• 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!

Confederate Flag[W:1518,2230, 2241]

Should the Confederate Flag be abolished?

  • Yes

    Votes: 55 30.2%

  • No

    Votes: 127 69.8%
  • Total voters
    182
Re: Confederate Flag

Gimmesometruth said:
All human understanding comes from other humans (sorry for the truism but you asked for it), the point is that for knowing, one requires some kind of verifiable proof. Your sources cannot be verified. Humans can and do lie all the time, the best we can do is to try to verify facts to determine truth.

The Confederacy does not only look bad, but was bad for a huge portion of its population....a fact that is pushed back in Lost Cause argument.
Click to expand...

It can, indeed, and the proof was already provided. However you chose to ignore said proof.
 
Re: Confederate Flag

Kobie said:
I don't buy the filtered version you apparently take as gospel.
Click to expand...

Prove my point. You believe whatever makes the South look like demons but have a hard time accepting that the South was indeed right, current climate proves that.
 
Re: Confederate Flag

HorseLoverGirl said:
I have posted facts but the yankee lovers hated them
Click to expand...

Yankee?? What century do you live in? Maybe you should prove that know you what a fact is, first... before acting like you posted any so called facts that obviously came from horses rear end.
 
Re: Confederate Flag

HorseLoverGirl said:
It can, indeed, and the proof was already provided. However you chose to ignore said proof.
Click to expand...
Your argument is going in circles, we already went over this yesterday, the page you linked to in defense of your arguemt has zero references, no footnotes, nothing to support the contentions it made.
 
Re: Confederate Flag

HorseLoverGirl said:
Prove my point. You believe whatever makes the South look like demons but have a hard time accepting that the South was indeed right, current climate proves that.
Click to expand...

Well, what are you doing besides making the north look like demons and telling half truths about the South? You prove everyone right every time you post such nonsense and refuse to back it up with credible sources and factual evidence.
 
B'smith said:
---------------------------

You don't know where to begin because you you can't refute the points I've made with which you were unfamiliar.

If you're "tired", go take a nap & try again.

No one is forcing you to Post here & embarrass yourself by being incapable of responding to the many genuine causes of the Civil War.

To respond to your request:

“Cyrus McCormick’s Reaper and the Industrialization of Farming”

http://www.stephenhicks.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/forbes-mccormick.pdf

EXCERPT “ McCormick proved an emancipator of a different sort. The reaper, invented by his father, liberated hundreds of thousands of Americans from agrarian drudgery. The process of industri- alization, which turned the nation’s economy into the world’s most pro- ductive force, could not have been complete without the mechanization of farming.”CONTINUED


Do you dispute the fact that, in general, additional, new inventions have made & continue to make human labor obsolete?


Please continue to show me "the errors of (my) position"
Click to expand...

lol.

Well, at least you didn't say the Cotton Gin reduced the need for labor -- as I've seen by some Lost Causers.

You said "the advent of new farming / harvesting technology was making slavery obsolete" - and your Reaper does not in any way show how it was making slavery obsolete. It was invented in 1831. When did slavery end again?

What was it that made slavery obsolete?

In addition, it wasn't even used that much in the South: " Many of McCormick's potential customers, primarily farmers in Virginia, owned slaves and did not see the need for a machine to reduce workloads, since they already had enslaved African Americans to do the hard physical labor common with farming."

Even in your own link: “The reaper is to the North what slavery is to the South,” - War Secretary Edwin Stanton

Yes, I absolutely dispute "in general, additional, new inventions have made & continue to make human labor obsolete?"

No, mechanization and new invention does not erode the need /desire for "free labor" - and it certainly would not make "human labor obsolete."

There is always a demand for free labor (and don't give me that crap a slave isn't essentially free labor, I'm not going to go into the weeds with that part here) - or the cheapest labor you can possibly get.

In alllllllll kinds of other areas, there is always labor to be done to get that product to market - mechanization may remove certain tasks associated with the product, but nothing suggests slaves could not - or would not be utilized in all other kinds of endeavors (as they already *were* being used - mining, Iron Works factories, just about anywhere labor was needed) spurned by inventions that increase production and output.

Lastly, if you even have a doubt your belief "new inventions have made & continue to make human labor obsolete" is hogwash, as I just showed you....

One word:

China
 
Last edited:
Re: Confederate Flag

HorseLoverGirl said:
Prove my point. You believe whatever makes the South look like demons but have a hard time accepting that the South was indeed right, current climate proves that.
Click to expand...

I have a "hard time accepting" that the South was right because they weren't. Period, discussion over.
 
B'smith said:
---------------------

1. If you'll read my Post more carefully, you'll note that I never said that the North was fighting "to free the slaves". I said that it was used as a pretext to seize the natural resources of the South either through lopsided political legislation or through outright plunder
Click to expand...

