasn't clear enough in my very first post (I guess)... I don't believe that the confederate flag should fly over statehouse and institutions of power. None of my statements are vague, they are the facts and experiences that I have had or am currently having. If you're looking for a fight, look elsewhere. Obviously you feel very strongly about this subject, and you have that right. It doesn't make you right though, just as others who disagree with you aren't right either. One absolute fact is that racism still exists and attacking a symbol of that racism will not lessen it in any way at all sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted July 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 HOF, I think we do agree more than we disagree. It's just hard for me to fully support this issue as it stands because, for one thing, this IS affecting the cemeteries. The issue is also what I believe to be vague. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted July 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 USN, I believe the military did ban and punished those symbols of racism, quite some time ago. KKK, Nation of Islam, certain Christian groups, etc... The DOD had even listed alot of the groups as specific Hate Groups. Regardless what some may think, racism still exists in the military. IMHO, racism will equal the same percentage as the civilian community. In other words, I am here to confirm your last paragraph. To the day that I retired, I witnessed racism. P.S. I enjoyed kicking them out more than I enjoyed bringing OSVETS and NAVETS in. Other Service Veterans and Naval Veterans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 One absolute fact is that racism still exists and attacking a symbol of that racism will not lessen it in any way at all sadly. Not entirely true; if nothing else it serves to further marginalize those who cling to it as a symbol of racist ideology & puts them on the defensive. For example you can look at the folks who've made it their profile photo on social media or businesses that have made a point of displaying it in their windows and know to avoid them. USN, I believe the military did ban and punished those symbols of racism, quite some time ago. KKK, Nation of Islam, certain Christian groups, etc... The DOD had even listed alot of the groups as specific Hate Groups. Anecdotal, but I knew a guy in HS who had to cover up a skinhead tattoo before he was allowed to enlist. It was just the popular crucified skinhead image, nothing obviously political/hateful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 HOF, obviously I wasn't clear enough in my very first post (I guess)... I don't believe that the confederate flag should fly over statehouse and institutions of power. We all seem to be agreeing on that point. If you're looking for a fight, look elsewhere. Obviously you feel very strongly about this subject, and you have that right. If I were looking for a fight I wouldn't take the time needed to pepper my posts with jokes. One absolute fact is that racism still exists and attacking a symbol of that racism will not lessen it in any way at all sadly. IMHO the issue isn't about attacking symbols of racism, but rather refusing to allow state governments to continue honoring them in the future. Continuing to do nothing is little more than giving defacto approval and that's unacceptable...especially when current events serve to change the debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 HOF, I think we do agree more than we disagree. It's just hard for me to fully support this issue as it stands because, for one thing, this IS affecting the cemeteries. I think I've been pretty clear about the type of changes I'd like to see and none of the things I'd like to see happen would have any impact on cemeteries. Can't comment further without additional info. As for the matter of full support I'm curious where you'd draw the line if given the chance. Have I mentioned any potential change you wouldn't embrace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 Not entirely true; if nothing else it serves to further marginalize those who cling to it as a symbol of racist ideology & puts them on the defensive. For example you can look at the folks who've made it their profile photo on social media or businesses that have made a point of displaying it in their windows and know to avoid them. Like the guy who sent me the e-mail I posted earlier in the thread. FWIW my connection to that guys relates to an uncle of mine who was killed in early 1944 when his B-24 was shot down. My uncle was the tailgunner. The guy who wrote about keeping 'em skeered is a relative of the pilot, also killed that day. We're both members of a chat group composed of family members of the downed crew. I can only guess his e-mail was a way of reaching out to someone who shares an interest in history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USN Bengal Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 Not entirely true; if nothing else it serves to further marginalize those who cling to it as a symbol of racist ideology & puts them on the defensive. For example you can look at the folks who've made it their