Lowering the Confederate Flag - and Wally World

[Cow Poke]

Right, I mean, he says that like there has been some good argument in favor of this flag that, so he keeps telling us, is nothing something he owns or plans to own.

Unfortunately, CP is the kind of person for whom personally loyalty

"personally loyalty"?

[JimL]

Right, I mean, he says that like there has been some good argument in favor of this flag that, so he keeps telling us, is nothing something he owns or plans to own.

Unfortunately, CP is the kind of person for whom personally loyalty matters more than most anything else so he feels beholden to support his "side" even when it's obviously untenable.

They are unable to face up to the truth about the civil war south, and to some extent some factions within the south of the present day, and so rather than face up to it and distance themselves from it, they make excuses for it.

[shunyadragon]

"personally loyalty"?

I would prefer 'personal loyalties.'

[Teallaura]

Yes, the history of the nation clearer is represented in the flags. That is the Big Problem with the Confederate flag. The case against the American flag is first class slander. The Confederate States of America was based firmly on the preservation of slavery and racism. The United States was never based on these evil beliefs. The United States clearly evolved away from such beliefs, which were never the basis for the existence of the nation.

It is not slander - you don't know what that word means, do you?

I see that CP supplied the definition. Learn it.

You cannot commit slander in the US UNLESS you lie - to slander you have to know that the statement is untrue [Sullivan] and the substance cannot be true. Truth is an absolute defense against slander or libel - so as long as the statements are substantively true (and they are) then no slander has occurred even if it were intended (which it clearly wasn't).

[Teallaura]

Pedanticly, it isn't quite the same flag since we added numerous states (at the very least, 2 for alaska/hawaii) long after the various ethnic cleansing's were completed.

It really isn't comparable, which is why neither myself or Shuny were planning on touching it. There isn't much to gain from going over the picture RG keeps posting in detail. There is a helluva lot of a good attached the American flag in its what it's stood for. The confederate flags, by being short lived in their official capacity, are always going to have a much more focused set of symbolism attached to them.

edit:

I'd like to take a moment to reiterate that my primary objection to this flag is that its one of rebellion and treason to the United States. As a veteran, I don't see how I can support, even in theory, a flag raised in rebellion against the country I've sworn to protect.

You weren't touching it because you had no argument that didn't involve special pleading.

[Teallaura]

I don't know. I don't think I buy it. When, and if Americans feel just as strongly about the Stars and Stripes, and all that it symbolizes, then I agree we should question whether or not it's appropriate to fly it outside our state buildings. Public consensus hasn't come to that point yet (at least, not in this country).

So Option 3: Public opinion denotes meaning.

Really, a number of things on that list simply don't register with people on the same level as slavery. Presumably the million of dead Iraqis was a good thing to help free a nation, and to help snuff out terrorism. Presumably the use of Agent Orange and the internment of Japanese-American citizens was done to save American lives in the midst of wartime. I imagine that there are plenty of people who could argue to this very day that the right (or at least, justifiable) thing was done in all three of those cases. I don't know anyone outside of extremists who would still argue that chattel slavery was a necessary evil, or that it was justified. The final one, "more black prisoners than black college students" just feels tacked on. What direct association does the American flag have to do with that? Little if any. The only legitimate issue raised looks like the genocide of the native tribes. Arguably, the American flag we have today is not the same one that was used to wipe out native tribes, but I think that would be a weak argument. I would not be surprised if Native Americans had no great love for the stars and stripes, and I think a public debate could be raised about that. Currently there isn't one, and there isn't the same association (again, for right or wrong) with Indian genocide to the Stars and Stripes as there is the Confederate flag to slavery. There simply isn't. Not yet anyways.

Except that if you're still addressing my argument, you just applied the Band Wagon Fallacy. I wasn't arguing that meaning resulted from 'resonating with the public' - the point was either their 'it's about history and slavery and nothing else' is true in which case the same logic applies to the US flag or there is more to it than that in which case neither flag is denoted purely by history.

You do realize my actual argument is that both sides are being stupid - it's NOT the confederate flag and not even the confederate battle flag (that one was square). It's letting the 1950's/60's segregationists win a Pyrrhic victory by keeping the 'segregation forever' nonsense alive by still attributing it to the wrong flag years after those who fly it lost that meaning entirely.

