EPTConfederate Flag Removed from stores - Page 15
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
FHDH
United States7023 Posts
| ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
For example, in the south, a "coke" means pretty much any carbonated drink, but elsewhere it means a specific product made by coca cola. It's not reasonable for me to ban their usage among themselves solely because I declare them ignorant of the "real" meaning. It might, on the other hand, be reasonable to restrict their usage if a huge proportion of the population - including their local population - found it hurtful for some reason. My point is that those are fundamentally different arguments. One can be valid depending on the extent of the harm, the other is highly questionable. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On June 30 2015 01:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Just out of curiosity, are there groups of violent Separatists that exist even today? Because our issues with prejudice (especially black prejudice) here in America are still huge problems, even today. It's not *just* about the Civil War era, because that message of hate has existed over the past 150 years too. Depends on what you mean by today. If you mean today in 2015, no, the most extreme of the Separatists basically fell away when there was a provincial referendum and the people said no (in a 60-40 vote). If you mean in recent times, long after Quebec was conquered, then yes, the Front de liberation du Quebec (aka the group that were essentially terrorists) were from 1963-1970. | ||
|
FHDH
United States7023 Posts
On June 30 2015 10:14 Belisarius wrote: Words are actually a good analogy. For example, in the south, a "coke" means pretty much any carbonated drink, but elsewhere it means a specific product made by coca cola. It's not reasonable for me to ban them from their usage of the word solely because I declare them ignorant of the real meaning. It might, on the other hand, be reasonable to restrict their usage of the word if a huge proportion of the population found it offensive. My point is that those are fundamentally different arguments. One is valid, the other can be as ignorant as it accuses people of being. The Coca Cola company didn't create a beverage made from the blood of Mexicans and later try to take the exact same branding and associate it with a brown sugary carbonated drink. The argument has to be had, in public, about what the symbol actually means. It needs to be publicly accepted for what it is. Because anyone who is truly using it in some innocent "Southern Pride" manner is doing so out of ignorance. No one who isn't actually a racist would want to continue using it ACTUALLY understanding its history. The "innocent" use of the CBS is symbolic of the South's rewriting of their history, the creation of this fable where they fought the Civil War over "many reasons"; the fable where the CBS became popularized in post-Civil War America for literally any other reason than the continued oppression of black people. A banner under which atrocities continued well into the 20th century. A banner under which hate was codified publicly and enforced with fires and nooses. Every person who in their heart-of-hearts sees black and white as equal, who claims to love the United States, but uses the CBS as a symbol of "The South" needs a fucking history lesson. Because if that's how they really feel, once they know the truth behind the symbol they will feel deep shame at every bit of Confederate symbology they identify with. Everyone else is full of shit. | ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
Maybe they have white-washed their history and so on. That's probably unfortunate, but if they genuinely believe something different about their flag than people in the north do, I don't think anyone can claim that they are "wrong" for trying to interpret their flag in a different way. The only real issue is whether minorities and blacks would be offended by the flag. But all you really have to do is be explicitly clear, and say that our state, or our community, flies the flag only as a symbol of brotherhood with our southern neighbours, but that we don't believe in racism, and don't interpret our flags in this way anymore. If the buddhist swastika can be used by germans to mean something completely different (well technically its a reversed swastika but its close enough), I feel like the reverse process should be possible. It may be difficult and somewhat offensive to make that transition, but it still should be possible. After a sufficient period of time has passed, people tend to believe in contemporary meanings over what a flag used to mean 100 or more years ago. If you check Wikipedia, a polls on this issue will show that the majority of people are ambivalent (i.e. they have no positive or negative reactions) to the flag, but that a significant minority do find it offensive. I think this is indicative of the fact that interpretations surrounding the flags meaning and historically racist connotations have largely watered down already to the point where most people aren't offended by it anymore. The Confederate flag is a controversial symbol for many Americans today. A 2011 Pew Research Center poll revealed that 30% of Americans have a "negative reaction" when "they see the Confederate flag displayed."[35] According to the same poll, 9% of Americans have a positive reaction. A majority (58%) have no reaction. There was another yougov poll in which 44% view the flag as a symbol of racism (significant, but not a majority). So I don't think its as unanimous as people on here make it sound, and all that really matters is what people's current interpretations are, and that perhaps they will continue to change in the future. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
However, it's not beyond possibility that there's people who haven't grown up with the historical association, and to whom it simply represents a collection of regional differences which may or may not include closet racism. Plus, a historical association isn't inherently more valid than any other. Either way it seems the flag is coming down. On the balance that seems like the right decision, but I still think that labelling every objector a racist or an idiot is a gross generalisation. | ||
|
FHDH
United States7023 Posts
There was another yougov poll in which 44% view the flag as a symbol of racism. So I don't think its as unanimous as people on here make it sound, and all that really matters is what people's current interpretations are. No one said the view is unanimous or nearly-so. And the only reason that Pew poll is so lukewarm is because of the drum we've been beating through the whole thread: aggressive historical revisionism. If, indeed, the flag had not been flown since the Civil War there might be an argument to be made that it had been revived in some new light, as some symbol of the South. But that's not what happened. Again, only historical revisionism even makes that argument available. There is one reason and one reason alone the flag has become prevalent in the modern South and that is the oppression of African Americans. They don't have the right to pretend otherwise. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23957 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/4rFazba.jpg) The Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan’s Pelham, North Carolina, chapter have reserved the Statehouse Grounds in South Carolina for a rally next month. James Spears, the Great Titan of the chapter, said the group would be rallying to protest “the Confederate flag being took down for all the wrong reasons.” “It’s part of white people’s culture,” he added. source This is what comes to mind when I see people defending the flag and the 'pride' argument. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On June 30 2015 10:48 GreenHorizons wrote: source This is what comes to mind when I see people defending the flag and the 'pride' argument. Wouldn't be the first time the KKK's co-opted a symbol. | ||
|
rararock
United States41 Posts
On June 26 2015 08:57 BisuDagger wrote: How come black people can be offended by the flag, but not by the N word. They condone white people if they use it, but then use it freely. And now we get in trouble if we say African American instead of black. I'm having trouble keeping up with how to not offend people. The president saying the N word is endorsing that it is okay for blacks to say it, yet if a white person said the word in that interview he/she would lose their job. What? This is pretty disappointing to read. I have enjoyed your broodwar casts for years. At best you are an ignorant fool, at worst a racist one. Educate yourself about the history of the confederacy and what that flag represents. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23957 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cagOfNi.png) + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Hmj73Wz.jpg) If those are supposed to be the same thing they did a pretty crappy job of appropriating, nothing new for those bums though. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On June 30 2015 11:03 rararock wrote: What? This is pretty disappointing to read. I have enjoyed your broodwar casts for years. At best you are an ignorant fool, at worst a racist one. Educate yourself about the history of the confederacy and what that flag represents. I wouldn't go that far but I'll have to admit I found that rather shallow and disappointing too -_- | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On June 30 2015 11:12 GreenHorizons wrote: + Show Spoiler + + Show Spoiler + If those are supposed to be the same thing they did a pretty crappy job of appropriating, nothing new for those bums though. Basically all of the Klu Klux Klan's symbols are appropriated. The aforementioned Capirote, the obvious wooden cross, the red cross of the Crusaders... Safe to say that the KKK is only recognizable in North America (and not even all of it), and the rest of the world will either have no clue who they are, or will think they're representing something else that's entirely innocuous. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23957 Posts
On June 30 2015 11:55 WolfintheSheep wrote: Basically all of the Klu Klux Klan's symbols are appropriated. The aforementioned Capirote, the obvious wooden cross, the red cross of the Crusaders... Safe to say that the KKK is only recognizable in North America (and not even all of it), and the rest of the world will either have no clue who they are, or will think they're representing something else that's entirely innocuous. The point being what? | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On June 30 2015 10:30 radscorpion9 wrote: I feel like we should be more flexible and understanding of people who want to interpret the flag in a different way. You can certainly argue that, historically speaking, they have an incorrect interpretation of what the flag means. But I'm not sure why this is particularly important. After more than 100 years, if people want to appropriate the flag and give it a new meaning, as not being a symbol for racism, but instead as a generic banner that symbolizes the unity of the south and their resistance to being invaded by a foreign power, then what exactly is wrong with that? Maybe they have white-washed their history and so on. That's probably unfortunate, but if they genuinely believe something different about their flag than people in the north do, I don't think anyone can claim that they are "wrong" for trying to interpret their flag in a different way. The only real issue is whether minorities and blacks would be offended by the flag. But all you really have to do is be explicitly clear, and say that our state, or our community, flies the flag only as a symbol of brotherhood with our southern neighbours, but