Actually, it's not that bad a comparison. Both flags were flown by a group of people who, for reasons solely of hate, sought to fully subjugate another group of people by violent means.

You keep forgetting the union held slaves a through the war as well.

---

No, it's not hateful in that context. Hate is what the Nazis did to non-Aryans. slavery was just an economic condition. Blacks weren't the only race to suffer slavery in the history of humanity. Even Indentured Servitude wasn't hateful, just a means to an economic end. Hate is an overused term that's lost its meaning in modern discourse, the same as using liberal to describe Leftists.

 

That's an over simplification of both situations.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

That's an over simplification of both situations.

Reality is often far simpler than we give it credit for.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

No, it's not hateful in that context. Hate is what the Nazis did to non-Aryans. slavery was just an economic condition. Blacks weren't the only race to suffer slavery in the history of humanity. Even Indentured Servitude wasn't hateful, just a means to an economic end. Hate is an overused term that's lost its meaning in modern discourse, the same as using liberal to describe Leftists.

The key question in my reply, and the one you didn't answer, is whether white people just instantly started hating black people the second the Civil War ended. How else does one explain the emergence of the KKK, racial segregation laws, lynchings, etc., if not for hate? And if hate is the reason, are you suggesting that white people were perfectly fine with black people as long as they were just horses and cows to them? Or was there maybe some deep-seated hatred present right along with that air of superiority, and once slavery was ended and the superiority was stripped, hatred was all that was left?

 

You keep forgetting the union held slaves a through the war as well.

No, I don't. I'm well aware that four Union states held slaves, and that Lincoln treated them with kid gloves to avoid losing them to the Confederacy (and the war along with them). Lincoln wasn't the great hero of the African race that history books would have you believe. He was a politician first and foremost, and he saw slavery as a topic that he could build a career around, so that's exactly what he did.

 

You may also note that I phrased my question with regards to "white people" hating black people. Not "southerners" hating black people. Some of the worst segregation in the country was found in the northeast, particularly Boston, but no one organized any major protests there because northern states were perceived by the NAACP as strong allies in the Civil Rights Movement. The South was a much easier target because those idiots made a big, loud deal of their segregation laws, and if you dared stand up to them, the fire chief would tell his white boys to break out the hoses and inadvertently put on a show for the new TV news medium to air nationwide. This isn't my first time discussing US history.

---

I fail to see how the main reason for the Civil War was slavery when Abraham Lincoln and the Union offered the Confederacy a deal that would guarantee them slavery if they would agree to rejoin the union... On TWO separate occasions. Of course, as we know, the Confederacy declined... Because while slavery was an issue, it was only a small part of what caused the secession. The south would have never left if it was just about slavery. Many in the south had already freed their slaves and many more were in favor of a gradual end to slavery that wouldn't overtly punish the 2% of the population in the south who still relied on slavery.


State rights was the general cause of secession, but the real issue that the vast majority of southerners were concerned with above slavery were the prohibitively punishing tariffs being levied against the south with which the union refused to budge, even in their two deals that they offered to the Confederacy. The Confederacy would very likely have accepted an offer that included ditching the tariff and a gradual phasing out of slavery. The north had no intentions of offering that, however, because the south and the tariff were supporting the dependent northern states. This was a very similar issue as the Revolutionary War's taxation without representation theme.

---

The key question in my reply, and the one you didn't answer, is whether white people just instantly started hating black people the second the Civil War ended. How else does one explain the emergence of the KKK, racial segregation laws, lynchings, etc., if not for hate? And if hate is the reason, are you suggesting that white people were perfectly fine with black people as long as they were just horses and cows to them? Or was there maybe some deep-seated hatred present right along with that air of superiority, and once slavery was ended and the superiority was stripped, hatred was all that was left?


No, I don't. I'm well aware that four Union states held slaves, and that Lincoln treated them with kid gloves to avoid losing them to the Confederacy (and the war along with them). Lincoln wasn't the great hero of the African race that history books would have you believe. He was a politician first and foremost, and he saw slavery as a topic that he could build a career around, so that's exactly what he did.


You may also note that I phrased my question with regards to "white people" hating black people. Not "southerners" hating black people. Some of the worst segregation in the country was found in the northeast, particularly Boston, but no one organized any major protests there because northern states were perceived by the NAACP as strong allies in the Civil Rights Movement. The South was a much easier target because those idiots made a big, loud deal of their segregation laws, and if you dared stand up to them, the fire chief would tell his white boys to break out the hoses and inadvertently put on a show for the new TV news medium to air nationwide. This isn't my first time discussing US history.

So it's white people not just the south. So why the blowback against the southern flag? Should we not be calling to remove the union flag since it to is representative of white people and all their sins?

---

The key question in my reply, and the one you didn't answer, is whether white people just instantly started hating black people the second the Civil War ended. How else does one explain the emergence of the KKK, racial segregation laws, lynchings, etc., if not for hate? And if hate is the reason, are you suggesting that white people were perfectly fine with black people as long as they were just horses and cows to them? Or was there maybe some deep-seated hatred present right along with that air of superiority, and once slavery was ended and the superiority was stripped, hatred was all that was left?

 

It seems like you're saying that animosity between the races was limited exclusively to whites hating blacks in America. The emergence of those institutions was an attempt to preserve the culture during Reconstruction. It's no secret that America was not kind to the freed slaves or to minorities in general through the mid-20th century, but I still don't think hate is the right word. Sure, some folks hate others because of their race, but blacks in America were suffering a class war, and poor (especially southern) whites were just as likely to be abused. Yes, whites were fine with blacks as a component of their farm equipment. Hating them makes no more sense than me hating my Dell. I think it was very rare for a guy to say "I really hate them Negroes, I'm gonna go buy me some so I can abuse 'em." Now, contrast that to Nazis who rounded up all the Dells they could find and stuffed them in an incinerator. THAT is the definition of hate in my book.  

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

The simplest way to put it would be to say the Union did not fight the south to abolish slavery, but the south seceded to preserve slavery.

 

Had slavery not been an issue, the southern states would not have seceded. Among their grievances, slavery was the single non-negotiable point.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

It seems like you're saying that animosity between the races was limited exclusively to whites hating blacks in America. The emergence of those institutions was an attempt to preserve the culture during Reconstruction. It's no secret that America was not kind to the freed slaves or to minorities in general through the mid-20th century, but I still don't think hate is the right word. Sure, some folks hate others because of their race, but blacks in America were suffering a class war, and poor (especially southern) whites were just as likely to be abused. Yes, whites were fine with blacks as a component of their farm equipment. Hating them makes no more sense than me hating my Dell. I think it was very rare for a guy to say "I really hate them Negroes, I'm gonna go buy me some so I can abuse 'em." Now, contrast that to Nazis who rounded up all the Dells they could find and stuffed them in an incinerator. THAT is the definition of hate in my book.  

 

I understand your point, but the common thread between Nazis and slave owners was the belief that certain races were subhuman. Slave owners subjugated their targets, Nazis exterminated theirs. Defining one as more hateful than another is splitting hairs. Either way, each has a flag symbolic of their deplorable actions.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

The disrespect of actual facts and the knowledge thereof is such an inherent part of every leftist I know.

 

 

Evolution: only slightly more proven than global warming.

 

Putting these two statements together, I'm thinking you must be a leftist. 

---

The simplest way to put it would be to say the Union did not fight the south to abolish slavery, but the south seceded to preserve slavery.

 

Had slavery not been an issue, the southern states would not have seceded. Among their grievances, slavery was the single non-negotiable point.

 

If the South seceded to preserve slavery, why did they turn down the North's offer to allow them to keep slavery if they would rejoin the union?  

 

It was about money... As most wars are.

---

Actually, it's not that bad a comparison. Both flags were flown by a group of people who, for reasons solely of hate, sought to fully subjugate another group of people by violent means.

 

Yes it is a bad comparison.  The "reasons solely of hate" is not really true.

 

The Nazi's, yes that was based on hate and the belief of a "supreme race".  As far as the south with regards to slavery, many viewed slaves as a "commodity".  Contrary to popular belief (and I'll probably take some flak for this) most slave owners actually took relatively good care of their slaves.  Please keep in mind, I don't condone slavery and yes, I do know that many were abused.  However, slavery wasn't about "hate" or "abuse".  Slaves were considered "property" much like livestock was considered.  The majority of slave owners allowed their slaves to marry, raise families and they generally were "good" to them.

 

The reasoning for southern states wanting to keep slavery going was about commerce.  The south at the time depended on farming/agricultural lifestyle where much of the north was dependent more on other types of commerce.  However, the north needed the products from the south in order to survive.

 

Now do I think that slavery was right?  Of course not.  However, given the time in history it was a "common" issue, and wasn't considered "hate".  What followed in the next decade century would be what I call "hate".

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Now do I think that slavery was right?  Of course not.  However, given the time in history it was a "common" issue, and wasn't considered "hate".  What followed in the next decade century would be what I call "hate".

 

Fixed.

 

The hate that evolved after emancipation continued, both institutionally and socially, at least 100 years, some would say more.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Asking as a guy with no real dog in this hunt, I just have a simple question:

 

The flag flies over a Confederate graveyard, correct?

 

 

 

You wouldn't fly a Star of David over a Christian graveyard, would you? 

---

Asking as a guy with no real dog in this hunt, I just have a simple question:

 

The flag flies over a Confederate graveyard, correct?

 

 

 

You wouldn't fly a Star of David over a Christian graveyard, would you? 

 

First of all, the only Confederate graveyard I've visited is in Franklin, TN and the U.S. flag flies over it, with individual graves marked by the flag under which each inhabitant fought.

 

Second, I've never seen any flag flown over a "Christian" graveyard other than the Stars and Stripes. I don't think a Star of David flag flies over any cemetery outside of Israel.

 

I guess I don't understand your point. An apple is quite unlike an orange.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

First of all, the only Confederate graveyard I've visited is in Franklin, TN and the U.S. flag flies over it, with individual graves marked by the flag under which each inhabitant fought.

 

Second, I've never seen any flag flown over a "Christian" graveyard other than the Stars and Stripes. I don't think a Star of David flag flies over any cemetery outside of Israel.

 

I guess I don't understand your point. An apple is quite unlike an orange.

My point is this, and it may be a bit more apple to apple than you perceived:

 

The soldiers fought for their country, but more than that, their unit, their family, their home.  They fought for a belief, which is no different than fighting for what one thinks his higher power wants of him.  To then take the winning flag and fly it over their resting place is kinda disrespectful.

 

And yes, I know slavery is disrespectful too.  But it does not exist any more in this country, no matter what manner of flag flies over the graves of the men who fought for it.

 

The Star of David analogy actually has some root in fact.  There was a lawsuit to take down a cross on a western national burial ground because Jewish people were buried there too.  I'll have to look that one up, but the lawsuit involved whether the cross was a religious symbol (which cannot be state sponsored) or a historical one.

---

Fixed.

 

The hate that evolved after emancipation continued, both institutionally and socially, at least 100 years, some would say more.

I wouldn't say "continued", but say erupted.  Again I argue that slavery was never about "hate".

 

What happened during the same and next decade brought about or amplified the KKK and segregation.  During that period of time, then I would call the events "hate" towards blacks in America.  However, events started changing in the 1960's that brought about The Civil Rights movement and changed things.  Prior to that, it was common between the civil war and the time of the Civil Rights movement to have segregation.  There were "whites only" and "blacks only" places which included simple things like water drinking fountains, bathrooms and restaurants.  That was really the era of "hate".  It didn't happen in civil war times (roughly 1859).  It happened in later times.

 

Many people don't understand the issues of slavery and what REALLY happened before the Civil War broke out.  The bottom line is, the Confederate Battle Flag never represented "hate" or bigotry.  It was all about state's rights and their people.

 

EDIT.  By the way, I fixed my original post.  You are correct regarding the time line and used the incorrect term.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

I wouldn't say "continued", but say erupted.  Again I argue that slavery was never about "hate".

 

What happened during the same and next decade brought about or amplified the KKK and segregation.  During that period of time, then I would call the events "hate" towards blacks in America.  However, events started changing in the 1960's that brought about The Civil Rights movement and changed things.  Prior to that, it was common between the civil war and the time of the Civil Rights movement to have segregation.  There were "whites only" and "blacks only" places which included simple things like water drinking fountains, bathrooms and restaurants.  That was really the era of "hate".  It didn't happen in civil war times (roughly 1859).  It happened in later times.

 

Many people don't understand the issues of slavery and what REALLY happened before the Civil War broke out.  The bottom line is, the Confederate Battle Flag never represented "hate" or bigotry.  It was all about state's rights and their people.

 

Perhaps not hate, but most certainly bigotry. At the heart of European, and by extension American, slavery is the belief that some people are subhuman and therefore subject to ownership. That is bigotry.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

I wouldn't say "continued", but say erupted.  Again I argue that slavery was never about "hate".

 

What happened during the same and next decade brought about or amplified the KKK and segregation.  During that period of time, then I would call the events "hate" towards blacks in America.  However, events started changing in the 1960's that brought about The Civil Rights movement and changed things.  Prior to that, it was common between the civil war and the time of the Civil Rights movement to have segregation.  There were "whites only" and "blacks only" places which included simple things like water drinking fountains, bathrooms and restaurants.  That was really the era of "hate".  It didn't happen in civil war times (roughly 1859).  It happened in later times.

 

Many people don't understand the issues of slavery and what REALLY happened before the Civil War broke out.  The bottom line is, the Confederate Battle Flag never represented "hate" or bigotry.  It was all about state's rights and their people.

Maybe it wasn't overt hate, but it was a flag created by a band of traitors who believed that their "right" to own slaves, among other things, was going to be taken away if they remained a part of the United States. Those who came along later subverted it into a symbol of true hatred. Interesting question that I honestly don't know the answer to: are Nazi flags flown over the graves of ex-Nazi soldiers in Germany? That would be a good lead to follow, because the Confederate flag, over time, came to be a symbol of those who do overtly hate people of other races, colors and creeds. In fact, I would argue that that is its <i>primary</i> meaning today. "Heritage, not hate," blah blah blah, the "heritage" represented by the Confederate flag is a band of traitors who sought to maintain a nation in which a black slave was only three-fifths of a person.

---

Asking as a guy with no real dog in this hunt, I just have a simple question:

 

The flag flies over a Confederate graveyard, correct?

 

 

 

You wouldn't fly a Star of David over a Christian graveyard, would you? 

 

As far as I know, the flag flies over a memorial to the confederate soldiers lost during the war.  The "offense" that people take from that is because the Civil War was "about slavery" and thus the Confederate Flag is "racist" and "offensive".  No actual reference or news reports give a really honest answer,

 

To give you an answer, yes the flag flies (flew) over a burial ground and memorial of those that were lost during the Civil War.

 

The PC police are out in force, and want to eradicate our nation's history.  People on fringe groups are desecrating memorials and want our history effectively "erased".  I wonder which side of the political aisle they are on?

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.