The Confederate Flag

[Divine_Wind]

You still haven't answered whats wrong with being anti racist slaver.

An "anti racist slaver" is a non sequitur.

 

[Master Debator]

An "anti racist slaver" is a non sequitur.

I understand. It's a difficult question for a Confederate sympathizer to answer.

 

[D_NATURED]

The forum has a basement to be used by posters such as the above. There they can cuss, shout names and so on. I do not go there since I do not want to read such mickey mouse remarks.

Oh, sorry to offend your delicate sensibilities. I guess I assumed that someone, so callous as to bemoan the attack on states rights as being the great tragedy of that war, would be so used to mockery and insults that my meager offering would be but a butterfly fart in a tornado. Here, let me guide you gently through my point.

The civil war WAS about slavery. It was such a glaring, festering sore on this nation's morality that it stained even the otherwise clean. Every southern white person who died to end that abomination was a life well spent. The heritage, if you're going to brag about having one, must first be something DESERVING pride. How valiantly you defend evil is not worthy of a flag.

This is the magical thinking of the southern conservatives, who want to still fight this battle without ANY appreciation for where this state's rights madness took us last time, to the absolute commodification of humans and the detriment of our nation. But, no, if you want to fight the man, I encourage it. Gather as many like-minded individuals as you can, arm yourselves and march proudly upon the "clowns in DC". Oh, what justice will come to you gullible, frail victims.

Don't worry, some idiot will raise a flag in your honor. There's no limit to human stupidity.

 

[Divine_Wind]

Will someone, anyone, please explain to Master Debator why "anti racist slaver" is a non sequitur?

 

[D_NATURED]

Will someone, anyone, please explain to Master Debator why "anti racist slaver" is a non sequitur?

He should have hyphenated "racist-slaver", then the "anti" makes sense. Otherwise, it sounds like someone who is both an anti-racist AND a slaver. A slaver, I guess, who does not discriminate.

 

[JasperL]

History says you are wrong. Obviously you and I can agree to disagree on the matter. The fact you can't explain why the South seceded if there was no threat to slavery tells me you might be missing some information vital to your education.

So I guess you cannot or won't read replies, then wonder why I don't reply to your question, just answered. Let me quote part of what you've ignored:

The south knew if slavery didn't grow west with the country, long term it was dead, as eventually the slave states would lose power and the free states would eventually force the end of that peculiar institution. They saw the writing on the wall, but it was decades out, and they would not tolerate that threat, however distant.

:roll:

 

[Divine_Wind]

He should have hyphenated "racist-slaver", then the "anti" makes sense. Otherwise, it sounds like someone who is both an anti-racist AND a slaver. A slaver, I guess, who does not discriminate.

Agreed although adding "anti" to slaver works too: anti-racist AND a anti-slaver.

 

[it's just me]

Why would it bother me beyond the dubiousness of the claim? Criminals, whether black gangs or white gangs typically victimize people of their own race. That's just a fact. Most of the racist terrorism that goes on in this country however is committed by white supremacists. That's also a fact. That said I dislike gun violence as much as anyone having had lost friends and family to it and I would not have a problem with you calling out people who commit gun violence. Why would you even think I would?

:screwy




I actually didn't say but you seem intent on making my own arguments for me...




Lol what are you even talking about? What problems? The Confedracy was a racist country full of racist slavers and people who profited off it. That's a fact. It's only a problem because that fact seems to bother you.




:lamo

Have I suggested we stop teaching slavery and the civil war as history? Have I suggested we raze museums? No. I'm simply in favor of removing Confederate monuments and flags from public places. That doesn't equate to erasing history, and maybe try to sound less hyperbolic. In fact, maybe you should take your own advice and "get over it", if you were, removing statues of long dead racists wouldn't bother you so much.




Oh no we removed some statues the end is nigh, run for your lives!

:lamo

So let me get this straight: you claim to be black and it's okay with you if your own people kill each other (and whoever gets in their way) as long as these fricking statues of people you don't know and have never seen get torn down. And by the way, I don't give a damn whether you call it "gun violence" or not, violence is violence, but it's okay if you are only killing your own.

You've got your priorities bass ackwards. Again: the Civil War was over a century ago, get over it, and no, I will not "get over" your screeching about statues because no one can have an peace as long as bomb throwers like you keep yelling "fire" in crowded theaters.

 

[Divine_Wind]

So I guess you cannot or won't read replies, then wonder why I don't reply to your question, just answered. Let me quote part of what you've ignored:



:roll:

Because I know Einstein's definition of insanity and you obviously do not.

