(11-16-2015, 03:30 PM)Shadow Step Wrote: The united states existed, the South claimed secession, the US said, "You can't do that without convincing us that you have probable cause." The South decided fuck the North and started war prep. I'm generalizing here, but there's been discussion among political analysts for years about whether the Confederate flag should be considered a flag of treason, considering what the South did to the US by forming their own failed government, attacking the USA, etc.

Legally, the South never managed secession, they went turncoat and were brought back into the union. That was a key point of the whole war, the South stopped listening to law and said, "No, we can do whatever we want, we don't have to listen to you. We've made our own government." I promise you that if I gathered up a few million people, made my own flag, and said, "Okay, we have to attack America now so we can do what we want to do" my group would be labeled traitors. It all hinges on what you consider legal secession, if that's even possible, etc. Which is what started the whole war to begin with.

The right of the South to secede was the same right the original 13 colonies exercised when seceding from the British Empire. To say otherwise is to ignore historic fact and precedent. And the South never set out to attack the North, they were merely attempting to fortify and protect their own border, knowing their neighbor to the north would aggress (as they did).

And the patriots *were* labeled traitors in 1776, you know. The only difference is the South lost whereas the patriots eventually beat the British.

So I suppose I misspoke. To the North I suppose the South could have been considered traitors. But to continue labeling them as such to this day, after losing the war and being forced back into the Union, is a bit much, tbh. But whether or not a group is labeled as "traitor" is really subjective and relative to the side on which an individual stands. As such, I don't think it should be bandied about as historical fact.

I am surprised at how quickly this thread of discussion fulfilled Godwin's law, though.

(11-16-2015, 04:02 PM)amatscintilla Wrote: The right of the South to secede was the same right the original 13 colonies exercised when seceding from the British Empire. To say otherwise is to ignore historic fact and precedent. And the South never set out to attack the North, they were merely attempting to fortify and protect their own border, knowing their neighbor to the north would aggress (as they did).

And the patriots *were* labeled traitors in 1776, you know. The only difference is the South lost whereas the patriots eventually beat the British.

So I suppose I misspoke. To the North I suppose the South could have been considered traitors. But to continue labeling them as such to this day, after losing the war and being forced back into the Union, is a bit much, tbh. But whether or not a group is labeled as "traitor" is really subjective and relative to the side on which an individual stands. As such, I don't think it should be bandied about as historical fact.

I am surprised at how quickly this thread of discussion fulfilled Godwin's law, though.

I knew all of this, which is why I made the nazi comparison to start with and said a political agenda/party that really should just be removed entirely. The South wanted to keep slavery, and they tried to secede over that. Of course the North was going to attack when America was supposedly built on freedom yet allowed slavery to continue. It was hypocritical, and we knew that, but Southerners couldn't give up the whole idea.

Meanwhile, Hitler led a pure political coup, along with a few mentionings of fear mongering in corners, and established something that's very far removed from Germany as we know it and as it was. It had its own flag, structure, etc, much like the South did. The difference between the two is that when someone in Germany says, "You know, I would like to fly the Nazi flag" they are arrested because of the shit nazi's pulled, but in America people fight for their right to embrace a group that was fine destabilizing a new country so they could keep free labor.

The problem with Godwin's law is that it's very easy to draw connections from Hitler to other things. Not just on a factor of, "NAZI'S WERE EVIL!" but the way he did things, the repercussions on laws, etc. I actually think, outside of academia, that it's silly to negate an entire argument just because someone brought up Hitler. There's a lot of guys in control of nations doing very similar stuff, but the moment you bring that up it's all, "Hitler was the worst, don't compare anyone to him ever because he's bad guy number one til the Earth implodes."

(11-16-2015, 12:52 PM)EquestrianPenguin Wrote: If people say you can wave a confederate flag because it's your "heritage", does that mean I can wave a Nazi flag and yell "HEIL HITLER" if I'm German?

My heritage is German, and I've made similar comments before (specifically about the swastika) while discussing the confederate flag. Obviously I haven't the slightest interest in glorifying Hitler, supreme historical fuckhead that he was, in any way, shape, or form. I just like to point out that I have the good sense and capacity for empathy (to say nothing of decency and compassion) that generally prevent me from doing stupid, insensitive shit like that.

I've said, repeatedly, that southerners need to find something else from which to derive pride. They stubbornly cling to a symbol that is inextricably associated with slavery and racism. And nobody better give me a history lesson; it doesn't matter. Perception holds the greater influence nowadays, and the association is a deep-seated one. Hell, members of the KKK wave the damned thing. I think they've figured it out, and they're bigoted morons.

Well, I don't own any Confederate merchandise, but really have no problem with it. The flag wasn't a symbol of slavery, it was a symbol of the Confederacy. Of course they supported slavery. But so did the Union. And you don't see this same demonization of the actual American flag (even the colonial flag) very prevalent.

Just seems a waste of time and effort to demonize symbols. If anything, the recent anti-Confederate flag brouhaha has just heaped more meaning onto the old symbol.

Quote:The problem with Godwin's law is that it's very easy to draw connections from Hitler to other things. Not just on a factor of, "NAZI'S WERE EVIL!" but the way he did things, the repercussions on laws, etc. I actually think, outside of academia, that it's silly to negate an entire argument just because someone brought up Hitler. There's a lot of guys in control of nations doing very similar stuff, but the moment you bring that up it's all, "Hitler was the worst, don't compare anyone to him ever because he's bad guy number one til the Earth implodes."

The reason why Godwin's law is a thing isn't due to the lack of applicability in drawing parallels between Hitler and other things, it's the fact that it's done all the time, that it's lost most of its meaning. "Mom making you take out the trash? She's worse than Hitler!" is an example of this "reductio ad Hitlerum."

(11-17-2015, 12:09 AM)amatscintilla Wrote:

Quote:The problem with Godwin's law is that it's very easy to draw connections from Hitler to other things. Not just on a factor of, "NAZI'S WERE EVIL!" but the way he did things, the repercussions on laws, etc. I actually think, outside of academia, that it's silly to negate an entire argument just because someone brought up Hitler. There's a lot of guys in control of nations doing very similar stuff, but the moment you bring that up it's all, "Hitler was the worst, don't compare anyone to him ever because he's bad guy number one til the Earth implodes."

The reason why Godwin's law is a thing isn't due to the lack of applicability in drawing parallels between Hitler and other things, it's the fact that it's done all the time, that it's lost most of its meaning. "Mom making you take out the trash? She's worse than Hitler!" is an example of this "reductio ad Hitlerum."

But that's tossing out the best comparison. When you talk about something that's a literary classic, people will always draw comparisons to it. I hate Tolkien, but even I describe my favorite fantasy author as "Tolkien lite." And that happens all of the time, every fantasy book is compared, at some point, to Lord of the Rings. Does that mean we should stop comparing everything to the largest event in fantasy in several decades? Probably not. Do all of these comparisons suddenly lose impact because they're being held to an often used standard? Not at all.

(11-17-2015, 12:09 AM)amatscintilla Wrote: The flag wasn't a symbol of slavery, it was a symbol of the Confederacy. Of course they supported slavery. But so did the Union. And you don't see this same demonization of the actual American flag (even the colonial flag) very prevalent.

None of that matters.

The swastika wasn't a symbol of antisemitism and the mass extermination of innocents, either, but that's sure as hell what people think of when they see one.

The original meaning of a symbol is relatively unimportant, and the one that southerners so proudly and thoughtlessly wave is irreversibly tarnished. That's just the way it is. Not that I think there was ever anything remotely admirable about the confederacy from the get-go.

And the U.S. flag (as much as I genuinely don't care about it) wasn't raised as a result of some people wanting to continue owning other people. The confederacy was, at least in part, established as a result of precisely that. People, usually in the defense of the confederate flag, try to downplay the hell out of this. "Oh, it wasn't the major or the only reason." So what? Southern slave owners feared that their slaves would be taken away from them. It was a compelling reason.

Nowadays, white southerners aren't allowed to own African Americans. Seemingly in lieu of that, they're holding firm to a remnant of that time.

A really crappy flag.

And there have been some modern day asshats talking secession, too. During, coincidentally I'm sure, the administration of our first black president.

I don't want to believe that a lot of southern Americans are racist shitheads, but a lot of southern Americans are racist shitheads. That's what I associate the confederate flag with, and I'm not the only one who makes that connection.

(11-17-2015, 08:17 AM)Ziggy and Angelbaby Wrote:

(11-17-2015, 12:09 AM)amatscintilla Wrote: The flag wasn't a symbol of slavery, it was a symbol of the Confederacy. Of course they supported slavery. But so did the Union. And you don't see this same demonization of the actual American flag (even the colonial flag) very prevalent.

None of that matters.

The swastika wasn't a symbol of antisemitism and the mass extermination of innocents, either, but that's sure as hell what people think of when they see one.

The original meaning of a symbol is relatively unimportant, and the one that southerners so proudly and thoughtlessly wave is irreversibly tarnished. That's just the way it is. Not that I think there was ever anything remotely admirable about the confederacy from the get-go.

And the U.S. flag (as much as I genuinely don't care about it) wasn't raised as a result of some people wanting to continue owning other people. The confederacy was, at least in part, established as a result of precisely that. People, usually in the defense of the confederate flag, try to downplay the hell out of this. "Oh, it wasn't the major or the only reason." So what? Southern slave owners feared that their slaves would be taken away from them. It was a compelling reason.

Nowadays, white southerners aren't allowed to own African Americans. Seemingly in lieu of that, they're holding firm to a remnant of that time.

A really crappy flag.

And there have been some modern day asshats talking secession, too. During, coincidentally I'm sure, the administration of our first black president.

I don't want to believe that a lot of southern Americans are racist shitheads, but a lot of southern Americans are racist shitheads. That's what I associate the confederate flag with, and I'm not the only one who makes that connection.

Ohai, I'm from and currently live in the southern U.S.

It sucks over here the most, especially in the state I live in. I know some southerners who really love it here, and they like the confederate flag, and I don't really care. I support the first amendment.

I even know one who put a confederate flag on his car in response to them being outlawed.

They don't see it as a symbol of slavery, they see it as a symbol of rebellion.

It's all about perspective, which is also what life is about.

(11-17-2015, 04:44 AM)Shadow Step Wrote: But that's tossing out the best comparison. When you talk about something that's a literary classic, people will always draw comparisons to it. I hate Tolkien, but even I describe my favorite fantasy author as "Tolkien lite." And that happens all of the time, every fantasy book is compared, at some point, to Lord of the Rings. Does that mean we should stop comparing everything to the largest event in fantasy in several decades? Probably not. Do all of these comparisons suddenly lose impact because they're being held to an often used standard? Not at all.

Who is your favorite fantasy author?

(11-17-2015, 08:17 AM)Ziggy and Angelbaby Wrote: And there have been some modern day asshats talking secession, too. During, coincidentally I'm sure, the administration of our first black president.

I don't want to believe that a lot of southern Americans are racist shitheads, but a lot of southern Americans are racist shitheads. That's what I associate the confederate flag with, and I'm not the only one who makes that connection.

I'm a yank who grew up in the north, lived quite a while out west, and now live in a southern state which is largely populated by northerners (Florida, where the further south you go the more northern it gets). I also am lucky enough to have spent considerable time visiting every state in the contiguous US (as well as all the Canadian provinces). I used to hold the traditional Northern image of the south as an enclave full of racists, sort of as you describe it. But living here now for 12 years has taught me how wrong I was. Sure, there are racists here, there are racists everywhere. But what I see everyday in the South are people from various backgrounds living together, getting along, and being a community. Not racism. Now, maybe my "white privilege" is getting in the way of me seeing the racism, but I hope that's not the case.

I also happen to support secession. Mostly on an argument of scope. The scope of our current federal government is astronomical and untenable. It simply doesn't make a whole lot of historical sense to manage a country of this size from one central location. Dividing the nation up would allow better representation, improve the accountability of government to the people, and move the power that controls so much of our everyday lives closer to us.

To illustrate, in 1793 the population of the US was 3.9 million and our House of Representatives contained 31 seats for an average of 125,806 people per Representative. Today, our population is 319,000,000 and the House of Representatives contains 435 seats, for an average of 733,333 people per Representative. That means, individually, our power in influencing our representatives today is 1/6 what it was when the country was founded.

In a system such as this, it is no wonder the true influence comes from corporations and the like.

The most logical solution is to divide the country up into smaller segments, maintaining a loose federation along the lines of the European Union, primarily to ensure mutual defense and free trade between the new nations.

I can't believe I'm posting this stuff in the waifu community lol.

(11-17-2015, 08:41 AM)Fiction Wrote: Ohai, I'm from and currently live in the southern U.S.

I've lived in the southern U.S. all of my thirty-two years.

(11-17-2015, 08:41 AM)Fiction Wrote: I support the first amendment.

As do I. Hence my willingness to point out the stupidity of how other people utilize it lol.

(11-17-2015, 08:41 AM)Fiction Wrote: I even know one who put a confederate flag on his car in response to them being outlawed.

Always a great reason to do something: Because someone said you couldn't. I've done the same, obviously... When I was a child. x )

(11-17-2015, 08:41 AM)Fiction Wrote: They don't see it as a symbol of slavery, they see it as a symbol of rebellion.

It's all about perspective, which is also what life is about.

Oh, it is a symbol of rebellion. A symbol of rebelling against a country that they feared would deprive them of slave labor.

---

(11-17-2015, 08:47 AM)amatscintilla Wrote: But living here now for 12 years has taught me how wrong I was.

Let me know how you feel on the subject two additional decades from now.

---

(11-17-2015, 08:47 AM)amatscintilla Wrote: I can't believe I'm posting this stuff in the waifu community lol.

I'm not surprised lol. Central has been slowly drifting (satellite that it is) towards everything but the original intent of the community.

(11-17-2015, 08:52 AM)Ziggy and Angelbaby Wrote: I've lived in the southern U.S. all of my thirty-two years.

h-hey, you're almost as old as me. Glad I'm not the only one over 30 hanging around here