profile photo on social media or businesses that have made a point of displaying it in their windows and know to avoid them. Anecdotal, but I knew a guy in HS who had to cover up a skinhead tattoo before he was allowed to enlist. It was just the popular crucified skinhead image, nothing obviously political/hateful. So correct me if I misinterpreting what you mean... people and or businesses that are displaying the confederate flag are automatically racist and should be avoided? Then you stated that a guy who had to get the skinhead tattoo covered wasn't representing anything political or hateful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted July 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 I think I've been pretty clear about the type of changes I'd like to see and none of the things I'd like to see happen would have any impact on cemeteries. Can't comment further without additional info. As for the matter of full support I'm curious where you'd draw the line if given the chance. Have I mentioned any potential change you wouldn't embrace? It's not you that is mentioning cemeteries, it is the government. Changes in regards to political offices or law enforcement, then yes, the display of the confederate flag should not happen. Other issues and places should be addressed on a case by case basis. I should hope nobody would desecrate the grave of anyone of any side. In federal cemeteries, like Arlington, this will be a reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted July 17, 2015 Report Share Posted July 17, 2015 So correct me if I misinterpreting what you mean... people and or businesses that are displaying the confederate flag are automatically racist and should be avoided? Then you stated that a guy who had to get the skinhead tattoo covered wasn't representing anything political or hateful? No, what I said was "obviously political/hateful". Big difference. It was still considered a symbol of something the military would rather not associate with. Same idea with the confederate flag. No, it doesn't automatically make them a racist, but it does indicate they are sympathetic to something with overwhelmingly negative connotations and have made a point of displaying it anyway. In much the same way that the military wants to avoid people with skinhead tattoos even though a few of them might be cool, I want to avoid people who identify with the confederate flag even though not all of them are racists. If they identify with it that strongly I'm going to be suspicious. They don't owe me an explanation and I don't owe them the benefit of the doubt. In both cases they've chosen to represent themselves a certain way and I've chosen to accept that representation at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USN Bengal Posted July 18, 2015 Report Share Posted July 18, 2015 Thanks, that's why I wanted to clarify what you meant. I understand your point of view, and generally agree with you. Sad that we even have to have a conversation like this though... I've seen what many united can accomplish, and it is a beautiful thing. I can only hope and pray that all people can put aside their hate, fear, and ignorance some day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnickyCat Posted July 18, 2015 Report Share Posted July 18, 2015 I agree with all the government stuff being discussed but still think its rather silly removing the Dukes Of Hazzard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dub Posted July 18, 2015 Report Share Posted July 18, 2015 Thanks, that's why I wanted to clarify what you meant. I understand your point of view, and generally agree with you. Sad that we even have to have a conversation like this though... I've seen what many united can accomplish, and it is a beautiful thing. I can only hope and pray that all people can put aside their hate, fear, and ignorance some day. IDK that it's sad, regrettable that we still need these conversations but better late than never. I think it's cool that we're having the conversation at all, and this thread in particular has been relatively civil. There's a productive dialogue happening, not just here but nationally, that is long overdue and all the more painful for our procrastination. What's sadder to me is the backlash that comes along with so much as acknowledging this stuff; the predictable charges of race-baiting, political correctness, white guilt and so on from people when made to question why things are the way they are and how they could be better for everyone. They see it as zero-sum, apparently, but refuse to shoulder any responsibility for making it so. Cognitive dissonance leading to anger. More specific to the OT I think a whole lot of that brand of Southern resentment comes not from the Civil War or even race, but from the hamfisted attempt to keep the South pastoral/agrarian (or whatever you want to call it in a socioeconomic sense) during Reconstruction after the war. It's a topic I've been trying to learn more about because it seems like the beginning of a shift in American politics towards the plutocracy we have now. I was reading about the transcontinental railroad and the Credit Mobilier as a turning point towards the huge, concerted effort