I disagree vehemently with the removal of flags and monuments, my reasons are as follows
1) it is the symbol for an ethnic and a cultural group.
2) there have been multiple compromises already, the left keeps breaking them and pushing ever further.
3) Public Law 85-425, May 23, 1958 (H.R. 358) 72 Statute 133 states that anyone who served in the armed forces of the Confederacy are US veterans. The fact that they fought under several different flags doesn't change the fact that they were fighting for self-determination, on which this country was founded. We can argue whether the planter class was right, or not (Morally, they weren't), but the vast majority of the men that fought, fought for their homeland. Not so some guy on a hill, born with a silver spoon, could continue to price him out of the labor market
4) the honoring of Southern history was a big part of reconciliation, and if the US wants to turn their backs on us after all the south has done for the US, post war, then I will turn my back on them too. I will not see my forefathers spit on for the sake of the feelings of people who don't know anything other than what #fakenews SPLC tells them.
5) when you try to appease the left, they always come back 5-10 years later pushing for more. It started with the Battle Flag. Now it's Confederate monuments - paid for by families who lost their sons, husbands, and fathers in the war. Already there is talk about taking down monuments to Washington and Lincoln. What's next? Change the American flag, to be inclusive? It flew over slave ships long before the CSA rose in rebellion. Shred the Declaration of Independence? It was written by a slave holder, and signed by yet more. People on the right seem to think we're dealing with people who are arguing in good faith. They're not.
My question is… why fly the flag of a defeated army? Why fly the flag that symbolizes oppression and enslavement? I do not think historical figures should be removed either but I do not think they should be venerated as though it was good that they wanted to cause great social unrest to an entire people.
International Level: Senior Politician / Political Participation: 164 16.4%
Krusten, the flag has come to represent a ethnic/cultural group - of course others fly it for their own reasons too, but that argument is akin to saying "Why fly the British flag, they lost X war".
As for it representing slavery - it represents that to some people, but not most people. If I saw you holding an Israeli flag I would assume it's because either you support the Israeli people, or because you're showing your ethnic pride. Neither one of these things automatically mean that you support mistreating Palestinians, but that doesn't mean that you won't get people telling you that that's what you think/feel when you hoist said flag. It's assuming motives when it's none of their business. And frankly the US flag flew over far more slave ships and plantations - plus was involved in far more wars. Does it stand for colonization to some people? Yes. Are we going to tuck our tails and abandon that too? We're setting a precedent here.
As for the historical figures, most of them weren't the rabid haters that certain people try to portray them as. They were simply patriots of their own states, by and large. The whole argument against those men, our forefathers, relies on taking the worst of the bunch and then portraying them as the rule, rather than the exception. You could do the same thing with the founders of the United States, and indeed some people are starting to do that. A people without a past, have no future - and when I see our history, not just in the South but all of the USA and the West, being erased I have to ask "Why?". I see no one condemning the Aztec emperors - who slaughtered tens of thousands for their gods. I don't see anyone condemning Genghis Khan in Mongolia - they revere him, and he killed more people than Stalin. Basically, my point is that history is universally ugly and great men often have many faults by contemporary standards. They're still our forefathers and I would hate to see how people will judge us haughtily in 200 - by standards that would seem completely foreign and arbitrary to us. I have no duty to spit on the people who are responsible for my existence today, to appease people who are unappeasable.
So in short you're basically saying that people should be able to use, keep or fly any kind of symbols they want. I don't mind that but I think the argument is where they choose to do so. You are debating personal use and what it means to you. Using your example while someone might want to fly an Israeli flag it doesn't mean it should be done in a court house as an example since the meaning or purpose could be double for some people. I think its the same with the confederate flag, it has different meanings for different people but utilizing it in a public establishment is a different affair.
International Level: Senior Politician / Political Participation: 164 16.4%
Yes and no. It should be allowed by private citizens, of course. It should also be on public buildings too, because this is the south and that's our history and culture. We've had compromises about this before, in the 90s, and the compromise worked just fine until Dylann Roof did what he did, and suddenly people are jumping over each other to say "Me too" about how offended that they are. It's nothing but virtue signaling. None of these people were voicing an opinion one way or the other, beforehand.
We should not appease people who are largely being dishonest about how badly they're affected by it. It's setting a precedent that will bite the rest of America in the rear - and if everyone else wants to play at being Neville Chamberlain, then they don't deserve my support when it's their symbols, symbols, and ancestors that are under attack.
Here is my opinion of the Virginia battle flag also known as the Confederate flag. It was never the flag of the south. It was a battle flag and many people have adopted this flag as a representation of rebels or rebellion. This is a time for our nation to be coming together as a whole instead of people finding ways to keep dividing us.
Has this flag been used to promote hate and bigotry? Yes it has and I can understand that many people do not want to see it. I am one of those people but I will not tell a person they have no right to have this flag in their home. I was in the military and I told people at a parade they needed to remove that flag from the parade as I would not march behind that flag. There is no place for that flag in our nation just like there is no place for another nation flag in our nation.
If people want to support another nation while in our nation I have no issues with that but that does not mean to flaunt that nations flag for others to see and try to say it means nothing. Obviously it means something to the people waving it about. If you can not let the past go and stop using a symbol of hate and oppression to intimidate or other wise harass others then I do not know what to say to you. This is just about this Battle flag not the statues.
It was a symbol of a people who chose to betray their nation in order to keep slavery. It was revived as a symbol of people who were doing everything they could to keep racism around. It remains as the primary symbol and rallying point for two of the most evil organizations technically legally operate in the United States.
I realize that isn't what it represents to many people, nor do I seek its removal myself. But I can easily see why others find it offensive, do not see it as appropriate to display in an official capacity (IE on par with the US flag), and find it amusing in a rather dark way that some people are deluded enough to equate the thing with patriotism.
KN, that is the exact point. It was never the flag of the Confederacy. It is the battle flag which armies fought and died under. Many people fly that flag because they had ancestors who fought for what they believed in with great courage against incredible odds. Slavery is now considered the primary reason for secession. It was part of it but most men that fought for the south [didn't] even own slaves. They were fighting to protect their country and their lands.
In that time period the state came before the country. It was the way this nation was founded. As to them being traitors.. They wanted to go their own way just like the founding fathers did. If we would have lost the revolutionary war Washington and the others would be considered traitors. In that period it was still up for debate whether states could secede. Now it is settled that they can't by brute force. If a man and a woman are married and the woman wishes to leave the relationship… The husband catches her and beats her into submission and she stays with him. I guess that settles that as well. That's basically what happened.