Fatal shooting Charleston SC

[Cackalacky]

NFL's Benjamin Watson: Remove The Confederate Flag For The Right Reasons

Benjamin Watson for President.

Yup. That man has a very good head on his shoulders. Also went to Jeff Burris's high school. I also can say for sure that school has also had a serious problem with race relations.

 

[BGIF]

You can continue to throw out stats on the popularity of removing the flag from various states but at no point in the history of this country has Civil Rights issues benefiting the MINORITY been determined and achieved by popular vote. To the contrary, predominantly most all Civil rights issues have been determined by the state and federal governments that legislates such changes for better or worse.

I agree with your statement BUT don't recall such issues being put to popular vote.

The states that seceded from the Union did so by legislative action.

Rejoining the Union was legislative action.

Jim Crow laws were by state legislatures, or county, or city government.

Amendments dealing with those issues were Federal with approval by state legislatures.

Have there been popular votes on these matters?

 

[Cackalacky]

I agree with your statement BUT don't recall such issues being put to popular vote.

The states that seceded from the Union did so by legislative action.

Rejoining the Union was legislative action.

Jim Crow laws were by state legislatures, or county, or city government.

Amendments dealing with those issues were Federal with approval by state legislatures.

Have there been popular votes on these matters?

In Deep South states there have been popular votes on interracial marriages, women's suffrage was defeated numerous times before the amendment, LGBT obviously....

Yeah....putting civil rights up for popular vote is not a great idea. See Loving v Virginia which. Struck down all bans on interracial marriage but was muddy enough so that many states didn't even comply with it till the last 20 years or so.

Also I guess we could classify literacy tests and other Jim Crow policies popularly enacted to restrict blacks access to the political protection? Debatable.

I recall reading about NC putting repealing portions of the Jim Crow law up to a vote in the 1970s which were defeated popularly. It was largely symbolic anyway but still was voted down.

 

[BGIF]

In Deep South states there have been popular votes on interracial marriages, women's suffrage was defeated numerous times before the amendment, LGBT obviously....

Yeah....putting civil rights up for popular vote is not a great idea. See Loving v Virginia which. Struck down all bans on interracial marriage but was muddy enough so that many states didn't even comply with it till the last 20 years or so.

Also I guess we could classify literacy tests and other Jim Crow policies popularly enacted to restrict blacks access to the political protection? Debatable.

Loving v. VA woke up a dormant brain cell or two. I actually voted in 2000 to overturn the miscegenation law in Alabama. Technically we weren't voting to overturn a law but to abolish and rewrite a portion of the state constitution. After Reconstruction the powers that be wrote such laws into the constitution so another Yankee induced legislature could not overturn a legislatively passed law. To change a provision of the constitution in Alabama it takes a statewide referendum. As a result Alabama has the most modified constitution in the nation. I don't recall the exact numbers but recall miscegenation was eliminated at the ballot box by a 60/40 vote.

 

[JughedJones]

When was the Confederate flag planted on the SC capitol building? I'm doing some searching and can't find a definitive answer.

The best I can make out, it was resurrected in 1962. I'm not sure if there's a correlation with some other events at the time that would make that relevant.

Oh, right.... That would be hate, not heritage. So that can't be correct.

 

[BGIF]

When was the Confederate flag planted on the SC capitol building? I'm doing some searching and can't find a definitive answer.

The best I can make out, it was resurrected in 1962. I'm not sure if there's a correlation with some other events at the time that would make that relevant.

Oh, right.... That would be hate, not heritage. So that can't be correct.

Here's a timeline from ABCNews

History of the Confederate Flag on Statehouse Grounds - ABC News

 

[NDgradstudent]

You can continue to throw out stats on the popularity of removing the flag from various states but at no point in the history of this country has Civil Rights issues benefiting the MINORITY been determined and achieved by popular vote. To the contrary, predominantly most all Civil rights issues have been determined by the state and federal governments that legislates such changes for better or worse.

So the legislature can vote on "civil rights issues" but the voters (at referendum) cannot?

Also, why should any Confederate monuments continue to exist in the South at all? Why should streets continue to be named after Confederate generals? If they were only fighting for racism, white supremacy, etc., honoring them in any way seems sordid.

 

[Cackalacky]

So the legislature can vote on "civil rights issues" but the voters (at referendum) cannot?

Also, why should any Confederate monuments continue to exist in the South at all? Why should streets continue to be named after Confederate generals? If they were only fighting for racism, white supremacy, etc., honoring them in any way seems sordid.

Such is the dichotomy of the south. Quite the conundrum.

I will also ask if you really believe that the natural rights of man, of which, our constitution is based, should be up to the whims of the majority? Interesting considering you vehement defense of the individual. The majority can be just as tyrannical as an emperor.

 

[Cackalacky]

Walmart is removing all confederate memorabilia from its stores nationwide.

 

[NDgradstudent]

Such is the dichotomy of the south. Quite the conundrum.

I will also ask if you really believe that the natural rights of man, of which, our constitution is based, should be up to the whims of the majority? Interesting considering you vehement defense of the individual. The majority can be just as tyrannical as an emperor.

The "rights of man" are always up to the whims of some majority, whether of the population, a court, a legislature, etc. I believe in natural rights, but that the people of a particular society must decide whether or not to recognize them. If they do, the government is just. Our Constitution provides an amendment mechanism whereby any right in it can be changed or repealed: ultimately, the people are responsible for protecting natural rights.

If streets named after Confederate generals are causing all this violence then what is causing the violence on nearly every MLK Boulevard throughout the country?

 

[Cackalacky]

The "rights of man" are always up to the whims of some majority, whether of the population, a court, a legislature, etc. I believe in natural rights, but that the people of a particular society must decide whether or not to recognize them. If they do, the government is just. Our Constitution provides an amendment mechanism whereby any right in it can be changed or repealed: ultimately, the people are responsible for protecting natural rights.

If streets named after Confederate generals are causing all this violence then what is causing the violence on nearly every MLK Boulevard throughout the country?

Ok.... You are purposefully obfuscating the discussion. I am not sure why I am continuing on but anyway ... You believe in the natural rights but those rights are to be taken away or given as deemed prudent? What a confusing stance. If they are natural then who is anyone to deny another person. You can't simultaneously believe in natural rights of all men yet accept that they can be taken away on a whim by direct democracy. Our constitution provides checks and balances to prevent abuse of power as well as makes incredibly difficult to amend the constitution. For the PRECISE reason that decisions made on a whim are rarely advisable.

The protection on individual rights lies in the purview of the authority bequeathed by the people. The social contract if you will. In all the democracies to have come to exist why have none ever adopted a fully libertarian society?

And no one is saying anything about streets or violence committed thereon because of the name of the street and taking it to that extreme is fairly unreasonable. MLK Blvds, while the reason for the name was quite benevolent, are typically in impoverished areas of large cities and as we all know violence and poverty go hand and hand and rarely is decided based on race alone. I get the feeling you really just don't like black people very much because you are trying ever so hard in each post to shed a dark light on them. Maybe I am wrong?

 

[GoIrish41]

Walmart is removing all confederate memorabilia from its stores nationwide.

I am glad, but the Walton clan is always just a half step behind -- minimum wage, selling ammunition, confederate flags. They usually take a stance, but only when they are sure the ground is good and sturdy first.

 

[IrishLax]

I am glad, but the Walton clan is always just a half step behind -- minimum wage, selling ammunition, confederate flags. They usually take a stance, but only when they are sure the ground is good and sturdy first.

And they've carefully done the math and decided it's in their long term economic best interest.

 

[GoIrish41]

And they've carefully done the math and decided it's in their long term economic best interest.

Yep. Probably not a bad social indicator but it always strikes me as a bit soulless and opportunist.

 

[Cackalacky]

Yep. Probably not a bad social indicator but it always strikes me as a bit soulless and opportunist.

At this point I just want it gone. I don't care what corps do so much now. I mean eBay and Amazon are starting to take some questions and haven't released statements yet. If they want to sell them I am fine I just am opposed to it being associated with government in any way.

We will start to see the ultra conservatives stepping out here soon I think. My FB thread has some real winners posting right now. Haha.

 

[Bishop2b5]

I guess it's only racist, offensive and a sign of oppression when the other side uses it.

 

[pkt77242]

I guess it's only racist, offensive and a sign of oppression when the other side uses it.

I don't understand your point? Do you really think that people are going to defend those?

It is political pandering of the worst kind. Nice try on your part though.

 

[Bishop2b5]

I don't understand your point? Do you really think that people are going to defend those?

It is political pandering of the worst kind.

No, probably not. The point is that a generation ago the Confederate flag wasn't viewed by most people as a symbol of slavery, hatred, racism or oppression. It's only become that recently because some have insisted that it is, despite the fact that most people who used to own one never had such thoughts cross their mind. Clearly in '92 the Clinton/Gore campaign and their supporters didn't view it as such.

I don't really care whether SC or any other state flies it or takes it down. I'm for taking it down and not offending anyone as long as they're genuinely offended and not just posturing for political effect. I don't own a Confederate flag, haven't owned one since I was about 12, and didn't own one then because I was racist or making any sort of political statement. It simply didn't have any connection to any of that for most people until recently.

I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other about the flag. I'm just tired of the bs whining and moaning from the Left about how awful anyone who flies it is, insisting they must be rabid racists, all the revisionist history crap, making up something to be mad about, and using all of it to smear anyone whose political views differ from theirs.

 

[Redbar]

No, probably not. The point is that a generation ago the Confederate flag wasn't viewed by most people as a symbol of slavery, hatred, racism or oppression. It's only become that recently because some have insisted that it is, despite the fact that most people who used to own one never had such thoughts cross their mind. Clearly in '92 the Clinton/Gore campaign and their supporters didn't view it as such..

This is just not true. It was absolutely viewed by most objective people even in the south as everything that is being discussed right now. Maybe not by those people in the bubble, sort of like how it is possible to not know you were poor because everyone was poor, it was just how things were for everyone. Clearly you grew up in that environment. But the bubble is not representative of the whole.

I don't really care whether SC or any other state flies it or takes it down. I'm for taking it down and not offending anyone as long as they're genuinely offended and not just posturing for political effect. I don't own a Confederate flag, haven't owned one since I was about 12, and didn't own one then because I was racist or making any sort of political statement. It simply didn't have any connection to any of that for most people until recently.

]I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other about the flag. I'm just tired of the bs whining and moaning from the Left about how awful anyone who flies it is, insisting they must be rabid racists, all the revisionist history crap, making up something to be mad about, and using all of it to smear anyone whose political views differ from theirs.

Everything is not politics. Politics is not what life is about. Most of the times politics proactively intercedes and complicates life, IMO. Sometimes politics is woefully behind what is happening in life and politicians scramble to seem relevant and curry favor, that doesn't mean though that politics is the reason behind it or the cause of it. Just because you or some far left progressive tries to turn everything into a political divide doesn't mean that it started out that way. Some things are real and not just posturing.

 

[Redbar]

Such is the dichotomy of the south. Quite the conundrum.

I will also ask if you really believe that the natural rights of man, of which, our constitution is based, should be up to the whims of the majority? Interesting considering you vehement defense of the individual. The majority can be just as tyrannical as an emperor.

Cack, this is exactly it. Madison took this topic on directly in Federalist 10, in his discussion on factions and I don't think enough people who claim to be constitutionalist and pro individual rights truly get it.

 

[Bishop2b5]

This is just not true. It was absolutely viewed by most objective people even in the south as everything that is being discussed right now. Maybe not by those people in the bubble, sort of like how it is possible to not know you were poor because everyone was poor, it was just how things were for everyone. Clearly you grew up in that environment. But the bubble is not representative of the whole.



Everything is not politics. Politics is not what life is about. Most of the times politics proactively intercedes and complicates life, IMO. Sometimes politics is woefully behind what is happening in life and politicians scramble to seem relevant and curry favor, that doesn't mean though that politics is the reason behind it or the cause of it. Just because you or some far left progressive tries to turn everything into a political divide doesn't mean that it started out that way. Some things are real and not just posturing.

I have no doubt that some, for generations, have used the Confederate flag as a symbol of resistance to integration or the civil rights movement, but my own experiences, my own observations, and the views I've heard from most people I've known throughout my life - black or white - was that until the past couple of decades the flag wasn't symbolic of any such thing for them. They saw it as nothing more than a piece of cultural history symbolic of a region... no more, no less.

The pics of the Clinton/Gore campaign in 92 using the flag illustrates this well. They certainly weren't using it to offend anyone and surely wouldn't have used it if they thought of it as offensive or representing any of the negative things it does now.

The current outrage over the Confederate flag is a bit artificial and mostly a recent phenomenon. It's also a case of selective application of what to decry or condemn. Is the American flag from the 1700's any less symbolic of slavery? It was the flag that flew over a country where slavery was legal in virtually every area and the law of the land. What about the state flags of New York or Pennsylvania? Although slavery was in the process of being abolished, it was very common once and wasn't actually outlawed and ended in those two states until 1827 and 1847 respectively, and was still legal throughout most Northern states until the late 1700's to early 1800's. Do we insist that those states take down their flags because they once supported slavery? Notre Dame once refused admission to Blacks. Does that make wearing an ND jersey symbolic of that and taint all of ND's history beyond repair?

The answer, of course, is no for several reasons. First, slavery and discrimination were never the only things those states or ND or our nation were about. Also, times were simply different then: the entire thing was seen in a very different light at the time and those people were products of their time just as we are of ours. Last but not least, people, cultures, schools, churches, states, and nations all make mistakes, all have some not-so-good moments in their past, but hopefully learn from those things and change for the better. George Wallace attempted to block James Hood from enrolling at Bama in 1963. Years later the two would become good friends, Wallace would repent of his segregationist stance, and be re-elected governor in 1982 with 85% of the Black vote. Our nation changed its views on slavery, renounced its past mistakes, and moved forward.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Every state, school, church, person, and our nation itself has parts of its past that aren't perfect. Those things don't necessarily define them forever or override the good things they did or stood for.

 

[JughedJones]

I have no doubt that some, for generations, have used the Confederate flag as a symbol of resistance to integration or the civil rights movement, but my own experiences, my own observations, and the views I've heard from most people I've known throughout my life - black or white - was that until the past couple of decades the flag wasn't symbolic of any such thing for them. They saw it as nothing more than a piece of cultural history symbolic of a region... no more, no less.

The pics of the Clinton/Gore campaign in 92 using the flag illustrates this well. They certainly weren't using it to offend anyone and surely wouldn't have used it if they thought of it as offensive or representing any of the negative things it does now.

The current outrage over the Confederate flag is a bit artificial and mostly a recent phenomenon. It's also a case of selective application of what to decry or condemn. Is the American flag from the 1700's any less symbolic of slavery? It was the flag that flew over a country where slavery was legal in virtually every area and the law of the land. What about the state flags of New York or Pennsylvania? Although slavery was in the process of being abolished, it was very common once and wasn't actually outlawed and ended in those two states until 1827 and 1847 respectively, and was still legal throughout most Northern states until the late 1700's to early 1800's. Do we insist that those states take down their flags because they once supported slavery? Notre Dame once refused admission to Blacks. Does that make wearing an ND jersey symbolic of that and taint all of ND's history beyond repair?

The answer, of course, is no for several reasons. First, slavery and discrimination were never the only things those states or ND or our nation were about. Also, times were simply different then: the entire thing was seen in a very different light at the time and those people were products of their time just as we are of ours. Last but not least, people, cultures, schools, churches, states, and nations all make mistakes, all have some not-so-good moments in their past, but hopefully learn from those things and change for the better. George Wallace attempted to block James Hood from enrolling at Bama in 1963. Years later the two would become good friends, Wallace would repent of his segregationist stance, and be re-elected governor in 1982 with 85% of the Black vote. Our nation changed its views on slavery, renounced its past mistakes, and moved forward.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Every state, school, church, person, and our nation itself has parts of its past that aren't perfect. Those things don't necessarily define them forever or override the good things they did or stood for.

But they offend people now. Like a lot of them.

Why do you stand on principle, when that principle is hurtful?

Why can't you just say, "you know what? Fuck it. It hurts people, so I don't like it either."

Why do you fight the fight of the jagoff?

The confederate flag was flown to show opposition to desegregation. It's still there now.

Fuck it. Why do you fight this fight?

 

[JughedJones]

I guess it's only racist, offensive and a sign of oppression when the other side uses it.

this is laughable horseshit.

You don't even want a discussion, you want to be disingenuous. Some idiot made a button, and you pin it on... what?

What point are you even making?

You're an interloper and a known racist... keep on flying your flag, dude.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

And there's this guy again. I was hoping you'd come back.

Please... go on.

Tell us about the terrible injustice that the white man must persevere through. I'd love to hear about it.


(by the way? your interpretation of statistics is fascinating.)

I must tell you. With every post, I doubt the sincerity of your username.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mjzrvRKv6Ks" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[gkIrish]

The current outrage over the Confederate flag is a bit artificial and mostly a recent phenomenon. It's also a case of selective application of what to decry or condemn. Is the American flag from the 1700's any less symbolic of slavery? It was the flag that flew over a country where slavery was legal in virtually every area and the law of the land. What about the state flags of New York or Pennsylvania? Although slavery was in the process of being abolished, it was very common once and wasn't actually outlawed and ended in those two states until 1827 and 1847 respectively, and was still legal throughout most Northern states until the late 1700's to early 1800's. Do we insist that those states take down their flags because they once supported slavery? Notre Dame once refused admission to Blacks. Does that make wearing an ND jersey symbolic of that and taint all of ND's history beyond repair?

No no no no no.

The reason a 1700s American flag or all the other flags you mentioned aren't the same as the Confederate flag is that one of the main reasons the Civil War happened was because of slavery. In other words, supporters of the Confederacy were, generally, also supporters of slavery and wanted to fight to retain the ability to have slaves. The Confederate flag would not exist if it wasn't for the Civil War so it stands as a symbol of the beliefs of the South at the time. The American flag in 1776 didn't symbolize slavery because we didn't declare our independence from England because of it.

Say, hypothetically, that the North and South fought a second world war tomorrow over the rights of homosexuals. Let's say the North created a new "Pride" flag and ultimately lost the war. In 100 years, our 50 star, 13 stripe American flag won't be viewed as "anti-homosexual" because it pre-dated the 2nd Civil War. However, the Pride flag would continue to symbolize homosexual rights and people flying it outside their houses would be presumed to support the cause of the North.

 

[GoIrish41]

I have no doubt that some, for generations, have used the Confederate flag as a symbol of resistance to integration or the civil rights movement, but my own experiences, my own observations, and the views I've heard from most people I've known throughout my life - black or white - was that until the past couple of decades the flag wasn't symbolic of any such thing for them. They saw it as nothing more than a piece of cultural history symbolic of a region... no more, no less.

I really do not understand how the argument against the stars and bars progresses beyond the blolded statement. I do not know the people that you know, but I find it impossible to believe that it has not crossed any of their minds that the symbolism of the confederate flag is not potentially negative and offensive to many.

The pics of the Clinton/Gore campaign in 92 using the flag illustrates this well. They certainly weren't using it to offend anyone and surely wouldn't have used it if they thought of it as offensive or representing any of the negative things it does now.

Disgusting pandering. Plain and simple.

The current outrage over the Confederate flag is a bit artificial and mostly a recent phenomenon. It's also a case of selective application of what to decry or condemn. Is the American flag from the 1700's any less symbolic of slavery? It was the flag that flew over a country where slavery was legal in virtually every area and the law of the land. What about the state flags of New York or Pennsylvania? Although slavery was in the process of being abolished, it was very common once and wasn't actually outlawed and ended in those two states until 1827 and 1847 respectively, and was still legal throughout most Northern states until the late 1700's to early 1800's. Do we insist that those states take down their flags because they once supported slavery? Notre Dame once refused admission to Blacks. Does that make wearing an ND jersey symbolic of that and taint all of ND's history beyond repair?

The confederate flag is a symbol of the willingness of half of America to break off from their country to protect their own way of life, built on the backs of African American slave labor, and to ensure their "right" to continue these horrific and inhumane policies. The flag, itself, is a symbol of that line in the sand. All of the other symbols you mentioned are symbols of something bigger, deeper ideals. The confederate flag is centered around the idea of economic gains by whites by exploiting blacks. And while it is terrible that New York and Pennsylvania waited so long to outlaw slavery, it was not until Feb. 7, 2013, that the state of Missississippi submitted the required documentation to ratify the 13th Amendment, meaning it took them 166 years longer than Pennsylvania to do the same.

The answer, of course, is no for several reasons. First, slavery and discrimination were never the only things those states or ND or our nation were about. Also, times were simply different then: the entire thing was seen in a very different light at the time and those people were products of their time just as we are of ours. Last but not least, people, cultures, schools, churches, states, and nations all make mistakes, all have some not-so-good moments in their past, but hopefully learn from those things and change for the better. George Wallace attempted to block James Hood from enrolling at Bama in 1963. Years later the two would become good friends, Wallace would repent of his segregationist stance, and be re-elected governor in 1982 with 85% of the Black vote. Our nation changed its views on slavery, renounced its past mistakes, and moved forward.

Yes, the willingness to fight for the right to own other human beings was, at best, a mistake. In my house, we don't hang math quizzes on the fridge when our kids get a D. That is not to say that we don't discuss the quiz and do our level best to ensure it does not happen again, but we certainly do not celebrate the nobility of the lack of focus that caused the poor grade. We learn from our mistakes, but we don't have to consecrate and revere them through symbolism. If there are any Johnny Come Latelys to the argument, it is those who claim that the confederate flag is a symbol of states rights. That is such a BS argument that nobody, including those who make the argument, believes. Next time you see one of these flags flying in front of a person's house, knock on the door and ask why they are flying that flag, and I guarantee that not a single person will tell you that they are doing it to symbolize the rights of the state to steer its own course.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Every state, school, church, person, and our nation itself has parts of its past that aren't perfect. Those things don't necessarily define them forever or override the good things they did or stood for.

Would you be offended if your neighbor decided to celebrate his German heritage by raising a Nazi flag in front of his house? The confederate flag represents the same kind of hate for African Americans as the swastika does for Jews. Both represent a brief, misguided and awful period in the history of their respective cultures, and we should view both with the same type of disgust. It is the entire point of symbolism, to make a statement. The nation is finally getting to the point that it seems to be ready to stand up and recognize what it symbolizes to others. Why dig in so deep to fight for the right to do something that is offensive to others? Just take it down! It is the right thing to do.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

The pics of the Clinton/Gore campaign in 92 using the flag illustrates this well. They certainly weren't using it to offend anyone and surely wouldn't have used it if they thought of it as offensive or representing any of the negative things it does now.

There's no indication that I've seen that those materials came from the campaign itself. Any whack job can make a button. And they could in 1992 as well. Neither has the union made symbol on them, which most Clinton/Gore images did (see the circled logo).

The second one, especially, seems to be made in someone's basement.

What those Clinton-Gore Confederate flag buttons say about politics in 2015 - The Washington Post

If they came from Clinton/Gore, I find that disgusting.

 

[NDohio]

Yes, You're a Racist -- And a Traitor | John E. Price

 

[Cackalacky]

Two monuments have been vandalized with spray paint. One is a Confederate memorial in White Point Gardens and the other is the John C. Calhoun statue in Marion Square. Perp of the memorial was identified as a person from D. C. ( I believe). I guess there will always be a few people to ruin a good thing.

This is a statue for the Confederate Defenders of Charleston. The statue is located at the tip of the peninsula closest to Ft. Sumter where cannons were formerly located to protect the harbor.

Calhoun Statue

 

[kmoose]

But they offend people now. Like a lot of them.

Why do you stand on principle, when that principle is hurtful?

Why can't you just say, "you know what? Fuck it. It hurts people, so I don't like it either."

Why do you fight the fight of the jagoff?

The confederate flag was flown to show opposition to desegregation. It's still there now.

Fuck it. Why do you fight this fight?

Probably the same reason that you continually curse at people, and call them names, when they don't come around to your point of view?