from industry to control politics. Of course there's always been some corruption there but IDK that it had been quite so organized & deliberate here. Maybe closer to the truth to say "effective"? Like I said, it's something I'm just learning more about myself, but the more I read the more the racism & antifederal stuff starts to overlap. With a black man as POTUS they become one in the same for anyone already holding either viewpoint and it's a Petri dish for violent radicals. There's a fine line to be walked between thought police and curbing dangerous antisocial behavior. We'll line up to get groped by the TSA but refuse to wait more than 3 days to rage-buy a handgun. Lately I feel like if that line were a sobriety test we'd be faceplanting in the middle of it. Lose the uniform patches and state flags, but who gives a high-flying fuck about the General Lee? Every character on that show was a stereotype FFS & none of them particularly flattering. Except for Uncle Jessie. One of the best things about growing up in Dixie is that brown, white, or purple you're issued an Uncle Jessie. tl;dr : this thread has sucked much less than usual re: these topics & if loving this is wrong I dont wanna be right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USN Bengal Posted July 19, 2015 Report Share Posted July 19, 2015 One of my favorite posts I have seen on the www is where someone suggested that all politicians should have to wear suits like NASCAR, and they have to wear the corporate sponsor patches so we would know who owns them and their votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelWeston Posted July 19, 2015 Report Share Posted July 19, 2015 One of my favorite posts I have seen on the www is where someone suggested that all politicians should have to wear suits like NASCAR, and they have to wear the corporate sponsor patches so we would know who owns them and their votes. There is an app that I had posted a long time ago where every time a politician was mentioned if you hovered over his name you would get his top donors. Can't remember anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HairOnFire Posted July 19, 2015 Report Share Posted July 19, 2015 IDK that it's sad, regrettable that we still need these conversations but better late than never. I think it's cool that we're having the conversation at all, and this thread in particular has been relatively civil. There's a productive dialogue happening, not just here but nationally, that is long overdue and all the more painful for our procrastination. I'm frustrated but hopeful. Frustrated because some changes seem to happen at breakneck speed while others move forward in fits and starts. Or in this example too often lurch backward as southern states and others pass heritage laws written to prevent the removal of flags, memorials, or statues regardless of who or what they honor. But I'm hopeful because change is coming. Google Ben "Pitchfork" Tillman. Ex- South Carolina Govenor, United States Senator, once a candidate for President, and a co-founder of Clemson University. By his own words Tillman bragged about slaughtering many blacks, bragged about attempting to deny them the vote, and bragged about stuffing ballot boxes to keep them out of office. He also admitted killing Simon Corker, a black state senator, while Corker was on his knees in prayer. I only mention this because there's an 8-ft tall statue honoring Tillman on the very same SC statehouse grounds where the flag was removed, as well as a building known as Tillman Hall on the Clemson campus. But that may soon be changing as Clemson just renounced Tillman officially and said they will change the name of the building if they can get enough support (75%) to satisfy the demands of the Heritage Act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddChatter Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 I agree with you completely Ken, but that doesn't change the fact that they are all US Veterans. They didn't make their hate, prejudice, and ignorance legal Ken, they just recognized them all as veterans... even the black regiments who fought for both sides. "the black regiments who fought for both sides" statement for the record is incorrect. Blacks didn't carry or fire weapons for the confederacy. They were used as laborers, cooks, litter carriers musicians. There may be instances where blacks picked up a weapon during battle but there were not armed black regiments of confederacy black soldiers. This is a myth to imply that look....... even slaves went to war for the confederate cause. Not like they would have had a choice anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 More specific to the OT I think a whole lot of that brand of Southern resentment comes not from the Civil War or even race, but from the hamfisted attempt to keep the South pastoral/agrarian (or whatever you want to call it in a socioeconomic sense) during Reconstruction after the war. It's a topic I've been trying to learn more about because it seems like the beginning of a shift in American politics towards the plutocracy we have now. I was reading about the transcontinental railroad and the Credit Mobilier as a turning point towards the huge, concerted effort from industry to control politics. Of course there's always been some corruption there but IDK that it had been quite so organized & deliberate here. Maybe closer to the truth to say "effective"? Like I said, it's something I'm just learning more about myself, but the more I read the more the racism & antifederal stuff starts to overlap. With a black man as POTUS they become one in the same for anyone already holding either viewpoint and it's a Petri dish for violent radicals. Racism and anti-federalist stances do overlap and have since the Revolution (and before.) And your instinct is good when you want to look at Reconstruction to see how this really meshes together. This is the great sadness to me--Lincoln's assassination let loose a lot of turmoil that he otherwise would have avoided (or at least have worked hard to avoid.) He could have contained the radical Republicans who were so harsh on the South through 1876. That might have slowed or certainly would have diluted the return to power of many of the hard-core secessionists, and Lincoln's economic policies would have promoted a faster industrialization of the south which, too, would have resulted in a wider distribution of power in the south. In fact, there was a strong sentiment coming from some factions in the north prior to the Civil War that argued for building a north/south railroad to create more economic ties and to kick start an industrialized south. (Look at the Pennsylvanians for this: Henry Carey, Pig Iron Kelley, Andrew Stewart, etc...) Instead what resulted was an agrarian (and bucolic) economy which had little free labor that wasn't tied to agriculture--and much of agriculture was tied to quasi-feudal sharecropping at the lower end of the economy and to finance/mortgage pressures from the top end of the economy. Hence, the postwar south resembled antebellum south in most important ways--only with more mythos and more resentment and entrenchment of the local powers. I'd suggest tying in your Reconstruction research with some prewar work, too. The political economic debates which underlie the entire period are fascinating and also offer up some thoughts regarding race and economics that sometimes get overlooked. A decent place to step off from (click through to the abstracts to get some ideas for research): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 "the black regiments who fought for both sides" statement for the record is incorrect. Blacks didn't carry or fire weapons for the confederacy. They were used as laborers, cooks, litter carriers musicians. There may be instances where blacks picked up a weapon during battle but there were not armed black regiments of confederaye black soldiers. This is a myth to imply that look....... even slaves went to war for the confederate cause. Not like they would have had a choice anyway. You're mostly right, MC. Pat Cleburne was virtually ostracized for suggesting that the south enlist slave regiments (and free them for their service.) And I do think that a few units of self-organized free negros from Louisiana were declined if my memory serves me. But very late in the war (when it was far too late) laws were passed that allowed for the enlistment and formation of negro units in the south. I want to say early 1865 (Feb/March?) Although I think USN could have argued his point better, I tend to agree with him that the law making rebels U.S. veterans in 1957 has force and should be upheld. Yes, this was the Dixiecrat era but if one were to adopt a Lincolnian view that a ) the south was in rebellion and never recognized as separate from the union in any legal form, and b ) that although the rebels bear moral culpability for their actions defending slavery, the issuance of pardons--wherein anyone formerly in a state of rebellion swears to uphold the Constitution, etc...--effectively and legally granted full citizenship again. And as an aside, let's not forget that racism in the north was/is very virulent, too. The most structurally racist region was/is the south but the most overtly racist place I've ever lived was Philadelphia. Do as everyone here suggests, remove the flag symbolism from all government paraphernalia, leaving cemeteries, etc... alone. Especially Arlington. I personally think that the fact of using the former home (via his wife) of one of the greatest traitors of them all, R.E. Lee, as a cemetery is all the symbolism--and just reward--necessary. If that ain't "rubbing it in" I don't know what is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddChatter Posted July 20, 2015 Report Share Posted July 20, 2015 One of my favorite posts I have seen on the www is where someone suggested that all politicians should have to wear suits like NASCAR, and they have to wear the corporate sponsor patches so we would know who owns them and their votes. USN, Good idea. We would probably be shocked to find out who owns who. By the way USN, as one who went the sports route after HS, I appreciate your service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USN Bengal Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Thank you, it was an honor to serve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.