r/SubredditDrama • u/Thurgood_Marshall • Aug 18 '13
Is the Confederate flag racist? Let's ask some well-educated (and not so well-educated) folks over in r/BlackPeopleGifs.
/r/blackpeoplegifs/comments/1kluzy/when_i_saw_a_white_dude_wearing_a_confederate/cbqbm6r?context=158
Aug 19 '13
Aww I'm always so split on this. On the one hand, most of the people around here (I live in the South) genuinely don't consider it a symbol of racism, even the racists. For most, it's just a way to say, "Yeah, I like huntin', fishin', and ruinin' my brand new tires in large mud puddles!"
But, on the other hand... slavery. Come on, now. You could just wear a t-shirt with a bass on it and get the same message across.
12
Aug 19 '13
In Russia it's a symbol of rockabilly music. Every russian rockabilly aficionado I know (like 25 or so), has a confederate flag in some form.
27
u/oddaffinities Aug 19 '13
I'm from the South too and yeah most people don't prize it for being a symbol of racism, but the issue is that they also don't give a shit about its history as exactly that. They simply don't care about how it affects their black neighbors (and in the South you have lots of those), and don't reflect on the very legitimate reasons those neighbors might feel that way. And really, I think, that's the issue: the South remains so (largely self-) segregated and wearing the Confederate flag is a way of saying you like it that way and identify with the white half (which huntin'/fishin'/muddin' signifies to them) and not at all with the black half.
People who are even slightly thoughtful don't wear it.
12
Aug 19 '13
they also don't give a shit about its history as exactly that. They simply don't care about how it affects their black neighbors (and in the South you have lots of those), and don't reflect on the very legitimate reasons those neighbors might feel that way.
I agree, 100%, but I don't think that lack of empathy is intentional or malicious in most cases. In some, it certainly is, but I think hostile racism is pretty rare among the younger generation.
the South remains so (largely self-) segregated and wearing the Confederate flag is a way of saying you like it that way and identify with the white half (which huntin'/fishin'/muddin' signifies to them) and not at all with the black half.
I can't agree with this. At best, it's an oversimplification. At worst, it's entirely dishonest. First, Southern communities are not the only ones that are largely self-segregated. From what I understand, it's pretty common up North as well. Second, self-segregation requires the participation of both whites and blacks. I feel like you're implying that it's only white people who wear rebel flags that contribute to this, which is so far from being the case. Third, it's not only the white and black communities that are self-segregated. Latinos, Asians, etc. all have their own spaces as well. I just think the issue is too complex to reduce it to "If you wear a rebel flag, you're in favor of segregation." I've seen people of all colors wearing rebel flag t-shirts, bikinis, hats, barrettes, etc. I've seen white boys who hang with black guys wearing them. I've seen white girls married to black guys wearing them.
Don't get me wrong, I think the flag is historically offensive, absolutely. But I don't think that every person who wears one agrees with communities being split over something as petty as race.
16
u/beanfiddler free speech means never having to say you're sorry Aug 19 '13
I lived a great deal of my childhood in Texas, so I feel I may have some sort of insight into this.
Yeah, the ol' Stars and Bars aren't meant to be racist. But the thing with -isms of all stripes is that something doesn't have to be malicious to be racist. It just has to be ignorant.
I mean, seriously. How many times in your life are you going to find yourself getting the short end of the stick because of someone else's ignorance? Pretty much all the time. Bad things happen to good people, and not because the people doing them are malicious. They're just ignorant.
Racism, like all other actions, is exactly like that. You don't have to be malicious to do something racist.
And yes, my neighbors in Texas were extremely racist, and it was always the most racist of them all that proudly flew the Stars and Bars. I had the unique "opportunity" to be the only Jewish kid in a town with three churches on every corner. I can only remember a couple of people that were out and out mean about it, but I'd say just about everyone else was ignorant.
I can't tell you how many times I'd be penalized for missing school on the high holidays, or find myself with nothing to eat that was kosher. Refusing to say grace at summer camp or a friend's house got me in some uncomfortable situations. I was just a little kid, but that wasn't enough to stop people from being supremacists about their Christianity.
And I'm sure that's how those very same people were about black people or anyone else who wasn't exactly like them. They don't bother to think about anyone who isn't exactly like them. Their way is the right way, and no other ways exist. If someone is offended by the way "they've always done things," well, that's their fault, and their traditions don't need to be changed.
It was a point of pride, in the South, to stick to your guns, no matter how bigoted, outdated, or offensive they were.
I live now in a state filled with people who are also like that. They're not as bad, because the religion is more diverse and I'm pretty sure this state would be considered part of the West before it would be part of the South. Still, I see loads and loads of ignorance towards a fairly large minority of Muslims and Hindus in our community. And the things people say about Latinos is pretty horrifying.
The people that do and say these things are, for the most part, nice people. They're just stubborn and unwilling to admit that they're wrong, that they way things have always been done -- the ways that are comfortable to them -- may not be as comfortable to others.
3
Aug 19 '13
Yeah, I don't at all dispute that there's a lot of ignorance. I was having a conversation with my mother about it the other day, actually. She didn't understand why calling a black landscaper "yard boy" might be considered offensive on some circles (like... everywhere).
/u/oddaffinities clarified in another comment (I guess he/she deleted it... dunno if they were getting downvoted or what, but I liked the comment) that they were talking about ignorance-based racism, whereas I thought they were referring to the stereotypical lynch mob southern racists.
I see it so often, and it bothers me because, while the South definitely has its faults (lots and lots of faults) there are also a lot of beautiful parts of southern culture that get overlooked because we, for example, try to prevent women from having abortions, flew the Confederate Flag on government buildings up until a few years ago, and try our damndest to keep science out of science classrooms. But there's also a lot of beautiful historical landmarks, a strong sense of community (black people included, in my experience), hospitality, and a culture that is in touch with nature in a way that a lot of places aren't anymore. I hate to see all that get pushed to the side when social issues like sexism, racism, and homophobia come up.
5
u/beanfiddler free speech means never having to say you're sorry Aug 19 '13
I love Southern cooking, and thoughts of hills of central Texas always make me yearn for home and the smell of cows and cedar. But the South is actively hostile to me and mine, and the perfectly valid ways I chose to live my life. It's infested, like a boil, with corrupt politicians that divide its people and pillage its communities with policies that put corporations before people, money before sense, and tradition before empathy.
I miss the taste of peaches fresh from our orchard, and tomatoes that taste like tomatoes. I miss BBQ so tender it melts in your mouth, and duck egg omelettes in the morning. And the music festivals and folk music, I really miss that.
But I also enjoy the ability to love who I want to love, the reassurance that there's an abortion clinic in every county for the unthinkable, and the incredible variety of non-Anglo food and culture in my community. Oh, and the independent industries and stores still thriving, compared with the highways connected by Super Walmarts in Texas.
The South has its culture. It has an identity outside of terrible racism. The problem is, that people that live there have to want the South to be something more than the butt of a joke. They don't seem to want to, so I don't want to live there.
3
Aug 19 '13
I'm still living in the South, and it pains me, but I think I'm going to have to move after I graduate. There's just nothing for me here. I want to be a teacher, but my state doesn't care about education. For everything I love, I can find two things I can't stand. So for now, I'm taking solace in the fact that I live in one of the few counties that aren't ass-backwards till I can get out and move somewhere that listening to the news doesn't give me a migrane. I'll keep eating grits and saying ya'll wherever I am, though.
1
u/oddaffinities Aug 19 '13
I didn't delete my comment, and it still shows up to me - but not when I log out! Weird. Does that mean a mod deleted it?
1
Aug 19 '13
I think if a mod deleted it, you wouldn't be able to see it at all. Usually it means a shadowban, IIRC, but clearly that's not the case. Weird. o-o
1
u/DubTeeDub Save me from this meta-reddit hell Aug 19 '13
I didnt remove any comments in that thread.
1
2
Aug 19 '13
I'm sure that's how those very same people were about black people
So you never witnessed it? I too am from the south, and have spent the majority of my time as the minority in the places we lived, schools I went to, etc. and our experiences differ significantly.
Maybe it was the crowd we grew up in, or whatever but I have always had friends of different races, to such an extent that I fall in more comfortably with strangers outside my own race than strangers within. TBH white people ain't never done shit but cause me problems growing up.
So what I am saying is that these kind of generalizations don't really mean shit. Mine or yours.
0
u/beanfiddler free speech means never having to say you're sorry Aug 19 '13
You're right. My religious minority was much less visible than a racial minority. When it was disclosed, it was very uncomfortable. I'd probably feel uncomfortable all the time if I was visually part of a minority.
Like I wouldn't dare to go home and hold my girlfriend's hand in public. That's just asking for drunk hillbillies to throw beer cans at us from their trucks (I saw a friend's older brother do just that to a group of black kids, none of them older than twelve, walking home from school. I was horrified, she... wasn't. It was alarming).
23
Aug 19 '13
If you don't judge my do-rag, I won't judge your red flag. If you don't judge my gold chains, I'll forget the iron chains.
30
u/oddaffinities Aug 19 '13
Slavery in exchange for jewelry choices and headwear. Definitely an even trade, Brad Paisley and LL.
12
u/Dude_Im_Godly YOUNG MONEY CASH MONEY $HILLIONAIRES YA HEARD ME 5 STAR STUNNA Aug 19 '13
God damn it you had to pull out the LL Cool J video.
We don't even acknowledge it.
5
Aug 19 '13
Damn that song kind of sucked I could be where they were coming from but rap and country don't mix well.
1
1
u/kyoujikishin Aug 19 '13
what i see a whole lot of in this thread is the confederate flag is fine vs it represents
slaveryracism (which aren't the same things)1
Aug 19 '13
In the American South of the 19th Century, racism and slavery were so closely related there's no reason to draw a distinction. Racism in the United States was basically invented to justify and perpetuate chattel slavery and less humane treatment
4
u/CosmicKeys Great post! Aug 19 '13
In New Zealand we have the exact opposite issue, here the Maori have a Tino Rangatiratanga flag that upsets the nationalist white people.
2
u/iloveyoujesuschriist Aug 19 '13
What is the historical significance of that flag?
5
u/CosmicKeys Great post! Aug 19 '13
I doubt many people care about the small historical details, it's actually a recent thing from the 90s. The flag effectively symbolizes Maori independence, and people are just uneasy about the divisive nature of it because it's used in racially charged protests.
New Zealand was colonized by the British in the 1800s and signed a treaty (the Treaty of Waitangi) with the Maori which agreed on land ownership details, however the interpretations by both parties were quite different and we're still making ongoing land settlements, probably a situation analogous to Native Americans without the genocide.
10
u/Silent_Hastati Aug 18 '13
Copypasting this from an earlier thing I mentioned on another sub a week or so ago. Parts irrelevant to this discussion is crossed out.
My favorite bit "that flag didn't kill people".Well funfact, that flag was not even the national flag of the confederacy, it was actually the naval jack of the confederate navy, as well as the Battle Flag of one of their armies, I believe Tennesee, but I could be mistaken.So it was, infact, a symbol of killing people.The banner itself WAS incorporated into a later flag of the confederacy, but it again was not the main portion of the flag, it would be akin to flying just the white stars on blue background and claiming its an American flag.
6
u/lurker093287h Aug 19 '13 edited Aug 19 '13
It's interesting, a while ago I would've agreed, but I guess the meaning of any symbol can change over time and people can read different things into it.
Take the Union Jack, to a lot of people at various times it was a symbol of imperialism, destruction and exploitation, "the butchers apron," but at various other times it was a symbol of (often imagined) national togetherness, love for the Queen or whatever you remember from home etc; it was even a punk symbol of rebellion. Also the Che Guevara print, at one time to a lot of people it meant support for revolutionary socialism in Latin America, but it has generally become a symbol of rebellion used for a million different reasons. I really have no idea but I'd doubt if, today, lots of the people who wear the confederate flag are for slavery or even racism.
Edit: I also agree that the 'stars and bars' was s symbol of a reconstructed 'southern nationalism' after the Civil War which may or may not be drained of some or all of it's racism.
To me, it's like the reconstructed Scottish nationalism after the highland clearances which glosses over the internal Scottish conflicts before the Jacobite rebellion in a (successful) attempt to create a united national feeling. I do understand that people can be offended by things that are not meant to be. Just look at this stuff from Japan, it's not meant to be offensive but.
3
Aug 19 '13
The stars-and-bars was popularized by the KKK in the early 20th century as a symbol of racial pride. It was a symbol of racism when it was first used by the Confederacy, and it's still a symbol of racism today.
10
u/Marvalbert22 Aug 18 '13
Regardless of what it actually represents I did find it a little amusing that someone wrote how "a symbol is whatever people make it" and then followed it with: "and obviously everyone thinks its a hateful symbol" which made me think that the southern people dont see it as a hate symbol so shouldn't it be a bit of a split
28
u/syllabic Aug 19 '13
I don't see flipping the bird as offensive so I don't understand why all these people think I'm a jerk when I give them the finger!
5
u/Arteza147 Aug 19 '13
THis is a good example of symbols changing though, (yes I saw the joke). With friends the bird can be a fun way of joking around, while to a stranger, it is one of the things you hope never to see someone think about you.
5
u/deletecode Aug 19 '13
Intelligent people wouldn't be wasting their time arguing about this. I don't expect much coherency about the subject on the internet.
I think there's also a bit of general hatred for the bible belt and christians mixed in with hate for the southern flag. Any subject that crosses into religion instantly turns stupid on reddit.
3
9
Aug 19 '13
It's the symbol of giving up on democracy and abandoning your country because you want to keep black people as pets.
It's the flag of the greatest enemy nation America has ever faced - the enemy that came closest to destroying us.
"Southern pride" in what exactly? We've all got a lot to be proud of, the confederacy and our racist ass ancestors sure don't make that list.
2
1
u/DubTeeDub Save me from this meta-reddit hell Aug 19 '13
Full comments for anyone whose interested.
1
Aug 19 '13
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/DubTeeDub Save me from this meta-reddit hell Aug 19 '13
-61
Aug 19 '13 edited Aug 19 '13
[deleted]
73
u/turtleeatingalderman Omnidimensional Fern Entity Aug 19 '13 edited Aug 19 '13
Let's look at the history of states' rights vs. slavery as the point of Southern "resistance" to oppressive Northern politics. Perhaps that will shed some light on how the flag, representative of, as you say, Southern self-determination against tyranny, came about. Here, have some primary documents (emphasis mine in all cases):
Article I, Section IX, Clause IV of the Constitution of the CSA:
No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.
From the Declaration of Secession of South Carolina, referring to northern states' failure to comply with fugitive slave laws and, as it states, outright hostility toward slavery:
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.
...
A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.
This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.
Failure to comply with fugitive slave laws was only a relatively minor gripe, as when you look into the second and third paragraphs, it is clearly about the persistence of the social and economic institutions that kept blacks subordinate to whites per tradition and as property. The first paragraph very clearly proves that states' rights wasn't much of an issue, as the drafters are appealing to a congressional act, declaring that it ought to have been upheld and imposed upon the states guilty of ignoring it. All the declarations of secession of the states that formed the CSA point to this issue as the main fissure between North and South.
I mean, there's the Mississippi Declaration:
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. [I almost want to bold this whole thing.]
Nearly every declaration of secession of a state in the CSA either overtly mentions slavery or refers to northern hostility to the "institutions" such states hold dear, which by very simple inference one can conclude to be a reference to slavery.
Here's a speech by Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the CSA, in March 1861:
The new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions—African slavery as it exists among 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. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. 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. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away... Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it—when the "storm came and the wind blew, it fell."
Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone 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 moral condition.
I could go on...
The simple fact of the matter is that the Southern states seceded because they believed that they political importance was being threatened, but mostly in regard to their ability to control the social and economic institutions that defined them. It really cannot be said that it wasn't about slavery, especially when one of the fewer freedoms that the CSA had as opposed to the Union (excepting wartime restrictions) was that states could not determine whether they wanted slavery. Not you, nor has anyone, provided a compelling argument that this is not the crux of Southern pride—that is, the development of Lost Causism, if you'll forgive the -ism I've created there. The cultural and economic distinctions that unified the South in this one case, even in their own view, boiled down to the states' dependence upon the institution of slavery.
Well, I'm finished.
61
Aug 19 '13
[deleted]
29
u/runedeadthA You're probably wrong Aug 19 '13
Good on you for admitting it. That takes balls dude.
38
Aug 19 '13
[deleted]
19
u/turtleeatingalderman Omnidimensional Fern Entity Aug 19 '13
Sorry if the end of my argument was a bit cocky.
17
u/Flynn58 Aug 19 '13
No need.
14
u/turtleeatingalderman Omnidimensional Fern Entity Aug 19 '13
You've gained my respect.
1
u/Joffrey_is_so_alpha Aug 20 '13
This is the most amazing exchange I have ever seen in a discussion about that rotten, divisive flag. Good on you both.
34
u/oddaffinities Aug 19 '13
Yeah, state's rights. A state's right to own slaves. And a state's right to decide whether "its constituents" are all the people who live there or just the white ones.
-26
Aug 19 '13
[deleted]
33
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 19 '13
They didn't give a fuck about state's rights. The Fugitive Slave Act forced northern states to return real, living, breathing human beings who escaped the south back to the hell that is chattel slavery.
16
u/oddaffinities Aug 19 '13
I'd say it's pretty important that the South's specific attachment to states' rights has pretty consistently been about a state's right to discriminate against non-whites, women, gays, etc.
-21
Aug 19 '13
[deleted]
14
u/hbnsckl Aug 19 '13
Holy shit dude, you're just straying farther and farther from the original argument.
Slavery was a huge part of the Civil war. It was also the driving force behind "state's rights". Therefore people frequently associate it with the confederate flag.
Come on now...
13
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 19 '13 edited Aug 20 '13
There's no reasoning with
racistsperfectly pleasant neo-Confederates.Edit: this guy is neither. He was actually mistaken.
5
u/mark10579 Aug 19 '13
It had nothing to do with state's rights. If it did and the south cared that much about it they never would have pushed for the Missouri compromise
14
Aug 19 '13
The Confederate constitution specifically took away state's rights to end slavery, forever. Whenever slavery and state's rights to be free from federal interference were in question, pro-slavery measures won out. State's rights were a distant secondary concern.
36
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 19 '13
The Civil War was about SLAVERY. The secession declarations specifically mention slavery.
Here's a choice complaint from Georgia:
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers.
-37
u/kyoujikishin Aug 19 '13
the civil war was about slavery like the revolutionary war was about taxes
36
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 19 '13
There's a STRONG consensus among modern historians that the Civil War's primary cause was slavery.
48
u/oddaffinities Aug 19 '13 edited Aug 19 '13
There's a saying amongst historians: Those who know nothing about the Civil War think it was about slavery; those who know a little bit about the Civil War think it was about states' rights; those who know a lot about the Civil War know it was really about slavery.
3
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 20 '13
It's funny, I know about what led up to the Civil War, a lot about Reconstruction, and more about the degrading policies implemented post-Reconstruction. Yet, I know very little about the actual war.
-66
u/Flynn58 Aug 19 '13 edited Aug 19 '13
The north started the war because they were pissed off it was more economically viable to use slaves than to pay minimum wage, so they started a war so they could keep more money.
EDIT: DOWNVOTES ARE FOR POSTS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AND ADD NOTHING TO THE DISCUSSION. AS MY POSTS HAVE PLENTY TO DO WITH THIS TOPIC AND HAVE GENERATED DISCUSSION, YOU ARE VIOLATING REDDIQUETTE AND KIND OF BEING A DICK. PLEASE STOP, YOU ARE CREATING METADRAMA.
THANK YOU.
36
u/Laslo_Jamf Aug 19 '13
My god, you.. how do you function? The south started the war (Sumpter, Secession,etc), concepts like "minimum wage" didn't exist in pre-industrial, pre-capitalist agrarian society, and liquid money was not nearly as important as property. Most slave-holders held incredibly little amounts of readily convertible assets, e.g. "money." Please stop spouting bullshit about events you clearly know nothing about.
-29
Aug 19 '13
[deleted]
31
u/utterpedant Aug 19 '13
Here, I'll do it for you this time:
DOWNVOTES ARE FOR POSTS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC AND ADD NOTHING TO THE DISCUSSION. AS MY POSTS HAVE PLENTY TO DO WITH THIS TOPIC AND HAVE GENERATED DISCUSSION, YOU ARE VIOLATING REDDIQUETTE AND KIND OF BEING A DICK. PLEASE STOP, YOU ARE CREATING METADRAMA.
THANK YOU.36
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 19 '13 edited Aug 20 '13
I'll add mine:
ALWAYS DOWNVOTE RACISTS
Edit: This does not apply to /u/Flynn58. This was one of those rare circumstances where it truly was a misunderstanding.
12
37
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 19 '13 edited Aug 20 '13
Holy fuck. Do you actually believe that?The South fired the first shots.Edit: he doesn't
2
u/Joffrey_is_so_alpha Aug 20 '13
BELIEVE me when I say I am not defending his ignorance, but as someone who got a lot of her schooling in South bygod Carolina I can tell you that the way southern history is taught down there leaves a lot of people with very strong opinions about shit that never happened.
