DESOTO COUNTY, Miss. — There’s now renewed efforts to have Mississippi’s state flag redesigned. The flag, which is the last in the nation to contain the Confederate battle emblem, has been at the center of controversy for years. Even as a resolution to replace the flag was being drafted Thursday, opinions remained strong. “That flag has flown for so many years, and it has a lot of good meaning to it and very little bad … in my eyes,” Clinton, Mississippi, resident George Lee said. Protests over the murder of George Floyd have once again brought the flag that has the Confederate battle emblem in the corner to the front and center in a longstanding debate over its design and message.
“The current Mississippi flag design aligns our state with a shameful, hateful chapter in our nation’s history,” Rep. Hester Jackson-McCray said. Rep. Jackson-McCray said many of her constituents in DeSoto County are in favor of a change “If a flag is to be a symbol of pride and unity among citizens, it must represent those ideals for all people,” she said. Gov. Tate Reeves made it clear that voters who decided in 2001 to keep the state flag as-is should be the ones to decide its fate, even as nearly 100,000 people have signed a petition to replace the flag. Leadership at DeSoto County’s NAACP said elected officials need to follow the will of the people.
“And it is up to them to represent us at this time to change the flag of Mississippi so that we may become a part of this movement that’s going on right now to change America,” said Rev. Dr. Charlie Reese, communications coordinator for DeSoto County NAACP. With restrictions imposed by COVID -19, it’s uncertain whether the resolution to change the flag will be debated during this current legislative session.
As a new resident to the State of Mississippi, this controversy is knocking at my front door. I am neither pro or con to the current state flag but, I do agree with Rep. Jackson-McCray on one thing. “If a flag is to be a symbol of pride and unity among citizens, it must represent those ideals for all people,” she said. I also agree with our Governor. This should be voted on by the entire state.
I look at things a little different than most of our pathetic society.
First, George Floyd was murdered by a stupid, moron cop. Race had nothing to do with it because if it was a race issue, the "N" word would have been spewed out of at least one of the cop's mouths and the focus of the media would be on that aspect.
Second, how does the Confederate Flag negatively affect the blacks living in the South today? Does the flag make them not have a job? Does the flag shoot at them with a rifle? Does the flag cause them to be homeless and broke? It does NOTHING to harm anyone. People try to erase the visual aspects of histroy but guess what, they will NEVER erase the physical history. It will continue to be taught in schools and history books so getting rid of the flag will do nothing.
I've been on PFF for nearly 20 years (various cars, various usernames). Honestly, I don't know how to feel about the Confederate flag or the toppling of statues. On one hand, I want to advocate for America's history, regardless of how ugly or unfavorable it is; on the other hand, what's going on is ugly and unfavorable. I actually watched the Sesame Street episode on current events to help me make sense of this, and I don't have kids, I'm just an 80s kid.
That was my first thought. Although I guess it could be said that was more the exception, than the rule. As far as the U.S. and its government and armed forces. Or something like that.
I wonder if there was an antebellum version of the Mississippi state flag. Or maybe the Mississippi state flag history doesn't go back that far.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 06-12-2020).]
I've been on PFF for nearly 20 years (various cars, various usernames). Honestly, I don't know how to feel about the Confederate flag or the toppling of statues. On one hand, I want to advocate for America's history, regardless of how ugly or unfavorable it is; on the other hand, what's going on is ugly and unfavorable. I actually watched the Sesame Street episode on current events to help me make sense of this, and I don't have kids, I'm just an 80s kid.
It isn't hard to understand at all.
It's properly called a *Communist Insurgency*
It also ISN'T just about "The "Confederate flag" (which the flag the morons are arguing over ISN'T).
They are tearing down statues of Christopher Columbus and they recently vandalized a memorial to BLACK soldiers that fought in the Union army in the civil war.
They defaced a statue of a famous ABOLITIONIST in Baltimore.
This the resurrection of the Communist, Maoist RED GUARD of the 1960s now rampaging in America.
The signs read: "Destroy the Four Olds." "Establish the Four News"
It depicts Mao's Red Guards destroying and burning all of China's history including films, books, religion and symbols, the same as the Leftists are doing here right now.
