Confederate Battle Flag Feeding Frenzy

[Jim Beaux]

I recall being in high school on a band trip. As a joke, some friends covered another black friend's eyes and held up a confederate flag behind him. When he saw it he jokingly tore it out of their hands, laughing the whole time. I remember wondering what the joke was. I had a confederate flag hanging in my room, and never once considered it a statement on race (and I grew up in a very racist home). It was always a symbol of southern pride to me. Still is today. I do choose not to put one on my vehicle because I don't want to be perceived as something I'm not, but I think people are creating a problem where there mostly isn't one.

Similarly, I am a Cajun. Not just a guy from South Louisiana, but my grandparents were French speaking, true decedents of Nova Scotia. There is a slang term that Cajuns use referring to each other - coonass. I wear that name as a badge of honor as as it is my heritage as a Cajun. Admittedly, it's an odd sounding name, but nothing that any Cajun I know is offended by. If there were a Cajun flag, I'd fly it with pride too.

My grandma (From Abbeville) would get mad when I called her that . I agitated her every chance I got. I would proclaim that Im not KA-JOHN, but an American. and she would give me a lesson in "mad cajun".

Today I proudly claim that I be RCA!

[ShootDontTalk]

Too many people are willfully ignorant of the way history is "adjusted" by the victors in war. The Confederate flag being one glaring current example.

To portray the Civil War as having its roots solely in the issue of slavery is akin to claiming that America's dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan had its genesis in racism. War is never so simple.

[SewTexas]

YES!!! my people!!!!!

I have tried to explain to several people on FB and they just don't want to hear it, the war was fought for the same reason most wars have been fought. $$$
The south left and the pres realized "Ah heck, we need their money to pay to run the government!"

[K.Mooneyham]

Call me paranoid but here is my take on why this Confederate flag thing blew up like this. After the terrible and tragic shooting, there was a certain group of folks who hoped a riot would ensue like in other areas, mostly for political purposes. However, this shooting happened at a Christian church and a lot of the folks there obviously take their devotion and religion seriously. So, they didn't riot. The political agitators got kind of mad about that and quickly looked for something political they could use to get a "victory". They saw the racist nutjob with the Confederate flag and BAM! They had their angle. Since a certain political affiliation has huge sway on the internet, and especially on social media, companies couldn't dare not comply with demands that anyone and everyone immediately disassociate themselves the the Confederate flag, or risk being labeled as "racist".

I'm a Texan, and I care way more about the Lone Star flag than any other except the American flag. However, I really, really despise political correctness and the rewriting of history for political purposes. So, Amazon, Walmart, and others refusing to sell the Confederate flag irritates me to no end. But what irritates me more is all the people who jumped on the "ban it" bandwagon just to seem like they were doing the right (trendy) thing.

[dale blanker]

I'm totally baffled as to why anyone would want to tout the Confederate Battle Flag anyway. The Civil War is over at extremely high cost to both North and South. It seems to me that that Southern States should have been allowed to quit the Union but my guess is that they are much better off in it now. We should not forget history but how can there be pride or any satisfaction in remembering our Civil War???

[K.Mooneyham]

I'm totally baffled as to why anyone would want to tout the Confederate Battle Flag anyway. The Civil War is over at extremely high cost to both North and South. It seems to me that that Southern States should have been allowed to quit the Union but my guess is that they are much better off in it now. We should not forget history but how can there be pride or any satisfaction in remembering our Civil War???

Because Americans, northern and southern, are ornery people, and big questions about freedom and rights and government mean something to them. And many Americans refuse to forget the bravery and sacrifices made on both sides, though some obviously want us to do just that.

[jimlongley]

Call me paranoid but here is my take on why this Confederate flag thing blew up like this. After the terrible and tragic shooting, there was a certain group of folks who hoped a riot would ensue like in other areas, mostly for political purposes. However, this shooting happened at a Christian church and a lot of the folks there obviously take their devotion and religion seriously. So, they didn't riot. The political agitators got kind of mad about that and quickly looked for something political they could use to get a "victory". They saw the racist nutjob with the Confederate flag and BAM! They had their angle. Since a certain political affiliation has huge sway on the internet, and especially on social media, companies couldn't dare not comply with demands that anyone and everyone immediately disassociate themselves the the Confederate flag, or risk being labeled as "racist".

