The Confederate Battle Flag...

[iOS Gravity]

No. Certain people, not necessarily in this thread, are demanding that the Confederate flag be removed altogether. Some states have or are in the process of removing confederate license plates. The problem I have is not the actual removal of the flag, as long as each State allows for the people's vote to decide, but with certain people wanting it removed after the SC incident, as if the flag had something to do with it. Furthermore, prior to that incident, the flag was a non-issue.

I see where your coming from. A really great point.

 

[anon(4698833)]

I am shocked this thread has gone almost 5 pages and is still on topic and civil, LOL! Cheers guys. :beer:

 

[Just_Me_D]

I am shocked this thread has gone almost 5 pages and is still on topic and civil, LOL! Cheers guys. :beer:

We've had numerous touchy conversations in the off-topic forum to where people have learned to simply agree to disagree. Besides, everybody who participated got a chance to give their opinions and thoughts, and that's the most important thing, in my opinion.

 

[anon(4698833)]

We've had numerous touchy conversations in the off-topic forum to where people have learned to simply agree to disagree. Besides, everybody who participated got a chance to give their opinions and thoughts, and that's the most important thing, in my opinion.

Yup...it also seems like a certain handful of posters who typically incite the drama have either A.) Not found this thread, or B.) Are gone all together. That might be making a big difference too...rebalancing the maturity level lol!

At any rate, I saw today that South Carolina passed the bill to remove the flag from their capital building. I don't blame them for wanting to be at the fore front of this "movement" because it creates a more peaceful existence for them...but their idea that it unifies people more, I feel, is a bit of a skewed logic on it, because they are really only appeasing one side of the argument without regard to the other side. Feels more like a fearful reaction vs. an attempt at true "unification" and progression.

But alas, it is their decision...would have been interesting to see what a public vote yielded in this regard. Kind of worrisome that so many actions are taken these days without even a hint of actual public vote. Soon we'll have a president that is just assigned instead of voted in, but that is another can of worms.

 

[Just_Me_D]

Yup...it also seems like a certain handful of posters who typically incite the drama have either A.) Not found this thread, or B.) Are gone all together. That might be making a big difference too...rebalancing the maturity level lol!

I think you're right, and thankfully so...

At any rate, I saw today that South Carolina passed the bill to remove the flag from their capital building. I don't blame them for wanting to be at the fore front of this "movement" because it creates a more peaceful existence for them...but their idea that it unifies people more, I feel, is a bit of a skewed logic on it, because they are rally only appeasing one side of the argument without regard to the other side. Feels more like a fearful reaction vs. an attempt at true "unification" and progression.

You, sir, are spot-on.

But alas, it is their decision...would have been interesting to see what a public vote yielded in this regard.

Yep, but the powers that be are afraid that the outcome will not be what they had hoped.

Kind of worrisome that so many actions are taken these days without even a hint of actual public vote.

Historically speaking, that should be a real concern to us as Americans, but unfortunately, it isn't, and by the time we show solidarity against it, it will be too late.

Soon we'll have a president that is just assigned instead of voted in, but that is another can of worms.

No doubt about it......Anyway, thanks for the conversation, my friend. I've got to prepare for work. Take care and have a great Friday.

 

[Scatabrain]

Yup...it also seems like a certain handful of posters who typically incite the drama have either A.) Not found this thread, or B.) Are gone all together. That might be making a big difference too...rebalancing the maturity level lol!

At any rate, I saw today that South Carolina passed the bill to remove the flag from their capital building. I don't blame them for wanting to be at the fore front of this "movement" because it creates a more peaceful existence for them...but their idea that it unifies people more, I feel, is a bit of a skewed logic on it, because they are really only appeasing one side of the argument without regard to the other side. Feels more like a fearful reaction vs. an attempt at true "unification" and progression.

