US goverment, Anything on the Internet is an Export.
-
What a lot of people argue for today is that it is no longer racist but simply anti-American, a symbol of a desire to not be part of America. There are many who feel that way and somehow use that instead of the flag of the confederacy. That's very strange but they do exist and are willing to accept its racial connotations in exchange for the overarching anti-US message. But I think that they are a small group or one that so often overlaps with the other group that it's not significant.
There is also a large group that simply use it to inform those not from the south that they are not welcome. Which isn't exactly racist but regionalism. Similar as it is a trait with which someone is born and inherits and they cannot change.
-
It's a tough one. I think that state governments are super foolish to fly something so widely seen as both racist, a symbol of hatred and of anti-American sentiment. States themselves should think carefully about doing that. There are far better ways to be "pro State" or even "pro South" that aren't "anti-North" and "anti-freedom." When Catalonia flies their national flag, it implies zero anti-Spain feelings. It is just that they are in support of their own nation. It is a very different thing.
In Texas, flying the Texas flag is "pro-Texas." Flying the confederate flag is "anti-American." Two very clear and very different messages. And the number of people who are very, very anti-American and want a new civil war there is probably higher than the number of people willing to openly fly the flag. The "we aren't American" sentiment is very strong. But starting to weaken, I think.
-
But for individuals, I think that the right to fly the flag at the national level should be kept, just like I feel that banning the Swastika in Germany is foolish. Don't make it a symbol of the oppressed, keep it as a symbol of oppression.
-
Oh, I don't think government should fly it. I wouldn't just because of some people's perception of it either. But, I don't think the flag should be banned or made illegal. Nor do I think it was meant to be racist other than hate groups started using the flag later on.
-
Dang... I had this long post written up, and everybody else goes taking all my points, lol.
People are just looking for reasons to be offended. And because this shooter in SC had his picture in front of the dixie flag, that has become the latest target.
See, I growed up in redneck central, and I know folks that are on both sides of the spectrum. Some of them are all about the southern hospitality no matter what the color of your skin is... And folks I just tolerate until they start making racist comments, then I leave their presence, and they know why. (Fortunately for me, it ain't family members).
That flag is part of my growing up, and I seen it on trucks and cars and people's houses. Heck, it was even a major part of the state flag for how many years? People gonna see a symbol for what they want to see it as. I take it as a reminder of my heritage, things lost and gained, and a reminder that Georgia is my home. Yawl can read into it what ya want. Ya' hear now?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
The problem is that once you have someone else telling you what a law means is the moment you have given up your freedom. Yes, I realize that our form of government has been in operation for almost 2 and a half centuries. Yes, I also believe our freedoms have been eroding since that time.
But it is widely seen as not being very free. And two and a half centuries is a tiny amount compared to historically stable governments (Pax Romana, Persian Empire, Holy Rome, Rome, etc.)
I don't feel our freedoms are eroding, not across the board. They are expanding. In what way do "we" have fewer freedoms (that don't involve oppressing others) that before?
Freedom of travel. It's much more scrutinized if not flat out hindered than before.
-
@Dashrender said:
Freedom of travel. It's much more scrutinized if not flat out hindered than before.
See that's one that I thought had improved. We are completely free to move everywhere now (inside of the country.) Do you mean into and out of the country?
In what way do you see the freedom reducing?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Freedom of travel. It's much more scrutinized if not flat out hindered than before.
See that's one that I thought had improved. We are completely free to move everywhere now (inside of the country.) Do you mean into and out of the country?
In what way do you see the freedom reducing?
I'm not sure how far back you'd have to go to find the ability to move around within the country hindered - I've never seen that personally, but I've only been here for 40 years.
I'm talking about internationally.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
But, I don't think the flag should be banned or made illegal.
Is there some political group of note that is actually attempting to ban it? I know companies are and I know that states are taking it down. I'm sure fringe political groups are trying to ban it, but they always have. Someone is trying to ban the US flag and coffee too, but they are never going to see it get to a vote. But is there someone actually potentially going to get this to a vote? I feel like that's the feeling that people have and maybe I'm missing some amount of force behind this but the impression that I have is only that its localized use is being curtailed, at a local level by local oversight (state or smaller level.)
Making it illegal is foolish and without precedence. We can fly the British flag and that could imply that we wish to rejoin the crown.
-
@Dashrender said:
I'm talking about internationally.
Okay, then yes, I agree that in the last 70+ years that freedom has reduced significantly. But more than 100 years ago, I'm not confident that that is true . Could be, but I have no idea if there were difficulties moving over borders in 1800 or 1850 or 1900. My impression is that in those eras that international travel was harder and less free. I could totally be wrong, but that's my impression.
-
-
-
The power is with the people, if they choose to exercise it.
-
The probelm is convincing others that they need to wield the power. Although for certain circles and certain topics that is not really an issue.
-
@dafyre said:
The probelm is convincing others that they need to wield the power. Although for certain circles and certain topics that is not really an issue.
But what are the 2 biggest problems in this area? Ignorance and apathy? Well, I don't know and I don't care.
-
@art_of_shred said:
@dafyre said:
The probelm is convincing others that they need to wield the power. Although for certain circles and certain topics that is not really an issue.
But what are the 2 biggest problems in this area? Ignorance and apathy? Well, I don't know and I don't care.
Ha hah a. Either of the two sounds about right.
-
@dafyre said:
@art_of_shred said:
@dafyre said:
The probelm is convincing others that they need to wield the power. Although for certain circles and certain topics that is not really an issue.
But what are the 2 biggest problems in this area? Ignorance and apathy? Well, I don't know and I don't care.
Ha hah a. Either of the two sounds about right.
Ha, It's not either, it's both sound right.
