Is the Confederate Flag Racist? Options

[latinprep12]

Im from newyork and well northen people dont rep. the flag like the people in the south especially rednecks in my area...they even got shirts with them on them and they say [Git-R-Done] and other random redneck stuff..i dislike it alot, but hey i can tell people to take it off...well i think it is..

[Equator]

Refer to post 8/21/05.

[latinprep12]

Equator is the best at debating [your really good with words] and well im a yankee until the day i die, but i wont have a tattoo or show it like southers do

[Equator]

Latinprep12:

Yankee gloating puts down Confederates. People (Confederates) that feel put down, put down others (blacks) in-turn.

I'm glad you don't gloat with your Yankee flag and tatoo over Confederates the way Confederates do over blacks. Your the man, Yank!!

[latinprep12]

haha thanks...but you explain really good..keep it up and i seen that your new to c.b. well welcome

[ComradeRed]

Relativist: Because a flag is a meaningless except for the social value ascribed to it, then it is not racists. People make it racist.

Response: True. Gold and all other material objects have no intrinsic value accept for the social value ascribed to them. Similarly, the racist social value ascribed to the Confederate flag makes it racist. Racism involves the social value (and lack thereof) ascribed by majority (e.g. whites) to minority (e.g. blacks) people.

You're right. Gold isn't intrinsically valuable. To SOME PEOPLE (albeit most in society), it is valuable in that they are willing to trade goods that are intrinsically valuable for gold, but that means that gold is valuable to some people; not that it is valuable intrinsically. If I don't want gold, and I won't accept your gold as payment for my goods, then the value of gold to me is zero, whereas if you really, really like gold, you might but an extremely high value on gold--everyone puts a different value on gold, and thus it has no universal value.

Similarly, just because the Confederate flag is racist to some people doesn't mean that it is racist in general.

Response: Good can be the intent of any act with negative results. Killing people can be with good intent. It can be for self-defense. Killing can be done to preserve heritage. The KKK did (does?) just that. The negative effects of killing are still negative regardless of the acclaimed intent.

If it's self-defense, then the effect of the killing is positive, since the person that initiated the attack is dead. And heritage killings are not good, because the killing is part of the intention, that outweighs the other part of the intention (unless the killing is accidental).

Although we do have the right to kill people, the negative effects remain, despite the acclaimed positive motive and effects. The claim of good intentions behind one’s actions doesn’t negate their evil motive or their evil effects.

Motive and intention are synonyms. If something has good intentions, it has good motives, and vice versa.

Society (a collection of people) discerns (though it may not always be able to prove) evil motive when people knowingly perform acts (e.g. waving the Confederate flag) that have evil effects (by putting down blacks).

Yet it also has good effects in uplifting whites, and since whites are the majority in society, the Confederate flag in this argument does more good than bad.

Confederate: Our flag doesn’t put down anyone. It elevates Southern Society.

Response: It elevates Southern whites over subjugated blacks, base on Confederate racism.

The NAACP elevates blacks over subjugated whites, who now have to endure things like affirmative action and unfair tax laws. So? It's a Special Interest--just like the Confederate flag wavers are. And every special interest advances the interests of its group sometimes at the expense of another.

Confederate: Our flag is not a flag of racist heritage.

Response: Confederate documents (e.g. their Declaration of Secession to be found at http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html) establish their racist theology (an oxymoron). Among the alleged good of the Confederacy, there is poisonous racism.

Practically every society before the 1950s was founded on at least one racist precept. From the Ancient Egyptians to the Spanish Conquistadors, all of those societies believed that thier people or race was better than other peoples or races. It's unfair to judge them based on our modern PC standards, the same way it is unfair to judge the 1860s Confederacy by today's PC standards. We don't call people who have model pyramids in their homes pro-slavery, and thus we shouldn't call people with Confederate flags pro-slavery (even though the pyramids are arguably worse--they were actually built by slaves).

Confederate: Because good heritage in the Confederate flag, then it can’t be racist.

Response: The presence of good doesn’t negate evil. The abundance of good intended water in a poisonous drink doesn’t negate the effects of the evil arsenic. One’s claim of goodness is often (though not always) a veil for evil. By this veil of rationalism, man perpetrates all manner of evil.