Part of the problem of this counter-argument, though, is that it kinda cuts both ways. If you truly think that an argument for the Confederate flag is, "the Stars and Stripes represent as much, if not more evil, and we're still okay with it", how far are you willing to go down that lane of thinking? Were the Americans wrong for famously blowing up the swastika atop the Tribune at ZeppelinFeld in Nuremberg? Would it be appropriate for people to wear images of the swastika on their shirts in public? Should it be?

No, that wasn't what I argued at all - I argued that you either have to attribute history as the source of meaning to both or you have to recognize that meaning can change - you simply cannot have it both ways. History is either insurmountable or it isn't. I personally say it isn't hence I have no issue with the American flag at all. Those who say it is have an issue with both the law of non-contradiction and basic consistency.

[Adrift]

So Option 3: Public opinion denotes meaning.

Yes. Exactly.

Except that if you're still addressing my argument, you just applied the Band Wagon Fallacy.

It's no fallacy to assert that the populous gives meaning to its symbols. That'd be like saying that it's fallacious to assert that words are defined by how they're commonly used. I don't think the bandwagon fallacy applies here.

You do realize my actual argument is that both sides are being stupid

Of course.

it's NOT the confederate flag and not even the confederate battle flag (that one was square). It's letting the 1950's/60's segregationists win a Pyrrhic victory by keeping the 'segregation forever' nonsense alive by still attributing it to the wrong flag years after those who fly it lost that meaning entirely.

I don't see Confederate flags being lowered on state buildings, and being dropped from Walmarts as a net win for segregationists. Quite the contrary in fact.

No, that wasn't what I argued at all

Of course that's not what you're arguing. I'm following your argument to what I perceive is its logical conclusion.

I argued that you either have to attribute history as the source of meaning to both or you have to recognize that meaning can change - you simply cannot have it both ways. History is either insurmountable or it isn't. I personally say it isn't hence I have no issue with the American flag at all. Those who say it is have an issue with both the law of non-contradiction and basic consistency.

Many of the people who are against the Confederate flag believe that the meaning hasn't changed, or if it has, it's only gotten worse. In the end all will be settled in the court of public opinion.

[Cow Poke]

They are unable to face up to the truth about the civil war south, and to some extent some factions within the south of the present day, and so rather than face up to it and distance themselves from it, they make excuses for it.

You're gossiping like an old woman.

[Teallaura]

The American flag was not created as symbolic of some of the evils that may have later been carried out by the U.S. government., the Confederate flag on the other hand was specifically created as symbolic of the Souths support for and their battle to secure their continued right to enslave a people.

No, it wasn't - it's the Tennessee battle flag - it was created to keep the other Southern troops from shooting at them.

Slavery didn't end officially until long after slave importation had ended - and it wasn't even officially 'ended' until 1863 when Lincoln felt it was politically safe to do so. The South and other slave states weren't engaged much in enslavement - mostly in perpetuation and that only those who were profiting.

Had there been no 'states rights' or 'union preservation' issues, there would have been no war. Neither Lincoln nor Davis could have fielded an army had the issue been solely couched as slavery. No one on either side would have shown up to fight.

[Teallaura]

Yes. Exactly.

I disagree - far too simplistic. I do agree it plays a role. I think intent is more important, however.

It's no fallacy to assert that the populous gives meaning to its symbols. That'd be like saying that it's fallacious to assert that words are defined by how they're commonly used. I don't think the bandwagon fallacy applies here.

It's fallacious in that it wasn't an option in the actual argument. The actual argument rested on the contradictory nature of the two possibilities thus far presented. Adding Option 3 makes no sense in context and introduces a fallacy only because popular opinion has nothing to do with the contradictory issue.

In larger context, it's still a problem for the argument though it may not be the fallacy itself.

I don't see Confederate flags being lowered on state buildings, and being dropped from Walmarts as a net win for segregationists. Quite the contrary in fact.

It's the political gamesmanship - no different in effect from how the silly thing got up there in the first place. It's just points in a game - and since it plays by the old rules, it is a rather stupid win for them.

The danged thing would have been off statehouses decades ago but for the gamesmanship. This is no different that Alvin Holmes and Joe Reed threatening to climb Alabama's capitol dome - when there was a ten foot construction fence around the building to prevent any real effort to do so. What could have been done quietly in the halls was instead splashed all over the papers and TV - the net effect being that the silly thing stayed up another decade.

It's just for show. SC has a lot of real issues - the stupid battle flag isn't one of them.

Of course that's not what you're arguing. I'm following your argument to what I perceive is its logical conclusion.

No, you derivated too far from the argument to reach its logical conclusion. You put in another option when that wasn't what was at issue. Actually, Option 3 is a suboption of Option 2, so if you were following my argument, then there shouldn't have been an issue.

Many of the people who are against the Confederate flag believe that the meaning hasn't changed, or if it has, it's only gotten worse. In the end all will be settled in the court of public opinion.

And here is where intent matters. Your belief doesn't supersede the speaker's (fliers?) intent.

Record
Blue
Jealous


Now, tell me - what do each mean? What did I mean? Pull out your dictionary and you'll find multiple possibilities for all three. But all you will be able to tell me is what you think they mean - you cannot tell me what I meant. Had I given you context you might have - and that holds for the flag as well. Painted on the top of a Dodge Charger belonging to a couple of guys who probably couldn't pronounce the n word (you get whooped bad enough and it ain't so easy! My guess is Bo and Luke probably learned quick not to bring that one home from school - and probably only one of them had to visit the woodshed to figure that out!) it isn't about racism, slavery or the negative aspects of Southern history. It's about pride of place, a degree of rebelliousness (arguably all moonshine is) and being redneck. Oh yeah, and having a sister who can't afford a full pair of shorts...

[JimL]

No, it wasn't - it's the Tennessee battle flag - it was created to keep the other Southern troops from shooting at them.

It doesn't matter if the confederate flag was the Tennessee battle flag, the Northern virginia battle flag, or any other battle flag. The battle flags of southern states were created to symbolize the souths secession from the union over the slavery issue.

Slavery didn't end officially until long after slave importation had ended - and it wasn't even officially 'ended' until 1863 when Lincoln felt it was politically safe to do so. The South and other slave states weren't engaged much in enslavement - mostly in perpetuation and that only those who were profiting.

Thats correct. Slavery legally ended in 1863 with Lincolns signing of the Emancipation Proclimation, at the end of the war. Slavery was the reason for secession, the reason for the war, and legally ended with the end of the war.

Had there been no 'states rights' or 'union preservation' issues, there would have been no war. Neither Lincoln nor Davis could have fielded an army had the issue been solely couched as slavery. No one on either side would have shown up to fight.

The war didn't have to be couched in slavery in order that slavery be the actual cause of the war. You are playing semantical games in order to rationalize away the main cause of the war. The main cause was slavery!

[Jaecp]

You weren't touching it because you had no argument that didn't involve special pleading.

Feel free to quote the specific arguments and explain the special pleading then. Otherwise, meh

[shunyadragon]

It is not slander - you don't know what that word means, do you?

I see that CP supplied the definition. Learn it.

You cannot commit slander in the US UNLESS you lie - to slander you have to know that the statement is untrue [Sullivan] and the substance cannot be true. Truth is an absolute defense against slander or libel - so as long as the statements are substantively true (and they are) then no slander has occurred even if it were intended (which it clearly wasn't).

It was a lie!

[shunyadragon]

It doesn't matter if the confederate flag was the Tennessee battle flag, the Northern virginia battle flag, or any other battle flag. The battle flags of southern states were created to symbolize the souths secession from the union over the slavery issue.

Thats correct. Slavery legally ended in 1863 with Lincolns signing of the Emancipation Proclimation, at the end of the war. Slavery was the reason for secession, the reason for the war, and legally ended with the end of the war.

The war didn't have to be couched in slavery in order that slavery be the actual cause of the war. You are playing semantical games in order to rationalize away the main cause of the war. The main cause was slavery!

. . . and racism as stated in the speeches and documents of states that seceded from the Confederacy. Tennessee originally rejected secession by popular vote, but later seceded in a closely close divided vote. This did not effect the original purpose declared by all the other states.

[Jaecp]

It doesn't matter if the confederate flag was the Tennessee battle flag, the Northern virginia battle flag, or any other battle flag. The battle flags of southern states were created to symbolize the souths secession from the union over the slavery issue.

Plus, like, I already answered every possible version of her defense already with my arguments about gained symbolism as opposed to inherent symbolism.

At best, she is repeating a bad argument.

At worse, she's doing so because she doesn't think someone elses argument is as solid.

Either way, meh