Long Island Shooters Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'll post the video at the bottom, so if you'd like to watch it first and skip my summary - feel free!

This will sum it up - in the past few weeks, there's obviously been a lot of talk about the Confederate flag. I'll even own up to the fact that I considered buying one in the aftermath of the shooting, based on the fact that I personally think it's wrong to not only ban a flag, but attempt to deface, discredit, and diminish the memories of thousands of Americans who died defending something they believed in. My belief was that buying a confederate flag, or any flag for that matter should show your support in what the flag stands for, and serve as a memorial to the men and women who died fighting to preserve not only our union, but the freedoms we now enjoy.

Now, whether or not the soldiers of the confederacy fought for the best intentions is for you to determine.

Summing up the video - The Confederate flag was the flag of Southern Democrats. The Republican Party was founded from the coattails of the Whig party to combat slavery, and yet many republicans and conservatives are defending the flag of racist democrats. Shouldn't we make it clear that the flag every PC democrat wants to ban is THEIR flag? The flag that their ancestors fought and died under to maintain the bounds of slavery? Shouldn't they take ownership of their racist past, rather than pass it off on republicans? I feel this needs to be said, because it's important to be educated in history before the books are changed and/or burned.

I don't like the idea of banning a flag anymore than any of you guys, because it causes a domino effect, and it's just another step in the agenda to take away what few freedoms we have left. I understand, people want to be "rebels," but if we want that, please, fly the Gadsden flag.

Make it clear to people that the confederate flag is NOT a republican/conservative flag. It's a democrat flag. Make them accept their past. It's my hope that this post will serve as education for everyone, and hopefully bring about a change that we actually WANT.

 

·
Borders, Language, Culture
Joined
·
4,738 Posts
I doubt many Republican politicians know the history of which you speak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tonto

·
Trapped in a Socialist-Facist Dictatorship
Joined
·
1,882 Posts
Based on this short and incomplete lesson some facts about the war and the flag come to mind.

The Civil War or "War Between The States" as it's known in the south began as a war based on individual states rights verses a big federal government.
Slavery didn't become a major issue in the war until after the Emancipation Proclamation was passed in 1863.

The large majority of those serving in the southern armies didn't own slaves but were willing to go to war to protect their individual states and homes from an all powerful northern run government that didn't have their best interests in mind as it was perceived at that time.

When we're told that the Confederate battle flag is a flag of racism this is a misnomer, a phony "fact" brought about during the later half of the twentieth century by left leaning and all knowing educators. Those who decided to place the blame for racial inequality on an object and not the Democrat run government that was the cause.

The Confederate flag is a flag of rebellion and can be categorized with the Betsy Ross or Gadsden Flags but that doesn't sell advertising for the media.

So another object of American history gets thrown by the wayside because history has to be rewritten to meet the requirements of the current agenda and serve as a smokescreen to distract our 3 second attention span from the real events destroying this country today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,136 Posts
The Civil War or "War Between The States" as it's known in the south began as a war based on individual states rights verses a big federal government.
Slavery didn't become a major issue in the war until after the Emancipation Proclamation was passed in 1863.
BS, the war was about slavery and it was an issue since the founding of the country. The hackneyed old saw that the war was about "States Rights" is true, but was about "States Rights" to maintain the institution of slavery.

Thousands of southern men who did not own slaves died for a few wealthy southern plantation owners who made their fortunes because of slavery. The northern soldiers died for the bankers who got wealthy with the triangle trade.

As always, the troops died for the wealthy, on both sides.

That said, the "Stars and Bars" is a cultural symbol important to the south. It is indeed unfortunate that some bad actors have adopted it as a symbol of rebellion.
 

·
Trapped in a Socialist-Facist Dictatorship
Joined
·
1,882 Posts
BS, the war was about slavery and it was an issue since the founding of the country. The hackneyed old saw that the war was about "States Rights" is true, but was about "States Rights" to maintain the institution of slavery.

Thousands of southern men who did not own slaves died for a few wealthy southern plantation owners who made their fortunes because of slavery. The northern soldiers died for the bankers who got wealthy with the triangle trade.

As always, the troops died for the wealthy, on both sides.

That said, the "Stars and Bars" is a cultural symbol important to the south. It is indeed unfortunate that some bad actors have adopted it as a symbol of rebellion.
Not entirely true.

