• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the Confederate flag a symbol of treason?

Is the Confederate flag a symbol of treason?

  • Total voters
    82
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thunder said:
white racists believed Africans were genetically and culturally inferior, but made a fine source for manual labor. Just like mules and donkeys.
Click to expand...
Based on some of the arguments in this thread that belief is alive and well - but it isn't racist in the least.
 
theplaydrive said:
This is different argument from the one I'm making. Also, you seem to be suggesting that some traders didn't think Africans were inferior. This is just factually incorrect.
Click to expand...

If it is factually incorrect.... then you shall provide the facts that make it that way, yes/no?

So, blacks were so inferior that crackers Purchased their slaves from other blacks instead of just taking them, and then taking the sellers too.............. You are going to have a hard time convincing me that this is so.
 
Last edited:
Caine said:
If it is factually incorrect.... then you shall provide the facts that make it that way, yes/no?

So, blacks were so inferior that crackers Purchased their slaves from other blacks instead of just taking them, and then taking the sellers too.............. You are going to have a hard time convincing me that this is so.
Click to expand...

so white slave-traders didn't consider blacks to be inferior, because they bought black slaves from other blacks?

how does this work?
 
Thunder said:
so white slave-traders didn't consider blacks to be inferior, because they bought black slaves from other blacks?

how does this work?
Click to expand...

You didn't answer my question first....

Why didn't these white slave traders just kill or capture the people they were buying their slaves from, if blacks were so "naturally inferior"??

Why purchase something when you can take it?
 
Caine said:
You didn't answer my question first....

Why didn't these white slave traders just kill or capture the people they were buying their slaves from, if blacks were so "naturally inferior"??

Why purchase something when you can take it?
Click to expand...

cause by actually purchasing them from slave-traders in Africa, they were able to get millions.

if they simply grabbed local black folks, they wouldn't have gotten away with it for long.
 
Caine said:
You are going to have a hard time convincing me that this is so.
Click to expand...
The problem is that you are changing my argument. My argument, as you would see by reading my actual words, is that many Americans viewed Africans as inferior to them. You've set me up so I have to substantiate the claim that those assumptions of inferiority were so strong that Americans would have not even purchased slaves from other Africans. I never made that claim, you did. So if you want to address my actual argument (the underlined part), say so, but don't think I'm going to let you drag me into substantiating a claim I haven't made.
 
theplaydrive said:
The problem is that you are changing my argument. My argument, as you would see by reading my actual words, is that many Americans viewed Africans as inferior to them. You've set me up so I have to substantiate the claim that those assumptions of inferiority were so strong that Americans would have not even purchased slaves from other Africans. I never made that claim, you did. So if you want to address my actual argument (the underlined part), say so, but don't think I'm going to let you drag me into substantiating a claim I haven't made.
Click to expand...

You said something was factually incorrect. I need those facts.
 
theplaydrive said:
The problem is that you are changing my argument. My argument, as you would see by reading my actual words, is that many Americans viewed Africans as inferior to them. You've set me up so I have to substantiate the claim that those assumptions of inferiority were so strong that Americans would have not even purchased slaves from other Africans. I never made that claim, you did. So if you want to address my actual argument (the underlined part), say so, but don't think I'm going to let you drag me into substantiating a claim I haven't made.
Click to expand...

Of course many American viewed Africans as inferior to them. The same can be said of any culture when viewing a differing one. The real issue is how does this real issue make the Confederate Flag a symbol of racism, slavery and treason? The same argument can be made that many Southerners did not view Africans as inferior to them. When you can show that this fact is false then you can make the sweeping claim that the CF is a symbol of racism, slavery and treason. Right?
 
Thunder said:
cause by actually purchasing them from slave-traders in Africa, they were able to get millions.

if they simply grabbed local black folks, they wouldn't have gotten away with it for long.
Click to expand...

Oh? Why? The African tribesmen had a chance of standing up to the British Army?
 
Bodhisattva said:
Oh? Why? The African tribesmen had a chance of standing up to the British Army?
Click to expand...

if the Brits, Spanish, Portugeese, Dutch, and other slave-traders decided to just invade and kidnap thousands of black Africans for slavery, they would end up uniting all Africans against this.

however, by instead buying slaves with money or weapons, they insured a constant supply of slaves.
 