that we don't believe in racism, and don't interpret our flags in this way anymore. If the buddhist swastika can be used by germans to mean something completely different (well technically its a reversed swastika but its close enough), I feel like the reverse process should be possible. It may be difficult and somewhat offensive to make that transition, but it still should be possible. After a sufficient period of time has passed, people tend to believe in contemporary meanings over what a flag used to mean 100 or more years ago. If you check Wikipedia, a polls on this issue will show that the majority of people are ambivalent (i.e. they have no positive or negative reactions) to the flag, but that a significant minority do find it offensive. I think this is indicative of the fact that interpretations surrounding the flags meaning and historically racist connotations have largely watered down already to the point where most people aren't offended by it anymore. There was another yougov poll in which 44% view the flag as a symbol of racism (significant, but not a majority). So I don't think its as unanimous as people on here make it sound, and all that really matters is what people's current interpretations are, and that perhaps they will continue to change in the future. 1) The problem is that it didn't mean this 100 years ago. That flag stands for racism and white supremacy now. 2) As a northerner, a former member of the U.S. military, and a 4th generation U.S. sailor that also had ancestors fight in both the Civil War (for the Union) and the Revolutionary War, I find the "rebellion against a foreign power" element of "southern pride" very insulting. The Confederates were traitors that fought to commit horrible human rights violations. Slavery was one of the worst institutions that humanity has ever conceived. 3) While you can go for the hardcore subjectivity route ("Symbol meaning is subjective and can always change!") and that's a nice fantasy to have, it just doesn't work that way in reality. The Swastika went from being a peace symbol to being the most hateful and evil symbol in the world because the Nazis forced it to become associated with particular things. They used it as their symbol while they perpetuated the Holocaust. The Virginia Battle Flag symbolizes racism and hatred because people used it that way for over 100 years and still do today. You can't just magically say, "Well I'm not flying it for that reason so it doesn't mean that!". To change the meaning of the flag, you would have to actually associate it with something positive (and the people that use it make no attempt to do this aside from saying, "It means southern pride, not racism") instead of just saying that it means something else. Even then, that effort really isn't worth it and shouldn't be given serious consideration. It's a hateful symbol and it needs to die. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
That just because the KKK uses it doesn't make it a ubiquitously racist symbol. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23957 Posts
On June 30 2015 12:04 WolfintheSheep wrote: That just because the KKK uses it doesn't make it a ubiquitously racist symbol. Well it's not just the KKK, and you do realize the KKK weren't just random folks either. A lot of them were politicians, powerful businessmen, and law enforcement? If people in Afghanistan don't know the flag is offensive and racist doesn't really mean anything. I don't even understand the point of establishing that "That just because the KKK uses it doesn't make it a ubiquitously racist symbol."? | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On June 30 2015 12:04 WolfintheSheep wrote: That just because the KKK uses it doesn't make it a ubiquitously racist symbol. If you're under the impression that ANYBODY is arguing that the KKK's use of the flag is the only thing that makes it a racist symbol, you're mistaken. It's a feeble supporting factor that can be pointed to as evidence, but nothing trumps just the historical relevance of it and what it represents. You can point at cold hard realities of the past and show that the flag does have a history which is closely related to slavery and racism and you've got plenty of evidence to say what the flag represents. Then, you add on top of that that an openly racist group of people is using the flag. Anyone can connect the dots. The KKK thinks that the confederate flag is represents them (a racist group). It's just additional damning evidence. And this conversation is getting silly now, I don't think that the arguments that the confederate flag has other meanings are actually holding any water whatsoever. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On June 30 2015 12:34 GreenHorizons wrote: Well it's not just the KKK, and you do realize the KKK weren't just random folks either. A lot of them were politicians, powerful businessmen, and law enforcement? If people in Afghanistan don't know the flag is offensive and racist doesn't really mean anything. I don't even understand the point of establishing that "That just because the KKK uses it doesn't make it a ubiquitously racist symbol."? The point is that saying "if you defend the confederate flag in any way I think you're KKK" is stupid. I probably agree with what you post more often than not, but most of your posts are also extremely closed-minded when it comes to discourse. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23957 Posts
On June 30 2015 12:41 WolfintheSheep wrote: The point is that saying "if you defend the confederate flag in any way I think you're KKK" is stupid. I probably agree with what you post more often than not, but most of your posts are also extremely closed-minded when it comes to discourse. I think you are missing my point. What I was saying is that I believe them about as much as I believe the KKK. Not that what they are saying isn't true, just it's obvious that it's disingenuous. | ||
| ||
