The Confederate Flag

[CarolineM 0]

Both and no. Being a southernor i've seen it used both ways...it depends on who and how

This idiot on the board who keeps saying it's the polish flag or some nonsense is retarded

[mybackpages 0]

The flag also symbolizes treason depending on which side of the argument you stand.

I had a student once who wore a shirt that said "if I would have known it would have turned out this way, I would have picked my own damn cotton."

It's not the flag so much that is offensive to me but the ignorance.

[KarenCee 3]

I live in the South, and I just don't get it. The war is over, they lost - move on.

I agree. But as long as there are those organizations such as the SCV (Sons of Confederate Veterans), the war will never be forgotten nor will anyone move on. Pathetic.

I had a nice long post here about how the Civil War was NOT fought for or against slavery. It was fought for state rights. The end result of the north winning was the government being able to institute things like income tax, highway money tied to states doing what the gov wants, etc. Hell, Lincoln freed the slaves as an afterthought.

And no....I'm not southern. Just a history major who is tired of all of the uneducated ####### being spewed about the civil war and the confederacy.

Actually if we read the declaration of sucession from south carolina, it states very clearly that slavery is the issue for leaving the US or more specifically the fact that there were too many pushing for an end to slavery. South Carolina wanted to keep slavery and left the union because of it. How is that not about slavery?

http://facweb.furman.edu/~benson/docs/decl-sc.htm

Actually slavery was NOT the catalyst that started the war, although it was a factor. It WAS about state rights. Slavery factored into this as only one component. However, you will find differing views on what started the American Civil War. The important thing to remember here is, IT IS OVER...MOVE ON.

Edited September 1, 2006 by KarenCee

[mybackpages 0]

Actually slavery was NOT the catalyst that started the war, although it was a factor. It WAS about state rights. Slavery factored into this as only one component. However, you will find differing views on what started the American Civil War. The important thing to remember here is, IT IS OVER...MOVE ON.

All I am saying is read the primary evidence from the states that left the union. I know historians can disagree on this, but the idea of states' rights was formulated in the historical analysis after the war was over. Several writers, in the years after the war, began to formulate the argument the war was about was states' rights.

historical revision is nothing new

Edited September 1, 2006 by mybackpages

[KarenCee 3]

Actually slavery was NOT the catalyst that started the war, although it was a factor. It WAS about state rights. Slavery factored into this as only one component. However, you will find differing views on what started the American Civil War. The important thing to remember here is, IT IS OVER...MOVE ON.

All I am saying is read the primary evidence from the states that left the union. I know historians can disagree on this, but the idea of states' rights was formulated in the historical analysis after the war was over. Several writers, in the years after the war, began to formulate the argument the war was about was states' rights.

historical revision is nothing new

This is the point I was making....the states that left the union. THAT is the states rights issue. While I never agreed with the fact that the south kept slaves, it was not against any federal laws at that time. The north also outnumbered the south in factories, weapons, finances, etc. It was really an unbalanced war in my opinion...the south had limited weapons, compared to the north, and one cannot win a war on arrogance alone. Personally...again I say this is just my opinion...if the north had left the south alone they would have eventually rejoined the union at some point, because the south would have realized their semi dependence on being a part of the United States. The CSA would never have stood on its own.

Historical revision. One will never really know the absolute truth of the cause of the American Civil War because no one is alive to testify to its actual cause. All we HAVE is what historians have written. Of course, that can also be said of other major historical events. Anyone who was actually there is already dead and gone.

[mybackpages 0]

This is the point I was making....the states that left the union. THAT is the states rights issue. While I never agreed with the fact that the south kept slaves, it was not against any federal laws at that time. The north also outnumbered the south in factories, weapons, finances, etc. It was really an unbalanced war in my opinion...the south had limited weapons, compared to the north, and one cannot win a war on arrogance alone. Personally...again I say this is just my opinion...if the north had left the south alone they would have eventually rejoined the union at some point, because the south would have realized their semi dependence on being a part of the United States. The CSA would never have stood on its own.

Historical revision. One will never really know the absolute truth of the cause of the American Civil War because no one is alive to testify to its actual cause. All we HAVE is what historians have written. Of course, that can also be said of other major historical events. Anyone who was actually there is already dead and gone.

My definition of states' rights is that each state has the right to accept or reject the institution of slavery. If this definition of states' rights is correct, then those that argue that the civil war was about states' rights would say the southern states who left did so because they wanted the right to keep slavery if their state chose to do so.

The problem I see with this argument is that in the states who did choose to leave used a different argument in their declaration of succession. South Carolina, for example, defended their right to leave because the division in the country over slavery- some states chosing to keep it and others choosing to reject it would not allow South Carolina to remain in the union.

The words of the states that left leave me to believe they in fact did not accept a state's right to reject slavery because it would cause too much rift in the nation. The primary evidence shows that upholding the concept of states' rights was in south carolina's opinion the very cause for leaving the union. Thus the southern states were AGAINST states' rights. The CSA dis not fight the war to protect states' rights, but rather to protect the institution of slavery which they believed could not exisit if the US continued with a policy of states' rights.