The "Four Olds" were: Old Customs, Old Culture, Old Habits, and Old Ideas.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 06-12-2020).]
I've been on PFF for nearly 20 years (various cars, various usernames). Honestly, I don't know how to feel about the Confederate flag or the toppling of statues. On one hand, I want to advocate for America's history, regardless of how ugly or unfavorable it is; on the other hand, what's going on is ugly and unfavorable. I actually watched the Sesame Street episode on current events to help me make sense of this, and I don't have kids, I'm just an 80s kid.
My family fought in the battle of Shiloh for the Union Army, and were captured and brought to Richmond where my great great great great grandfather tortured, and later died of the injuries he sustained while prisoner. My family have always been Republicans, so the stars and bars, and any of the Confederate monuments, don't mean anything to me personally.
That said, I lived in Richmond, Virginia for several years as a child, and I always appreciated how the city took care of the statues and their historical monuments. I remember driving by Stonewall Jackson, driving up and down that road with all the historical row houses. To see those monuments come down is very upsetting to me. Just like Randye said... it's not about racism or anything like that, it's a Communist agenda that's all about erasing our history. They also vandalized the Lincoln Memorial... the man directly responsible for emancipating the slaves.
When the leftists are able to destroy history, they're able to re-write it... and THAT my friend, is the goal here.
When the leftists are able to destroy history, they're able to re-write it... and THAT my friend, is the goal here.
While not a "true" southerner, I am effected by this issue.
Having recently moved to Southern Mississippi, the "Stars and Bars" issue is knocking on my front door. Today, Hattiesburg had a peaceful demonstration where they demanded a civil war monument be removed. Again, I don't really have an emotional dog in this fight but, I hate to see memorials to the "fallen" removed. Many are calling for the change of the state flag, it still has the Stars and Bars on the it. The governor says it's up to the voters of Mississippi to make that decision.
It's an Opinion & Editorial column, not particularly long for an OpEd in this contemporaneous and modern (or postmodern?) era of online publishing.
I understand, I've read the arguments before. In many cases, they talk about bringing down the statues of Stalin, or the statues of Saddam as an example.
Incidentally, many of the people who want these Confederate statues down, would much rather have a statue of Stalin than a status of George Bush, which I think is more telling.
But there's more to this than that. The Civil War in the United States wasn't against a radical dictatorship that took over the country, it was a civil war. It was two co-equal side of the country which fought about states rights. Yes, the right to slavery was part of that, but slavery was but one portion of it. So we're clear... my family has never had any association with the South. My family has ALWAYS been Republican from the beginning of time, and everything we're talking about has to do with Democrats. But we ALL know here that slavery wasn't the only reason. States rights, regulation, and economic disparity caused a great divide. During and after the war, it was understood that it was brothers and sisters fighting against each other.
Many countries which have been in similar situations, still maintain their statues and murals of prior fights, both political and militaristic. Belgium, for example, still has Communist murals all over the place from a time when they were heavily influenced by Communism. Here's an example of a Communist mural in Central Station in down town Brussels. I can't find a better picture of it, but I remembered it because when I saw it, I too thought to myself... why don't they remove this?
... and the reason of course is so they remember, and because it's part of their history.
No one alive right now remembers personally any of the statues of Democrats up and down Monument Avenue in downtown Richmond... but it is part of the city's history.
Good idea. But I am leaving it for "maryjane" to start that conversation with the CDC. Seeing that "maryjane" is the screen name of the Pennock's forum member that is responsible for those drooling-level insanity kind of remarks about the virus.
~ rinselberg, aka "Ronald"
If you are looking at this message and the one just before (from another forum member) and you do not see how this message puts that other one in its proper perspective, then--dare I say it?--something must be wrong with your "eyes."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 06-15-2020).]
Originally posted by blackrams: <snip> “If a flag is to be a symbol of pride and unity among citizens, it must represent those ideals for all people,” she said. I also agree with our Governor. This should be voted on by the entire state.
Rams
So true. Nobody's business but the people of Mississippi.
Statues are not history. Statues are errected to cannonize people/events. Is there a point where the statues themselves become historic? Sure. But that takes a time a lot longer than they have been up.
Many of these statues were put decades after the war and blacks were prohibited from attending their commemoration.
Have any of you ever seen a statue of Himmler? Then how do you know about wwii?
Have any of you ever seen a statue of Himmler? Then how do you know about wwii?
Statues reflect history and are a tribute to those it was erected for. Haven't ever sought out a statue of Himmler but, my guess is, there are none. Were there any statues of Himmler?
Generally speaking, winners get to write the history books.
What I can relate to is memorials such as the Viet Nam Veterans Memorial Wall and the Marine Iwo Jima memorials. Yeah, I'd be very upset to see them removed or destroyed. As I previously stated, I don't have a dog in this fight, maybe I should but...………… Removing a statue does not change the history behind it but stands as a reminder as to what occurred. Both good and bad.
Although I haven't personally seen a swastika but, I have seen many reproductions and yes, I find it revolting but, it does stand as a reminder to significant evil.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-19-2020).]
That was my first thought. Although I guess it could be said that was more the exception, than the rule. As far as the U.S. and its government and armed forces. Or something like that.
I wonder if there was an antebellum version of the Mississippi state flag. Or maybe the Mississippi state flag history doesn't go back that far.
Denazification, on the surface, seemed to be the right thing to do. With the Unified Allies and even the Soviet occupied East Germany deciding to get rid off all the Socialist Unity Party or Nazi symbols, propaganda and written works. The Allies collected and rounded up millions of Nazi propaganda material and burn it all. When a lone voice stated that this was the same that the Nazi's did to rid the old Germany/Prussia history from existence.
Then it started to go further, with "collective shame and collective guilt" campaigns, where they would have all kind of posters on display showing Holocaust photos and telling every German person that "YOU DID THIS!" And they had widespread Radio Broadcast of the same.
Allies then were thinking to go beyond Nuremburg and the 400,000 German soldiers in interment camps and to have trials of the 17-million Germans who were listed complicate to be jailed and some even suggesting that all Industry in Germany be destroyed and reduce Germany to a level of a subsistence farming.
This went on for quite awhile, until cooler and more educated heads starting to look into this and actually deployed a more humane approach of actually just talking to the German people to see what they really thought. Not surprisingly they found out that the vast majority of Germans were non-violent and normal people who had no harden negative views about Jews or any sympathy for Nazis. In fact, they were surprised to find in a survey that 91% of Aryan Germans didn't see anything wrong with Aryans marrying Jews.
They saw this entire Allied campaign to rid everything Nazi from Germany was nothing more than "Victor's Justice" and didn't really make any sense, as it was basically the same what the Nazi's did when they took power.
Finding the entire campaign as counter-productive, the Allied Powers along with the support of Germany officially and legally ended denazification in 1951 As denazification was deemed ineffective and counterproductive by the Americans.
Still as today, people in Europe get railed up about Nazi symbols and such and propose bans and etc, but it is always opposed, as we need to remind ourselves that trying to wipe away symbols and history, regardless of what it represents, by force or law, is nothing more than the same that the so called "society stains" that they may be known to be is just another society stain doing the same thing. It is best to keep ourselves reminded and free from such acts of aggression by not becoming just like the aggression that it came from.
So when Leftist White Guilt Americans (they just have white guilt because they don't have close black friends), want to destroy and take down all the history of Confederacy, Christopher Columbus and the early framers of the USA (Washington and on), by tearing down all the statues, renaming all the streets and schools and etc, because they want to show and score more brownie points within their own political cliques, makes them no different or worse than the oppression which they label these so called history symbols or people are.
This is the same the Brownshirts did before Nazi took over or the Red Guard did in China, when even having a violin or a piano was considered bad and destroyed, when we always find out later that they were on the wrong side of History.
Now the White Guilt Leftist Democrats, who hijacked racial issues and trying to make it as it everyone (but them of course) is racist and that we must wipe away all history of racial injustice and whatever form, cancel people, destroy their careers, rid everything White and rename everything after Blacks, and whites to pay for the sins of the past, and that anyone that opposes this is just a racist and their lives must be destroyed, because they will lead us to a a utopia of a post racial society.
Not knowing that most everyone is already post racial and that we already have a post racial society. Not perfect and it will never be perfect, as there is always bad people among us. Not a single country doesn't have this issue, that is why jails and prisons exist. But to go so far as thought crimes, shaming everyone, destroying history... Then you are no different than the Slavemasters you say you hate, or the Confederates and racists you say you despise, as they would do the exact same as what you are doing. You are tying to build your own trail of tears of others, because they don't agree with your White Guilt and Social Leftist agenda.
[This message has been edited by Wichita (edited 06-20-2020).]
Denazification, on the surface, seemed to be the right thing to do. With the Unified Allies and even the Soviet occupied East Germany deciding to get rid off all the Socialist Unity Party or Nazi symbols, propaganda and written works. The Allies collected and rounded up millions of Nazi propaganda material and burn it all. When a lone voice stated that this was the same that the Nazi's did to rid the old Germany/Prussia history from existence.
Then it started to go further, with "collective shame and collective guilt" campaigns, where they would have all kind of posters on display showing Holocaust photos and telling every German person that "YOU DID THIS!" And they had widespread Radio Broadcast of the same.
Allies then were thinking to go beyond Nuremburg and the 400,000 German soldiers in interment camps and to have trials of the 17-million Germans who were listed complicate to be jailed and some even suggesting that all Industry in Germany be destroyed and reduce Germany to a level of a subsistence farming.
This went on for quite awhile, until cooler and more educated heads starting to look into this and actually deployed a more humane approach of actually just talking to the German people to see what they really thought. Not surprisingly they found out that the vast majority of Germans were non-violent and normal people who had no harden negative views about Jews or any sympathy for Nazis. In fact, they were surprised to find in a survey that 91% of Aryan Germans didn't see anything wrong with Aryans marrying Jews.
They saw this entire Allied campaign to rid everything Nazi from Germany was nothing more than "Victor's Justice" and didn't really make any sense, as it was basically the same what the Nazi's did when they took power.
Finding the entire campaign as counter-productive, the Allied Powers along with the support of Germany officially and legally ended denazification in 1951 As denazification was deemed ineffective and counterproductive by the Americans.
Still as today, people in Europe get railed up about Nazi symbols and such and propose bans and etc, but it is always opposed, as we need to remind ourselves that trying to wipe away symbols and history, regardless of what it represents, by force or law, is nothing more than the same that the so called "society stains" that they may be known to be is just another society stain doing the same thing. It is best to keep ourselves reminded and free from such acts of aggression by not becoming just like the aggression that it came from.
So when Leftist White Guilt Americans (they just have white guilt because they don't have close black friends), want to destroy and take down all the history of Confederacy, Christopher Columbus and the early framers of the USA (Washington and on), by tearing down all the statues, renaming all the streets and schools and etc, because they want to show and score more brownie points within their own political cliques, makes them no different or worse than the oppression which they label these so called history symbols or people are.
This is the same the Brownshirts did before Nazi took over or the Red Guard did in China, when even having a violin or a piano was considered bad and destroyed, when we always find out later that they were on the wrong side of History.
Now the White Guilt Leftist Democrats, who hijacked racial issues and trying to make it as it everyone (but them of course) is racist and that we must wipe away all history of racial injustice and whatever form, cancel people, destroy their careers, rid everything White and rename everything after Blacks, and whites to pay for the sins of the past, and that anyone that opposes this is just a racist and their lives must be destroyed, because they will lead us to a a utopia of a post racial society.
Not knowing that most everyone is already post racial and that we already have a post racial society. Not perfect and it will never be perfect, as there is always bad people among us. Not a single country doesn't have this issue, that is why jails and prisons exist. But to go so far as thought crimes, shaming everyone, destroying history... Then you are no different than the Slavemasters you say you hate, or the Confederates and racists you say you despise, as they would do the exact same as what you are doing. You are tying to build your own trail of tears of others, because they don't agree with your White Guilt and Social Leftist agenda.