Then who said...

If The War of Northern Aggression aka The Civil War was "about slavery" why, then was the selectively liberating Emancipation Proclamation only declared after 2 years of fighting during which the North was losing & after the "Draft Rebellions" in N.Y. & elsewhere. - B'smith

Because again... The North was not fighting to "free slaves" they were fighting to preserve the Union...

While modern audiences might easily see the abolition of slavery as a noble cause clearly worthy of sacrifice, many northerners were largely indifferent on the subject, coming to endorse it only in terms of a punishment for the rebel South, he said. Instead, the professor argued, the chief motivating factor for the North was the concept of the country as an inviolable union. The citizens and their leaders prized the freedoms they had won in the American Revolution and saw themselves in sharp contrast to the oligarchical setups then in favor in Europe, he said. Northerners viewed the South as the domain of moneyed aristocrats and feared that allowing the country to split would mean, essentially, the death of the republic. So they felt they had to force the Confederate states to rejoin the United States. - Civil War expert: North fought to preserve Union - The Daily Progress: News

Civil War wasn't to end slavery Purposes: The South fought to defend slavery. The North's focus was not to end slavery but to preserve the union. The slavery apology debate misses these facts. - Civil War wasn't to end slavery Purposes: The South fought to defend slavery. The North's focus was not to end slavery but to preserve the union. The slavery apology debate misses these facts. - tribunedigital-baltimoresun

President Abraham Lincoln was faced with a monumental challenge during his two terms as Commander-in-chief of the United States: reuniting the shattered halves of the Union. This was his sole purpose in fighting the Civil War—nothing more, nothing less. However, Lincoln was flexible enough to accommodate changes to the war plan if they would help achieve the ultimate goal of preserving the Union. On January 1, 1863 Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, making the abolition of slavery, as well as the preservation of the Union a war aim. Lincoln freed the slaves to weaken the Southern resistance, strengthen the Federal government, and encourage free blacks to fight in the Union army, thus preserving the Union. - https://www.apstudynotes.org/us-history/sample-essays/abraham-lincoln-and-the-struggle-for/

Now please feel free to point out these mythical resources the North wanted?

B'smith said:
2, Re: "...you really don't know why the North or Lincoln went to war...."

- I was able to provide a specific list of many causes of the War between the States while you could not state even one.
Click to expand...

No you didn't. You provided lip service backed up by? Yes nothing.
 
B'smith said:
3. Re: "....The South's main reason was to preserve the institution of slavery..." and "...North the main reason was to preserve the union,..."

- Since the vast majority of Southerners owned no slaves, Blacks DID own slaves & the advent of new farming / harvesting technology was making slavery obsolete, the issue of slavery is highly overrated as a cause. The introduction of slavery to the American Colonies was a joint effort from which Northern importers initially also profited also. The institution of Slavery was becoming obsolete on its own.

I'm not advocating Slavery but only stating that the fondness for Black people was far behind economic reasons & underrepresentation of the Southern states' interests in the existing Federal government as causes for the War.
Click to expand...

Well lets see what an actual confederate John S. Mosby, had to say ...

How can a soldier be proud of the country he defends while at the same time opposed to the cause he is fighting for? John S. Mosby, the renowned Confederate partisan leader, dealt with this moral dilemma years after the Civil War ended. Mosby despised slavery and believed the South had seceded to protect it. Yet he fought to defend the Confederacy, as he felt his patriotic duty to his nation outweighed all other factors. After the war, Mosby befriended General Ulysses S. Grant and joined the Republican Party, but firmly stated, “I am not ashamed of having fought on the side of slavery – a soldier fights for his country – right or wrong – he is not responsible for the political merits of the course he fights in . . . The South was my country.”

In the wake of Reconstruction a growing number of southerners began to argue that protecting slavery had not been the real cause of the war, and some even claimed that slavery was in fact a just institution. These ideas spread and grew into the “Lost Cause” movement, a romantic vision of the South that would eventually gain exposure from the popularity of films including Birth of a Nation and Gone with the Wind. In this letter written in 1907, when he was an attorney at the Justice Department, Mosby furiously attacked the men who supported this mindset. Mosby expressed a complex and fascinating set of beliefs about the Civil War at a time when its history was just beginning to be written. - A former Confederate officer on slavery and the Civil War, 1907 | The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History

Kind of disagrees with you huh?

B'smith said:
4. Re: "....In the North the main reason was to preserve the union, period...."

- Like most Wars, the Civil War was fought for economic reasons. The South had enviable natural resources that the North wanted cheaply or, ideally, for free. The pretext of "Saving the Union" is simply a noble sounding way of saying "preserving the unjust Status Quo" by which the more populous North was able to dominate Government legislation to its benefit & the Souths' detriment.