But alas, it is their decision...would have been interesting to see what a public vote yielded in this regard. Kind of worrisome that so many actions are taken these days without even a hint of actual public vote. Soon we'll have a president that is just assigned instead of voted in, but that is another can of worms.

Hey, am I one of those people! .

I don't have an informed opinion on this other then I put a conf flag on my car years ago and it was not a statement about race. Perhaps a fan of a certain TV show perhaps.

And your comment about un-elected presidents - 2000 was exactly that scenario.

 

[anon(4698833)]

Hey, am I one of those people! .

I don't have an informed opinion on this other then I put a conf flag on my car years ago and it was not a statement about race. Perhaps a fan of a certain TV show perhaps.

And your comment about un-elected presidents - 2000 was exactly that scenario.

I don't particularly want to get into it because it deserves it's own thread, but it goes back A LOT further than that. The machine has been in place for generations now...it's nothing new, but now, it's going to be right in our face instead of behind the scenes. The government is in your face more year after year. This flag scenario should be a key reminder in this...people we elect to represent us do so without a true representation of the people who elected them.

 

[Scatabrain]

I don't particularly want to get into it because it deserves it's own thread, but it goes back A LOT further than that. The machine has been in place for generations now...it's nothing new, but now, it's going to be right in our face instead of behind the scenes. The government is in your face more year after year. This flag scenario should be a key reminder in this...people we elect to represent us do so without a true representation of the people who elected them.

I largely agree.

But there have been times in history when inequality was kept alive by popular vote.

I can't speak to this issue and whether it is a symbol of inequality or not. That essentially is the argument for taking the flag down.

 

[anon(4698833)]

I largely agree.

But there have been times in history when inequality was kept alive by popular vote.

I can't speak to this issue and whether it is a symbol of inequality or not. That essentially is the argument for taking the flag down.

Inequality, in my opinion, stems from the idea that we have opposing "teams" of elected officials. It's always been a weird concept to me...instead of having people who represent ideas in a very specific and identified way, we have these grandiose "teams" with which we are supposed to assign an understanding of a root set of ideas. That is crazy to me...it almost BREEDS inequality, and it has become a defined scenario of choosing the lesser of two evils.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of citizens in this country don't fully support either side of the fence (since our elections almost always end up in a stand off of republicans vs. democrats)...yet people still cast what they view as a decisive VOTE to elect one of these people to a position of control.

I'm spiraling off topic now but in the end, one of the reasons I don't vote anymore is because I never feel comfortable with the idea that I had a part in electing one of these people into office.

 

[Scatabrain]

Inequality, in my opinion, stems from the idea that we have opposing "teams" of elected officials. It's always been a weird concept to me...instead of having people who represent ideas in a very specific and identified way, we have these grandiose "teams" with which we are supposed to assign an understanding of a root set of ideas. That is crazy to me...it almost BREEDS inequality, and it has become a defined scenario of choosing the lesser of two evils.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of citizens in this country don't fully support either side of the fence (since our elections almost always end up in a stand off of republicans vs. democrats)...yet people still cast what they view as a decisive VOTE to elect one of these people to a position of control.

I'm spiraling off topic now but in the end, one of the reasons I don't vote anymore is because I never feel comfortable with the idea that I had a part in electing one of these people into office.

Maybe. I see inequality as a larger group imposing advantage / privilege over a less powerful group, knowingly or otherwise.

People should feel free to embrace the conf flag personally. But it has no place on gov property IMO. But religious writings and symbols have no place there either.

 

[anon(4698833)]

Maybe. I see inequality as a larger group imposing advantage / privilege over a less powerful group, knowingly or otherwise.

People should feel free to embrace the conf flag personally. But it has no place on gov property IMO. But religious writings and symbols have no place there either.

By why does it have no place on a government building? That is the question I pose in this conversation...it represents a part of history no differently than the current flags we see in so many southern states. The re-designed Georgia state flag represents the confederacy in the same way the confederate battle flag did (same colors, 13 stars reflecting 13 confederate states, the bars, etc)...yet when they changed the state flag from the battle flag to this flag, people were ok with it and no ok with the old version?