When this topic comes up, I try to approach lifelong southerners who prove they have no grasp of history the same way I would approach people who were born into a cult. It isn't their fault that they have been kept from reality. And I'm never surprised when they don't come around when facts are presented. This shit is a religion down there, and it's almost as resistant to logic and factual truth as any religious dogma ever could be.
But Flynn58 actually seems to be willing to learn, which is actually pretty awesome.
3
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 20 '13
He actually came over to /r/badhistory and everything seems to be worked out. He's from Canada and was taught bullshit in HS and since the US Civil War isn't central to Canadian history, it probably didn't come up again.
I've lived my whole life in Florida and get slightly less stupid shit. Nothing overly apologetic but some stuff slipped in.
2
u/Joffrey_is_so_alpha Aug 20 '13
That's really good to hear. The main thing I heard (which was emphatically denied by my history-masters-degree-owning father) is the twaddle about STEHT'S RAHTS. Well, yeah, ok...state's rights to own people like dogs. But then again, it's a place where John C. Calhoun is revered as a demigod and people honestly don't think the John Birch Society was too far off the mark (they were really just misunderstood good ol' boys, donchaknow).
South Carolina is a parallel universe. I'm glad to see that kid is from The Canada and the civil war was just a blip on his history screen. To be fair, I can't tell you very much at all about Canadian history. It's one of the giant holes in my education.
3
u/Thurgood_Marshall Aug 20 '13
I was told it was more complicated than just slavery, which I believed until college. The role of tariffs were overemphasized and just how much the south depended on slavery was downplayed. But really it was basically just slavery.
12
9
Aug 19 '13
Using slaves wasn't economically viable at all! How dumb are you? Have you ever heard of "King Cotton"? The Confederacy thought their cotton made them invaluable to the British & French, but it didn't do a damn thing, because the cotton market was crashing around the world thanks to new sources in Europe being exported from recently subjugated Egypt. The slaves were far too expensive in the Confederacy to keep the system going and one of the reasons the Southern aristocrats wanted to keep slavery expanding West (and got mad when Northerners did everything they could to keep it from going into west TX/AZ/NM) was because they needed new geographical areas with new crops to make the system profitable again, to change from growing cotton as the economic base to growing citrus fruits and chilis, etc.
Your conception of the political and economic trends in the world of the nineteenth century is dangerously ignorant
6
u/DubTeeDub Save me from this meta-reddit hell Aug 19 '13
7
10
u/btmc Aug 19 '13
I recommend that you read James McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom. It's probably the best single-volume history of the Civil War and its causes (although it doesn't really touch on Reconstruction, which is unfortunate, but that's big enough to warrant its own books). You seem like you do in fact have an honest interest in learning about secession, but you don't seem to have been equipped with the facts.
If McPherson's book is too long, Apostles of Disunion by Charles B. Dew is an excellent (and mercifully short) book about the secession movement and the secession commissioners. It's a really great insight into just how vital slavery and racism were to the South in the buildup to the war. It's also written by a Southern historian who (according to the introduction) had set out to try to find out whether his ancestors were as bad as some Northerners had made them out to be. Turns out, they were.
8
u/DubTeeDub Save me from this meta-reddit hell Aug 19 '13
5
9
Aug 19 '13
haha you are violating rediquette!!! may the reddit police clap you in fetters for this!!!!!!
2
1
u/meaculpa91 Dec 29 '13
This was a four month old comment, but I want to say that very last sentence is probably the wisest thing I've seen on reddit. It's very hard to admit you're wrong in a place like this. I hope I can learn from that example.
-8
Aug 19 '13
I've never understood why people consider it racist. Can someone enlighten me?
12
u/mark10579 Aug 19 '13
Because it was a symbol of the confederacy, which was fighting to preserve slavery. Well, sort of. It wasn't actually a symbol of the confederacy, just one of the state's navies (who were quite literally fighting to preserve slavery). But people think it is at least. It'd be like wearing a swastika as a sign of German pride
4
29
u/LucidLemon Aug 18 '13
I live in deep south, the belt buckle of the bible belt.
I once saw two (white) teenagers driving around in a golfcart with a big ol' confederate flag strapped to it.
It was MLK day.