But then all things are part good and part evil, and your argument becomes meaningless and non-unique.

The arsenic spreads to other parts of the water and mixes with it. A better analogy would be if a table contained a glass of water and a separate glass of arsenic--the table itself isn't evil; it has a separate good and evil component. Just like with the Confederacy's separate components of responsible government and racism.

Confederate: It is inconsistent to denounce the Confederate flag as racists while people can claim that the US flag is racist.

Response: Peoples’ claim doesn’t determine reality. Any act can be rationalized.

Ahem. Then black people's claim that the Confederate flag is racist doesn't determine reality. Thanks for conceding my point.

The US flag is a symbol of a nation that exists. Therefore, it has practical meaning (e.g. it distinguishes US Troops, ships, etc.). If someone’s motive for flying the US Flag is racist, then their motive is wrong. Flying the flag of a lost cause indicates (though it doesn’t always prove) that people nostalgically desire the heritage behind the flag.

See, here you judge people based on their motives, but earlier you say to judge based on effects. So which one is it?

The Confederate heritage is one of racism. Their own documents state so. The fact that there may be something besides racism in the Confederacy is a red herring. There is often something good (e.g. water) in evil (a poison drink). The good is the reason for partaking of the evil. People who see the good, will drink a potion of water without paying due respect for the arsenic in it. Neo-Confederates expect others to ignore the racist poison behind their good heritage. Whatever good there is / was in the Confederacy, racism inseparably remains a poison evil.

But then that evil exists in EVERY COUNTRY ever created. No country has ever been without the stain of racism, or at least some other sort of immorality. It's unfair to hold the Confederacy up to a higher standard than we hold any other country, and it's equally unfair to hold the Confederacy up to the modern standards of PC, the same way it is unfair to hold the Roman legal system to modern standards of humaneness and due process.

Confederate: I have the right to my heritage.

Response: Yes you do. Heritage (found in society) is often (though not necessarily always) a vicarious veil to disguise one’s personal pride. Society disallows personal boasting, yet encourages vicarious social boasting. Society doesn’t allow you to say that you’re better than others, yet it does allow you to say that your society is better than others. The Confederate flag boasts (flaunts) Confederate white society above inferior (in Confederate society) blacks. Therefore, the Confederate flag is racist. You have the right to heritage, your Confederate flag, and your racism. No one can take your right away from you. MLK was right “Either we live together as brethren or perish as fools.”


But then the Union flag boats that the North was better than the South. Once again, your argument is non-unique and so broad as to be meaningless.

[Equator]

Latinprep12:
et al.:

Would you like me to address Comradred's last response? I'd be glad to. His "The other guy's wrong, justifies the Confederacy" arguments aren't worth much time. Unless someone else sees anything worthy of comment in his argument, I'll let him have his last word on most of his points. He argues that because other societies were racist, then that makes Confederate racism justifiable. He's saying two wrongs make right.

People don't wave the flag of ancient racist civilizations. Nor does any society, which I'm aware of, currently express that they are currently put down by the beliefs of the ancients. Confederates use History as a veil behind which to hide the truth. The truth of Confederate racism is not only rooted in the History over 140 years, it has been the common meaning of those (e.g. the KKK, Black Code and Jim Crow Law enforcers, anti-civil rights activists, etc.) who've carried the banner into the modern day. You can see in his response that the Confederacy's modern meaning is hostile to blacks. When the majority (socially superior in power and influence) exerts (e.g. by flaunting) superiority over minorities (socially inferior in power and influence) through put-downs, then the position is racist. The Confederate flag is racist because it puts-down blacks and makes white Southern society appear racist. American Southern white society has always been distinguished by its black antagonism: racists slavery, the racist Confederacy, racist KKK, racist Black Codes, racist Jim Crow Laws, racist segregation, racist anti-civil rights, et al. This phenomenon is a function of its greater (compared with the rest of the US) population of blacks in comparison to whites. The antagonism has waned somewhat as indicated by the prominence of the Confederate flag: a measure racial tensions. If American Southern whites wish to repudiate racism, then they may want to join the American culture by forsaking their antagonistic racism in Southern racist Confederate culture.