While obviously slavery was an issue for both sides before and during the war the south wanted the option for each individual state to control what went on within it's borders. Be that control over taxation, crop pricing or slavery the southern states wanted the right to choose for themselves. Newly imposed federal taxes to support a larger national government was a huge factor but Lincoln's election was the tipping point. Hence the war over states rights as it went into the history books at the very first. Long afterward modern history changed it's meaning to suit current needs and those of the civil rights movement which was starting to gear up in the 1950's.

Yes you are correct about the troops being caught in the middle of a disagreement between rich entities but that is the sad truth of the entire history of mankind.

Don't misconstrue my meaning here, I'm not a racist or pro-slavery I am simply stating true historical facts that have been changed through the passage of time and are no longer taught in schools.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
656 Posts
BS, the war was about slavery and it was an issue since the founding of the country. The hackneyed old saw that the war was about "States Rights" is true, but was about "States Rights" to maintain the institution of slavery.

Thousands of southern men who did not own slaves died for a few wealthy southern plantation owners who made their fortunes because of slavery. The northern soldiers died for the bankers who got wealthy with the triangle trade.

As always, the troops died for the wealthy, on both sides.

That said, the "Stars and Bars" is a cultural symbol important to the south. It is indeed unfortunate that some bad actors have adopted it as a symbol of rebellion.
The war was fought because the South wanted to succeed from the Union, it had nothing to do with slavery. The North also had slaves and if you check history you will find that the Southern states freed their slaves long before the North did. As was said before the issue of slavery came long after the start of the war and as I said the North had their fair share of slaves so how is the Confederate Flag a racist symbol? If that is the case then the American, Dutch, British, South Africian, Egyptian and any other country that had slaves at anytime is also a racist flag. I think it is time to grow a set and realize that just because you don't like something does not mean it is wrong or you are right. History has been done and can't be changed, we need it to learn from.
 

·
Trapped in a Socialist-Facist Dictatorship
Joined
·
1,882 Posts
To make another example and take this point a little further along, say in 2125 they start teaching in schools that WWII was fought as the war to free the Jews would that be true? Nobody who was there or their children would be around to dispute it.

As we know today most people on this side of the Atlantic didn't know what was going on in Germany and the countries it had occupied. When reports of the atrocities did come through they were dismissed because by our way of thinking no civilized country would commit such acts. It was only after the camps began to be liberated by the allies did the truth become world known.

Do you see how this works? Revisionist history can make people believe anything despite the actual recorded facts. Start putting it in the heads of the young and suddenly it becomes history and carries on for generations to come.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
To make another example and take this point a little further along, say in 2125 they start teaching in schools that WWII was fought as the war to free the Jews would that be true? Nobody who was there or their children would be around to dispute it.

As we know today most people on this side of the Atlantic didn't know what was going on in Germany and the countries it had occupied. When reports of the atrocities did come through they were dismissed because by our way of thinking no civilized country would commit such acts. It was only after the camps began to be liberated by the allies did the truth become world known.

Do you see how this works? Revisionist history can make people believe anything despite the actual recorded facts. Start putting it in the heads of the young and suddenly it becomes history and carries on for generations to come.
Which is exactly why common core does not push for science or social studies. No critical thinking + no history = Sheeple.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,833 Posts
The war was fought because the South wanted to succeed from the Union, it had nothing to do with slavery. The North also had slaves and if you check history you will find that the Southern states freed their slaves long before the North did. As was said before the issue of slavery came long after the start of the war and as I said the North had their fair share of slaves so how is the Confederate Flag a racist symbol? If that is the case then the American, Dutch, British, South Africian, Egyptian and any other country that had slaves at anytime is also a racist flag. I think it is time to grow a set and realize that just because you don't like something does not mean it is wrong or you are right. History has been done and can't be changed, we need it to learn from.
The North also had slave farms, where they would 'breed' slaves for the South, these were few and far between though. They stemmed from the importation of new slaves being illegal via the 1807 act and previous acts. Hell, even in 1794 you had the "Slave Trade Act" which basically terminated all U.S. involvement in the slave trade.

