Confederate symbols and "winners-write-history" syndrome

[BigT]

@Eternal_Truths

blacks are more enslaved today than in 1860. Whites had to use guns and whips to control them then, now all we need are foodstamps / WIC cards.

I would not go that far. I can see arguing that there is still a type of slavery for black people, but it’s not more than in 1860. The fact that those guns and whips could be used without recourse alone shows that they were worse off then.

Why do you think that 140-something years after the Emancipation Proclamation we are still talking about racism?

Because it’s still around…

This, however, is absolutely true. Those who try to say it would go away if we’d stop treating race like a thing are being ridiculous. When racism stops being a thing, then we will stop needing to talk about race and racism.

[BigT]

@bobot

I did not intend to condemn the entire State. The state senate acted as they should have without hesitation. The state house made a mockery of decency by virtue of the length in time that the session took. House Republicans, most of them, anyway, were on the right side of things in the end.
Kicking and screaming may be harsh descriptors, but SC politicians sure didn’t fucking volunteer to take that flag down, it took the massacre of 9 human souls to demonstrate what everyone already knew about that flag’s message.

I don’t agree. I think they took longer than necessary. The decision to take it down temporarily should have been the decision to take it down permanently, and the temporary take down should have been done a lot faster.

And there are a lot of people who think they did it more because it became a national issue. I’d love to see a new SC poll to see how close the vote corresponds with what would happen under a direct democracy.

[HumbleThinker]

@Velocity

Regardless of what one thinks of Confederate symbols - positively or negatively - how much of the opposition to the Confederate flag today stems from the adage that “history is written by the winners (in this case, the Union)?”
Had the Confederacy conquered the North (extremely improbable, but let’s say it happened,) would the Confederate flag be viewed in a very different light today?

It would certainly be viewed in a different light, though that different light would likely be largely an even more negative opinion of it by those still oppressed and an even more positive opinion by those benefiting from the oppression.

As far as the “winners-write-history” syndrome, it’s part of it, but in a different way that I think you may mean. Given that the Confederacy broke away from the United States and then were defeated and brought back into the United States, it makes no sense for it to be flown on government grounds. It would be like if South Korea defeated North Korea and reunified the country only to still have the North Korean flag flying on government grounds. This is not even mentioning the state flags that actually have Confederate iconography physically on it.

[Alex_from_CB]

@iiandyiiii

What should have been done, in my mind, was some sort of de-Confederization similar to the post-WWII de-Nazification in Germany, perhaps combined with something like the post-Apartheid Truth and Reconciliations committees. And the Federal government should have remained entirely in control until the rights of black people were protected and guaranteed (by both cultural attitudes and legislation) for the future.

This. And not considered them citizens until they reapplied and were accepted. Not considered their states as anything other than captured territory. They forfeited statehood when they booked. Statehood might be granted when they were sufficiently de-nazified, I mean de Southified and showed that they could be civilized Americans.

And hung a few Bobby Lee, J Davis types…

[Monty]

I’m thoroughly enjoying the conniption fits the racists in the South are having over this issue now. And it’s even more amusing to see them whine they’re not racist immediately before they launch into some rather vicious racist diatribes.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Eternal_Truths

blacks are more enslaved today than in 1860. Whites had to use guns and whips to control them then, now all we need are foodstamps / WIC cards.

Leaving aside just how noxious such a comparison is, there are lots of white people on welfare and the vast majority of black people aren’t.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Alex_from_CB

This. And not considered them citizens until they reapplied and were accepted. Not considered their states as anything other than captured territory. They forfeited statehood when they booked. Statehood might be granted when they were sufficiently de-nazified, I mean de Southified and showed that they could be civilized Americans.

And hung a few Bobby Lee, J Davis types…

And of course such behavior wouldn’t come back to bite the North in the Ass.

You might remember the aftermath of the Versailles Treaty and WWI.

[Irishman]

@Trinopus

You’re wrong, and twice. First, anti-Irish bigotry is not racism, as the Irish were of the same race as their Anglo oppressors. It’s ethnic bigotry, not racial bigotry.

I don’t think this is a helpful distinction. Race is a rather arbitrary distinction anyway, arguing whether a particular ethnic distinction rises to the level of a racial distinction seems pointless.

Had a conversation with a friend who is a southern redneck, rather more conservative on a lot of issues than me. His perception of events was it was all about taking something from the whites. I tried to explain the perception of the symbol means something very different to black people, it’s all about the slavery.

He’s caught up in the southern pride and heritage and has a hard time seeing beyond his own perspective.