An excellent post!
Seeing what we want to see is not just applicable to art, statues, politicians or the opposite sex. Applicable to life in general.
The Civil War was about slavery--period. Not one of the other reasons that are commonly cited--the generic "states rights", Northern-imposed tariffs on international trade, North vs South economic disparity--would have been enough to ignite secession and a full-scale civil war. Only the deeply rooted institution of slavery, fundamental to the race-based dominion of Southern whites over blacks, had the emotional gut-punch within it to stand up as a casus belli.
You may not like everything that the well known Ta-Nehisi Coates advocates for, but his historiography in The Atlantic magazine is spot on.
The title above this very brief column from Ta-Nehisi Coates is "arch." It is meant to be understood as "The Civil War WAS About Slavery." Ta-Nehisi Coates presents some of the transcript from the famous "Cornerstone Speech", words uttered by the Vice President of the Confederacy, Alexander Hamilton Stephens, on March 2, 1861, shortly before the first shots were fired in the Civil War.
quote
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone 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 normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.
"What This Cruel War Was Over"
quote
The meaning of the Confederate flag is best discerned in the words of those who bore it.
This is a longer column from the same well known Ta-Nehisi Coates, in which he examines the words of the Confederacy's leaders and influencers, from 1858, with the Civil War already on the horizon, all the way until 1931 and beyond. Ta-Nehisi Coates presents the words of a U.S. Senator from Florida, Duncan Fletcher (D), in 1931, before the United Daughters of the Confederacy:
quote
The South fought to preserve race integrity. Did we lose that? We fought to maintain free white dominion. Did we lose that? The States are in control of the people. Local self-government, democratic government, obtains. That was not lost. The rights of the sovereign States, under the Constitution, are recognized. We did not lose that. I submit that what is called “The Lost Cause” was not so much “lost” as is sometimes supposed.
Going back to the time of the Civil War itself:
quote
As the Late Unpleasantness [the Civil War] stretched from the predicted months into years, the very reason for the Confederacy’s existence came to threaten its diplomatic efforts. Fighting for slavery presented problems abroad, and so Confederate diplomats came up with the notion of emphasizing “states rights” over “slavery”—the first manifestation of what would later become a plank in the foundation of Lost Cause mythology.
Ta-Nehisi Coates corroborates that even the Confederacy's influencers, writing in the newspapers and magazines of the Confederate states, stepped out of line with this canard and admitted that "States Rights" was merely a euphemism for "Slavery" and the race-based dominion of whites over blacks. This, from the Richmond-based "Southern Punch" in 1864:
quote
‘The people of the South,’ says a contemporary, ‘are not fighting for slavery but for independence.’ Let us look into this matter. It is an easy task, we think, to show up this new-fangled heresy — a heresy calculated to do us no good, for it cannot deceive foreign statesmen nor peoples, nor mislead any one here nor in Yankeeland. . . Our doctrine is this: WE ARE FIGHTING FOR INDEPENDENCE THAT OUR GREAT AND NECESSARY DOMESTIC INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY SHALL BE PRESERVED, and for the preservation of other institutions of which slavery is the groundwork.”
Along the same lines,
"How people convince themselves that the Confederate flag represents freedom, not slavery"
quote
... as the paramount symbol of the Confederate nation and as the flag of the armies that kept the nation alive, the St. Andrew’s cross ["Confederate flag"] is inherently associated with slavery. This conclusion is valid whether or not secession was constitutional. It is valid whether or not most southern soldiers consciously fought to preserve slavery. It is valid even though racism and segregation prevailed among nineteenth-century white northerners.
Modern Americans looking for this kind of definitive judgment go wrong, however, in concluding further that the St. Andrew’s cross was only a symbol of slavery. Historians emphasize that defense of African-American slavery was inextricably intertwined with white southerners’ defense of their own constitutional liberties and with nearly every other facet of southern life. Descendants of Confederates are not wrong to believe that the flag symbolized defense of constitutional liberties and resistance to invasion by military forces determined to crush an experiment in nationhood. But they are wrong to believe that this interpretation of the flag’s meaning can be separated from the defense of slavery. They need only read the words of their Confederate ancestors to find abundant and irrefutable evidence.
Ta-Nehisi Coates is NOT an American Civil War historian.
Ta-Nehisi Coates is NOT a historian of ANY kind.
Ta-Nehisi Coates DOES NOT have a real college degree of ANY kind,
Ta-Nehisi Coates is the Leftist, racist, bastard son of a Black Panther Party, racist, Marxist, "father". YOU are a psychopath that seriously needs professional mental health treatment.....
GO GET SOME
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 06-22-2020).]
So I didn't use the standard Quote Another Member And Reply format, but these were the remarks that were lighting up my memory retrieving neurons when I went to find the two columns in The Atlantic magazine from Ta-Nehisi Coates and the other column in the Washington Post:
quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
But there's more to this than that. The Civil War in the United States wasn't against a radical dictatorship that took over the country, it was a civil war. It was two co-equal side of the country which fought about states rights. Yes, the right to slavery was part of that, but slavery was but one portion of it. So we're clear... my family has never had any association with the South. My family has ALWAYS been Republican from the beginning of time, and everything we're talking about has to do with Democrats. But we ALL know here that slavery wasn't the only reason. States rights, regulation, and economic disparity caused a great divide. During and after the war, it was understood that it was brothers and sisters fighting against each other.
Segue to President Trump, decrying the tearing down of our "beautiful [Confederate States] monuments" at the Tulsa reelection campaign rally... I was surprised to hear the Trump'ster saying it so exactly that way--"beautiful monuments"--in the light of everything that's been in the news since the death of George Floyd. There have been comparisons of the current national election cycle to 1968, with Trump taking a page from Richard Nixon when Nixon ran as the "Law and Order" candidate. But President Trump sounds more like the George Wallace of 1968 than the Richard Nixon of 1968. Especially when Trump talks about "our beautiful monuments."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 06-22-2020).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: <snip> Segue to President Trump, decrying the tearing down of our "beautiful [Confederate States] monuments" at the Tulsa reelection campaign rally... I was surprised to hear the Trump'ster saying it so exactly that way--"beautiful monuments"--in the light of everything that's been in the news since the death of George Floyd. There have been comparisons of the current national election cycle to 1968, with Trump taking a page from Richard Nixon when Nixon ran as the "Law and Order" candidate. But President Trump sounds more like the George Wallace of 1968 than the Richard Nixon of 1968. Especially when Trump talks about "our beautiful monuments."
Did you really project your racism by putting [Confederate States] into a quote? You do realize that Washington and Jefferson monuments are being attacked? Do you think that no one sees your feeble attempts at deflection?
Did the President distinguish between monuments to Washington and Jefferson, and monuments to Stonewall Jackson and Robert E Lee?
I have the impression that all he said about it was "our beautiful monuments" being pulled down. A transcript of his remarks could tell a more complete story. I have not looked for that.
BUT--it's a "big" but--I consider it kind of an aside or a footnote (what the President said in Tulsa) compared to the historiography on display in the two columns from Ta-Nehisi Coates and the third one that I pulled up, from the Washington Post.
It seems like no statue can stand easy anymore. The statue of Lord Admiral Horatio Nelson in Trafalgar Square? He committed the faux pas of endorsing the continuation of the international slave trade. I just saw about that, on CNN.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 06-22-2020).]
So I didn't use the standard Quote Another Member And Reply format, but these were the remarks that were lighting up my memory retrieving neurons when I went to find the two columns in The Atlantic magazine from Ta-Nehisi Coates and the other column in the Washington Post: Segue to President Trump, decrying the tearing down of our "beautiful [Confederate States] monuments" at the Tulsa reelection campaign rally... I was surprised to hear the Trump'ster saying it so exactly that way--"beautiful monuments"--in the light of everything that's been in the news since the death of George Floyd. There have been comparisons of the current national election cycle to 1968, with Trump taking a page from Richard Nixon when Nixon ran as the "Law and Order" candidate. But President Trump sounds more like the George Wallace of 1968 than the Richard Nixon of 1968. Especially when Trump talks about "our beautiful monuments."
