Posted on 07/13/2015 11:33:52 AM PDT by Republican1795.
There is definitive proof that the besieged Confederate Battle Flag is not and cannot in fact be a so called racist flag. A lot of people do not realize that there is definitive proof because they simply have not looked into the history as closely as they should. I discovered this important tidbit myself about fifteen years ago when I first looked into the topic of the so called Civil War / War Between the States / The War of Northern Aggression. Most people do not realize that different states seceded for different reasons and that they all did not secede all at once. I will get straight to the point. The states of North Carolina / Virginia / Tennessee and Arkansas were the last states to secede and they only did so because the North had invaded the CSA (the other southern states that seceded prior ) thus were prompted / forced to join their Southern brethren in response to Northern aggression. This is a relevant point because the flag that is often referred to as the Confederate Battle Flag [ the thirteen star emblazoned blue saltire on the red background ] was first used by the Army of Northern Virginia [ in square form ] and then later by the Army of Tennessee - in rectangular form just like the CSA Naval Flag. Therefore since the Confederate Battle Flag was from the battles flags of two of the states that seceded solely due to the Northern invasion and not for any slave related political considerations [ in fact slavery played a very minor role in the whole debate throughout the CSA ], there can be no legitimate stigmatization of the Confederate Battle Flag somehow being a racist flag.
A better case can be made for the various CSA National flags [ of which there were 3 ] since those were the official flags of the CSA State, yet few ever appear to complain about those flags. Furthermore there were many free Black Southrons that fought for the CSA. Thus the CSA armies were not all White and the vast majority of the White Southrons did not even own slaves nor cared to maintain that institution. Also it is important to remember that a flag [ as a piece of cloth ] cannot be racist nor hold any ideologies seeing as it is an inanimate object that can be defined in any way by anyone with its meaning being determined by its owner. Testament to this is the fact that it is used all around the world as a flag of resistance and rebellion.
The slave owners wanted to remain in the Union as they had a much better deal to remain within it but later many decided to join the Confederate cause as they wanted to protect their interests should the Confederates have won the war. The Confederate Battle Flag is a flag that came to represent the entire Southron people in the same way that the old Saint Jean Baptiste Société Flag of Quebec [ with its strong religious connotations and symbolism ] later came to represent the people of Quebec [ who are now quite anti religious ] after Premier Maurice Duplessis adopted it as the flag of Quebec during the late 1940s. Therefore flags can change their meaning over time. The Fleur de Lis Flag no longer represents simply a religious context but now represents the entire Francophone [ also everyone in Quebec as a whole ] population of the Canadian province of Quebec. Just as the Confederate Battle Flag once represented some of the Confederate soldiers... but now has since the early 20th cent come to represent the entire Southern population.
Quote: [ All his friends call him Mike. ]
Nice try but you are certainly not one of his "friends" thus you do not have the right to call him by the diminutive version. I doubt you would like an enemy propagandist to refer to you in the third person by the diminutive version of your first name. You are obviously betraying your contempt and disrespect for a person who exposes your lies as he looked into the matter and went to primary sources.
Nice try but slavery was dying out at any rate so even if the Confederate Constitution was as iron clad as you laughably assert... it would be IRRELEVANT to the on ground reality... rather like the Third Amendment. [ Though many have also noted that spyware is a form of Third Amendment violation ] The CSA leaders were in the process of abolishing slavery for the recognition of France and others therefore no amount of Confederate Constitution semantics changes that fact.
Quote: [ But all presidents are expected to abide by their constitution, as their oaths require them to do. Confederate supporters are always complaining about what they see are Lincoln's constitutional transgressions; are you saying that those were OK because that's what presidents do? ]
Well your hero Lincoln suspended the Constitution and threw dissenters into prison so you do not have a leg to stand on. The CSA leaders almost certainly would have followed the Constitutional process and AMEND the Constitution but if they actually chose to arbitrarily abolish slavery it could hardly be compared to the draconian usurpations of the Constitution that Lincoln engaged in. Nice try - no one would have removed Davis from office for abolishing slavery which is an odd point for a Northern propagandist like yourself to make in light of the fact that you promote the discredited and erroneous notion that the war was fought over the dying institution. Nice try but Dixie did not "start the war" as they did not invade the North and the Fort Sumter incident was a marginal event that did not even lead to war. Your Northern heroes started the war when they invaded the sovereign CSA. Quote: [ Even the attack on Fort Sumter did not have to lead to war. The Confederacy made no hostile moves against any Northern state. But, two months after the Fort Sumter incident, a large Union force marched into Virginia, which led to the first major battle of the war, the Battle of Bull Run (or Manassas). ] Michael T Griffth.
The truth vindicates Dixie and expose the Northern propaganda as slanderous lies as they could not afford to allow the CSA to remain sovereign.