Decades out so they seceded then? That doesn't make sense. Occam's Razor says exactly what history does: they seceded because they were concerned Abe Lincoln would ban slavery...and he did just a few years later, not "decades out".

 

[JasperL]

I don't expect you to read all 1640+ posts, but the least you could do is read a few of my posts....or do you really think I will stop and teach history to every person who drops out of nowhere without a clue?

I don't think that point has been addressed - why didn't the CSA draft or force or even ALLOW slaves to fight? Several reasons - the biggest one is giving your slaves a bunch of loaded guns is generally a bad idea, even if the slaves didn't turn on their former enslavers and kill them, they couldn't be trusted not to escape, and or spy on the South, and of course then and for the next almost century, whites didn't want to serve in battle with blacks their ideology insisted were inferior beings, not really even people, savages, etc. And so it was ILLEGAL/prohibited for blacks to serve in combat until the end was already written, and in desperation the CSA allowed them to fight.

 

[JasperL]

Because I know Einstein's definition of insanity and you obviously do not.

What I see is someone being challenged and running away because you got nothing...

Decades out so they seceded then? That doesn't make sense. Occam's Razor says exactly what history does: they seceded because they were concerned Abe Lincoln would ban slavery...and he did just a few years later, not "decades out".

Quote me some history, then. The GOP platform didn't pledge to ban slavery, and Lincoln in fact supported a constitutional amendment GUARANTEEING what he'd often admitted, which is slavery was a state, not a federal issue, and the first 13th amendment would have made that guarantee explicit. Lincoln supported THAT. So how in the hell can you square his support for the first 13th Amendment and a plan to end slavery in what became of the CSA?

Here's some background: Corwin Amendment - Wikipedia

Lincoln's comments on it at his inauguration:

I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service ... holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

It passed both houses of Congress, with the required margins and was sent to the states for ratification. This was about a month before the shelling of the Fort Sumter that began the war.

You cannot in fact quote him at any time with any goal of ending slavery in the slave states, because it was not a goal of him or the Republican party.

So, yes, the threat was limiting the spread of slavery to the territories and therefore new states being admitted as 'free' states.

 

[Master Debator]

So let me get this straight: you claim to be black and it's okay with you if your own people kill each other (and whoever gets in their way) as long as these fricking statues of people you don't know and have never seen get torn down. And by the way, I don't give a damn whether you call it "gun violence" or not, violence is violence, but it's okay if you are only killing your own.

:roll:

Yeah, that's exactly what I said. You got me.

You've got your priorities bass ackwards. Again: the Civil War was over a century ago, get over it, and no, I will not "get over" your screeching about statues because no one can have an peace as long as bomb throwers like you keep yelling "fire" in crowded theaters.

:2wave:

 

[Master Debator]

Agreed although adding "anti" to slaver works too: anti-racist AND a anti-slaver.

So you knew exactly what I meant but are still dodging the question?

:lamo

 

[Divine_Wind]

What I see is someone being challenged and running away because you got nothing...

Then why are you not ignoring me as the ignorant, racist bigot you think I am?

 

[Divine_Wind]

So you knew exactly what I meant but are still dodging the question?

:lamo

No, I thought you meant "anti-racist slaver" which is why it would have been a non sequitur.

BTW, "Debater" is spelled with an "e", not an "o". Those two instances are just one of many of yours that indicate a lack of education. Sure, we all make typos and I certainly make my fair share of them, but when a person continually makes certain mistakes it usually indicates a lack of proficiency in writing in English.

 

[Jonsa]

The Bible was the premier document supporting the enslavement of black people.

In america. In other lands it was other scriptures.

To be fair, religious dogma has ALWAYS been used to justify any and all actions of its believer's political/economic/military leadership regardless of denomination, location or governance.

 

[Jonsa]

When you bloat and groan, I try to imagine some history course approving language like yours. Can you imagine students paying attention to a braggart who truly displays hate over this topic?

Just using your dear leaders' language. If its okay for him, why isn't okay for everyone else?
And I do understand you trying to imagine a history course. Perhaps taking one might crystallize that whimsy.

 

[JasperL]

Then why are you not ignoring me as ignorant, racist bigot you think I am?

I didn't call you a racist or a bigot, but you just made an argument that's ignorant, and I showed you why it is, with cites, and quotes, and of course you ignored it to spew BS. A bad meme won't save your terrible argument, which is too bad for you I guess.

Lincoln's views pre-war were very, very clear. Here's a few: Lincoln on Slavery - Lincoln Home National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service)

I have always hated slavery, I think as much as any Abolitionist. I have been an Old Line Whig. I have always hated it, but I have always been quiet about it until this new era of the introduction of the Nebraska Bill began. I always believed that everybody was against it, and that it was in course of ultimate extinction.

I have said a hundred times, and I have now no inclination to take it back, that I believe there is no right, and ought to be no inclination in the people of the free States to enter into the slave States, and interfere with the question of slavery at all.

when the fathers of the government cut off the source of slavery by the abolition of the slave trade, and adopted a system of restricting it from the new Territories where it had not existed, I maintain that they placed it where they understood, and all sensible men understood, it was in the course of ultimate extinction; and when Judge Douglas asks me why it cannot continue as our fathers made it, I ask him why he and his friends could not let it remain as our fathers made it?

I have never sought to apply these principles to the old States for the purpose of abolishing slavery in those States. It is nothing but a miserable perversion of what I have said, to assume that I have declared Missouri, or any other slave State shall emancipate her slaves. I have proposed no such thing.

I do not wish to be misunderstood upon this subject of slavery in this country. I suppose it may long exist, and perhaps the best way for it to come to an end peaceably is for it to exist for a length of time. But I say that the spread and strengthening and perpetuation of it is an entirely different proposition. There we should in every way resist it as a wrong, treating it as a wrong, with the fixed idea that it must and will come to an end.

Here's a late speech:

I say that we must not interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists, because the constitution forbids it, and the general welfare does not require us to do so.

Etc....

Bottom line is you cannot quote Lincoln or the Republicans as threatening slavery in the existing slave states, what became the CSA. What I did above is provide you many quotes proving the opposite, that they had NO intention of interfering with slavery where it existed, but they did promise to STOP ITS SPREAD.

If you want, post another stupid image, but what you can't do is pretend what we all know, which is your argument was wrong.

 

[JasperL]

No, I thought you meant "anti-racist slaver" which is why it would have been a non sequitur.

BTW, "Debater" is spelled with an "e", not an "o". Those two instances are just one of many of yours that indicate a lack of education. Sure, we all make typos and I certainly make my fair share of them, but when a person continually makes certain mistakes it usually indicates a lack of proficiency in writing in English.

What do you call it when people invent history then won't address challenges to their invented history and instead post memes? Asking for a friend...

 

[Divine_Wind]

What do you call it when people invent history then won't address challenges to their invented history and instead post memes? Asking for a friend...

Left Wing Politically Correct Revisionist History. Why?

 

[JasperL]

Left Wing Politically Correct Revisionist History. Why?

Then why are you doing it, since you're a right libertarian?

You said, "Occam's Razor says exactly what history does: they seceded because they were concerned Abe Lincoln would ban slavery."

That was FALSE. The 13th Amendment, the Corwin amendment, passed Congress before the war began, and it enshrined in the Constitution (were it ratified by the states) the right of slave states to remain so as long as they wanted. I then quoted a half dozen of Lincoln's speeches before he was elected making clear what he said at the time of the Corwin Amendment, which is he had no plans to, and did not believe the constitution allowed him, to interfere with slavery in the states that became the CSA. Which is why he supported the Corwin Amendment - it confirmed what he's said many times.

The CSA seceded because limiting the spread of slavery to the west meant long term the CSA would be surrounded by free states and it would eventually force the end of slavery everywhere. That was years, perhaps decades, out. That was the Republican plan in fact. Limit the spread of it westward, and it would die of its own accord. The CSA knew this, and didn't accept it ===> secession.

 

[Master Debator]

No, I thought you meant "anti-racist slaver" which is why it would have been a non sequitur.

No you didn't, I've asked that same question in multiple ways and you still haven't given a response. What's so wrong with hating racist slavers Rising?

BTW, "Debater" is spelled with an "e", not an "o". Those two instances are just one of many of yours that indicate a lack of education. Sure, we all make typos and I certainly make my fair share of them, but when a person continually makes certain mistakes it usually indicates a lack of proficiency in writing in English.

Lol. Master Debator is spelt that way because its supposed to be a semi-overt euphemism for masturbator. Its the internet not a grad class, take yourself less seriously.

:lamo

 

[Court Jester]

Liberals crack me up with their constant hand-wringing. The Confederate flag had no "racist" meaning at all, it was merely a flag of rebellion same as the first American flag with 13 stars was a flag of rebellion against the British.

 

[Divine_Wind]

No, I thought you meant "anti-racist slaver" which is why it would have been a non sequitur.

No you didn't, I've asked that same question in multiple ways and you still haven't given a response....

LOL. So, besides all of your problems being my fault, I'm now responsible for reading your mind whenever you fail to post above a sixth grade level. Got it. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[marke]

The difference is you have advantages you don't even know you have

I never had the advantage Elizabeth Warren had for being native American Indian.