This, I feel, is where my problem arises with this whole situation...people are uneducated on what the flags represent, so they choose a target and they go after it whole heartedly until a state government gives in and changes things. Looking at our current state flag, it kind of defines the fact that most people who are rising up against the confederate flag aren't really focusing on the flag itself, but just on their desire for something to change because they demanded it.

Tell me this...from a technical perspective...what does this represent:

...that this one does not...?

 

[kilofoxtrot]

Maybe. I see inequality as a larger group imposing advantage / privilege over a less powerful group, knowingly or otherwise.

People should feel free to embrace the conf flag personally. But it has no place on gov property IMO. But religious writings and symbols have no place there either.

Democracy is 5 foxes and 4 chickens voting for whats on tonight's menu.

 

[Just_Me_D]

Let's start with 'inequality'. That term is a tool to keep racism alive and keep the less fortunate bitter. No one is equal. We consist of various colors, sexes, ethnicities, heights, weights, intellects, health, drive, talents, etcetera, so how is it that some people claim that we can all be 'equal'? Before anyone claim that I'm missing the point of inequality, just know that I'm not. Let's use the argument that 'people should be paid the same for the same job'. For the most part, that is indeed the case, however, what if two people work at McDonald's and are both cooks. One of them is black and the other is white. The white guy has been working there for 3 years whereas the black guy has only been working there for a week. The white guy gets paid $10.50 an hour and the black guy only get paid $7.50. Is that an instance of inequality? If so, is it because of experience or because of race? If the former, then is it really an instance of inequality? If it's the latter then is it fair that someone with years of more experience be paid the same as someone with very little experience? If it's not fair, then how can it be a case of inequality? If it's not a case of inequality then why would some people consider the pay difference a racial thing? If everything in the universe has to balance itself then how can there be equality for all? If there is wealth, there must also be poverty. If there is strength, there must also be weakness. If there is success there must also be failure. The only real thing we have that is equal is arguably 'opportunity', but is it a case of inequality if some people choose not to take advantage of that opportunity? Sorry for rambling. I'm tired and at a skating rink with my youngest son and one of his friends...

 

[Scatabrain]

Let's start with 'inequality'. That term is a tool to keep racism alive and keep the less fortunate bitter. No one is equal. We consist of various colors, sexes, ethnicities, heights, weights, intellects, health, drive, talents, etcetera, so how is it that some people claim that we can all be 'equal'? Before anyone claim that I'm missing the point of inequality, just know that I'm not. Let's use the argument that 'people should be paid the same for the same job'. For the most part, that is indeed the case, however, what if two people work at McDonald's and are both cooks. One of them is black and the other is white. The white guy has been working there for 3 years whereas the black guy has only been working there for a week. The white guy gets paid $10.50 an hour and the black guy only get paid $7.50. Is that an instance of inequality? If so, is it because of experience or because of race? If the former, then is it really an instance of inequality? If it's the latter then is it fair that someone with years of more experience be paid the same as someone with very little experience? If it's not fair, then how can it be a case of inequality? If it's not a case of inequality then why would some people consider the pay difference a racial thing? If everything in the universe has to balance itself then how can there be equality for all? If there is wealth, there must also be poverty. If there is strength, there must also be weakness. If there is success there must also be failure. The only real thing we have that is equal is arguably 'opportunity', but is it a case of inequality if some people choose not to take advantage of that opportunity? Sorry for rambling. I'm tired and am at a skating rink with my youngest son and one of his friends...

No no. It's not "everyone should be offered the same opportunities". It's: no one group should have a lock on them based on race or gender etc, etc.

 

[Just_Me_D]

No no. It's not "everyone should be offered the same opportunities". It's: no one group should have a lock on them based on race or gender etc, etc.