And all your misinformed claims are only making you look worse and worse. The 13th Amendment, AKA the Corwin Amendment, wasn't introduced in Congress until after the original seven Southern states had seceded and it wasn't introduced by Lincoln.
...but rather over the high tariffs that the North had imposed.
Incorrect.
You can dance all day around the Morrill Tariff but the fact of the matter is that the intent of the North was all too clear towards Dixie and only a damned fool would not be able to discern the intent of the North.
You're the one doing the dancing since you're the one who claimed the South was being bankrupted by the Morill Tariff and have been backtracking ever since.
Alleged protections on slave ownership within the Confederate Constitution...
If you would bother to read the Confederate Constitution you would see that they were actual protections.
...[ which in fact had outlawed the importation of slaves! ] ...
Which, in fact, specifically protected slave imports from the U.S.
...does not preclude the fact that a non-slave owning state could have joined as this is just common sense.
Common sense and your posts don't often collide. How could a non-slave owning state enter the Confederacy when their constitution guaranteed that slavery would be allowed in the territories and that slave owners could travel and remain in any state in the Confederacy with their slaves and nothing could be done to prevent that?
The entire Union should have joined the CSA just to avert and moot Lincoln's genocidal war.
Well that suggestion makes no sense at all.
Nice try but you are certainly not one of his "friends" thus you do not have the right to call him by the diminutive version.
Just ask him. We're very close.
You are obviously betraying your contempt and disrespect for a person who exposes your lies as he looked into the matter and went to primary sources.
Having read his stuff I confess that I'm not impressed with his scholarship.
Though many have also noted that spyware is a form of Third Amendment violation
LOL. You are the first person I've ever heard allege that.
The CSA leaders were in the process of abolishing slavery for the recognition of France and others therefore no amount of Confederate Constitution semantics changes that fact.
Your contempt for constitutions and the rule of law is pretty apparent. What clause of the Confederate Constitution gave them the power to do that?
Well your hero Lincoln suspended the Constitution and threw dissenters into prison so you do not have a leg to stand on.
Considering how inaccurate that claim is then neither do you.
The CSA leaders almost certainly would have followed the Constitutional process and AMEND the Constitution but if they actually chose to arbitrarily abolish slavery it could hardly be compared to the draconian usurpations of the Constitution that Lincoln engaged in.
So you're condemning Lincoln for what you see as his violations of the Constitution, but are suggesting that it would have been perfectly OK if the Southern leaders violated their constitution even more than they did? Scratch a Confederate supporter and you'll almost always find a hypocrite.
Nice try - no one would have removed Davis from office for abolishing slavery...
Which they couldn't since their constitution required the Chief Justice of their supreme court to judge any impeachments and the supreme court was never established.
...which is an odd point for a Northern propagandist like yourself to make in light of the fact that you promote the discredited and erroneous notion that the war was fought over the dying institution.
Only on the Southern side. For the North the war was fought to save the Union.
Nice try but Dixie did not "start the war" as they did not invade the North...
Japan didn't invade the U.S. but they sure started a war.
...and the Fort Sumter incident was a marginal event that did not even lead to war.
Actually it did, so how "marginal" it was depends on which side you are on.
Even the attack on Fort Sumter did not have to lead to war. The Confederacy made no hostile moves against any Northern state. But, two months after the Fort Sumter incident, a large Union force marched into Virginia, which led to the first major battle of the war, the Battle of Bull Run (or Manassas).
Another one of Mike's many idiotic claims.
The truth vindicates Dixie and expose the Northern propaganda as slanderous lies as they could not afford to allow the CSA to remain sovereign.
I've noticed that you, on rare occasions, manage to stumble over the truth. But in every case you just pick yourself up and move on.
The North was imposing high tariffs that were the MAJOR cause for Dixie wanting to become independent of the totalitarian North. If you think the Morrill Tariff was so fair - then why do you not voluntarily pay more taxes to the government yourself? After all you would not want to be called a racist mow do you?
Go look up the high tariffs that the North had imposed onto Dixie for DECADES then come back and try to assert that I am somehow "incorrect". You are simply incorrigible. The most pressing concern facing Dixie was the high tariffs as the slavery issue was only important to a very small elite who were not an accurate reflection of the average inhabitant of the Dixie region.
Quote: [ Common sense and your posts don't often collide. How could a non-slave owning state enter the Confederacy when their constitution guaranteed that slavery would be allowed in the territories and that slave owners could travel and remain in any state in the Confederacy with their slaves and nothing could be done to prevent that? ]
A little thing called decentralization. But then I would not expect an Obamanoid Lincoln worshiper like you to recognize or ascribe to this sound political notion. During the era in question each state had Tenth Amendment [ or equivalent ] protection thus would have been free to pursue their OWN policies with regards to slavery or any other issue for that matter. IE: those states that joined the CSA and wanted to outlaw slavery would certainly have been allowed to do so under the law and the Constitution.
