On this whole Confederate Flag debacle

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Yeah, well, hardly a surprise that South Carolina is considering just now the maybe-possibility of taking down the Confederate Flag from its government buildings. After all, didn't another exemplary southern state, Mississippi, officially ban slavery just a couple of years ago?

But the dumbest argument of all in favor of the continuous official display of this flag is the "cultural heritage OMG" one. And "it's just a monument to the Confederate dead". Sorry, do these guys take us for imbeciles? Sure, I get it, those bemoaning the fact that they've consistently been at the wrong side of history, do genuinely regret that the South lost the Civil War. No doubt they'd have loved it if it hadn't - with all the social and historical implications that such a hypothetical outcome would've brought.

But let's get real, people of the South. Flying a flag that unequivocally represents nothing more nor less than an attempt to destroy the United States for selfish reasons, is the exact opposite of being a patriot - which many among those folks like to present themselves as, and on a regular basis.

Hey, if South Carolina's white citizens so much insist on displaying this "heritage" flag at their seat of government and asserting all the values that it "stands for", perhaps they should put their money where their mouth is, and make another attempt to secede, huh? Let's see how that goes.

And mind you, even today this flag ain't being lowered at half-mast, even after the recent shooting that took place in that very same state, and was clearly 100% racially motivated.

"Noble" flag? I'm sure you believe so, Sir. After all, it quite evidently represents what you guys "stand for".

Comments

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

To be fair, the flag couldn't be lowered because it was permanently affixed to the pole. To lower it at all, it would have to have been removed entirely.

Which would be fine by me. ;)

Seriously, though, I have no issue with people wanting to take pride in their heritage or homeland. However, there is so much baggage attached to this flag (it was only really brought back into public prominence as an anti-civil rights rallying symbol in the 1960) that anyone with even a hint of self-awareness ought to be embarrassed to be in any way associated with it. It's well past time we put this symbol of treason and sedition to rest.

---

Those bemoaning the fact that they've consistently been at the wrong side of history, do genuinely regret that the South lost the Civil War. No doubt they'd have loved it if it hadn't - with all the social and historical implications that such a hypothetical outcome would've brought.

This isn't a consensus, but I've heard it argued (and I agree with this) that what you're describing is not hypothetical at all. The South, ultimately, did win the war. Reconstruction's final dismantling in 1877 was really the final "shot" in the war, and the South was the side that fired it. As part of the political compromise leading to Hayes' election, the South was able to get the Army to leave, which led to the reversal of almost all of the civil rights gains that had been achieved since 1865 (most of which were being enforced at the barrel of the Federal gun keeping terrorist groups like the KKK in check.) With those gains reversed, the Democratic party was able to return to power (remember, at the time - and all the way up until the 1960s - they were the more conservative party) and those officials cemented their power (and the position of blacks) with new laws designed to enforce the status-quo. For another almost 100 years, the South was able to continue as it always had, with black people nominally "free" under the Constitution, but in reality not much better off than they'd been under slavery. It wasn't until the 1960s that the voting franchise was finally guaranteed to black people, again at the point of the Federal gun (and some would claim that that right still hasn't been fully achieved for all.)

When we look at the situation from this perspective: that freedom was only actually achieved 50 years ago, one can more easily understand why things haven't magically become equal in this country. When ignorant pundits wonder, aloud, why black people haven't achieved the same level of "success" as whites, despite being "free for 150 years," it displays their own ignorance and prejudice. In reality, they have not been free for 150 years, and it might as well have been only yesterday, for all the success we've had in actually getting to the point where opportunities are truly equal.

The rabid rush by so many to defend a flag that symbolizes treason and the rejection of equal rights only demonstrates just how badly we've failed to meet that challenge.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

the flag couldn't be lowered because it was permanently affixed to the pole. To lower it at all, it would have to have been removed entirely.

HAHAHA!

[dexeron.livejournal.com]

Seriously, I'm hearing "Well, we can't lower it. We'd have to take it down all the way!"

And my response is: "GREAT! Let's do that!"

EDIT:

Rachel Maddow's blog just noted an interesting fact: Roof stated that he wanted to start a race war - to enact some kind of political and social change by his actions. What's astounding is that he has, in fact, created a change - a progressive change. We, today, have officials in both parties (some in Mississippi - a state that still includes the confederate flag as part of their official state flag) saying that it's time that we put this flag to rest. This would have been unthinkable even a week ago. Roof created change, but in the opposite direction from what he intended. He wanted to bring out the worst in people. Some, as always, met that expectation, but far more have risen up to reject that, and that fact, if nothing else, makes me hopeful for the future.

[foolsguinea.livejournal.com]

I don't even consider the secession to be "treason." The USA was founded by slavers, and run by slavers for most of a century before Lincoln's election. The Fugitive Slave Act was the law of the land, and the slave power was the conservative and normative power structure.

The GOP in those days was seen as a far-left fringe, sort of the SJW Tumblrinas of the day. Southern secession was a deeply conservative act, to hang onto the plan and purpose of the Union as it had been up to that point, if only in diminished form. The likes of John Brown, Frederick Douglass, U.S. Grant, and Wm. Tecumseh Sherman were radical revolutionaries who betrayed the traditions of the people and amended the Constitution to abolish slavery. But much of the country had no idea how to manage their economy, let alone their culture, without it.

Granted, I think Brown, Douglass, Grant, and Sherman were right. But that doesn't make the secessionists traitors, when they were fighting for the very traditions that the USA was instituted on and had defended up to that point.

[luvdovz.livejournal.com]

Hey, the swastika is also part of the German heritage. But you won't see it anywhere around Germany, eh?

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

It is difficult to fly a symbol of hate that's officially forbidden. ;)

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

And then they call us Balkanites backward.

[oportet.livejournal.com]

This won't work on the internet of course - but in any real life argument with someone claiming to have confederate pride - ask them what the capitals of the confederacy were, ask them to name a battle other than Gettysburg, maybe throw in some light Jefferson Davis trivia. There's a small chance they'll have any answers, giving you a great chance at a follow up question to find out what exactly it is they're really proud of.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

You gotta name Fort Sumter too. They'll know about that one.

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

I see some of this with 'national pride' in England. They like the flag, they like football, and they complain about how they're not allowed to have pride in their nation... but they don't tend to take much interest in English history, heritage or tradition. If they were serious about celebrating British culture then they'd presumably be learning to take part in Morris Dancing rather than whining about not being about to celebrate being white.

That being said, 'independence movements' in the UK are associated with the left-wing rather, as opposed to 'secession' being associated with the right-wing in America. I tend to find that quite jarring in discussions like this because I am a strong supporter for the right of regions to self-government given a suitable democratic mandate. Obviously, the historical context of self-government movements in the two nations are very different, hence the difference in attitudes.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I was left with the impression that the Tories want independence from the EU, and the UKIP were far-right. Perhaps you mean that independence movements in Scotland are associated with the left-wing?

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

I think that may be mixing up two different things.

When I say 'independence movement', I'm referring to regions within a nation-state deciding to form their own independent government.

The Scottish Nationalist Party, Plaid Cymru and Sinn Féin are all left-leaning parties seeking greater devolution / independence for their respective regions within the United Kingdom. There are also minor independence movements within regions of England (principally, Cornwall).

There are also plenty of examples of regions outside of the British Isle that have become independent of the United Kingdom: List of countries that have gained independence from the United Kingdom (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_that_have_gained_independence_from_the_United_Kingdom)

The UK is a sovereign nation that has EU membership, which it is free to withdraw whenever it wants. Despite UKIPs choice of name, the UK leaving the EU is not akin to declaring independence; it's merely a case of deciding to leave an international organisation.

Opinion is divided on whether continued membership of the EU is good for the UK and it is true that leaving the EU has more support from right-wing voters.

One of the debates around Scottish independence was whether Scotland could retain EU membership after becoming an independent nation (the SNP wants Scotland to remain part of the EU, but it was possible that an independent Scotland would be treated as a brand new nation and forced to reapply for EU membership.)

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Despite UKIPs choice of name, the UK leaving the EU is not akin to declaring independence

That doesn't seem to be the impression that generally comes across when listening to Cameron's rhetoric. ;)

[wight1984.livejournal.com]

Well, Cameron (seemingly) wants the UK to stay in the EU. The whole reason why UKIP exists is because the Tory party does not support withdrawal from the EU.

However, Cameron is under a lot of pressure to please Eurosceptic voters, hence we will have a referendum on EU membership whilst Cameron does everything he can to convince Eurosceptics that he's doing the right kinds of 'renegotiation' to address their concerns.

The referendum question itself shows the bias of the Tory party; we will be voting 'Yes' to stay and 'No' to leave.

At the moment, he's probably feeling safe. Polling suggests a safe win for the Yes vote, which means he will be able to sit back afterwards and claim that the UK public feel adequately assuaged by his efforts.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

I think that the Tories are split down the middle on "the matter of Europe". UKIP are pretty far-right.

The British context of republicanism/nationalism/separatism is one of left-of-centre independence movements. Obvs this is not universal.

Personally, I think of the '70's incarnation of the IRA as being close to some sort of Strasserite (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism) cultural revolutionary movement. I can remember hearing, from the lips of an otherwise beloved uncle, the desire to go and sort out those folk in the North, proposing what can only be called ethnic cleansing of a pretty brutal kind. And he was, in Irish Republican terms at the time, quite a moderate. And the Proddies in the North were just as bad, if not worse.

I am suspicious of all nationalists, yet I would regard myself as an Englishman, and fortunate to be so. I cannot explain the cognitive dissonance...excepting maybe football does that to folk.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

I'm not exactly sure how specifically has football provided Englishmen with any reasons to be feeling fortunate to be so. ;)

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

I didn't say we were any good at it. Heroic, stupid, gormless, occasionally brilliant when irrelevant...

Nah, I'm being glib. Aside from football and against all odds, we Brits have, every now and then, done the right thing. Which may not be a stunning batting average a la Bradman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Bradman), but nevertheless, we're getting there.

Two steps forward, one step backwards, we silly-walk into the future...at our own pace, and taking our own eccentric course. I often think we are pretty stupid in this...and I'm often proven wrong.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

You know what they say. Even a clock that runs backwards is sometimes correct. :)