I'm a Texan, and I care way more about the Lone Star flag than any other except the American flag. However, I really, really despise political correctness and the rewriting of history for political purposes. So, Amazon, Walmart, and others refusing to sell the Confederate flag irritates me to no end. But what irritates me more is all the people who jumped on the "ban it" bandwagon just to seem like they were doing the right (trendy) thing.

I agree completely about the attempt to foment riot by choosing the Confederate flag, but you make a point about caring more about the Texas flag, which raises an interesting conundrum.

Texas, as a separate nation, existed for close to 9 years, and then its flag flew as a state flag for another 19 before slavery was outlawed by the 14th Amendment. Without getting into all of the "little border" wars that flourished in the region after the Louisiana purchase, as first pain and then the newly independent Mexico encouraged immigration into the largely unpopulated area, many of the immigrants blatantly ignored Mexico's laws against slavery. This was actually one of the several causes of the rebellion against Mexico after Mexico decided to ban further immigration due to the immigrants' willful violations of the laws.

So Texas won her independence in 1836 and was a wholly independent country for 9 years before becoming a State of the United States in 1845. Thus Texas' Lone Star flag flew over a slave holding country, and then state, for 28 years, far longer than any Confederate standard.

If we let the rabble rousers get away with eliminating an historical relic because they see a tenuous association with slavery, is our beloved Lone Star flag next? And, as has been pointed out, the good old Stars and Stripes has flown over legalized slavery for a much longer period, so would it not be next? What do we get for a replacement, a rainbow?

[VMI77]

I hate to disagree with you guys, but the war was over slavery. The southern states seceded because they correctly believed that the Republicans intended to abolish slavery. Everyone at that time believed that. And as soon as the Republicans took office they passed a bill intended to emancipate the slaves, The First Confiscation Act of 1861. It is a matter of historical record that the act contained an Emancipation Clause, which was gutted by Congress. The War of Northern Aggression.

The first act of the war was the attack on Fort Sumter. South Carolina believed that a Federal fort on their coast was a threat to their independence. Lincoln believed it would be a tacit acknowledgment of South Carolina's independence to abandon the fort, so he ordered immediate reinforcement. The Confederate Army asked the occupants to surrender. They refused, so South Carolina began bombarding the fort and thus the war began. The First Shot of the Civil War The Surrender of Fort Sumter, 1861

South Carolina seceded in Dec 1860, before Lincoln had even been sworn into office. Fort Sumter was attacked in April, 1861. The First Confiscation Act was passed in August, 1861. All eleven states had seceded by June, before the act was passed.

If you read South Carolina's Declaration of Causes of Seceding, slavery is mentioned 38 times, including this:

The Presidential election of 1852 resulted in the total overthrow of the advocates of restriction and their party friends. Immediately after this result the anti-slavery portion of the defeated party resolved to unite all the elements in the North opposed to slavery an to stake their future political fortunes upon their hostility to slavery everywhere. This is the party two whom the people of the North have committed the Government. They raised their standard in 1856 and were barely defeated. They entered the Presidential contest again in 1860 and succeeded.
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers.

I think it's abundantly clear what the cause of the Civil War was - the Republicans wanted to abolish slavery and were willing to use every means they could employ to succeed. The southern states did not want slavery abolished and chose to leave the Union rather than submit to the government.

My post was accurate. Abolishing slavery was simply an means to an end. If it was as claimed about slavery, why did Lincoln wait 3 years into the war before ending it? It wasnt a morality play, it was a war tactic. He did it with the hope that the slaves would revolt against the south.

The intent to abolish slavery was not one of morality, but of economics. We had two diverse economies. One fueled by the industrial revolution & one driven by agriculture. The south didnt need the north, but the north needed the south and feared it becoming a more powerful international player.

The south was shipping tons of cotton to Europe, & the ships were returning with European manufactured goods.

The northern manufacturers couldnt compete. So, having an advantage in the House, the northern representatives passed protective tariffs on imported goods. The industrialized northern majority in congress was an adversary to the rural southern states.

The Tariff of 1833 was ultimately abandoned in favor of the Black Tariff of 1842, and protectionism was reinstated. Average tariff rates nearly doubled from the initial 20% target for 1842 to about 40%, and the percentage of dutiable goods jumped from about 50% of all imports to over 85% of all imports. For some goods, such as those made with iron, the import tax constituted about two thirds of the overall price of the good. Unsurprisingly, the impact of the Black Tariff of 1842 was immediate: as the cost of imports jumped, there was a sharp decline in international trade in 1843.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_of_1833

Research Nullification Crisis & Tariff or 1842.

Europe threaten to slap tariffs on US manufactured goods & the US removed the tariffs. The tariffs make it clear that the intent was to sell goods to the south.

So when the tariffs failed, the yankees decided to attack the issue of slavery (under the guise of morality). It was the republican industrialists who financed the abolitionists. (Today it is OPEC funding the anti frackers for the similar reasons)

You can bet that if the northern states had a use for slaves, slavery would have continued for years.

Exactly.

[ShootDontTalk]

I'm totally baffled as to why anyone would want to tout the Confederate Battle Flag anyway. The Civil War is over at extremely high cost to both North and South. It seems to me that that Southern States should have been allowed to quit the Union but my guess is that they are much better off in it now. We should not forget history but how can there be pride or any satisfaction in remembering our Civil War???

Well let's see why we should remember. 620,000 dead Americans. Close to 900,000 missing and wounded. 4% of the total population of the entire nation was killed. More soldiers died in prisoner of war camps (both North and South) than died in Vietnam (58,209). Largest number of American battle casualties in a single day, 22,000+. Some died under one flag, some under the other. All were Americans.

Satisfaction? No. Pride? Absolutely. I'm proud of every single American who ever served and gave the last full measure, regardless of flag. They didn't fight for politics or even country. They fought and died for each other. In the end we learned a tough lesson about brotherhood. If you want to ban "battle flags", ban both.

BTW....the phrase "Confederate Battle Flag" tells us quite a bit about who you are.

[The Wall]

It seems we are now seeing more Confederate flags going up than before all of this ridiculous clamor. Looks like the flag is becoming a symbol for freedom of speech. I'm not from the South or North, and have always not only thought the flag looked cool but was a symbol of Southern pride.

[baldeagle]

Here's the problem that I have. Many people are saying that the Civil War was not about slavery. That's just as dogmatic as saying it was about slavery. Yes, there were other issues, as there always are. But as jimlongley admitted slavery was "among the root causes of the rebellion". So saying it wasn't about slavery is just as disingenuous as saying it was only about slavery (which, of course, I did not say.)

There is no question that there were many complexities involved in the causes of the Civil War, and Southerners were right about some things (e.g. states' rights) but they were wrong about slavery. And yes, I understand the economic implications of instantly freeing every slave.

Note that none of this has anything to do with the Northern Virginia Battle Flag, but when the controversy arose, I immediately began to see people arguing that the war was about this, that and the other thing but not about slavery, and that is flatly false.

Let me give you a personal perspective on the flag. At one time my daughter was dating a black man. He was and is a fine person and a personal friend, someone I would have been proud to call son. When we traveled, my daughter had to urinate quite frequently. So we worked out a signal system. When she had to go, he would flash his headlights three times, and I would know it was time to get off the highway and find a restroom.

On one trip we got off and I pulled in to the first thing I found, a motel. They go out, went in, and then came back out immediately. He came over to my door and said, "Can we go somewhere else? They have a Confederate flag behind the counter, and I don't feel comfortable being in there." Now, keep in mind, this young man holds a Masters Degree and is very intelligent, soft-spoken and gentlemanly in every way.

I said sure, and we headed further down the road. I came upon a pizza restaurant, so I pulled over again. They went inside, and shortly thereafter he came back out. I rolled my window down and asked if there was a problem. He said, "There's a Confederate flag in there. She can't hold it any longer, so she's gone to the bathroom. Would you mind going back in with me?"

Of course I did. But I also learned something. To him, and to millions of others, the battle flag meant danger. You are not welcome here, and if you stay, something bad might happen.

If there was a flag that made YOU feel that way, would you want it flying over the capitol of your state?

The flag has a place. It's a symbol of heritage and pride and many other positive attributes. But it is also a symbol of hatred and racism to some. You have southern Democrats to thank for that. So, the same party that started the KKK and fought tooth and nail against civil rights for blacks, lynched them by the thousands without blinking an eye, is now attacking that flag and insisting it be taken down. The irony is a thick as molasses.

The flag should not fly on an buildings owned by the state governments or on any of their grounds. It has no place there and sends a very wrong message. The flag should certainly be flown elsewhere. NASCAR is now banning the flag at their races, which to me is the height of insanity. They are committing suicide for political correctness.

To Beiruty, yes, the Constitution originally protected slavery. This article gives you some of the background and explains how slavery was dealt with in the Constitution. Suffice it to say that we would never have had a United States had slavery not been accommodated at the time of the creation of the Constitution. The Founding Fathers, although some were vehemently opposed to slavery and saw its glaring inconsistency with the principles of freedom, realized that to form a nation it would have to be allowed for a while.

Article 1 Section 9 forbade the banning of the importation of slaves until 1808. Congress passed a law forbidding any further importation of slaves that became effective on January 1, 1808.

[jmra]

Slavery was a flashpoint used by the Northern states to rally support for the war with the South. Ending slavery was without a doubt war worthy, but it was not the driving motive behind the governments desire to keep the union together. The North went to war with the South in order to preserve the Union for the simple fact that the North needed the South much more than the South needed the North. The South was a cash cow for the North, one that they were not willing to give up.

[baldeagle]

Slavery was a flashpoint used by the Northern states to rally support for the war with the South. Ending slavery was without a doubt war worthy, but it was not the driving motive behind the governments desire to keep the union together. The North went to war with the South in order to preserve the Union for the simple fact that the North needed the South much more than the South needed the North. The South was a cash cow for the North, one that they were not willing to give up.

OK, help me understand your position. Every one of the seceding states claimed that they left over slavery. http://www.civilwar.org/education/histo ... auses.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is from Georgia's declaration:

The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state. The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the way of the formation of the Constitution.

The Republicans were elected specifically to abolish slavery. They had a two-fold plan; starve slavery out by making all the surrounding states non-slave states, prohibit the import of slaves, make life difficult for the south economically, etc. If that didn't work, then they were prepared to abolish slavery by force, the Constitution notwithstanding.

All these reasons I see being articulated are secondary to the primary cause of the whole problem. So how do you explain this? Why did all the seceding states claim they left because of the North's attempts to abolish slavery? Was it all just rhetoric?

[ShootDontTalk]

The flag has a place. It's a symbol of heritage and pride and many other positive attributes. But it is also a symbol of hatred and racism to some.

I agree. On the other hand, my ancestors were enslaved by the British before fleeing to America. I have no problems with the flag of Great Britain. I even dare to eat fish and chips. I'm just not threatened by symbols - not even Pop Tarts chewed to resemble a gun.

I'm far more worried about becoming a slave of my own government.

[K.Mooneyham]

SNIP for brevity

All these reasons I see being articulated are secondary to the primary cause of the whole problem. So how do you explain this? Why did all the seceding states claim they left because of the North's attempts to abolish slavery? Was it all just rhetoric?

Responding to the text I have highlighted, I would say that it was rhetoric, to a point. These states were getting ready to defy the Federal government. Now, its a fine thing to have the backing of the common folks, yes indeed. But its perhaps more important to have the backing of the monied folks, and to let them know that you are doing what they want you to do. Slavery was certainly a central issue to the Civil War, but it was far from the only issue. I'd look at the whole thing as a powder keg waiting to blow, slavery as the fuse, and the actions of abolitionists as the match that lit the thing off.

I despise communists with a passion and I don't want the hammer-and-sickle banner ever flying over any government building. But, on the other hand, is Amazon going to stop selling it? After all, communism has resulted in more modern deaths than any other single reason, the figures are in the multi-MILLIONS. Think about it.