Song of the South Revisited

Main discussion area is here. Reply to a message to continue a discussion thread, or create your own new Topics.
User avatar
1Centrist
Posts: 243
Joined: 2015 Mar 07 10:03

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby 1Centrist » 2015 Apr 07 20:53

Your second paragraph is pretty much what I said, so we're on the same page. I noticed the new CSA battle flag on I-81 myself just the other day, in the hillside field just south of the billboard for my favorirte eatery, The Southern Inn Restaurant. (I recommend their Manhattan cocktail.)

I read about the Lexington brouhaha over the Stars and Bars. Though the government was able to keep the flag from flying on city property, it sure seems like a pyrrhic victory to me when the house right across from the Visitors Center flies a rather large one; not to mention the lady who buzzes round town with a pair mounted on the roof of her Lincoln Town Car.

While I certainly appreciate the flag as a symbol of a valiant struggle by brave, steely men, I'm not sure I'd view it as an icon of patriotism since it was, after all, the standard of a cause designed to rend the country. And what's a patriot without a country?

User avatar
1Centrist
Posts: 243
Joined: 2015 Mar 07 10:03

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby 1Centrist » 2015 Apr 09 09:20

On the anniversary of Appomattox, an interesting article in The Atlantic that depicts, among other things, how the positions of our political parties today have changed over 150 years. The following is an excerpt describing where we stand today, but the whole piece is worth a read when one has the time.
Yes, the Civil War was rooted in states’ rights, but like any other constitutional doctrine, its significance rests with the issue in whose service it is employed. States’ rights for or to do what? For whom or against whom? In 1860 and 1861, some Southerners exercised “state sovereignty” as an act of revolution in the interest, as they said over and over themselves, of preserving a racial order founded on slavery. Today, states’ rights claims are advanced by many governors, legislatures, and presidential candidates in the ubiquitous language of “limited government,” or resistance to “big government.” Every now and then, though, these claims are couched in the rhetoric of “secession” or even “nullification” made so infamous during the Civil War era. More often, such claims have manifested in a new Orwellian language etched into laws to protect the “right to work,” or “religious freedom,” or the “integrity of the ballot.”

Although these contemporary echoes from previous centuries ought not be treated as straight equivalence between past and present, far-right federalists, who dominate the movement called the Tea Party, and who have found a vigorous leadership position at the heart of the Republican Party and on the federal judiciary, have much in common with the secessionists of 1861. Both groups are distinct minorities who have suddenly seized an inordinate degree of power due to congressional districting practices and effective use of conspiracy theories about centralization and the “leviathan” state. One acted in revolution to create and save a slaveholders’ republic; the other seems determined to render the modern federal government all but obsolete for any purpose beyond national defense and the protection of private citizens from having to participate in a social contract with their fellow citizens in tax-supported programs such as Social Security, Medicare, public education, environmental protection, or disaster relief. Both groups claim their mantle of righteousness in the name of “liberty,” privatization, hyper-individualism and racial supremacy (one openly, the other covertly). Both vehemently claim the authority of the “Founders” as though the American Revolution and the creation of the Constitution have no history. Modern-day states’ rightists and sometimes nullifiers embrace versions of federalism that might once have been thought all but buried in the mass slaughter of the Civil War, or in the imperatives of the New Deal’s response to the Great Depression, or in the 1964 and 1965 Civil Rights Acts, or in the battle over the Environmental Protection Agency. But history does not end; it keeps happening. The radical wing of the conservative movement in America, still ascendant in Congress and dominant in most of the South, seems determined to repeal much of the twentieth-century social legislation, and even tear up its constitutional and social roots in the transformations of the 1860s. As Americans disturbingly learn, generation after generation, many have never fully accepted the verdicts of Appomattox.

I don't care much for this Yale prof's glossing over the causes of our Civil War as a "states rights" battle without mention of the underlying factors. As I noted previously, I agree with Sweetness 'n Light's take that it was fundamentally an economic problem — "the government cant just take away property so they had the right to defend their property." Nevertheless, the author redeems himself somewhat with "Yes, the Civil War was rooted in states’ rights, but like any other constitutional doctrine, its significance rests with the issue in whose service it is employed. States’ rights for or to do what? For whom or against whom?" Unlike SnL, however, I don't think property rights trump human rights.

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Coondog » 2015 Apr 09 11:06

History is ever rewritten to conform to the present zeitgeist. Yet, parallels between 1860's southern sentiments and the Tea Party don't stand up. The "Real Americans" of today express profound love of the United States and it's founding principles.........except that they don't. The Red State mentality is, for sure, steeped in state adoption of those part of the constitution that suit their fancy. The rest is up to interpretation according to Biblical translation.

The disassociation from federal initiatives involves protection from implementation of those facets of "America" which interfere with the prerogative of states to maintain control over Americans who are not quite American (socially conservative) enough to be allowed the personal freedoms or rights endowed upon "real Americans."

The idea of the War Between the States being about freeing slaves is as disingenuous as the Tea Party being all about Liberty and loving America.

Coondog :thumbup:

American by birth
Southern by birth
Liberal by reasoned logic

User avatar
1Centrist
Posts: 243
Joined: 2015 Mar 07 10:03

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby 1Centrist » 2015 Apr 09 11:19

Well said, CD. We need a thumbs up button for posts like yours so as to express agreement without bumping posts like this one to the top of the queue.

Is this doable, Stonewall?

User avatar
Stonewall
Site Admin
Posts: 134
Joined: 2007 Jun 11 03:26

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Stonewall » 2015 Apr 09 13:01

1Centrist wrote:We need a thumbs up button for posts like yours so as to express agreement without bumping posts like this one to the top of the queue. Is this doable, Stonewall?

You must be a mind reader. I've been poking around at this very thing for awhile. It should be built into the standard software, but until it is I would have to avail myself of customized modifications written for this purpose. They exist, but my take is that so far they are crude and poorly performing.

But I'll take your counsel as encouragement to keep looking!
Thanks for your posts! Stonewall, your administrator ... just an "empty suit."

User avatar
1Centrist
Posts: 243
Joined: 2015 Mar 07 10:03

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby 1Centrist » 2015 Apr 09 13:12

Thanks much.

User avatar
fangz1956
Posts: 1124
Joined: 2007 Jul 07 10:16

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby fangz1956 » 2015 Apr 12 10:08

Ever looked at someone and thought "the wheel is turning but the hamster is dead"?

User avatar
1Centrist
Posts: 243
Joined: 2015 Mar 07 10:03

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby 1Centrist » 2015 Apr 14 08:24



This video is neither meant to be a slam at anyone here nor a reflection of my view of the many folks I've met in Rockbridge who are proud to call themselves "red." I just thought it was interesting.

User avatar
Amy Probenski
Posts: 457
Joined: 2007 Aug 28 17:06

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Amy Probenski » 2015 Apr 15 20:49

Southern Assholes

But I repeat myself.

User avatar
Juggler
Posts: 710
Joined: 2007 Jun 11 03:51

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Juggler » 2015 Jun 01 14:12

Image

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Coondog » 2015 Jun 19 15:31

Well.......they waited until the bodies finished bleeding out in Charleston to get around to blaming the confederate flag. This is where an old southern coon dog parts ways with MSNBC. This is a "symbol of hate and the flag of traitors", espoused one uninformed advocate in a fit of less than expert punditry. More vilification follows every half hour.

One, and only one, statement stands out among the many examples of gratuitous flag bashing, and that came from a black lady on Morning Joe. But as far as we're concerned, says it all. Can't quote it exactly and don't know her name, but she basically said, 'I don't like the flag and find it personally offensive, but I can see why southern people whose family members fought and died under that flag might feel differently.'

Hell Bells! There is one person in this country who can understand something outside their own experience and acknowledge the legitimacy of someone else's point of view. If that's some sort of incurable disease, one might only hope it goes viral.

The next half hour will concern the necessity of gun control law, however, applicability to the current situation seems moot as one cannot conceive of how any proposed remedies for accessibility of guns would have affected this scenario.

Hate does not come from a flag, or even from a gun........it comes from the heart.

So....before we go off on tangents and start banning flags and re-naming the streets in Lexington (Lee....Jackson?) out of political correctness, lets put the blame squarely on the hate mongers who inspire people of questionable intellect to commit the murder of innocent people.

Coondog :shakeh:

And now Charles Cotton, a "dedicated" board member of the NRA—perhaps tiring of his political soul mates' attempts to shift the blame from racism to religious intolerance for the mass murder—decided to weigh in with his own explanation for who was really to blame for this horrific act of domestic terrorism: One of the murder victims. In a discussion on TexasCHLforum, it is pointed out that one of the victims was State Senator Clementa Pinckney. Said Cotton of the murdered public servant and pastor of the church:

"And he voted against concealed-carry. Eight of his church members who might be alive if he had expressly allowed members to carry handguns in church are dead. Innocent people died because of his position on a political issue."


User avatar
1Centrist
Posts: 243
Joined: 2015 Mar 07 10:03

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby 1Centrist » 2015 Jun 19 16:57

Well said, CD.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Wise One » 2015 Jun 19 21:49

Yup.

My view of flags, all flags, is that they generate much ado over not much. My eyes glaze over whenever I hear of flag controversy. And I get irritable when anybody suggests penalties for displaying or defacing a flag, any flag. (With the possible exception of the duty governments have to represent fairly ALL of their citizens by not rubbing their noses in vile symbols, on public property, against their will.)

On the other hand, I think Lexington's town fathers are missing an opportunity to rent out their public flag space. Rent to the highest bidder, any bidder, however insane he might be.

The prices paid by dim-witted bigots like our local flaggers, neonazis, KKK, ISIS, Texans, etc. would neatly compensate the public for any offense they cause.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
fangz1956
Posts: 1124
Joined: 2007 Jul 07 10:16

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby fangz1956 » 2015 Jun 20 07:30

Heritage is one thing and is generally reserved for museums....and hate is quite another. The continual flying and flaunting of this "symbol of heritage" only serves to perpetuate a climate of hate and racism, not only in the South, but in every place where white supremacy is embraced and allowed to thrive unchecked and unfettered. It is way past time relegate this "symbol of heritage" to museum displays so that we may unite as one people and move forward toward solutions that will see an end to racism, bigotry, and hatred.
Ever looked at someone and thought "the wheel is turning but the hamster is dead"?

User avatar
Neck-aint-red
Posts: 354
Joined: 2008 Apr 08 14:08

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Neck-aint-red » 2015 Jun 22 10:08

Yes.

I've been hearing bullshit from Southerners all my life. Here's another debunking of foolishness you've probably heard.

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Nope!

Postby Coondog » 2015 Jun 22 10:41

Lexington need not allow Nazis to fly swastikas over the streets to moderate a stupid flag ban. Simple rules, such as requisite current or historical local significance need only prevail. Of course, common sense needs to prevail first.

Stupid rules, such as South Carolina's arcane requirements concerning the battle flag on their capital grounds illustrate the difficulty of trying to please two opposing sides of an emotional issue. That's how the Civil War came about in the first place.

The newly contrived argument over the existence and symbolic meaning of the confederate flag stems from one homicidal maniac taking a snapshot of himself holding one. Clearly a symbol of hate and racism? What about the Gold's Gym wife beater tee shirt he's wearing? Is Gold's Gym to be construed as hateful and racist by similar association? Isn't this attention to disputable symbols of hate merely a distraction from the actual hate that lurks behind every act of evil? Neither the flag nor the tee shirt inspired this dumb, punk kid to kill....but, somebody did.

Hate is a destructive force. The first victim of hate is the individual who embraces it. When one allows oneself to be consumed by hate, defined by hate and inspired to act out of hate, one has already doomed oneself to share in the ensuing destruction.

The community in Charleston decided turn a tragedy into something positive. Those not satisfied with that result decided to resurrect an unrelated and divisive controversy. Do 'black lives matter' as much as winning an argument over ideological symbolism? Well.......look where the conversation has gone.

Who profits from this?

Coondog :hum:

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Wise One » 2015 Jun 23 00:22

And here's even more lore about the confederate flag, may she rest poorly in perpetual agony.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Perspective

Postby Coondog » 2015 Jun 23 10:48

Not sure there is a lot of historical accuracy in that screed, either. Perhaps it does represent a legitimate perspective, if only from that of the author.

The Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, it should be pointed out, is not always flown as a symbol of slavery and racism. Take any NASCAR event for example. Well.......maybe that isn't such a good example. Suffice to say, adoptive lost causes of this particular symbol don't particularly do so with slavery and racism in mind.

As far as South Carolina is concerned, removal of one flag from public display is not likely to put an end to either slavery or racism. The former is already dead an the latter is clearly alive and well. That is South Carolina's St. Andrew's Cross to bear, and if that brings some sort of solace to those who are horrified by this senseless crime (as should we all), then so be it.

We might be better served by removing groups like the Council of Conservative Citizens from public view, or at best holding them accountable for the results of their hate filled propaganda. They are every bit as culpable as Charlie Manson in mass murders that they didn't actually attend.

:hail: Coondog

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby Wise One » 2015 Jun 23 11:28

Good points.

Regarding flags, it must be acknowledged that when government places a symbol on government property, it is making a public statement about public policy. Since the confederate flag statement is at best muddled, and at worst intentionally hurtful to many, it's best to stop. It does no good and arguably causes harm.

But individual persons are entirely free to display whatever they want on private property, declaring their brainlessness openly to the world. As mentioned before, I'm not even opposed in principle to selling public space for the display of symbols to the highest bidder ... let them put their money where their potty mouths are as we rake it in in compensation for offense!

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
1Centrist
Posts: 243
Joined: 2015 Mar 07 10:03

Re: Song of the South Revisited

Postby 1Centrist » 2015 Jun 23 12:21

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe on Tuesday said he was taking steps to remove the Confederate flag from his state’s license plates, saying the image sends the wrong message to the rest of the world.

“Even its display on state issued license tags is, in my view, unnecessarily divisive and hurtful to too many of our people,” McAuliffe said.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/confederate-flag-debate-spreads-119320.html#ixzz3du1vC9Vw

Symbology changes over time; it's a shame this one became about as socially abhorrent as the swastika.