The antagonism of the NAACP isn't always justifiable, although it has served to revolt against white oppression. Their wrong doesn't make Confederate racism right. As the Confederate flags come down, so does the power of the NAACP. The antagonism of the Confederate flag and by many NAACP measures only gives power to those at the poles of division. The degree to which we stop putting down one another and exercise empathy to one another will determine the unity we will share as a nation.

The American family needs to act like one if we don't want to be a dysfunctional one. Whites and blacks are married together in the American family whether we like it or not. We made our bed together. So lets lie on it and seek means by which we can better function as a family. This means: stop pointing the finger at the other guy. Fix your own problem. We white people need to bring down our racist Confederate flag.

[ComradeRed]

You misunderstood my entire argument. I said that it's unfair to judge the Confederacy by more standards because, by the standards of the time, it was the one of the freest societies in the world, just like it would be unfair to judge someone from 150 years ago on his driving skills. Neither cars nor our modern perceptions of race existed in the 1850s and 60s, so its unfair to apply those standards to it. Our Constitution recognizes this by passing protections against ex post facto prosecution. If you do something that is legal, and then that thing is made illegal later, you can't be prosecuted for it--you're judged by the standards of your time. We don't expect a 3rd grader to do calculus, and thus we shouldn't expect an 1860s nation to have enlightened and nuanced ideas about race.

Ancient Civilizations didn't use flags because they were too expensive at the time. But we see people reenacting, dressing up as Roman legionaaires with Roman standards (primitive flags if you will). We see Egyptphiles with model pyramids and statues in their home, which definitely symbolized Egypt the way the flag symbolized the Confederacy. It's clear that people are historically fascinated with ancient civilizations, the way they are with the Confederacy. And we don't condemn the Romans for being racists, so why should we condemn the Confederacy?

That's the issue--not that two wrongs make a right, but that you're a hypocrite if you say the Confederacy was racist and that that negates all the good that it did, and then, when you look at Egypt or Rome, to admire the acqueducts and the pyramids, while somehow forgetting that they were far more brutal and racist than the Confederacy ever was.

[Equator]

Comradred:

The intent of judging the Confederate flag in our modern world is not based on ex post facto judgment. If the anachronistic, dead, lost cause behind the Confederate flag is to be kept alive, then so are its ex pos facto racist tenants (doctrines). If we let the Confederate flag live in the museums, then we have no need to judge the deeds of Confederates in our modern day. You can’t have neo-Confederacy without the essential doctrines of the cause.

Whatever the ex post facto American sins have existed are addressed in our modern world by how we respond to them, today. We, to some degree, have repented from many of our past evils. Reviving the Confederacy via the flag reveals unrepentance from racism.

I’m not denying any good (whatever that was) that the Confederacy did. Therefore, I’m not being hypocritical. I don’t condemn the Romans, Egyptians, or every Confederate. However, the Confederacy claims to have been enlightened (above the pagans) by Christianity – the basis of Western Civilization - and based their theology on a perversion of it. Thus, the Confederacy should be held to a higher standard, as this Christianity is alive and well today. The gods and the religions of the ancients are dead. Thus, the most fundamental Christian doesn’t object to the pagan calendar that honors (in its days and months) the names of dead Roman gods. Why? Because they are dead and the religious doctrines are dead. Ancient Christianity still lives and so does the manner in which the doctrines are taught. All, to my knowledge, of the racist neo-Confederates (including the KKK) claim Christianity and pervert its doctrine to further their racist cause.

Conclusion: by keeping the Confederacy alive, the racist “Christian” theology behind it is retained. Black people know this and are antagonized (rightly so) by the doctrine and the application of it over the centuries. Thus, the Confederate flag is racist.

Remember, this debate is if the Confederate flag is racist.
It is not whether the Confederate flag is something else (.e.g. something good). Good can be found in nearly anything. Not all things are racist.

Is the Confederate flag racist?
· Answer: Yes
· Reason: By virtue of the doctrine behind it, its usage (since its beginning), its effects, and its social values (as determined by society).

What is your answer?
· Answer:
· Reason:

[ComradeRed]

The intent of judging the Confederate flag in our modern world is not based on ex post facto judgment. If the anachronistic, dead, lost cause behind the Confederate flag is to be kept alive, then so are its ex pos facto racist tenants (doctrines). If we let the Confederate flag live in the museums, then we have no need to judge the deeds of Confederates in our modern day. You can’t have neo-Confederacy without the essential doctrines of the cause.

