Civil War/ Confederate Flag Continuation

[AcemanPB]

i was going to right a long post about how i feel on this topic put i think joker covered it all

the Confederate flag (not rebel) is a part of this nations history. Just because it wasn't during the brightest times of american history doesn't mean it should be forgoten.

I will say no more and will tread lightly on this topic put i do feel very strong about this issue

[RT_Luver]

Originally posted by Army
The Rebel battle flag still represents American soldiers.

The two sides, of course, had their economic and social differences, but never did anyone renounce being an American. The southern states hold pride deeply, and the flag is a symbol of the pride of doing what they considered necessary.

It is not a representation of the times, but one of honor for those who fought for what was believed to be right.

Thats 100% correct. I'm a southern and I hold nothing for slaves and in fact, 'm imbarrassed that we had them, but its a pride thing. We hold it in our hearts. keep it flyin

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by Kaiser Bob
However slavery was a key part of the states rights issue, as the south felt that abolishing slavery would ruin the southern economy, as it was primarily agrarian and that the north was being callous only because industry ran the north and the loss of slavery wouldent have much of an impact. So yes the south was fighting for slavery in the civil war.

Ok so I'm really bad with dates so please check all of these. We all know the emancipation proclamation only applied to the seceding states, but when did it happen? For some reason I was thinking that President Lincoln signed it January 1, 1863 and that the slave states that remained with the Union were not affected until the 13th amendmant in 1865. Since the war started in 1861 and ended in 1865 I figured slavery wasn't a real issue. Especially since northern slaves weren't freed until 1865. But, like I said, I'm not so good with dates in general and civil war stuff in particular.

[cphilip]

[url] In fact, under attack, it still flies over the South Carolina capitol building.

NO! It does not! your info is outdated.

And in fact it never flew over the Capitiol during the civil war nor was used by any SC regiment. It never flew there until 1964 when it was palced there by an act of our legislature. It was supposed to be placed up there for one year in celebration and morning of the centenial of the civil war. However it was left in defiance of civil rights movement and intergration. It was recently removed. SO there is another example of people using it to represent the wrong thing. Bigots and small minded folks have perverted it as a symbol it was not intended to represtent. That is unfortunate but a fact.

It does still exist incorporated into the body of the State flag of Alabama a did in Georgia's but i believed Ga. recently removed it.

[cphilip]

Well there were antislavery acts that proceeded the emancipation act that were indeed contributory so do not try and use that one as an argument that it was late in the war. Slavery was abolished in all the new territories outside the 13 colonies before that much to the dismay of the slave holding states and contributed to the hostilities which caused the war. Slavery issues were, among many other things, a real cause and issue of the American civil war from the begining. Read your history in entirety not selectively.

[Army]

In 1858, Lincoln said that he would not involve the Congress in the issue of slavery, for that was the States function to do as it sees fit. To whit, slavery was NOT true factor in the war, or Emancipation would have been a centerpiece right away.

[-J�ker-]

sorry for it being outdated but it backed what i was saying

[cphilip]

Another thing that is very important: Less than 5 % of southerners owned slaves. Most were sharecroppers and close to slaves themselves in some respects but at least free.

Most of these poor white folks were stripped of rights and propertied what little they had for repriations to blacks and Northern armies as they marched north. They suffered greatly and harbored ill will as there was no effort to assist them and many of them were destitute.

Many Northerners did not want an influx of freed slaves to come there and planed to relocate them to Carribean islands and some of that was done. Haiti is an example. So let's not completely associate racism with southern whites...it existed in all areas reguardless of how you sided in the civil war.

all the issues and reasons were complex and its not easy for anyone to pin it all down in a simple sentence.If they do I would not pay much attention to them...

[Kaiser Bob]

Lincoln first said that in 1858 because at the time Dred Scott v Sanford has just happened and it was clear things were coming to a head, so Lincoln tried an apporach of comprimise to keep the union whole. However, once things had escladed, Lincoln realized there could never be comprimise regarding slavery and made the Emancipation Proclamation.


EDIT- The Dred Scott case was the case where the Supreme Court ruled that a black man had no rights that a white had to respect.... proof that minority rights > majority rule.

[cphilip]

Originally posted by Army
In 1858, Lincoln said that he would not involve the Congress in the issue of slavery, for that was the States function to do as it sees fit. To whit, slavery was NOT true factor in the war, or Emancipation would have been a centerpiece right away.

Recheck that...I said new territories had outlawed slavery already. Emancipation was for existing slave holding states. and yes later. But there were indeed antislavery movements adn acts of congress already passed for opening up the new territories that worried southern states and caused friction before that and before lincoln. Lincoln said many things he needed to in order to get elected because of concern for that. His antislavery views were suspect for some time. hence the reason he said that was because these earlier issues indicated there was enough hostility to start a war already. And did.

[cphilip]

Hey you know this has been debated for over 200 years now and no one agree's even now!

good stuff though...

[ShooterJM]

Well, assuming you're not referring to the Confiscation Acts, yes there was some state sponsored legislation.
Vermont, which had almost no slaves or African Americans, abolished slavery in 1777. In 1780 Pennsylvania followed suit. During the 1780s Massachusetts courts ruled that the commonwealth's 1780 constitution had, in effect, outlawed the institution. Between 1784 and 1804 the states of Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey all adopted plans for gradual emancipation. The U.S. Constitution set a date of 1808 as the earliest date the African slave trade could be abolished, (the colonization to liberia and hati that cphilip was refering to).

This being said, I retract my last statement. I think abolition of slavery wasn't the main issue at hand until 1863 when the final confiscation act went through.

*Edit* -- I believe the issue of slavery was the choice of battle ground. As I stated above and as Cphilip noted, much legislation was in effect. However, I still believe the root reasons were a concern of the balance of economic power between the industrial north and rural south. As the new land became available after the mexican american war, much was being settled by southerners causing much concern by the north. yadda yadda yadda

Interestingly enough on Sept 11, 1861 President Lincoln revoked Gen. Fremont's military proclamation of emancipation in Missouri. He was later relieved of his command and replaced.

Didn't know that, just found it interesting.

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by cphilip
Hey you know this has been debated for over 200 years now and no one agree's even now!

good stuff though...

Yeah, human motives and conflicts are never as cut and dried as you hope. Although on a side note, I'm sure my views are skewed as I learned more about the Civil War in my economics classes then in my history class!

[ThePatriot]

Almost 150 years after the civil war and the Southerners still fight with the Northerners about a flag. The North think it represents slavery, and well nothing will change that, you can tell people that as much as you like, to the average northerner it will mean anti black, and pro slavery, also Hick. In NY people would make fun of other people sporting the Confederate Flag, calling them racist hicks who just hate blacks.

You wouldnt think that after 150 years the North and South would forget about it, but they didnt. I am telling you, where i came from it is assumed that all Southerners hate blacks, my question is, what do you Southerners think us Northerners do that you dont? I am very interested to hear.

[rios_creos]

I understand why the confederate flag could be flown out of pride. but down here in the south about 50% of the time its just racist rednecks. (this is around central florida). and really 90% of the people who claim to fly it outta pride have can not name their relatives that supposedly fought in the war. if your not gonna honor the people why honor what they did? especially since it was bad.

anyways for all you people saying how its pride and whatnot. thats fine. but the same argument could be made by aryan people here as they fly their nazi flags.

my friend (white, blonde, blue eyed, female) once said to me that if all the people down here fly their confederate flags outta of pride, shouldn't she just as easily be able to fly a nazi flag since her great grandfather was a nazi? not that she wants to but its mostly just a load of crap, this whole pride thing. how bout everyone just forgets about it. then their will be no problems.

rios_creos