Quote: [ Well that suggestion makes no sense at all. ]
Wrong. It makes perfect sense Lincoln Cult Worshiper. If every state in the so called Union had joined the CSA then Lincoln could not have staged his little genocidal war.
Quote: [ Just ask him. We're very close. ]
Absolute bulls***t! Now I KNOW you are an Obamanoid little troll because there is no way in hell that you would even know about let alone be "friends" with an obscure individual such as Griffith. There is no was in hell you could possibly be "very close" to someone who you have such contempt for and distort and disparage at every turn. I find quite it telling that you erroneously and laughable assert to be "very close" to Griffith yet distort his findings and did not learn a thing from the insight he brought forth.
Quote: [ Having read his stuff I confess that I'm not impressed with his scholarship. ]
Ha ha ha ha ha ha! What a friggin joke! His scholarship surpasses the fetid distortions you pathetically attempt to pass of as fact.
Quote: [ LOL. You are the first person I've ever heard allege that. ]
Glad to see you exposing your ignorance further. You really do not read very much do you. Quote: [ While a recent lawsuit by a Nevada family – covered by Mother Jones, Fox News and Courthouse News– alleges bodily violation of the Third Amendment, such literal violation is rare today. However, the NSA is stationing “digital troops” within our homes, taking over our computers and phones, and interfering with the quiet use and enjoyment of our houses. As such, the NSA is arguably violating our Third Amendment rights. ]
From: Have Americans Lost ALL of Our Constitutional Rights?
Quote: [ Your contempt for constitutions and the rule of law is pretty apparent. What clause of the Confederate Constitution gave them the power to do that? ]
The clause that allows states to pursue their own laws.
Quote: [ So you're condemning Lincoln for what you see as his violations of the Constitution, but are suggesting that it would have been perfectly OK if the Southern leaders violated their constitution even more than they did? Scratch a Confederate supporter and you'll almost always find a hypocrite. ]
No sane person could ever equate the brutal repression and warmongering of Lincoln with the noble act of Davis to abolish slavery! Abolishing slavery would certainly not have violated the Constitution "more" that what Lincoln did. It would be quite difficult to surpass his Constitutional violations. I never claimed to be a Confederate supporter. Furthermore: your hypocrisy in denying Dixie what you claim for yourself is apparent. When the thirteen Colonies seceded [ that's right! ] from Britain: they owned slaves - yet few begrudge them their inherent right to self determination.
Quote: [ Only on the Southern side. For the North the war was fought to save the Union. ]
How in God's name could both sides be allegedly fighting for DIFFERENT reasons? They were fighting over whether the Union should remain intact as it was before Dixie secession. The war had NOTHING to do with the politics that led to secession!!!!! The war was fought over the fact that the CSA was independent and the North wanted to FORCE it back into the Union [ the old "get in the car - bitch!" approach to the situation. IE: Not a legitimate approach. ] The main point that even led to Dixie secession was the high tariffs at any rate. Furthermore the vast majority of fighting Southrons were fighting to maintain the independence of Dixie from a rapacious North and could not give a damn about a dying institution that they never even supported.
Quote: [ Japan didn't invade the U.S. but they sure started a war. ]
Nice try but the Fort Sumter incident did not start the war since it started MONTHS later [ Fort who? ] when the North decided to invade Dixie. Prey tell Mr. Obamanoid: where was the battle of Dixie invading the North that "started" the war eh? You cannot produce such therefore you are spinning yarns and outright defamation concerning your specious "Dixie started the war" nonsense.
Quote: [ Another one of Mike's many idiotic claims. ]
Ha ha ha ha ha ha! You dumbass. This telling line betrays the contempt you have for Griffith and forever puts to lie your ridiculous claim that you and he are "friends" [ ha ha ha ha ha ha! ] with him as a friend would not call him "idiotic". I think he has grounds to sue you for misrepresenting yourself as a "friend" of his and your numerous distortions of his research.
Quote: [ I've noticed that you, on rare occasions, manage to stumble over the truth. But in every case you just pick yourself up and move on. ]
Well well well: so you now ADMIT that the North could not afford Dixie to remain sovereign. Which is a tacit admission on your part that the war was fought over the tariffs and the North's new found inability to collect those tariffs now that Dixie had declared its independence in the same vein as the Founding Fathers did with Britain. What an odd statement to make considering your stubborn refusal to admit the truth.
Oh good Lord, back again. Well I'm going to take Mark Twain's advice about arguing with stupid people to heart and let you rant on. Nothing is going to change your mind and I can live without your lame attempts at insults.
So Doodle when are you going to tell me and Jim Robinson about your position on the repeal of DADT you coward?
So Doodle when are you going to tell me and Jim Robinson about your position on the repeal of DADT you coward?
On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war--seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came.
Ape Lincoln.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.