Why would anyone want to fly a confederate flag?

Yea...except that the "doing that service" was engaging in a treasonous civil war that killed hundreds of thousands and in any other country would have gotten them all hung

 

The flag I fly represents the Regiment. That's the way I see it. It's the Regimental Flag of the 6th Florida Infantry Regiment. It does not represent the entire state of Florida or the entire CSA. My g,g,g grandfather was not a slaveowner.

 

They didn't see it that way and they swore allegiance upon the surrender in 1865 and they were not charged with a crime. Even had they been,there is a presumption of innocence is there not?

 

The 40th Alabama Infantry Regiment,in which my paternal g,g grandfather on my mother's side served honorably:

 

Emphasis added by me.

On that note, someone finally nailed the reason. WoG states it eloquently.

The relationship that slavery had in the cause of the civil war was as an indirect cause. The South was concerned about the north's several attempts to diminish their influence in Congress (and thus, the country), and one of many of those methods was via removing the institution of slavery (one that existed in the north as well, but did not play nearly as an important role in the north as the agriculturalist based south). They were afraid that the north was attempting to usurp control of their main economic engine.

This is why those who say the the Civil War was about the sovereignty of the individual state is accurate, instead of the the whitewashed "It was about slavery" clan. Anyone who actually read the entire Article of Secession for the states instead of reading it simply to cherry pick keywords like "slavery" would recognize it. That is why I began cutting and pasting them into the thread.

My best friend is a historian and a teacher, with multiple Masters degrees. He specializes in American history through the civil war. I never realized this until we were discussing it, and I took the typical misinformed view such as displayed in the OP. I was wrong.

 

Very disheartening to discover distant relatives fought for the Confederacy. What is there to be proud of?
The South seceded, primarily, for the preservation of slavery and the plantation economy

Slavery as an institution is vile.

America is still reeling from the consequences of immigrating millions of Africans against their will.

 

As noted...they're lucky that their treason was committed in this country.

Most other countries would have hung the lot of them

 

It's not disheartening to me. Not at all. It's history and I am not ashamed of it at all.

 

Wow ...... a dog-whistle chart. I'm impressed!!

 

I know.

 

No one has disagreed that slavery was a large factor in secession. But I can go and make up some unsourced or partisan pie charts right now saying anything I want. The "percentage of words" type of analysis is fallacious on its face. Every "word" about slavery was a word about states' rights as well because slavery was the chosen -symbol- of the usurpation of states' rights by the central sovereign in many different ways totally unrelated to slavery.

Once again, and will likely be ignored again. Men don't volunteer to fight and die over abstract issues that don't affect and threaten their lives. There was no draft on either side during the early war, all volunteers on both sides. One or a few men wrote secession articles. That or those men were most assuredly slaveowners, and the appeal was to get support for secession from THE RICH, which is another reason slavery was featured prominently in such documents. Men don't fight with documents, and in a real sense they won't fight -for- documents. The common soldier, with 0 skin in the slave game, fought against a hostile invader, and some of the more literate fought for the general notion of states' rights. The rank and file were not fighting "for slavery" wouldn't fight "for slavery."

Now let's talk slavery in a concrete sense up and into this century. Both the North and the South enslaved men via conscription, the nastiest form of slavery there is in history, because you are pushed with a bayonet in your back into mortal combat. Slavery drafts were conducted all throughout the 20th century under the US flag... and flags of other nations all over the world. Why would anyone fly ANY of those flags, no matter what the virtues of the underlying combat?

 

It was about Slavery. Not really a big deal... they lost.

 

Haha. No. I've been in and out of the hospital for many years because I had Ulcerative Colitis. I now have a Colostomy bag. It wasn't an emergency procedure and at most I waited 3 months. My hospital bill over the years had I been America. would be in the hundred thousands so you're not going to tell me that my healthcare system is bad. Btw the ops that take years are usually knee and hip replacements and that's because people are fat. It's their own doing.

 

If by 'it' you mean the war, you're wrong. It was about collecting revenue.

From Lincoln's 1st Inaugural Address:

"there needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere."

 

From what.

Okay?

 

From reading many postings on the various subjects
There is a clear pattern of denialism, diminishment
So lets review that pattern

Slavery wasn't really so bad

It was stupid for slave owners to beat or abuse their slaves,
so slave abuse was rare,
And potentially an understandable response of lack of working
Or maybe "Beating a slave may well mean he can't do the job."
and therefore not relevant to any current discussions
And no one should even mention abuse of slaves
And to even bring it up is VERY WRONG... Smutty

Freeing the slaves was pointless exercise
Which was even bad for slaves since field work was all they could do
and owners cared more for workers as property than as hired workers

Selling slave wifes and children was simply a legitimate means of dealing with economic stress
And therefore no indication of abuse of slaves

The civil war was not about slavery because most of the confederate soldiers did not own slaves

Slavery is irrelevant to anyone living today
because no one living today was actually enslaved

Lincoln and the north were also racist,
so southern slavery is irrelevant... Slavery is Just a different form of racism of the north and Lincoln

The civil war was about states rights.... Those important states rights OTHER THAN SLAVERY... Those other states rights other than slavery listed in the documents of secession

The civil war was really about taxes, not slavery
So slavery is irrelevant

People who fly the confederate flag today have their own reasons
these reasons are unrelated to Racism and slavery....
And therefore those flying the confederate flag can reasonably expect others to ignore the historical associations if that flag

Slavery has a long history and still exists today in many countries
So Slavery is a natural state of affairs....
And therefore Slavery was not objectionable

Slaves were originally captured and sold by africans themselves
So, really,
blacks have only themselves to blame
And no basis to blame others

Slavery is not so bad in comparison with conscription.... Which is commonly accepted.... So since we already accept something much worse, slavery is not really so bad and it is hypocritical to even bring up the subject

--------

I can understand if someone wants to honor their forefathers
Or perhaps feels the civil war was a struggle about states rights
And the over reach of the federal government

But, imo the denialism surrounding slavery is similar in kind
To those who propose that hitler has been unduly vilified when he was only trying to restore german pride and culture

 

I'd fly it simply because I know it will upset people.

It's an inanimate object.

 

Which may be why they are irrelevant.



​

 

Pretty sure from the Morrill Tariff Act of 1861.

They use to teach that before the left (cultral-marxist) started teaching revisionist history to divide America and to further their radical leftist political agenda. .

Lincoln invaded the South because without the South, the federal government couldn't pay it's bills.

 

Yeah. I tend to agree with you, as an American. I've spoken with a few people from Canada over a couple of decades... and while they admit things aren't perfect, they seemed to almost shudder at the system we have here in the United States. I understand firsthand why: I've had decent medical insurance all of my life. Although I've been VERY healthy as could be, paying that 'insurance' has been nothing less than 'costly'. I can't 'prove' it's a SCAM (the insurance), but I'm sure enough that it is.

Canada and other nations with highly socialized medicine, are doing better for their people than we are doing here. In the United States, it is about the business model and PROFITS, and not nearly as much about human beings.

 

And you're wrong about that. I've read credentialed historical 'scholars' that disagree with you on that.

I know myself, that the most preeminent figures associated with the South/CSA, made it CLEAR they 'about' the racist practice of chattel slavery. (They were horrible men... even if they didn't realize it; and I doubt that very much.)

 

Didn't Sweden just refuse citizenship to 2 girls because they didn't want to swim with the boys, and you want to talk about someone not knowing what they're doing?

 

It's because half the country has this idea that it's your own personal responsibility pay for your healthcare. In fact someone on this forum insulted me because I let the tax payers pay for my medical bills. Like what am I supposed to (*)(*)(*)(*)ing do just let myself die out of some sense of independence? I'm sure he'd rather I die it'd be one less liberal in the world.

 

So was Abe Lincoln.....those were different times of which I am glad we evolved.

 

I can see how a person could get SwitZerland mixed up with Sweden. They both start with S.