It is an ex post facto judgment to say that the racism of the Confederacy outweighs its good points. By the standards of the time, the Confederacy was defending its freedom, and that is therefore what their flag represents.

Whatever the ex post facto American sins have existed are addressed in our modern world by how we respond to them, today. We, to some degree, have repented from many of our past evils. Reviving the Confederacy via the flag reveals unrepentance from racism.

The Confederacy was never given the chance to repent, because we killed them off before they could.

If North and South went their own separate ways, I would bet you that the South would not have slavery today... after all, no country in the world kept slavery after 1888, when Brazil abolished it.

I’m not denying any good (whatever that was) that the Confederacy did. Therefore, I’m not being hypocritical. I don’t condemn the Romans, Egyptians, or every Confederate. However, the Confederacy claims to have been enlightened (above the pagans) by Christianity – the basis of Western Civilization - and based their theology on a perversion of it. Thus, the Confederacy should be held to a higher standard, as this Christianity is alive and well today. The gods and the religions of the ancients are dead.

The late Roman Empire was Christian, and it was still racist and pretty brutal.

What is your answer?
· Answer: No
· Reason: I've provided all of them above; at the time, the Confederacy's main purpose was to defend its freedom, and if it existed today, it would probably not be a racist institution; and that furthermore black people cannot assign values to things just because they are offended by them.

[Equator]

Revised Summary of the moral arguments in the Confederate Debate: “Is the Confederate Flag Racist?”

Note: This debate is not “Is the Confederate Flag Something Good” (e.g. Heritage).

Confederate: It is not consistent to judge modern Confederate flag usage as racist because other formerly racist causes aren’t judged by the same standard.

Response: Other formerly racist causes are dynamic – repentant - and alive: they (like the usage of the word “gay”) have changed. The Confederacy like the Latin language is dead. It doesn’t change. It’s dead (non-changing) racist beliefs remain when it is resurrected by usage of a dead (lost cause) flag. Reviving dead causes revives the once dead beliefs (e.g. racism) in its heritage. This truth is validated by Confederate flag usage in racist (or “racially” antagonistic) activities (e.g. anti-Civil Rights demonstrations, the KKK, et al.) since the defeat of the dead cause.

Confederate: Because the Confederacy would have abolished slavery prior to 1888 (like the Brazilians), the neo-Confederacy – represented by its flag - isn’t racist.

Response: Racism involves more than slavery. Claiming that the US would lead ahead of Brazil is flawed speculation, because the US hasn’t been the world leader in civil rights or in slave emancipation. Slavery continues today. In the 1960s the neo-Confederate South overtly segregated blacks and treated them as inferiors. Neo-Confederates haven’t changed except in the covert manner in which they appeal to modern anti-racist political correctness. This is why the modern KKK (www.kkk.com) claims not to be racist. Today’s racist beliefs are no different than the Civil War Confederates except that modern racism (symbolized by the Confederate flag) is more politically correct in attempt to remain under the radarscope of racist awareness.

Relativist: Because a flag is a meaningless except for the social value ascribed to it, then it is not racists. People make it racist.

Response: True. Gold (like paper money), the pentagram, the swastika, and all other material objects and symbols have no intrinsic value accept for the social value ascribed to them. Similarly, the racist social value ascribed to the Confederate flag makes it racist, regardless of whether others may (truly or in pretense) claim heritage. Racism involves the social value (and lack thereof) ascribed by majority (e.g. whites) to minority (e.g. blacks) people.

Confederate: Because of possible good motives of waving the Confederate flag, then it is not racist.

Response: Good can be the intent of any act with negative results. Killing people can be with good intent. It can be for self-defense. Killing can be done to preserve heritage. The KKK did (does?) just that. The negative effects of killing are still negative regardless of the acclaimed intent. Although we do have the right to kill people, the negative effects remain, despite the acclaimed positive motive and effects. The claim of good intentions behind one’s actions doesn’t negate their evil motive or their evil effects. Society (a collection of people) discerns (though it may not always be able to prove) evil motive when people knowingly perform acts (e.g. waving the Confederate flag) that have evil effects (by putting down blacks).