Remember, I said that I can't think of an instance in history in which an Industrialized society / Nation existed peacefully with an Agrarian society / Nation without the Industrialized Nation finding an excuse to seize the natural resources of the Agrarian Nation.

Can you?
Click to expand...

The facts I have posted above say no to your anecdotal or useless lip service. I would appreciate evidence I know you don't have, but in fairness I am offering you the opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Re: Confederate Flag

Kobie said:
I have a "hard time accepting" that the South was right because they weren't. Period, discussion over.
Click to expand...

Yes they were and if you read the book you would understand why. Bad enough I have to deal with black panther racists in my own home
 
Re: Confederate Flag

Moot said:
Well, what are you doing besides making the north look like demons and telling half truths about the South? You prove everyone right every time you post such nonsense and refuse to back it up with credible sources and factual evidence.
Click to expand...

I give you truth and you reject it because it does not fit your "agenda." That's a fact jack.
 
Re: Confederate Flag

Gimmesometruth said:
Your argument is going in circles, we already went over this yesterday, the page you linked to in defense of your arguemt has zero references, no footnotes, nothing to support the contentions it made.
Click to expand...

I see you're still upset that you were proven wrong, hence your rejection of the truth when put in your face but reality is that the history books are lying to you
 
Re: Confederate Flag

Moot said:
Yankee?? What century do you live in? Maybe you should prove that know you what a fact is, first... before acting like you posted any so called facts that obviously came from horses rear end.
Click to expand...

I have posted nothing but facts, from the horse's MOUTH, but you and your agenda reject fact for yankee myth. How sad for you
 
Re: Confederate Flag

HorseLoverGirl said:
I see you're still upset that you were proven wrong, hence your rejection of the truth when put in your face but reality is that the history books are lying to you
Click to expand...
Why do you keep referring to unverifiable claims as "truth", has your misunderstanding extended to English and logic alike?
 
Re: Confederate Flag

HorseLoverGirl said:
I give you truth and you reject it because it does not fit your "agenda." That's a fact jack.
Click to expand...

Still waiting for you to point out what this mysterious "agenda" is only you seem to know about? :lamo :2wave:
 
Re: Confederate Flag

Black Dog said:
That is nonsense. You are painting with a very broad brush. Not all southerners are racist. You want to talk about real racism? Let's talk Chicago, where I grew up. So no. Don't act like everyone in the South is some kind of racist. Damn I live in Florida.
Click to expand...

Never said all southerners are racists so that's your first straw man argument. And, of course there's still plenty of racism in the north and all over the country (witness what the very liberal town of Cambridge MA's cops did to Prof. Gates way back in 2009 that Obama got so much flack for describing accurately), so that's your second straw man. And repeating the first straw man with the false accusation that I "act" like everyone in the south, etc., etc. So when you have to make up false premises in order to score points you end up scoreless. Your final sentence simply doesn't even make sense so I don't know what to make of that one.
 
Re: Confederate Flag

Black Dog said:
She did not mean it in a racist way at all. You might want to lose the chip on your shoulder.
Click to expand...

Bull. Shyt. You must be too young to know how the language was used by these people.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
When one speaks of the North or the South in the current context, we are of course speaking of the govts. Carpetbaggers and Scallywags were not agents of the Union. If you are reduced to bringing up forks and spoons, your argument never had much to begin with.

Did the Union annex huge portions of Southern productive lands? Did it remove the slaves and capture them in productive enterprise exclusively for Norther wealth creation? Cmon, back up your argument.
Click to expand...


I was just kidding about the silverware.........

I listed many causes of the War other than slavery which was primarily a moral "Fig Leaf"

Concerning "natural resources" as a cause, I was drawing a parallel between the general reasons Industrial Nations / Societies invade Agrarian Nations / Societies throughout History & especially in reference to Colonial European Powers.

In the case of the North vs the South, the natural resources of the South would have assured timber, coal, metals, textiles & minerals well into the future.
But not all resources are tangible items. For example, the freedom to trade, for Treaties etc
If the South were free of the North, they could trade & form financially beneficial treaties with European powers which would have been anathema to a Northern Government.

Much of Europe was deforested in the 1800s from the prolific use of wood for fuel, building, export. I imagine that was noted by Industrialized Northerners & figured into "Preserving the Union.

When I cited "Economic Reasons", I meant that the North was benefiting from legislation that made Southern exports relatively cheap compared to European goods as one example.

My intent is not to rehash the Civil War but to cite that "Slavery" was not a major reason the North went to war. "Preserving the Union" meant perpetuating the Status Quo in which the more populous North shaped trade, tariff & tax legislation in the existing Federal Government that was financially beneficial to the North & detrimental to the South.

I'm about finished with this topic for now as I'm having to restate the same facts to 2 people & want to go outside.

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom