Dafaq?

[1300zuk]

How is a change of flags on state grounds going to end racism, mental issues, and/or mass shootings?

[thewalrus]

[Les / Vipers Rule]

[thewalrus]

[tut]

i've been pretty much disconnected from news and internet and everything for 2 months (roughly) and i only have a vague idea what's going on here..

but i'll just leave this bit here http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... rchandise/

[JaysonAych]

[tut]

[JaysonAych]

[thewalrus]

[thewalrus]

[Les / Vipers Rule]

I never said to not get rid of the Confederate flag, I say it's a flag that represents for most who view it with its sordid history a loser for the most part. I only note that for all too many people doing so only relieves a symptom and it makes often self-righteous look and feel better but they often then do not want to do any so called heavy lifting. Changing minds is a harder thing to do. Ridding society a symbol is rather easy in comparison.

[Les / Vipers Rule]

[ConeDodger]

So if I fly the Nazi Swastika flag...just cause I thought it was a cool design, nobody'd get upset, right?

[Les / Vipers Rule]

After listening to the latest No Agenda show podcast with Adam Curry an John C. Dvorak, they talked about the flag kerfuffle. I did learn a few things about it. The Confederate flag really was not about slave owners keeping slaves outright in the South (Rebel) states but it's basis was more about States' Rights and how the southern states were not on with the Federal govt. infringing on what they saw as States' Rights. So in this regard I now see why a lot of people in the south hold on to the Confederate flag because it was a symbol of opposing what many felt and may feel as an oppressive Federal govt. on them. Of course as time passed it became a a more sordid symbol. Of course most folks only see it as the Rebel flag during the Civil War and on representing slavery in the South, for which we have moved past now.

[Talon]

[Talon]

[ryguy79]

Only about 150 years late.

[sombrio]

[sombrio]

It occurred to me a little too late that I conflated the southern states' reasoning at the time of the Civil War with the after-the-fact reasoning of those who support the "Confederate cause" overall. Of course, the interstate commerce decisions came much later and weren't in play at the time of the Civil War. Still, I do think the reasoning was disingenuous at both stages. The Confederate states rebelled primarily because they wanted slavery and institutional racism. If you read the Declarations of Causes by the Confederate states in support of their secession (link http://www.civilwar.org/education/histo ... auses.html), most of the declarations mention slavery pretty heavily. While many of them do mention states' rights as a broader issue, it seems pretty clear from the context which of those "rights" they were willing to go to war over. Further, the Confederate states appear to not mention very many grievances other than interference with slavery.

In fairness, I haven't read these declarations in their entirety, so as before, feel welcome to "CMV."

[ConeDodger]