I've explained my feelings on this in the past, so I'll do it again just for reference. The small line of family that ties me to the United States prior to this last generation before me, is my grandfather on my mom's side. That line has *always* been Republican, and that line served in the Union Army (two people) who were both captured at the battle of Shiloh and tortured in Richmond by the Confederate Army.
I have no personal feelings towards Confederate statues other than that they represent the history of this country. I enjoy learning about the Civil War, and I've registered my daughter as a "National Society Daughter of the Union." So you understand where I'm coming from. I have never seen a Confederate statue that speaks despairingly about black people, or anyone else for that matter. Of all the Civil War battlefields I've been to, they represent a point in time, and a piece of history.
Never the less, that's not really what we're talking about in whole... it's the fact that roving bands of anarchists and leftists are arbitrarily tearing down statues of great historical Americans, to include Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and several others we've mentioned. The city doesn't do anything about it, or even denounce it.
While almost all statues were at some point, voted on through bonds or in local elections, the removal of any of these states are NOT being voted on. Liberal politicians are arbitrarily taking down these statues without consent of the community.
"Every record has been destroyed ... every book rewritten ... every statue and street building has been renamed ... And the process is continuing day by day ... History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right." — Orwell, 1984
Personally, I think all of this absolutely crazy stuff the Democrats are doing is going to lead to a land-slide victory for President Trump... so I say keep it up.
Someday, in the time of your great grandchildren, someone will uncover some long hidden text files and will formulate the new hypothesis that all of life’s troubles are because of the people who live on the other side of the river. They will proclaim that the texts surely must be the truth and were banned by an evil cabal in order to control the masses. There will be a cry to bring “the others” to justice. Which side of the river will your great grandchildren be living on?
Ok, now I’m pissed. This is a decision that should be made by the voters of Mississippi. Not. by legislators bowing to pressure. Personally, I would probably vote for a different flag but, I sure as hell don’t want a bunch of legislators making this decision!
That's fine. The people will still wear items of clothes with the Confederate logo as well as have decals on their vehicles and homes. Nothing changes.
This actually opens up more freedom for those who WANT to fly that flag. After all, since it's now not the state flag and has no more meaning, and you want to fly it on your front lawn, it's just like flying a Budweiser beer flag....right? I'm by no means a racist but I respect having freedom to display whatever the hell I want. If it offends you, look away.
[This message has been edited by IMSA GT (edited 06-29-2020).]
Ok, now I’m pissed. This is a decision that should be made by the voters of Mississippi. Not by legislators bowing to pressure.
Personally, I would probably vote for a different flag but, I sure as hell don’t want a bunch of legislators making this decision!
It's LEADERSHIP and the state's legislators and governor have just done honor to the offices that they were elected to.
I am not familiar with the particular laws of the state of Mississippi, but there may be an option for a grassroots petition that would force this "flag flap" onto a statewide ballot. A grassroots petition started by one of the state's newest residents, who habitually signs his online messages as "Rams."
I can't wait to see the new flag.
OK, I'm not that personally energized about it.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 06-29-2020).]
In 2001 the voters chose the current flag over another option, personally I believe it should be voted on again. I would probably chose a new flag. But I don’t pretend to speak for the entire state.
In 2001 the voters chose the current flag over another option, personally I believe it should be voted on again. I would probably chose a new flag. But I don’t pretend to speak for the entire state.
Rams
I agree. The flag belongs to the people.
Is there any discussion on the design of the new flag? Maybe they should have a contest, allow submissions from the public.
I genuinely wonder why many here think that this is erasing history?
We still teach about it, we still have museums about it, it is still well known. This is erasing a celebration of a part history that was a dark time for our country.
Mississippi literally stated in their letter of succession that it was about slavery.
quote
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.
The germans do not have a swastika on their flag, yet they still know the Nazi Flag. The Russians do not have a Hammer and Sickle on their flag, yet they remember the Soviet Union (Possibly too much..).
This "preservation of history" is really a celebration of slavery. It is literally why Mississippi seceded, so they could continue to own black people. Why should that still be on the state flag?