Confederate: Our flag doesn’t put down anyone. It elevates Southern Society.

Response: It elevates Southern whites over subjugated blacks, base on Confederate racism.

Confederate: Our flag represents our heritage not racism.

Response: The heritage is and has been racist. Confederate documents (e.g. their Declaration of Secession to be found at (http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html)] establish their racist theology (an oxymoron). Among the alleged good of the Confederacy, there is poisonous racism.

Confederate: Because good heritage in the Confederate flag, then it can’t be racist.

Response: The presence of good doesn’t negate evil. The abundance of good (originally pure) water in a potion doesn’t negate the effects of the evil (poisonous) arsenic. One’s claim of goodness is often (though not always) a veil for evil. Behind this type of rationalistic veil, man perpetrates all manner of evil.

Confederate: It is inconsistent to denounce the Confederate flag as racists while people can claim that the US flag is racist.

Response: The US flag is a symbol of a nation that exists. Therefore, it has practical meaning (e.g. it distinguishes US Troops, ships, etc.). If someone’s motive for flying the US Flag is racist, then their motive is wrong. Flying the flag of a lost cause indicates (though it doesn’t always prove) that people nostalgically desire the heritage behind the flag. The Confederate heritage is one of racism. Their own documents state this. The fact that there may be something besides racism in the Confederacy is a red herring. There is often something good (e.g. water) in evil (a poison drink). The good is the reason for partaking of the evil. People who see the good, will drink a potion of water without paying due respect for the arsenic in it. Neo-Confederates expect others to ignore the racist poison (like arsenic) within their “good” (like water) heritage while they fly their racist (poisonous) Confederate flag. Whatever good there is / was in the Confederacy, racism inseparably remains a poison evil.

Confederate: I have the right to my heritage.

Response: Yes you do. Heritage (found in society) is often (though not necessarily always) a vicarious veil to disguise one’s personal pride. Society disallows personal boasting, yet encourages vicarious social boasting. Society doesn’t allow you to say that you’re better than others, yet it does allow you to say that your society is better than others. Just as a society discourages one individual from placing himself above another, the larger American society is less tolerant of one sub-cultural society (e.g. white neo-Confederate) to place itself above another (e.g. black) society. The Confederate flag boasts (flaunts) Confederate white society above socially inferior (in Confederate society) blacks. Therefore, the Confederate flag is racist. You have the right to heritage, your Confederate flag, and your racism. No one can take your right away from you. MLK was right “Either we live together as brethren or perish as fools.”

We shouldn’t censor free speech. Let the people show their true colors. They can fly their flag. That way we can see who they are. Racist wolves who think their hiding behind the sheep’s fleece of heritage can play their “You can’t say I’m a wolf,” all they want. The racists Confederates can show their true colors. Without their flag we’d need greater discernment. Discerning people distinguish sheep from disguised wolves by what is missing, not just what is present. As far a public policy is concerned, the majority values will prevail if we express our disdain for racist symbols. This is why the Confederate flag is coming down off of public buildings.

Notice that neo-Confederates never admit to racism? At best they’ll say, “I’m not denying racism in the Confederacy.” While some neo-Confederates may not deny racism, they’ll never admit it. If they did, then they publicly expose their Emperor’s new clothes for what they are. They admire their Confederate Emperor for his heritage that the rest of us see as naked racism. The rest of American society is expected to play along with them.

[ComradeRed]

If you're going to repeat what you already said, "refer to my previous post" would suffice.

[sweet_as_pie13]

living in virginia, i see a lot of confederate flags around. like someone said earlier, its the ideas behind them that are racist. there are racist people in my area, myslef, having friends of all different races am not. (i dont know if that made sense)

[Moongirl1588]

Yes, I think the confederate flag is racist because the Confederacy was racist. Alexander Stephens, the vice president of the confederacy, stated

"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution—African slavery as it exists amongst us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind—from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just—but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal. "


To the person who said that the confederacy allowed more freedom in its constitution for its citizens than the United States, are you serious??? How could the confederacy advocate more freedom at the same time it advocated slavery and oppression of an entire race of people? I'm very offended that you're not including black people's experiences in the South into your views of the Confederacy.

People have said that due to economic pressures the South would have ended slavery. The more important issue though is would the South have ended racism. I think history shows us that the answer is no.

[1angel3]

the flag isn't racist. neither is the swastika. it's the ideas that were behind the two that are racist.

I agree. What it stands for what makes it racist. But the flag itself? no. I actually think the flag looks better then the American flag. I wish we could switch. I think people worship these flags too much.

[Uronacid]

I think that the people who plaster their personal items with the confederate flag are sending out a message. They want to send out a message. They wouldn't use symbols like the confederate flag if they didn't want to send out a message. Maybe we should ask them what kind of message they are trying to send out. If they tell us then maybe we can determine whether or not the symbol on the back of that red-neck's truck is racist. Of course he's a f**king racist.

I wonder if the garments worn by the KKK are racist? I wonder if I can get away with wearing a white rob and pointed hood with eye holes in down town NYC. I wonder if I can survive by saying, "Guys, c'mon now. This isn't racist. Look behind the hood."

[Kontroll]

Why don't you look it up for your god damn self. That's what f**king Google is for.

Southerner's View:
"Others, like I and most southerners, look at the confederate battle flag and think fondly of the outnumbered "grey's" whipping the "blue's", of the right of the people form their own government, of courage in the face of privation, of chivalry, of skill, and of daring."

Northerner's View:
"The New York public school district that I was taught in left me with the impression that it was a battle between the North, the good guys, and the South, the bad guys. The Northerners were abolitionists, fighting from the good of their hearts to end slavery. The Southerners were the cruel masters of the slaves, fighting to keep their wicked slavery ideals."

Like most things, it's a miscommunication and ignorance.

See that? It took me all of five minutes to look that one up. Do us all a favor and research it a little before you post something. I'm sure you're gonna get alot better answers going to a credible site than coming here and asking a cluster fuck of malnurished Asian middle schoolers.

[Uronacid]

Why don't you look it up for your god damn self. That's what f**king Google is for.

Southerner's View:
"Others, like I and most southerners, look at the confederate battle flag and think fondly of the outnumbered "grey's" whipping the "blue's", of the right of the people form their own government, of courage in the face of privation, of chivalry, of skill, and of daring."

Northerner's View:
"The New York public school district that I was taught in left me with the impression that it was a battle between the North, the good guys, and the South, the bad guys. The Northerners were abolitionists, fighting from the good of their hearts to end slavery. The Southerners were the cruel masters of the slaves, fighting to keep their wicked slavery ideals."

Like most things, it's a miscommunication and ignorance.

See that? It took me all of five minutes to look that one up. Do us all a favor and research it a little before you post something. I'm sure you're gonna get alot better answers going to a credible site than coming here and asking a cluster fuck of malnurished Asian middle schoolers.

lol

[Joss-eh-lime]

yeah, i think it is racist.
because it represents racist ideas.

just like a wearing a nike symbol means you support nike.

sure the south was exercising their right to refuse to abide by a federal law, but it was still based on slavery.

[Spirited Away]

If those who wish to fly the flag for purposes other than hate and racism are selfish because they don't take into consideration of how such action affect others, then others are just as selfish because they don't take into consideration that their singlemindedness is ruining another person's chance of upholding heritage.
Works both ways, I think.

People will revere it because it is hateful, and there are those who will revere it because it is heritage. Hate is wrong, heritage shouldn't be. Of course, the problem is distinguishing the two.

Useless post, but I wanted to remake a point.

[Sandraaa]

f**k, FAE? ZOMG!! Hi!!

[hypnotique]

I dont think its racist.

I mean I just look at it as a symbol of southern history.
If that makes sense.

[Spirited Away]

f**k, FAE? ZOMG!! Hi!!

Tee hee. Hey woman!

[Uronacid]

I dont think its racist.

I mean I just look at it as a symbol of southern history.
If that makes sense.

Yeah, I guess you're right, but there are a hundreds of people who post it up and are racist.

[pandamonium]

Yeah, I guess you're right, but there are a hundreds of people who post it up and are racist.

yea true.

For me I kinda do feel offended when I see a confederate flag. Its a kind of negative thing to me also cause of the history behind it.

edit.

I dont feel offended that im asian or anything but I guess I feel offended because I am an american.