Thunder said:
if the Brits, Spanish, Portugeese, Dutch, and other slave-traders decided to just invade and kidnap thousands of black Africans for slavery, they would end up uniting all Africans against this.

however, by instead buying slaves with money or weapons, they insured a constant supply of slaves.
Click to expand...

Nothing would ever unite all the Africans. Nothing ever has due to the tribe mentality. The slave traders could have easily just wiped out any that resisted and taken what they wanted. You know this too... don't pretend otherwise.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Nothing would ever unite all the Africans. Nothing ever has due to the tribe mentality. The slave traders could have easily just wiped out any that resisted and taken what they wanted. You know this too... don't pretend otherwise.
Click to expand...

ok, maybe not all of Africa, but certainly all of those in any specific region.
 
Thunder said:
ok, maybe not all of Africa, but certainly all of those in any specific region.
Click to expand...

You have to be joking me. This conversation isn't even serious any more. You are going to sit there and tell me that the British Army... the most powerful army in the world could not and would not have beaten a bunch of guys with spears?
 
Bodhisattva said:
You have to be joking me. This conversation isn't even serious any more. You are going to sit there and tell me that the British Army... the most powerful army in the world could not and would not have beaten a bunch of guys with spears?
Click to expand...

The British Army took South Africa from a united Zulu nation with a relativity small army.

So yes this is true.

PS the Zulu nation was among the best organized and largest native forces in Africa. The Zulu's won 1 battle due to a tactical mistake buy the British General. After that, it was pretty much over for the Zulu Nation. It would have been even easier in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
ok, maybe not all of Africa, but certainly all of those in any specific region.
Click to expand...

How do you united the tribes, when it's the tribes who are selling each other into slavery? :lamo
 
Thunder said:
white racists believed Africans were genetically and culturally inferior, but made a fine source for manual labor. Just like mules and donkeys.
Click to expand...

Right! Because whitey hates asses and jackasses.
 
Bodhisattva said:
You have to be joking me. This conversation isn't even serious any more. You are going to sit there and tell me that the British Army... the most powerful army in the world could not and would not have beaten a bunch of guys with spears?
Click to expand...

is that all that the people of Africa had as weapons? spears?

wow, some of these posts really due prove the point of the OP.
 
Thunder said:
is that all that the people of Africa had as weapons? spears?
Click to expand...

Except for a few captured, yes this is historically accurate. Since you ignore my example above I am assuming you have no argument.

Thunder said:
wow, some of these posts really due prove the point of the OP.
Click to expand...

Only to those with limited intellect and a less than accurate understanding of history.
 
Caine said:
You said something was factually incorrect. I need those facts.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I said it was factually incorrect to suggest that no traders viewed Africans as inferior. And I'm not going to bother finding sources for a claim that you already agree with with.

Caine said:
... as I mentioned earlier from the President down they all viewed blacks as inferior.
Click to expand...
I assume "they all" includes traders.
 
True, people do have a right to do and say what they want, it is not treason. Though should we as a country support a symbol with that much negative baggage?
 
Blackdog said:
The British Army took South Africa from a united Zulu nation with a relativity small army.

So yes this is true.

PS the Zulu nation was among the best organized and largest native forces in Africa. The Zulu's won 1 battle due to a tactical mistake buy the British General. After that, it was pretty much over for the Zulu Nation. It would have been even easier in the rest of sub-Saharan Africa.
Click to expand...

Yeah... I actually had to look up to see if there was another win for the Africans other than that one massacre. Even then the British lost about 1,000 and they killed 3,000 - 4,000. It was like the Black Hawk Down. We kinda lost but killed thousands to our 18 dead.
 
Thunder said:
is that all that the people of Africa had as weapons? spears?

wow, some of these posts really due prove the point of the OP.
Click to expand...

Yeah... they were just a bunch of spear chuckers. Yep, that is what I was saying :roll:

Is there any other reason that I might have made such a comment? One that might take a metaphore or logic to understand? No? You can't think of anything?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom