What the hell kind of heritage is an Iowa kid celebrating with that flag? Did they flunk history? I mean it's one think for a Florida fool to make that argument but the Iowa kids have a geography problem.
Georgia is once again issuing confederate flag license plates
- Thread starter TJ8869
- Start date
Maybe they grew up watching Dukes of Hazzard? Does it matter? You liberals want everything to be plain and boring. No invidiualism, no economic freedom, no freedom of speech, no babies, no killing killers, no fun at all.
Well the Catholics of course, but,..well, I guess if you like old men and everything.
Not having the state issue them does not mean that people want everything to be plain and boring.
It's pretty funny to see conservatives for this. They hate government until it's supporting their ideology, then the State should definitely be allowed to promote their views.
Aww, and here I thought you said you were going to be nice. Well, at least you have Blazin on your side. He's the Baghdad Bob of the "defend GWB till I die" crowd.
Yes. Since the KKK also flew the stars and stripes then that flag is a symbol or racism, too. I mean it's not all roses and lollipops between blacks and whites. There is equal hatred and racism on both sides. Funny that libs NEVER address the issue of blacks who are racists.
Would you be okay with state governments issuing special license plates honoring the Black Panther Party? How about the Bloods and the Crips?
Don't need to read this thread, but the state of Georgia is a bunch of losers. The need to appeal to their racist friends.
I've done that a few times. Short version is I do it because too many people are ignorant of what the flag actually stands for. They repeat what they've heard and don't do any actual research to learn the truth. Everything I said in my first post is true and verifiable. I have linked verification to every statement in past threads on this subject. Also despite what the media tries to claim. The majority of people do not believe it to be a symbol of hate.
jerryusc said: ↑
Yes. Since the KKK also flew the stars and stripes then that flag is a symbol or racism, too. I mean it's not all roses and lollipops between blacks and whites. There is equal hatred and racism on both sides. Funny that libs NEVER address the issue of blacks who are racists.
Click to expand...
Would you be okay with state governments issuing special license plates honoring the Black Panther Party? How about the Bloods and the Crips?
That's quite a reach. If you say A you gotta say B, therefore since the KKK flew the Confederate flag that makes it a symbol or racism and slavery then their flying the Stars and Stripes has the same effect. Anyway, the stars and stripes flew over this country when slavery was in effect for a lot longer than the Confederate flag did.
Yes. Since the KKK also flew the stars and stripes then that flag is a symbol or racism, too. I mean it's not all roses and lollipops between blacks and whites. There is equal hatred and racism on both sides. Funny that libs NEVER address the issue of blacks who are racists.
Click to expand...
Would you be okay with state governments issuing special license plates honoring the Black Panther Party? How about the Bloods and the Crips?
That's quite a reach. If you say A you gotta say B, therefore since the KKK flew the Confederate flag that makes it a symbol or racism and slavery then their flying the Stars and Stripes has the same effect. Anyway, the stars and stripes flew over this country when slavery was in effect for a lot longer than the Confederate flag did.
The flag was flown by rebellious states in defense of slavery. That's what it MEANS. You can try to "whitewash" that history all you want, you can even deny it, but you can't change it. The "southern heritage" it represents is a heritage of slavery and hate and terror against blacks. I could put a Nazi flag up and claim I was just celebrating my German heritage. It would be just as idiotic as your claims.
A fellow Southerner who has swallowed the hate and propaganda of the invaders from the north. The Civil War(a more appropriate name would be The South's War for Independence)was fought for a lot of other reasons. Don't try to make it all about slavery. The South should have been allowed to go its own way peacefully which is what it tried to do.
It's kind of swag's schtick around here. Go light on substance and avoid answering any hard questions.
Sure the KKK used the American Flag, but that use didn't turn the American Flag into a symbol of racism. The use of the American Flag in so many other situations overwhelmed the relatively small use by the KKK. Now to contrast that with the Confederate Flag. The Confederate flag isn't flown by the military in every battle. It isn't flown at every parade. And it doesn't sit behind every President in the Oval Office. The Confederate Flag was mostly flown by Southerners and was adopted by racists as a rallying point, which is why it is mostly seen in a racist light.I have no dog in this fight, but i will leave this here
Absolutely. But the state shouldn't be party to that racism which is why putting racist symbols on license plates is wrong.
I guess I just don't see the cost/benefit of taking up this cause. How long will it take to reverse the racist symbolism of the Confederate Flag? How hard will you have to fight? How much of a personal hit will you take? Now compare that to the benefits of bringing the Flag back to prominence. Even if you were able to make the Flag respectable again, which could take decades if not generations, will you really get enough from the Flag if and when it ever does become respectable again? I'm just not sure it's worth it.
I can completely understand Southerners wanting to take pride in their culture. But why attach that pride to a symbol of racism? Why not simply select another symbol that doesn't have such negative connotations and use that as a rallying point for pride? Seems a whole lot easier to me.
The South made it about slavery. Revisionist history doesn't change that. Every state knew when it joined the Union that this was NOT a confederacy...that had been tried and failed, This was "A NEW NATION" - kinda says so right there in the founding documents. Revisionist history doesn't change that, either.
I think it's pretty rock-solid that the Southern states were absolutely fighting for a nation that would allow slavery to go on as long as it wanted. I don't think even Kiting is denying that.
However, they lost the war. And, very few people in the North truly understand the ramifications of all the loss. They can't. They can't because their homes were not left in ashes. Average people bear the brunt of loss in all wars. And, as in all wars, the people who fought and died (the vast majority), were average people who had no access to the financial benefits of the outcome. They never do, never have, and never will. But, they are the ones who do all the actual fighting and dying and sacrificing in any war. They make up the majority... the vast majority.
So, after they experience defeat, are left with their homes (not just plantations, but entire cities) in ruin and ashes, an economy and society that is bankrupt and poverty-stricken, a lifestyle and culture that has disappeared, they are also left with a rancor. They are forced back in to a country that they see as their conquerors- and as invaders. The blacks become scapegoats for the misery as well. But, whatever pride or heritage or elements of their society they are able to reflect upon with happiness becomes something for them to symbolize. Their flag becomes a consideration. There is still, to this day, a resistance and token contempt toward the "USA" by many Southerners. That is indicative of how much destruction was done and how demoralized the populace had become. So, even though the KKK uses it for their hate, the rest of southern society, that is not as hate-driven about placing blame on blacks, still have a fondness for the flag because they lost a lot because of the war as well... and it wasn't the ability to own slaves, because, like in modern days, very few Southerners owned anything.
The South practically lost EVERYTHING IT HAD. Now, you can say "they had it coming", and I would agree that their desire to maintain an institution of slavery was wrong. I still maintain that war was and is the wrong way to fix things in a civilized society. BUT... the other aspects of their life were not rooted in oppressing other human beings. There is a great many cultural things that are "Southern" that aren't based in slavery.
Believe it or not, the entire nation, save for abolitionists (who, in my opinion are truly the heroes), were of the belief that Africans were inferior humans by nature! North, South, East and West had that opinion. In fact, the same whites that were allegedly freeing blacks went to work killing another color/race of humans in the west as soon as operations were over finished here. Regardless, not all Southerners associate keeping Africans as a subjugated class when they see or display that flag. Just because YOU see it that way, doesn't mean EVERYONE sees it that way. If you want to ostracize them, fine. But, at least try to observe that they are not advocating slavery, even though you don't like their symbol.
However, they lost the war. And, very few people in the North truly understand the ramifications of all the loss. They can't. They can't because their homes were not left in ashes. Average people bear the brunt of loss in all wars. And, as in all wars, the people who fought and died (the vast majority), were average people who had no access to the financial benefits of the outcome. They never do, never have, and never will. But, they are the ones who do all the actual fighting and dying and sacrificing in any war. They make up the majority... the vast majority.
So, after they experience defeat, are left with their homes (not just plantations, but entire cities) in ruin and ashes, an economy and society that is bankrupt and poverty-stricken, a lifestyle and culture that has disappeared, they are also left with a rancor. They are forced back in to a country that they see as their conquerors- and as invaders. The blacks become scapegoats for the misery as well. But, whatever pride or heritage or elements of their society they are able to reflect upon with happiness becomes something for them to symbolize. Their flag becomes a consideration. There is still, to this day, a resistance and token contempt toward the "USA" by many Southerners. That is indicative of how much destruction was done and how demoralized the populace had become. So, even though the KKK uses it for their hate, the rest of southern society, that is not as hate-driven about placing blame on blacks, still have a fondness for the flag because they lost a lot because of the war as well... and it wasn't the ability to own slaves, because, like in modern days, very few Southerners owned anything.
The South practically lost EVERYTHING IT HAD. Now, you can say "they had it coming", and I would agree that their desire to maintain an institution of slavery was wrong. I still maintain that war was and is the wrong way to fix things in a civilized society. BUT... the other aspects of their life were not rooted in oppressing other human beings. There is a great many cultural things that are "Southern" that aren't based in slavery.
Believe it or not, the entire nation, save for abolitionists (who, in my opinion are truly the heroes), were of the belief that Africans were inferior humans by nature! North, South, East and West had that opinion. In fact, the same whites that were allegedly freeing blacks went to work killing another color/race of humans in the west as soon as operations were over finished here. Regardless, not all Southerners associate keeping Africans as a subjugated class when they see or display that flag. Just because YOU see it that way, doesn't mean EVERYONE sees it that way. If you want to ostracize them, fine. But, at least try to observe that they are not advocating slavery, even though you don't like their symbol.
I've posed this question many times. Thr history of Georgia as a province, a colony, and a states goes back almost 300 years. Why is pride in their heritage so intrinsically tied to a banner that flew over their state for 4 short years? And why is it that those 4 years happened to coincide with the period of time in which they seceded from the Union and engaged in armed insurrection? If you're from Georgia and you're proud of your heritage then why not fly the official Georgia flag instead?
And I'm sure there are Germans who identify the Nazi flag, not with the Holocaust, but with the resurgence of German prestige after their loss in WWI. So what?
Fly whatever flag you want. I fully support your right to do so. You WILL be judged based on your choices so don't whine about it. These guys are more than free to fly the Stars and Bars. They will be judged as racist rednecks by many people - who have EVERY RIGHT to assign their own interpretation to the flag..
You don't "fully support their right to do so." You fully support the opportunity to judge them. You revel in the chance to appear superior to others. At least be honest.
I agree with the words you wrote, except for the judging part, but I know your intention. I don't spend a great deal of time judging people. So, it works out really well for me in that regard. Judging is no better than putting people in chains against their will. Judging puts the chains on them.
Still lying, eh? Are you actually claiming that if you support a particular right, you can't be outraged by a particular expression of that right? You might need to go back to Civics 101, honestly.
All you do is judge people. Holy cow! You just judged ME. No one projects a more superior attitude than the self-styled "libertarians".
Last edited:
You can be outraged, sure. Feel whatever you want. I don't judge them, my friend. Feeling outrage is not judging. Disagreeing is not judging. JUDGING THEM (which is what you said) is judging them! My civics are just fine. We can go back together, if you like.
I don't label myself as a "libertarian." You do! That's part of judging. If you think I "project a superior attitude" then, that's your opinion. It's not superior at all. I'm here to insist that it's NOT superior. If anything, it's an attempt to de-superiorize your attempts to be superior. Maybe that's where you're getting confused.
The current Georgia State flag design was based on the first national flag of the confederacy. In fact all state flags of Georgia have been designed to memorialize the confederacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Georgia_(U.S._state)
The real heart of treason has not died in the South. I honestly think the Union was too soft on the so called "confederates" after the war. It is us in the North that has failed them by allowing them to think that their ancestor's actions where somehow honorable. Allowing honorable surrenders instead of prison time and executions. We even have a confederate memorial at Arlington which all presidents including our current one have sent a yearly wreath to on confederate memorial day.
It is of no surprise that those in the South are deluded into thinking their treason was honorable.
LOL...what a load of BS. If you disagree with someone you are - by definition - judging them. They are - in your considered opinion - wrong...no? Perhaps your judgment is impaired.
When I read something like this I hope it's a minority opinion and I wonder if Sherman was too harsh or too lenient.
It's far too common down here. And then you have the apologists for this view who just make it worse.
I'm sure to someone that judges for sport, my judgement is impaired. I feel privileged for it, too. You've managed to make almost every word be a synonym for judging... congratulations. However, to be fair, in this context, I use, and view your use of, Judge to mean "feel superior to." Okay? That is exactly what you're doing. Your judgement is superior to their choice. You said "If they're judged by others..." You chose it, not me. I do not believe, by any stretch, that by disagreeing with someone you are automatically judging them.
Beautifully written and stated in a way that I would have been unable to.
That's a good point but I don't agree with it. All nations that have been invaded, raped and destroyed harbor feelings of disgust and hatred for their conquerors. That's why it wasn't a Civil War. It was a war between two separate nations but the conqueror of the South doesn't like granting any legitimacy to the South's cause and they write the history books. They have prettied up Lincoln who is solely responsible for the loss of 600,000 lives and a destroyed South.
That statement, sentiment, and attitude is the other half of the perpetuation of the rancor and contempt. You can't have one without the other. One side has to be empathetic and forgiving in order for the other to consider it.
Good job! By that endorsement, you actually display a sentiment of fondness for the destruction of your ancestor's home.
I can observe that they are not trying to advocate slavery but symbols mean things and that is based on their total history.
And the confederate battle flag was flown for 120 years to mean the subjugation of blacks and only recently has anyone tried to claim it ment something different.
What is striking to me about your post is that you talk about long held contempt by Southerners over the destruction of the South as though the people living there today where around to see it.
If the South can claim contempt for destruction that happened 150 years ago then I aught to be able to hold similar contempt for a great uncle who died in a war that THEY started because they didn't like the results of the last election.
Or how about the contempt that African Americans feel for not only the South but the South's cherished flag(s) for all the years of slavery their ancestors went through.
But according to the confederacy's defenders the only people who are allowed to feel contempt about how things went down in the civil war is the ancestors of the Southerners who started the war in the first place.
And yes they did have it coming to them. They started the war, Sherman ended it. They are lucky the entire south wasn't set on fire and execute all of the ring leaders as traitors. Boo Hoo the yankee's burned down a few cities 150 years ago.
I'm sure that's just like having every single ancestor you have up til 150 years ago be a slave who didn't know his or her own parents because they where slaves too and where sold away as soon as they could eat solid food.
You talk about there being a reason for contempt because ancestors who started a war and funded a war and participated in a war against their rightful government go their homes burned down. What about contempt for having your ancestors taken by force from their home, pressed into slavery, and having every single ancestor since then kept into slavery until about 150 years ago . . . BUT still having your ancestors from 150 years ago up until about 40 years ago be targeted for random extra judicial hangings?
Do you realize that there are blacks who are still alive today who watched their relatives be beaten or hung whilst that very same flag was waved proudly???
But their contempt is just living in the past while the contempt that white people living in the South now for the USA because they burned down a few cities during a war 150 years ago that the south started is TOTALLY LOGICAL and in no way "living in the past"
Last edited:
Thanks for the props, but Lincoln was NOT "solely responsible" for the deaths of 600,000. That's way off-target, man. The men in gray fired on men in blue without any orders from Lincoln. There's plenty of blame to go around for the loss of that war. I don't want to give one man that much power, even figuratively.
Anything you may have said with compassion just got torn down with that comment. Good for you. I hope it was worth it. You could have saved all that typing and just wrote what I quoted above. That's your focus, obviously.
Last edited:
