Should displaying Confederate symbols be illegal in the United States?

Luke Wolf said:

I really don't consider slavery an issue of the Civil War at all. "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by thier creator with certain unalienable rights..." Thomas Jefferson drafted these words, saying all men are equal, all men except for his black slaves. Many of the people that signed the Declaration agreed, all men are equal, except for thier black slaves. This nation was originally a slave holding nation. The North just decided it didn't want it anymore, and the South continued what America had been doing for the past 100 years. White men are equal, Indians, blacks, and any other race isn't.

Click to expand...

and the fact that this issue lay to fester for the better part of a century makes no never mind to you? This of course has nothing to do w/ the American Civil War?

The North didn't just wake up one day and decide that it didn't want...it was no longer economically viable for the north to have slavery directly...their economy was changing while the south remained agrarian and dependent on slavery as a key part of their production...that is not to say that the north didn't benefit indirectly from slavery through the raw materials produced in the south....

Maize said:

Following Germany's ban on Nazi symbols, should displaying Confederate symbols be illegal in the United States?

Click to expand...

I think that in order to ban any symbol, we would really have to know what it represents. We all know what the swastika represents, the Nazis made it easy for the world to detest them. It is doubtful that anyone with any good intentions would wear one of their symbols.

I have always detested the image of the Confederates. They represent (to me) a narrow-minded, racist, oppressive way of thinking. I would hesitate to put a ban on their symbols only because I do not completely understand them. If I were the only one one on the planet, you would never see another Confederate flag. They lost, freedom won. Get over it.

I must admit I err on the safe side (I have 'grown' into that mindset) - I always think more of what someone's reaction might be rather than how I see it myself. It works too, I don't seem to upset people anymore.

Click to expand...

I used to go on this as well, however, through councelling, I found that such an attitude was a key part of my depression. It meant that I was taking too much responsibility for my and others actions and not putting enough onto other people.

From these sessions I learnt that such an attitude, at least to the extent I was taking it, was harmful to both myself and others. It was harmful to myself because I was obviously unable to control others reactions and so felt guilty when I unintentionally hurt them, creating stress and depression on my part. As far as others were concerned, it meant that they were able to continue going about being offended by things that weren't intended to cause offence. The cause for offence was in their head and reaction, the object of which was essentially irrelevant and by taking this responsibility from them, I was inadvertantly aiding such a delusion.

Fluffy said:

I used to go on this as well, however, through councelling, I found that such an attitude was a key part of my depression. It meant that I was taking too much responsibility for my and others actions and not putting enough onto other people.

From these sessions I learnt that such an attitude, at least to the extent I was taking it, was harmful to both myself and others. It was harmful to myself because I was obviously unable to control others reactions and so felt guilty when I unintentionally hurt them, creating stress and depression on my part. As far as others were concerned, it meant that they were able to continue going about being offended by things that weren't intended to cause offence. The cause for offence was in their head and reaction, the object of which was essentially irrelevant and by taking this responsibility from them, I was inadvertantly aiding such a delusion.

Click to expand...

Hehe - that sounds good in theory..........

Some people find it offensive and threatening that homosexuals want the right to marry...do you care that what you want upsets them? Not having a go, just asking.

Click to expand...

Because homosexuals used to enslave heterosexuals and steal them from their homes and rip their families apart and beat and degrade and torture and rape and murder them on a mass scale, right? Right?



People who cling to ignorant ideas are ignorant themselves. Groups like the KKK started and live on because of ignorant people who really have nothing in life but their lack of education and lack of real purpose in their lives. To suddenly ban their harmless (and only the harmless) antics would make them rather cross and more destructive. Flying a flag of hate is distasteful, but no one has ever been killed by merely seeing a flag or other symbol.

Anyway, the First Amendment is about the right to free speech and all that jazz, it never says others need to take what you say seriously.

ch'ang said:

...Just last year I was learning about the Civil War and over and over the book said that the south was fighting for slavery and the North was fighting for freedom, it constantly demonized the south and idolized the North...

Click to expand...

would you prefer the text books before that which describes slavery in about 2 sentences...which basically can be summed up as, "The slaves didn't suffer much and in fact quite enjoyed their lives. Life in Africa had made them physically able to deal with the hard work they performed as slaves in the new world."

what's interesting is that after the american civil war and reconstruction it seems that the issues of civil rights that blacks had to deal with in this country disappear in most school text books until the 1950's and 60's with the civil rights movement.

again i'm not saying the north was fighting for high ideals, far from it, but i think talking about the institution of slavery which was a main issue of the war itself should be discussed instead of simply glossed over.

Majikthise said:

No banning the Confederate flag.

Anyway, the North had slaves too, they just called them immigrants.

Click to expand...

the status of immigrants and the institution of Black Chattel Slavery really can not be compared IMPO

I have to say I do not think it should be banned. Most of the time the people I see flying them are doing it simply because they are from the South and have pride in where they are from, and don't really know or care about history.

I don't really have a lot of pride in where I'm from, as it is a blue state where everyone is MEAN and the value of life is about 340 dollars, but I can understand why some people feel the need to have pride in thier cultural heritage. It is true that most families in the South were too poor to own slaves anyway, and many worked by the sweat of thier own brows. There is nothing inherantly bad in the South, there is good and evil everywhere. Show me one state who hasn't at one point honored a bad man, and I'll show one state that doesn't honor a lot of people!

That being said, yes I understand that some people are proud of the history of slavery and think that they can somehow show that pride by dragging down the reputation of the Southern flag. I hope those people convert and/or get what's coming to them!!!

We all know what the swastika represents, the Nazis made it easy for the world to detest them. It is doubtful that anyone with any good intentions would wear one of their symbols.

Click to expand...

If we had read the rest of the thread maybe we would be a little more informed as to the true meaning of the swastika. Far from being a symbol of hate, the swastika was originally used by Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, and many Native American tribes as a symbol of good luck. At different times, it has been used by the Celts, Hittites, Greeks, China, Korea, Japan, and regions of North America.

Hitler, mistakingly believing that the German people were descendants of the ancient inhabitants of India, adopted the swastika, forever associating it with his own evil ideals.

I think all that this proves is, as someone said earlier on this thread, that symbols are only what we make of them.

The swastika is not evil, nor is the Confederate flag. Nor is any other symbol, sign, or flag that we could devise.

huajiro said:

I have always detested the image of the Confederates. They represent (to me) a narrow-minded, racist, oppressive way of thinking. I would hesitate to put a ban on their symbols only because I do not completely understand them. If I were the only one one on the planet, you would never see another Confederate flag. They lost, freedom won. Get over it.

Click to expand...

That is a matter of subjective opinion. It is obvious to me that the North's victory was the end of true freedom in the States. A single, powerful federal government took hold through force, and stripped the states, and the individuals who lived there, of their liberty and self-government.

There are 296,791,048 (US POPClock Projection ) people in the United states and 100 senators. That's 1 senatorial representative for every 2,967,910 people. There are 435 representatives in the house. That's 682,278 people for every ONE representative.

The individual is nothing to our federal government. The community is nothing. It has relatively no political power. What power the states have, is entirely dependant upon the goodwill of the Federal Government at any given time.

Self-Representation? Ha! Not really. Freedom? Real Freedom? Not a chance. We had just about as much self-government when we were under the authority of a King. Except now, the King and his "congressmen" have much more power; and the accumulation of that power into a single government has drawn all kinds of less than savory suiters to purchase that power. Were the States allow a majority of political power, each individual's say would increase and the states which governed best, would fair the best. The states that governed worst would fair the worst. We would have political competition and would be able to see what ideas work best and what ideals fail.

No. Freedom didn't win. Government won. Liberty wasn't served. Power in the hands of the few...only the few were served.

My ex girlfriends son wears confederate symbols all over him and it makes me sick. But he has the right to wear those symbols of hatred (which is exactly why he wears them) just like anyone else.

Click to expand...

The confederate flag isn't a symbol of hatred. I display it and I don't hate any particular group of people.

IMO, the real cause of the Civil War was a federal government who couldn't stand the tought of 13 states breaking off and starting new nation. There going to be getting much less money, less raw material, and less political power. The greedy Northern states didn't want the Southern states to be on thier own.

You must spread some Karma around before giving it to Luke Wolf again. :banghead3

Well, it may not be a symbol of hatred for you, but I would say that generally it is. It stands for slavery, war and hatred in the minds of both those who fly it and those who are disgusted by it. But obviously it is your right to display it, and it is a right that must be protected if we are to be a society with basic liberties and the freedom of speech.

Faminedynasty said:

Well, it may not be a symbol of hatred for you, but I would say that generally it is. It stands for slavery, war and hatred in the minds of both those who fly it and those who are disgusted by it. But obviously it is your right to display it, and it is a right that must be protected if we are to be a society with basic liberties and the freedom of speech.

Click to expand...

That isn't what the Confederate Flag stands for in the South and I don't care what people outside of the south think about the flag, as long as they don't get in my way of flying it. It is the flag of the Confederacy, a cause for which many honorable men died. To tell southerners that we can not honor those who fought for our freedom is just bigoted nonsense.

It has only recently become, "Politically correct", to disdain the Confederate battle flag. This flag has flown over state houses and in various other places for many years. Why only recently do we hear about all the, "Insensitivity"?

"Let's talk about "insensitivity," shall we?

If you don't mind, some of us with southern roots are going to find every Vietnamese American citizen in this country, bus them to Washington, D.C. and protest to have the Vietnam Memorial removed from the park. Why stop there? On the way to Washington, we might as well grab every citizen with German or Japanese ancestors. With enough noise, we can get rid of that World War II Memorial, too. After all, these people all had relative who were killed by the men and women America honors at those Memorials. You liberal, nothing-else-better-to-do black folks wouldn't mind, would you?

Yes. Let that sink in real good. That's what you're doing to these good people of the South. You are DESECRATING THEIR MEMORIAL. Check that - OUR Memorial.

What ever happened to Diversity? Tolerance? Must be a one sided thing. Don't give me that "Symbol of Slavery" bull****. If that were the case, turn in all those 1, 20, 50, and 100 dollar bills. The faces on these bills are of men who were leaders when many blacks were slaves. But let's get down and dirty, shall we?

The worst riot in American history was not in Los Angeles. It was in New York, back in 1863. You see, there were a bunch of people who, like during Vietnam, didn't want be conscripted (read: drafted) to serve in an unjust war. Talk to your President about that. Over 1200 people died in just two days. Most when President Lincoln sent federal troops in to put down the "rebellion". Oh, by the way, 83 blacks were lynched in those two days - right there in The Big Apple. So, which flag do you really want taken down? " Source

"If the South was fighting for slavery, why did five slave states side with the North? And why did Lee free his slaves a decade before the Civil War, while Ulysses Grant remained a "master" until his slaves were liberated by the 13th Amendment?

If things associated with the Confederacy are symbols of defiance to civil rights, then why are federal military installations -- Ft. Bragg and Ft. Hood -- named for Confederate generals?

For almost 30 years, Old Glory flew on the masts of slave ships. In 1857, it waved over the United States Supreme Court, when the Court ruled that a slave was property and not a person.

It's only a matter of time before the perpetual grudge-bearers graduate from bashing the Confederate flag to savaging the Stars and Stripes.


Lincoln, who sent 620,000 Americans to their deaths to defeat secession, nevertheless respected the men his armies eventually overcame. When the news of Appomattox reached Washington, a crowd gathered outside the White House in celebration. The Great Emancipator paid homage to his vanquished foes by asking the band to play "Dixie."

If Lincoln were alive today, he would say let the South honor its heroes. Race relations aren't advanced by denigrating a symbol good Americans died for, even in a misguided crusade." Source

"Significantly, after the American Civil War, no person involved with the Confederate States of America was charged with treason, and only one major Confederate official, the commandant of the Andersonville prison, who was charged with war crimes, was charged with anything at all." Source

Natas said:

What ever happened to Diversity? Tolerance? Must be a one sided thing. Don't give me that "Symbol of Slavery"...

Click to expand...

yes whatever happened to it...i'm sure the leaders of the CSA would be for Diversity...

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other —though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution—African slavery as it exists amongst us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact...

The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically...They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew...

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth...

I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail...They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal...

Click to expand...

from a speech given by Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens
March 21, 1861

Maize said:

Following Germany's ban on Nazi symbols, should displaying Confederate symbols be illegal in the United States?

Click to expand...

I am assuming here that you are refering to the flag of the Southern States that was used during the Civil war ? Not all Confederations support slavery .

Or do you prepose to ban any display of the Canadian flag also ?

jewscout said:

yes whatever happened to it...i'm sure the leaders of the CSA would be for Diversity...

from a speech given by Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens
March 21, 1861

Click to expand...

Diversity was looked upon a little different in those days.

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, 16th. President of the United States, edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume V, "Letter to Horace Greeley" (August 22, 1862), p. 388.

"I am with the South in life or in death, in victory or defeat. I never owned a negro and care nothing for them, but these people have been my friends and have stood up to me on all occasions. In addition to this, I believe the North is about to wage a brutal and unholy war on a people who have done them no wrong, in violation of the Constitution and the fundamental principles of the government...We propose no invasion of the North, no attack on them, and only ask to be let alone." - Patrick R. Cleburne May 1861

"If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission, and offer my sword to the other side." --Ulysses S. Grant

"The Southern Confederacy will not employ our ships or buy our goods. What is our shipping without it? Literally nothing....It is very clear that the South gains by this process, and we lose. No---we MUST NOT "let the South go." "----Union Democrat , Manchester, NH, February 19, 1861

Pah said:

Most people know me as a champion of free speech. That being said, I have no trouble recognizing the Confederate flag as a symbol of a pus-filled cancer that nearly killed America.

The great heritage of the south blindly overlooks that all that was "good" in southern society was based on the sweat of men considered animals and property. All the politics of the old south rested on preserving that slave institution. All commerce in the old south originated in the labor of slaves. The "genteel" society with it's cotton wealth and grandious manner came from the inhuman conception of slavery. What exactly has the south to be proud of from it's history? Anything based on evil is evil. I truely bemoan the fact that my life has led me to live in the south where the honor and glory of evil is still practised.

The hospital I use is adjacent to the Confederate Museum and I shudder every time I have an appointment there and have to pass that building and it's proud sign.

Click to expand...

For about one hundred years Americans flew a flag, the same one we fly today, and slavery was both legal and encouraged. Should we then say that those who fly the American flag and harken back to the good old days of our founding fathers, are therefore racist creatins with no sense of morality? Should we jump to the conclusion that because one lived in the time of Washington, under that same flag, then they are therefore in posession of the same racist mind set?

What makes any symbol, a symbol of hatred is not the inanimate object, but the one who uses it to projest his or her hatred. A cross can be a symbol of hatred to one who would wish to use there religion to damn all homosexuals to hell. A rebel flag can be used by a grandmother to teach her grandchildren the history of their town, the great things that were once found in the south, and the terrible mistakes that were made and learned from. Keep a little bit more of an open mind folks. An object has no hatred. The one holding that object may.