Slavery in the United States would have died out naturally had it not been for the Civil War. I can say with certainty that by 1890 or maybe even earlier it would have been nonexistent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,071 Posts
BS, the war was about slavery and it was an issue since the founding of the country. The hackneyed old saw that the war was about "States Rights" is true, but was about "States Rights" to maintain the institution of slavery.
If that is true, then:

1. Why did 4 slaves states not rebel?
2. Why did Lincoln not free the slaves that he could free? The emancipation proclamation only freed slaves that were in rebellion, not those that were still held in bondage in the north.
3. Why are there no recruiting posters from either side urging the masses to defend or defeat slavery? None. Actually Lincoln had a standing order not to use slavery as a recruiting tool.
4. Why did 7 of the states not succeed and join the confederacy until Federal troops were sent to the South?

The war was about continuing problems between the North and the South, one of the biggest of which was the institution of slavery. Others included free trade with foreign entities, tariffs and embargoes. The war was not fought over just one issue. Boys didn't flock to the banners to save the poor southern slaves, nor did they join to make sure that slavery would survive. Serious historical study does not bear it out nor do surviving letters,diaries, newspaper articles, first hand accounts or other primary sources. While some abolitionists did form units and did recruit from within their ranks, they were a very small part of the Northern forces. In fact the Civil War did not become the "War To Free The Slaves" in school textbooks until the late depression-New Deal era.

Just like the American War for Independence did not start over tax stamps and tea but rather a whole laundry list of intolerable acts, the Civil War did not begin to save the poor slave from their cruel white masters.

My family lived in Eastern Ky and the war was fought through their farms and towns. However, none of my family joined the Union combatants until after the summer of 1863 when my great--great-great-grandfather was shot on his porch by confederate raiders. His sons and nephews all joined US KY Mtd Inf units by October.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
590 Posts
All of which rings true. However, it can safely be said that the rebel flag represented, among other things, the desire to let states choose their own course with regards to the economic model of slavery. The virtual slavery of the Jim Crow south, elements of which persisted well into the 20 century, shows how fervently some believed in that model.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
341 Posts
All of which rings true. However, it can safely be said that the rebel flag represented, among other things, the desire to let states choose their own course with regards to the economic model of slavery. The virtual slavery of the Jim Crow south, elements of which persisted well into the 20 century, shows how fervently some believed in that model.
If it all rings true the "however" is self defeating.
 

·
Trapped in a Socialist-Facist Dictatorship
Joined
·
1,882 Posts
The North also had slave farms, where they would 'breed' slaves for the South, these were few and far between though. They stemmed from the importation of new slaves being illegal via the 1807 act and previous acts. Hell, even in 1794 you had the "Slave Trade Act" which basically terminated all U.S. involvement in the slave trade.
A statement very similar to this is what cost Jimmy The Greek his career.

Even though it's the undisputable truth it wasn't allowed to be spoken aloud even twenty seven years ago.

PC has been around way too long
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,735 Posts
Found this which sort of states the case nicely and sums up how I learned about the war...it was about slavery....but other things as well:

What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America?

A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery.

In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict.

A key issue was states' rights.

The Southern states wanted to assert their authority over the federal government so they could abolish federal laws they didn't support, especially laws interfering with the South's right to keep slaves and take them wherever they wished.

Another factor was territorial expansion.

The South wished to take slavery into the western territories, while the North was committed to keeping them open to white labor alone.

Meanwhile, the newly formed Republican party, whose members were strongly opposed to the westward expansion of slavery into new states, was gaining prominence.

The election of a Republican, Abraham Lincoln, as President in 1860 sealed the deal. His victory, without a single Southern electoral vote, was a clear signal to the Southern states that they had lost all influence.

Feeling excluded from the political system, they turned to the only alternative they believed was left to them: secession, a political decision that led directly to war.


From the PBS website, of all PC places.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FatWhiteMan

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,833 Posts
It was Lincoln's decision to march troops on Fort Sumter that started the war. He claimed it was to "reinforce" the fort (they were supposedly bringing supplies). In reality the Fort was under South Carolina's government, which had already (legally) seceded from the Union. The Southern troops stationed there thought they were under attack...and ultimately they were, as the Northern troops seized control over the Fort. Further, the force Lincoln sent was fairly large, arguably outnumbering or at least matching the southern troops, which led to worries that Lincoln would order the troops to take the fort once they were inside. Lincoln wanted a reason to attack and he got it by provoking a response. Prior to this, the Confederate government was in the midst of talks with Lincoln on the secession and they were trying to reach a settlement with the Federal Government. Also, I'd like to add, Lincoln was apathetic towards slavery until his reelection campaign came up. He even wanted to ship all of the slaves back to Africa, but it was too expensive to do so.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top