Having a lock on something can be a matter of interpretation. Years back, some people claimed that the MLB was not 'diverse' enough because blacks were 'underrepresented'. In other words, they believed whites had a lock on the league. Well, someone opted to go talk to blacks and get their take on the game of baseball and discovered that blacks overwhelmingly found baseball to be 'boring' and had no interest in playing it. In this instance, the facts of why blacks were few in Major League Baseball were clearly at odds with some people's deceptive inequality claim.

 

[Scatabrain]

Having a lock on something can be a matter of interpretation. Years back, some people claimed that the MLB was not 'diverse' enough because blacks were 'underrepresented'. In other words, they believed whites had a lock on the league. Well, someone opted to go talk to blacks and get their take on the game of baseball and discovered that blacks overwhelmingly found baseball to be 'boring' and had no interest in playing it. In this instance, the facts of why blacks were few in Major League Baseball were clearly at odds with some people's deceptive inequality claim.

So you pick one point in time? How about the decades it took to get black players really accepted?

Times change. And perhaps hanging the conf flag on gov grounds has run its course.

Sean, the flags evoke nothing for me. My only reaction is that like our money it mentions God. Why should it? Gov should not endorse or restrict any faith IMO. Make a museum for the flag and tell what it was, is and isn't.

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

Times change. And perhaps hanging the conf flag on gov grounds has run its course.

Like you, I'm not really offended by the flag. It invokes nothing emotional in me. Now with that said, let's say they're all taken down from whatever government buildings they're raised at. IncludIng the flags that have remninces of the confederate flag that Sean pointed out. I ask this not in a condescedning manner but very genuinely: what problem does that solve? Or what problem does it begin to solve?

 

[Scatabrain]

Like you, I'm not really offended by the flag. It invokes nothing emotional in me. Now with that said, let's say they're all taken down from whatever government buildings they're raised at. IncludIng the flags that have reminisces of the confederate flag that Sean pointed out. I ask this not in a condescedning manner but very genuinely: what problem does that solve? Or what problem does it begin to solve?

Some have expressed that it is a symbol of times past (decades ago) when it was a symbol of opposition to the civil rights movement. Removing it is symbolic that things have changed. It took a tragedy to make the discussion feel more pressing then it had been.

 

[Just_Me_D]

So you pick one point in time? How about the decades it took to get black players really accepted?

Why is it okay to bring up the historical racial injustices to make a point but not okay to show that not all of those hardships were racially based? That's the point of my previous post. Blacks have made huge leaps in every aspect of American society. They are billionaires, millionaires, doctors, lawyers, judges, entertainers, athletes, corporate CEOs, business owners, have married interracially and have interracial kids, yet, those 'current' facts always seem to take a back seat to those who want to hold on to the time before 1970. The very people who spend so much time focusing on 'color' or 'race' are the very people who 'claim' they wish we lived in a world where it didn't matter. Yet, they refuse to acknowledge the evidence all around showing that many of us are going about our business not concerning ourselves with color or race.

Times change. And perhaps hanging the conf flag on gov grounds has run its course.

Time has indeed changed, but there are those who refuse to part ways with the past and is causing the rest of us to suffer the consequences of it.

Gov should not endorse or restrict any faith IMO.

Then why the problem with GOD being mentioned on money? How many people actually spend each and every day looking at the wording on their money other than the amount? How many non-Christians look at a dollar bill and feel as if their own religion or affinity for State rule is being restricted?

Make a museum for the flag and tell what it was, is and isn't.

How about teaching the history of that flag and explain how it's been used and portrayed over the years, and then explain how any symbol can be portrayed negatively under certain circumstances. and that we should focus on the people who misuse the symbol and not so much on the symbol itself.

 

[dchandler]

Does the flag offend me NO, but it has brought the other side of people out that I had no idea was that way. I live for today and not yesterday. I give respect even when not giving. Just live your life.