Confederate Flag

[SUNDAE]

The Chinese were slaves, through manipulation rather than being bought and sold. If you deny that, then you deny a culture their history and sympathy they deserve.

Get a grip!!!!

Frederick Douglas 1846
Now what is this system of slavery? This is the subject of my lecture this evening—what is the character of this institution? I am about to answer the inquiry, what is American slavery? I do this the more readily, since I have found persons in this country who have identified the term slavery with that which I think it is not, and in some instances, I have feared, in so doing have rather (unwittingly, I know) detracted much from the horror with which the term slavery is contemplated. It is common in this country to distinguish every bad thing by the name slavery. Intemperance is slavery; to be deprived of the right to vote is slavery, says one; to have to work hard is slavery, says another ; and I do not know but that if we should let them go on, they would say to eat when we are hungry, to walk when we desire to have exercise, or to minister to our necessities, or have necessities at all, is slavery. I do not wish for a moment to detract from the horror with which the evil of intemperance is contemplated; not at all; nor do I wish to throw the slightest obstruction in the way of any political freedom that any class of persons in this country may desire to obtain. But I am here to say that I think the term slavery is sometimes abused by identifying it with that which it is not.

Slavery in the United States is the granting of that power by which one man exercises and enforces a right of property in the body and soul of another. The condition of a slave is simply that of the brute beast. He is a piece of property—a marketable commodity in the language of the law, to be bought or sold at the will and caprice of the master who claims him to be his property; he is spoken of, thought of, and treated as property. His own good, his conscience, his intellect, his affections are all set aside by the master. The will and the wishes of the master are the law of the slave. He is as much a piece of property as a horse. If he is fed, he is fed because he is property. If he is clothed, it is with a view to the increase of his value as property. Whatever of comfort is necessary to him for his body or soul, that is inconsistent with his being property, is carefully wrested from him, not only by public opinion, but by the law of the country. He is carefully deprived of everything that tends in the slightest degree to detract from his value as property.

God bless the hard-working Chinese, Italians, Portuguese, Greeks, Irish and all other immigrants who helped build North America. Whether they toiled in over-heated sweatshops or in dangerous mines, most received little or no recognition for their labours.

In no way though, can they be compared to slaves-whose children were ripped from their breasts, and their women raped by masters who viewed it as their right-this among other atrocities.

 

[ozanaki tori]

mhatten:

Sadly, you are correct. Those are the images associated with the confederate flag by african-americans and northern people. However, go to a state like Virginia, and I've actually seen african-americans with the confederate flag on their car. A lot of people still remember what the war was really about.
I'm an advocate of reclaiming that.

 

[ozanaki tori]

So you are saying that the Chinese were not abused, then?

Furthermore, if that is the atrocity to stain a flag then we should all stop waving the mighty red white and blue for our own atrocities against the native american's.

 

[praying]

So you are saying that the Chinese were not abused, then?

Furthermore, if that is the atrocity to stain a flag then we should all stop waving the mighty red white and blue for our own atrocities against the native american's.

No btu abuse does not remotely compare to slavery, they are apples and oranges.

 

[SUNDAE]

So you are saying that the Chinese were not abused, then?

Never said that! I said they were not slaves!

Furthermore, if that is the atrocity to stain a flag then we should all stop waving the mighty red white and blue for our own atrocities against the native american's.

Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with that. But then I'm Canadian, so I probably wouldn't count. We are not ultra patriotic at the best of times anyway. I don't even own a flag. (Horrors!!)

 

[ozanaki tori]

lol maybe not, but every business logo has a maple leaf so i think we're all even.

You defined the atrocities of slavery that made it worse as being abused and raped and such.

So, as long as the word slave isn't used, America is faultless for their mistreatment - but the confederate states are not because they used the words slave?

 

[SUNDAE]

lol maybe not, but every business logo has a maple leaf

I don't know and I don't particularly care.

You defined the atrocities of slavery that made it worse as being abused and raped and such.

So, as long as the word slave isn't used, America is faultless for their mistreatment - but the confederate states are not because they used the words slave?

Huh!! You're not making much sense!!! :o :o

I NEVER said America was faultless. The truth is very far from that!!! To be honest I have a big problem with the Ultra patriotism practised by most Americans. There's something to be said for getting your own house in order.

 

[ozanaki tori]

Then we have no conflict here. I'm just sick of americans saying they're so righteous when their past is so filthy and corrupt.

(i'd've burnt the white house for you guys if i were around back then )

 

[jluke]

I have not had time to read all 13 pages here,but has anyone brought up the fact that a civil war is defined as "a fight between opposing groups of citizens for control of a country". The War of Northern Aggression was fought between the Confederate States of America and the United States of America.Despite over 140 years of spin,this conflict was not a "civil" war, but a conflict between two sovereign nations.
The CSA had no desire to take control of the USA , and could not care less whether any other state seceded.This was about the North losing tax revenues from the immense agricultural economy of the South.

 

[SUNDAE]

I have not had time to read all 13 pages here,but has anyone brought up the fact that a civil war is defined as "a fight between opposing groups of citizens for control of a country". The War of Northern Aggression was fought between the Confederate States of America and the United States of America.Despite over 140 years of spin,this conflict was not a "civil" war, but a conflict between two sovereign nations.
The CSA had no desire to take control of the USA , and could not care less whether any other state seceded.This was about the North losing tax revenues from the immense agricultural economy of the South.

And this is your particular spin!!!!


I don't know if you're going to bother to read this, but I just had to ask! Do you think the 'sovereign' south would've been 'oh so properous', and tax rich were it not for the thousands of unpaid labourers there?

The Confederate flag will always be abhorrent to most African Americans

 

[IrishJohan]

For African Americans the war was/is all about not being a slave. It did not matter about the politics, because it was not Lincoln's intention to free the slaves. If he could have preserved the Union without war or freeing the slaves he would have. You know why the politics were irrelevant, because we could not vote and were only considered 3/5's of a person.

I think it needs to be said that Lincoln was willing at the beginning of the war to allow slavery to remain if the Union could be preserved because he refused to budge on expanding slavery into the territories and believed the "peculiar institution" would wither and die. He may have been right. Yet after the Emancipation Proclamation, he was no longer willing to allow slavery even in the Southern states which that plus the rejection of Souther independence helped squelch any productive peace talks.

 

[IrishJohan]

Similarly, had the Confederates won, there would still be black slaves today. That, I think is the point. I don't think anybody lacks education on the flag. I think some people lack understanding how much the symbol affects the lives of those who were "hurt".

Extremely doubtful. Britain and France, the two leading world powers back then, would have undoubtedly forced an abolition of slavery. Sentiment for abolishing slavery, or a gradual emancipation like that proposed in Brazil, was already talked about among some of the Souther elite. Robert E. Lee for one opposed slavery and when he inherited slaves he freed them. Now whether we would still have segregation and Jim Crow laws is a different matter entirely. That is very hard to say because it's difficult to know how much they were connected to real racism and bitterness over losing the Civil War and enduring Reconstruction. My guess would be Jim Crow would still be around in some form in the South today if they had won the war. Pure speculation though.

 

[jluke]

The South could not have built such a massive agricultural economy without the hard work of millions of slaves.The industrial growth of the North depended on the revenue from the tax on this economy, it was the pending loss of that revenue that brought about the war, so in that way, slavery was the root cause of the conflict.
The war was about money, not the freedom of the slaves,the Emancipation Proclamation would have allowed the southern states to maintain slavery if they returned to the United States.

 

[jluke]

The framers of the Confererate Constitution knew that the institution of slavery could not last. They banned the importation of any new slaves (art1,sec9) which also meant that those who left could not be legally returned; with no new slaves and no way to retrieve runaways ,the instituion of slavery would not have lasted more than another generation.
Lincoln believed that Africans could never be the equal of whites, his policy was emancipation along with deportation. (Carl Sandburg "Lincoln,The War Years" or "The Annals of America" vol9pg363)

 

[praying]

The South could not have built such a massive agricultural economy without the hard work of millions of slaves.The industrial growth of the North depended on the revenue from the tax on this economy, it was the pending loss of that revenue that brought about the war, so in that way, slavery was the root cause of the conflict.
The war was about money, not the freedom of the slaves,the Emancipation Proclamation would have allowed the southern states to maintain slavery if they returned to the United States.

Well as a song of today's youth by Sean Combs (Puff Daddy) says:

"It's all about the Benjamins baby"

Has been and probably always will be.

LIke you said it was a war about money and maintaining the status quo to aquire that money which translated to maintaining the states rights to have slavery as an institution.

 

[praying]

The framers of the Confererate Constitution knew that the institution of slavery could not last. They banned the importation of any new slaves (art1,sec9) which also meant that those who left could not be legally returned; with no new slaves and no way to retrieve runaways ,the instituion of slavery would not have lasted more than another generation.
Lincoln believed that Africans could never be the equal of whites, his policy was emancipation along with deportation. (Carl Sandburg "Lincoln,The War Years" or "The Annals of America" vol9pg363)

Slavery IF the confedracy had remained would have lasted in some form for many years, I would venture to guess much longer than a generation given that it took 100 years for equal rights to be made law of the land via the constitution. Now if the confederacy survived there would not have been that ability to force the end of slavery/injustice towards Africans. Yes there probably would have been forgein governments pressuring the Confederacy to end the practice but as hsitory tells us mass forgien government pressure on the issue of human rights is extremely lacking unless it is somehow tied to the pressuring government's interests/economics. Evidenced with the exisitence of apartheid in South Africa until 1989. So we are back again to:

"It's all about the Benjamins baby"

Sad but true.

 

[SUNDAE]

The framers of the Confererate Constitution knew that the institution of slavery could not last. They banned the importation of any new slaves (art1,sec9) which also meant that those who left could not be legally returned; with no new slaves and no way to retrieve runaways ,the instituion of slavery would not have lasted more than another generation.

This is speculation. However, if it turned out to be so, it would have been one generation too long.

 

[SUNDAE]

Slavery IF the confedracy had remained would have lasted in some form for many years, I would venture to guess much longer than a generation given that it took 100 years for equal rights to be made law of the land via the constitution. Now if the confederacy survived there would not have been that ability to force the end of slavery/injustice towards Africans. Yes there probably would have been forgein governments pressuring the Confederacy to end the practice but as hsitory tells us mass forgien government pressure on the issue of human rights is extremely lacking unless it is somehow tied to the pressuring government's interests/economics. Evidenced with the exisitence of apartheid in South Africa until 1989. So we are back again to:

"It's all about the Benjamins baby"

Sad but true.

Mhatten, I've never heard of Benjamins Baby! I confess I'm not exactly "with it"!

You make a great point!!!!!

 

[praying]

Mhatten, I've never heard of Benjamins Baby! I confess I'm not exactly "with it"!

You make a great point!!!!!

Welcome to CF Sundae!

Shame on me (Tulc I am remiss here, I have been reading Sundae's posts for a bit now)

 

[praying]

The framers of the Confererate Constitution knew that the institution of slavery could not last. They banned the importation of any new slaves (art1,sec9) which also meant that those who left could not be legally returned; with no new slaves and no way to retrieve runaways ,the instituion of slavery would not have lasted more than another generation.
Lincoln believed that Africans could never be the equal of whites, his policy was emancipation along with deportation. (Carl Sandburg "Lincoln,The War Years" or "The Annals of America" vol9pg363)

Welcome to CF jluke