• 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!

Gov. Haley to call for removal of Confederate flag from Capitol grounds [W:154]

Should the flag be moved-removed from all State Buildings?


  • Total voters
    70
"Black lives matter...."

Whites, ah what the hell......we were slaves..

your man wants a race war. He thinks he can win.



Didn't take them long to deface this memorial, huh? Whats next.....riots? Charleston burning, again? Sherman uhm, I mean BO Peeps March, huh?
 
The South was fighting to destroy our country. The North as fighting in self-defense after Southerners attacked a defenseless Ft. Sumter.

Lincoln knew it would lead to war, preparing Ft. Sumter for war...
 
Photography is one of the most powerful ways to understand history. During the civil rights movement in the 50s and 60s, it was normal to see white Southerners in favor of segregation waving their flags in the faces of protesters. It was a counter protest of sorts.

People want to continue perpetuating this lie that the confederacy existed to do anything other than preserve slavery and enforce racist ideals that had become taboo even by the 1800s. However, they can't really dispute history or the amount of primary evidence that shows this to be nothing more than whitewashing.

Photos are indeed powerful. But you left some interesting ones out...
Byron-Thomas.jpg

black_confederates.jpg

h_k_edgerton_5.jpg

battle_flag_xlarge.jpeg


See next post...
 
BlackConfederates.jpg

xreu5qqt94xzwqc.jpg

black4.jpg

Civil+War+black-soldiers.jpg


So are these men, across 150 years just pro-slavery racists?

Or could it be that you are missing something? Like why they do what they do?
 
My problem with that is you are imposing your views on how southerns perceive the flag.

You don't get to tell them what it means to them.
If you were to remove the word 'Southerners' from your statement, and replace it with 'African Americans', you'd have an equally powerful argument.
 
So are these men, across 150 years just pro-slavery racists?

Or could it be that you are missing something? Like why they do what they do?
Um, there were Black slave holders. If they were subjugating, they were racists.
 
The public schools I attended in Tennessee never had us read some of the states' declarations of secession, which make the point crystal clear what the war was all about and why the South seceded. I'm embarrassed to admit I was over 40 before I looked them up and read them. Until then I thought there could be a case for a somewhat more nuanced cause for that war. But when the states say, paraphrased for brevity, "It's all about slavery" when they secede, you sort of have to take their word for it.
You've spurred-me-on, to take a peak at the SC declarations - you were right; theirs too, seems to center around slavery.

Yale Law School - 'Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union'
 
My problem with that is you are imposing your views on how southerns perceive the flag.

You don't get to tell them what it means to them.

I'm really not, and have acknowledged that some people who fly it do see it as a symbol of southern pride, etc.

But the policy choice is whether a flag with an easily documented racist past that IS a symbol of that racist past to a significant share of the population (racist whites and those who oppose those same racists) and a large majority of blacks in your state should fly on the grounds of the State Capitol. The racist murderer adopted that flag, and so do a number of racist organizations. There's a reason and that reason is it IS a symbol of racism and state sponsored white supremacy, which is what these racist dirtbags want to return to. It's no accident, for example, that the white owner of the barbq restaurants and who was an outspoken supporter of racial segregation and opposed civil rights for blacks flew a Confederate flag over his restaurants until he died.
 
The South was fighting to destroy our country. The North as fighting in self-defense after Southerners attacked a defenseless Ft. Sumter.

You never studied American history have you.

One, slavery was an indirect cause of the war. The south was fighting for states rights, not slavery. They were fighting for their way of life, hundreds of years of doing one way, then the north comes along and says no, you have to do it this way, and no we will no compensate you.

Sumpter was far from "defenseless" and the North, through Abraham Lincoln, another over rated president, was gearing up for a war whether the south wanted it or not. Like all wars, the primary ingredient was greed.

But you know, other countries have had civil wars, uprisings, even Canada had the Upper Canada Rebellion in 1837. The difference is other countries get over them.
 
I'm really not, and have acknowledged that some people who fly it do see it as a symbol of southern pride, etc.

But the policy choice is whether a flag with an easily documented racist past that IS a symbol of that racist past to a significant share of the population (racist whites and those who oppose those same racists) and a large majority of blacks in your state should fly on the grounds of the State Capitol. The racist murderer adopted that flag, and so do a number of racist organizations. There's a reason and that reason is it IS a symbol of racism and state sponsored white supremacy, which is what these racist dirtbags want to return to. It's no accident, for example, that the white owner of the barbq restaurants and who was an outspoken supporter of racial segregation and opposed civil rights for blacks flew a Confederate flag over his restaurants until he died.

In the eyes of many Native Americans the US flag is such a symbol of racism, should we take it down? Symbols will always offend some-thats not what matters, what matters is that the people of that state want it up. If the states representatives decide to take it down Im fine with that too.


What Im not fine with is outsiders TELLING them what it means and what they need to do. I just posted several links to black southerners who wave that flag, and others who fought for it. Enough of this orwellian PC garbage-it means different things to different people and if some don't like it they can go pound sand.
 
You never studied American history have you.

One, slavery was an indirect cause of the war. The south was fighting for states rights, not slavery. They were fighting for their way of life, hundreds of years of doing one way, then the north comes along and says no, you have to do it this way, and no we will no compensate you.

Sumpter was far from "defenseless" and the North, through Abraham Lincoln, another over rated president, was gearing up for a war whether the south wanted it or not. Like all wars, the primary ingredient was greed.

But you know, other countries have had civil wars, uprisings, even Canada had the Upper Canada Rebellion in 1837. The difference is other countries get over them.

actually slavery was one of 2 direct causes,the other tarrifs ,both economic reasons.the states rights issues came about as the southern states rejected tariffs and were reliant on slavery economically,and paid around 90% of all us taxes back then,through tariffs.the tariffs also crippled trade between the south and its trading partners,and severely crippled its economy.

now add in slavery,taking that away from the southernors would have made the south then like detroit now.add in the fact none of these things harmed the north in any way but the north recieved all the benefits,while the south paid all the cost.

and even something few people think of,the north wanted cotton prices in the south to rise,while putting tariffs on it to keep countries like britain from getting cheap cotton,so northern textile mills could corner the market on clothing,instead o the south selling cheap cotton to countries like england who were direct competitors to northern textile factories.
 
You've spurred-me-on, to take a peak at the SC declarations - you were right; theirs too, seems to center around slavery.

Yale Law School - 'Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union'

They're all here: The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States

Mississippi: "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."

Texas: "We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states."
 
actually slavery was one of 2 direct causes,the other tarrifs ,both economic reasons.the states rights issues came about as the southern states rejected tariffs and were reliant on slavery economically,and paid around 90% of all us taxes back then,through tariffs.the tariffs also crippled trade between the south and its trading partners,and severely crippled its economy.

now add in slavery,taking that away from the southernors would have made the south then like detroit now.add in the fact none of these things harmed the north in any way but the north recieved all the benefits,while the south paid all the cost.

and even something few people think of,the north wanted cotton prices in the south to rise,while putting tariffs on it to keep countries like britain from getting cheap cotton,so northern textile mills could corner the market on clothing,instead o the south selling cheap cotton to countries like england who were direct competitors to northern textile factories.

Pretty much what I said.
 
actually slavery was one of 2 direct causes,the other tarrifs ,both economic reasons.the states rights issues came about as the southern states rejected tariffs and were reliant on slavery economically,and paid around 90% of all us taxes back then,through tariffs.the tariffs also crippled trade between the south and its trading partners,and severely crippled its economy.

now add in slavery,taking that away from the southernors would have made the south then like detroit now.add in the fact none of these things harmed the north in any way but the north recieved all the benefits,while the south paid all the cost.

and even something few people think of,the north wanted cotton prices in the south to rise,while putting tariffs on it to keep countries like britain from getting cheap cotton,so northern textile mills could corner the market on clothing,instead o the south selling cheap cotton to countries like england who were direct competitors to northern textile factories.

Come on, tariffs had been much higher than when the Civil War was declared. There was constant bickering, but there is no way anyone can claim tariffs were a major cause of the war. Read the declarations - they tell you the reason. Slavery.

BTW, here's a nice seemingly balanced discussion of tariffs. Did tariffs really cause the Civil War? The Morrill Act at 150

The Morrill Tariff

For some years prior to the war the tariff rates actually stabilized around a relatively free trade status quo. This was due to the Walker Tariff of 1846, a lesser knownAmerican counterpart to Britain’s repeal of the Corn Laws that same year. Southern and western agricultural interests succeeded in lowering the tariff even further in 1857 with an across-the-board rate reduction, authored by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Robert M.T. Hunter of Virginia.

But tariffs were a big issue in the immediate runup to the Civil War - not what tariff levels were but what the proposed bills might do to them if the Southern and Western states couldn't cobble together enough support to defeat the increased tariffs. It was all made moot when the South seceded and cleared the way for whatever the northern states wanted to do.

So, yes, it was a big issue and constant source of disagreements, but was at best a DISTANT second to slavery.
 
Last edited:
Remove it, that time and that flag should have been gone a long ways back.
 
and even something few people think of,the north wanted cotton prices in the south to rise,while putting tariffs on it to keep countries like britain from getting cheap cotton,so northern textile mills could corner the market on clothing,instead o the south selling cheap cotton to countries like england who were direct competitors to northern textile factories.
Interesting you mention this -

Yes, I remember this facet being stressed very strongly in my Grammar School U.S. History class.
 
Pretty much what I said.

except you called slavery an indirect cause,as it was a direct cause,both slavery and tariffs were major issues that could have destroyed the southern economy,tariffs were already imposed and had to be scaled back to to south carolina trying to seceede before the civil war,then they tried to abolish slavery,in which the southernors took the offensive to prevent the last pillar of their economy from being destroyed.

heck i would imagine slavery would not have caused a war if tariffs were at reasonable levels.
 
Back
Top Bottom