patrick.net

Dan8267 says

So if I do this, you'll admit your wrong, right?

I'm wrong I guess in that you attempted it. Here's the thing, most of your suggestions are good, and difficult, not just in the south, and they are good suggestions for everywhere.

Which ones do I think addressed how the south uniquely might address improving things ?

1) Does happen more in the south - but I don't see how it's connected to southern pride
4) but I disagree here and will explain below
("which became popular solely because the KKK started using it as their symbol") FALSE

The rest is really undo right wing anti poor policies everywhere and not unique to the south.

There's little here related to southern embracing their ancestry or the confederate flag, as a cause that needs to be undone or proof of why. Yes the flag is the Navy Jack, but it's also a lot like the battle flags of Virginia and Tennessee, and is sort of a blown up part of the major design (upper left corner - the part that's not all white) on the 2nd and 3rd flags of the confederacy.

According to recent polls:

As of the early 21st century, the "rebel flag" has become a highly divisive symbol in the United States.[39] In a national survey in 2015 across all races, 57% of Americans had the opinion that the second Confederate Navy Jack represented Southern pride rather than racism. A similar poll in 2000 had a nearly identical result of 59%. However, poll results from only the South yielded a completely different result - 75% of Southern whites described the flag as a symbol of pride, while 75% of Southern blacks said the flag represented racism.[40]

I agree that the confederate flag has no place in government, but I do believe that for many in the south it is about southern pride and about their culture which should not be boiled down to simply racist.

Southern towns are very segregated, with a black side of town, and with much larger percentages of African Americans and also larger percentages of white right winger racists than in northern urban areas. But I don't buy your simplistic assertion that this has much to do with glorifying the slavery practices of the past or celebrating their ancestors.

You can wave your hands and say obviously that's cause and effect, but I don't see it. I'm proof that it isn't always that way. I'm a northern liberal but I have an ancestor who died in the civil war(on the confederate side), and his wife was active in the politics of the south after that. I have some historical pride in this, but it doesn't mean that I think slavery would be remotely close to acceptable now. And yes slavery was ugly as is much of what has happened since to African Americans.

I guess from marketing or political point of view I appreciate what you're saying, because you're arguing for change in the positive direction. But you aren't speaking a truth that I agree with. As I said it's too hyperbolic. Too simplistic. Too black and white. This is my opinion.

I guarantee that of the 75% of the white folks that said the confederate flag is about southern pride, I guarantee that at least a third of them are fairly liberal politically. OF the 25% that don't think that it's about southern pride, I believe a majority probably aren't from the south. They just live there now.

marcus says

Dan8267 says

And you will continue to pay those costs until you fix the problem your slaver ancestor scum created. And until you do fix those problems and stop glorifying those ancestors and their despicable culture, you deserved to be judged just like them.

"slaver ancestor scum ?" Some "slavers" had friendships and love for some of their slaves, and treated them all fairly well (considering it's slavery). Could Steve Jobs say the same about any of the employees at iphone factories in China that committed suicide because conditions were so bad ?

How is everything so fricking black and white for you ? Was Steve Jobs scum ? He was willing to do what it takes to succeed, just like those plantation owners, except those Chines employees clearly had it worse than most American slaves. The word slave just means the people had no choice. You think it's any different for many of those people working for almost nothing over there ?

I finally bought my fist iphone (replacing android) recently. Am I therefore now evil too ?

Dan8267 says

6. Stop embracing the culture of racism that is far more prevalent in the south.

Dan, are you a nutcase or something? Do you actually read this crap? Up to 3% more republicans in slave holding areas? WTF. So what about all the area's that never had slaves and are almost totally republican and hate affirmative action? Like Kansas, the Dakota's, Montana, Arizona, Idaho, Nebraska, Alaska, Utah and Nevada to name a few? Where did they get their attitude from? What nonsense. This is your supposed proof that racism is FAR MORE PREVALENT in the south?

Why post the same study twice from 2 different sources anyway? Did you just read the headline?

Dan8267 says

So, then you don't have sources.

Sources don't matter, you liberals repel reality all your life not like anything is going to change that. I'm not even going to waste time. If you care, look them up yourself, plenty of information out there.

bob2356 says

Dan, are you a nutcase or something?

Just pointing it out for you Dan, you are a mental case, even others notice.

FortWayne says

Dan8267 says

So, then you don't have sources.

Sources don't matter, you liberals repel reality all your life not like anything is going to change that. I'm not even going to waste time. If you care, look them up yourself, plenty of information out there.

Like creationism has nothing to do with conservatives repealing reality. Get a grip.

FortWayne says

you liberals

seriously, you know that any real discussion is dead the moment you say "you liberals", right?

it's the same the other way. as soon as you classify the other person as "that kind of person", your own tribe's orthodoxy is the only thing that is possible to say.

as far as i'm concerned, the whole point of this site is to be able to get past orthodoxies and actually understand text and subtext and have some sympathy for the other person's legitimate concerns. and there always are legitimate concerns.

ah, fuck it.

bob2356 says

Like creationism has nothing to do with conservatives repealing reality

It's old school Bob. You got to let that one go man.

seriously, you know that any real discussion is dead the moment you say "you liberals", right?

Yes Patrick I know. It makes for a real passionate conversation though. Because it doesn't matter what or how anyone says it. All those issues we discuss are always going to make people pick sides, and it'll never be pleasant. Dan will blow up regardless of how polite I sound, nothing will change that. Might as well just go at it.

well, if you enjoy that, ok.

You know Patrick, I think it bothers you, so I'll try to be a bit more conscious of that in my future posts. I'll do my best.

marcus says

most of your suggestions are good, and difficult, not just in the south, and they are good suggestions for everywhere.

By definition, social progress is good everywhere.

And things like voter suppression laws are unique to the south, not that matters, because of course the evil of one culture can exist in any other culture. The entire differences among all cultures are the degrees of good and evil values.

FortWayne says

Dan8267 says

So, then you don't have sources.

Sources don't matter

Exactly what someone with no sources would say.

FortWayne says

bob2356 says

Like creationism has nothing to do with conservatives repealing reality

It's old school Bob. You got to let that one go man.

Which of the multitude of conservative hypocrisies that you spout continually would you consider current?

FortWayne says

The guy who flat out says that he hates America isn't exactly loving the place. Those were his words, not mine, and he wasn't sarcastic either.

Since we're making up quotes now...

If it's wrong for a 50 year-old man to love sheep, I don't want to be right.
- FortWayne

Dan, did you read this far ?

marcus says

"slaver ancestor scum ?" Some "slavers" had friendships and love for some of their slaves, and treated them all fairly well (considering it's slavery). Could Steve Jobs say the same about any of the employees at iphone factories in China that committed suicide because conditions were so bad ?

How is everything so fricking black and white for you ? Was Steve Jobs scum ? He was willing to do what it takes to succeed, just like those plantation owners, except those Chines employees clearly had or have it worse than most American slaves did. The word slave just means the people had no choice. You think it's any different for many of those people working for almost nothing over there ?

I finally bought my fist iphone (replacing android) recently. Am I therefore now evil too ?

I don't know if it's true, but supposedly it got so bad that they had to install nets for those employees making iphones, because so many were jumping off the roof to kill themselves. I remember some people boycotted Nike for using child labor making their shoes, but that didn't last long. Maybe Nike improved those situations. I haven't heard of anyone boycotting apple because of work conditions in Chinese factories. Somehow I think that since it's happening now, and since we don't bring those Chinese people here to treat them terribly, and because it's contracted out to Chinese entities (making it inidrect), it makes it seem not nearly as bad as slavery of the past.

Was Steve Jobs slaver scum ?

There are racist liberals and racist conservatives. There are low bandwidth liberals and low bandwidth conservatives. There are bullshit liberal memes and bullshit conservative memes.

Adults are merely big children that like to be told simple stories that make them feel better.

In conservatopia, economic and social injustice is solved by ignoring it (and leaving those who prospered from it fully intact, on accounta THEY deserve their ill-gotten spoils). If someone believes in solving, and tries to remedy the injustice, they are:

*making matters worse
*are the REAL racists

And that's why conservatives are so fucking stupid that it makes people like Dan's head spin.

marcus says

but I do believe that for many in the south it is about southern pride and about their culture which should not be boiled down to simply racist.

OK--I hear this often. Could you be a bit more specific? What exactly does the confederate flag represent besides racism. What "culture"? What are Southerners taking pride in that the flag represents?

Other parts of the country have slightly different cultures, but you don't see a Midwest flag representing their culture or a Southwest flag representing desert culture.

Dan8267 says

And things like voter suppression laws are unique to the south,

Voter ID is pretty much the standard for all of Europe and the civilized world.

How is it "progressive" to have 16th century voting standards or to facilitate the poor and old to continue to live off the grid without any reasonable form of ID?

socal2 says

Voter ID is pretty much the standard for all of Europe and the civilized world.

The intent of voter ID in the south is to prevent legitimate voters from voting. Voter ID could be done trivially here without preventing a single legitimate vote. However, all supporters of voter ID laws oppose such measures.

Voter ID could be
1. Made free as in beer. There should be no cost to the ID.
2. The IDs could be issued years before they are required to vote.
3. An election could be run where the ID is asked for but not required to see what the current compliance level is. Until compliance is near 100%, the ID should not prevent voting.
4. Even when ID is required, it should not prevent voting. Instead, the votes should simply be flagged so that the voter can be verified. Unless it is proven by the state that the vote is fraudulent, it should count.
5. If a person shows up without ID, the voting site should be able to issue the ID on the spot within minutes. This is the 21st century, the apex of the Information Age. Securely issuing voting IDs should be easy to do in real time. Whatever procedures are needed to issue a voter ID should not take more than seconds using computers and automation. If computers and automation aren't used, then the procedures are not secure and the ID is worthless.

So, why is it that the voter ID proponents object to any system that meets the above five criteria? If the actual intent was to prevent voter fraud, they wouldn't. They would only object if the intent was to prevent legitimate votes. And that is why the south, which is where all these voter ID laws have been proposed, is still racist. This is just modern Jim Crow. And the laws and procedures in Europe are not designed to prevent legitimate votes, so the comparison is invalid.

The fact is that conservatives would block any voter ID system that met the above criteria because it would increase voting by minorities, especially blacks, by making the process easier and on-boarding potential voters who aren't registered. Image if everyone over the age of 18 with a driver's license had to get a voter ID to continue using their driver's license. There would be a lot more registered voters, both minorities and young people, and that would devastate Republicans and the Tea Party in every election. And people like you would oppose that measure.

Dan you will never grasp voter id laws of you prejudge everything based through a lens of 16 year old socialist comedy show.

So unless we can drag every American human being into a court house and give them free ID's, we need to keep our election laws like a 3rd world banana republic?

That makes sense!

Besides, many States already offer free IDs.
https://www.texastribune.org/2013/06/25/dps-begin-offering-free-voter-id-cards-week/

You can not function in the 21st century without ID. But dumb "Progressives" like Dan want to keep people living in the shadows and provide no incentive to participate in society.

socal2 says

So unless we can drag every American human being into a court house

Who said anything about a court house? IDs can be easily issued at polling stations.

But, of course, your objection is to any system that does not prevent legitimate voters from voting.

socal2 says

You can not function in the 21st century without ID.

Many voters have IDs that aren't accepted under voter suppression laws. This includes veterans.

Again, you objection isn't to lack of ID, it's to lack of suppression. Giving IDs to all voters without stopping anyone from voting is a trivial problem to solve.

What possible objection could you have to the system I proposed other than it doesn't suppress votes?

Dan8267 says

What possible objection could you have to the system I proposed other than it doesn't suppress votes?

First - I don't trust politically run polling stations to issue ID's.

"These 11 Illinois Counties Have More Registered Voters Than Eligible Residents"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/reboot-illinois/these-11-illinois-countie_b_8072078.html

Besides, why create yet another bureaucracy to issue separate ID's when we already have State organizations that provide this service?

Maybe if Illinois wasn't already bankrupt from paying union pensions, their DMV could afford to offer free ID's for the tiny percentage of "eager voters" who aren't capable of getting their own ID?

socal2 says

Besides, why create yet another bureaucracy to issue separate ID's when we already have State organizations that provide this service?

Inter-state voting fraud. Obviously any kind of national election needs to be managed at the federal level. Proposing a state-level ID law says you're not interested in alleged fraud in other states. So what's the motivation? Oh yeah, vote suppression.

It is clear from you posts that you are not in any way concerned about voter fraud and only concerned about rigging elections.

Dan8267 says

Inter-state voting fraud.

Whoa - so a Progressive admits that there IS voter fraud? That's progress I suppose....

But you still choose to not require State ID's arguing that a tiny fraction of American citizens who don't have the wherewithal to get an ID to function in society - so we need to keep our entire electoral system like a 3rd world banana republic?

socal2 says

Whoa - so a Progressive admits that there IS voter fraud? That's progress I suppose....

In person voting fraud is almost non-existence, 31 out of a billion cast ballots or 0.0000031%. In contrast, republicans ditching Ron Paul votes counted for thousands of times greater fraud. And even more cases of absentee ballot fraud.

And almost no general election race in recent history has been close enough to have been thrown by the largest example of in-person voter fraud on record.

That said, there have been examples of fraud, including fraud perpetrated through the use of absentee ballots severe enough to force new elections at the state level. But the slew of new laws passed over the past few years meant to address voter fraud have overwhelmingly focused on the virtually non-existent/unproven type of voter fraud, and not the still-not-common-but-not-non-existent abuse of absentee voting.

So anyone who really wanted to stop voter fraud would be concerned with absentee ballots, not in-person voting. Funny how voter ID advocates resist any effort to curtail absentee ballot fraud. Oh, that's because making it at all harder for absentee ballots would reduce the votes for Republicans. Total hypocrisy and lies.

Also, if you wanted to prevent in-person voting fraud, you'd have to do it at the federal level, not state level, because people could vote in different states if they were going to do in-person fraud. So once again, there is no justification for state-level IDs.

socal2 says

so we need to keep our entire electoral system like a 3rd world banana republic?

It's not. 31 in a billion ballots isn't even a rounding error. And that's across many elections.

It's obvious that the attempts to pass voter ID laws are designed to prevent far more than 31 legitimated ballots rather than any actual voting fraud. You, in particular, are transparent. Your false dichotomy cannot hide the clear fact that if you actually wanted to stop any voter fraud you would
1. Be calling to a ban on absentee ballots.
2. Be advocating the federal program I described above.

These two things would do far more to prevent voter fraud than any proposed ID law. They also wouldn't prevent legitimate votes. And there are absolutely no down sides to my proposal. The fact that you aren't cheering this proposal as the great solution proves beyond any doubt, reasonable or otherwise, that you don't want to stop voter fraud, you want to commit voter fraud by denying people their right to vote. And that makes you a scumbag.

But hey, prove me wrong by promoting the mechanism I proposed above. Write your congressman. Make YouTube videos promoting this proposal. Start a freaking petition on the White House petition page.

marcus says

I'll think about trying to ask that difficult, but also somewhat stupid question (in my opinion), if you answer a few questions for me fist.

No thanks. I didn't think it was that difficult.

I'll just say this-the flag represents the Confederacy which absolutely was about racism. Certainly you can see how honoring it seems to honor racism.

tatupu70 says

I'll just say this-the flag represents the Confederacy which absolutely was about racism.

This sounds really stupid to me.

tatupu70 says

Certainly you can see how honoring it seems to honor racism.

Yes, I can see how it would seem that way to some. Then again I can see how some might say all republicans are racists, or all liberals are homosexuals. It just depends on how stupid you want to get.

Another liberal with blind hate for Southerners.

marcus says

tatupu70 says

I'll just say this-the flag represents the Confederacy which absolutely was about racism.

This sounds really stupid to me.

That's not really an argument. Please post about all the things that the Confederacy was about, if not racism.

marcus says

Yes, I can see how it would seem that way to some. Then again I can see how some might say all republicans are racists, or all liberals are homosexuals. It just depends on how stupid you want to get.

Another liberal with blind hate for Southerners.

See, here's where you're wrong. I have nothing against Southerners. I know many, many folks from the South that understand history and find the Confederate flag repugnant. Southerners aren't racist-people that honor the Confederate flag (whether from Alabama or Minnesota) are racists (or idiots that don't understand history).

socal2 says

These 11 Illinois Counties Have More Registered Voters Than Eligible Residents"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/reboot-illinois/these-11-illinois-countie_b_8072078.html

Besides, why create yet another bureaucracy to issue separate ID's when we already have State organizations that provide this service?

Maybe if Illinois wasn't already bankrupt from paying union pensions, their DMV could afford to offer free ID's for the tiny percentage of "eager voters" who aren't capable of getting their own ID?

That's funny. I guarantee that those 11 Illinois counties voted strongly Republican last election. Probably 80% R.

So maybe it's Republicans that are the epicenter of voter fraud.

tatupu70 says

That's not really an argument. Please post about all the things that the Confederacy was about, if not racism.

I didn't say it was an argument. You don't respond to arguments, and you don't want to know what I think or why you're wrong. You want to tell me how simple and easy to understand my perspective should be for you to comprehend. I did put some effort into writing some questions that would help you understand a little.

IF you had said the flag was about slavery it would have been more accurate, than to say it was about racism. But to the typical guy fighting for the confederacy it was about having the right to keep their way of life and not being told by the north how they had to change and when.

tatupu70 says

I know many, many folks from the South that understand history and find the Confederate flag repugnant.

That's an outright lie that you pulled out of your ass. Unless you think not wanting it flown over the state capitol means they find it repugnant. Even then it's obvious that you made that up, thinking it sounds believable. Common Tat. I like to think liberals have integrity.

75% of white southerners say that the confederate flag is about Southern pride. Keep in mind this includes the fact that probably at least 50% of white southerners do not have roots that go back to the civil war.

marcus says

You don't respond to arguments

Why don't you try making an argument, and we'll see how it goes.

marcus says

IF you had said the flag was about slavery it would have been more accurate, than to say it was about racism. But to the typical guy fighting for the confederacy it was about having the right to keep their way of life and not being told by the north how they had to change and when

Not really--it was about the typical guy being told he couldn't own slaves. The North didn't say how often they had to bathe, what they should eat, or what kind of parties to host. Just that they couldn't own another human being. And forgive me, but I don't see a big difference between someone owning slaves and someone being a racist. I suppose it's possible for one to think it's OK to own another human being without thinking they are less than you, but I think it would be rare.

marcus says

That's an outright lie that you pulled out of your ass. Unless you think not wanting it flown over the state capitol means they find it repugnant. Even then it's obvious that you made that up, thinking it sounds believable. Common Tat. I like to think liberals have integrity.

75% of white southerners say that the confederate flag is about Southern pride. Keep in mind this includes the fact that probably at least 50% of white southerners do not have roots that go back to the civil war.

OK--this is ridiculous. It is most definitely not an outright lie. I DO know people in the South and they DO find the flag repugnant. Here's an short essay that sums up their view pretty well:

http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/50239-not-all-southerners-fly-the-confederate-flag

How simple minded does a person have to be to think that if a southernor has some historical pride that it means they wish slavery still existed now ?

I wonder how many Southerners Tat thinks she knows who think that if the south had won the war, they wouldn't have had to end slavery within a couple decades anyway ?

In 1864, the Confederate States began to abandon slavery. There are some indications that even without a war, the Confederacy would have ended slavery. Most historians believe that the Confederacy only started to abandon slavery once their defeat was imminent. If that were true then we are to believe that the CSA wanted independence more than they wanted to hold on to slavery. The CSA’s highest ranking generals, Robert E. Lee and Joseph E. Johnston were not slave holders and did not believe in slavery. And according to an 1860 census, only 31% of families owned slaves. 75% of families that owned slaves owned less than 10 and often worked beside them in the fields. The Confederate Constitution banned the overseas slave trade, and permitted Confederate states to abolish slavery within their borders if they wanted to do so. Slavery wasn’t abolished until 1868, 3 years after the war. Thus Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland and Delaware still had slaves.

http://listverse.com/2010/12/06/10-surprising-facts-about-the-confederacy/

marcus says

How simple minded does a person have to be to think that if a southernor has some historical pride that it means they wish slavery still existed now ?

You're completely missing the point again. My problem isn't with Southerners that are proud of some of the uniquely Southern foods, or colloquialisms like saying "Howdy". The issue is using a flag that is representative of slavery and shouldn't be celebrated.

And we can argue all day about whether the South would have eventually abandoned slavery--clearly they felt strongly enough about keeping it that they seceded from the Union and fought the Civil War. But, it's not important. You shouldn't be honoring the flag that represents slavery.

tatupu70 says

Not really--it was about the typical guy being told he couldn't own slaves. The North didn't say how often they had to bathe, what they should eat, or what kind of parties to host.

Now you're just trolling or else truly retarded. If you tell me one thing I have to do,, and I tell you you that I don't accept you telling me what I have to do, when did I imply that you were dictating to me all of my activities ?

tatupu70 says

And forgive me, but I don't see a big difference between someone owning slaves and someone being a racist.

That word racism wasn't even being thrown around then. But of course, if you owned slaves in 1840, and were okay with that conscience wise, then you must have felt either that blacks were inferior, or you felt there is this ugly business (slave trade - that the confederate constitution outlawed 20 years later) that had already brought many thousands of totally uneducated indigenous Africans into western civilization to work as slaves. Those totally uneducated Africans were already here, and had to do something. It's clear that most other white southerners (or all Americans) were prejudiced about them so the difficult question of what was to become of these people was not a trivial or easy question. Going along with slavery in the south at that time was kind of like going along with eating meat now, or going along with using iphones made by slave labor in China. IT was ugly that that slavery had even even happened, but most of our founding fathers participated. From the perception of an enlightened southerner, there was no way to instantly or easily undo slavery.

IF someone at that time thought that ending slavery was going to lead to a lot of difficulty for those black folks (they would have been right btw), and if they thought that at least for the time being, slavery was little worse or maybe even better for them than the frightening and probably very difficult road ahead for free blacks, that would have been an understandable point of view. It was based on what they know of human nature and the relative ignorance of everyone else.

But in any case, whether or not slavery in 1860 was racist, and regardless of ones simplistic interpretation of what that means if it was, it has nothing to do with now.

That is, people who honor the confederacy in any way or their ancestors who were in the confederacy, are not honoring slavery, any more than someone who honors the US flag is honoring terrible things that have been done by our country.

Again:
marcus says

75% of white southerners say that the confederate flag is about Southern pride. Keep in mind this includes the fact that probably at least 50% of white southerners do not have roots that go back to the civil war.

tatupu70 says

marcus says

How simple minded does a person have to be to think that if a southernor has some historical pride that it means they wish slavery still existed now ?

You're completely missing the point again. My problem isn't with Southerners that are proud of some of the uniquely Southern foods, or colloquialisms like saying "Howdy".

Actually you're missing the point. When I said "some historical pride" you have to know I wasn't referring to grits or saying "howdy" or "yes mam." Or maybe even now, I give you too much credit.

marcus says

Now you're just trolling or else truly retarded. If you tell me one thing I have to do,, and I tell you you that I don't accept you telling me what I have to do, when did I imply that you were dictating to me all of my activities ?

You didn't. Obviously. Just wanted to make clear that the ONLY thing the North was dictating was in reference to slaves.

marcus says

That is, people who honor the confederacy in any way or their ancestors who were in the confederacy, are not honoring slavery, any more than someone who honors the US flag is honoring terrible things that have been done by our country.

Bullshit. I'm back again to my original question that you never answered. What exactly are Southerners honoring with the Confederate flag, if not slavery. What else did it stand for?? You haven't argued that the South went to war for states rights or tariffs or any of the other nonsense, so I'm assuming you know that it was for slavery. The North wasn't trying to take away any other Southern culture except for slavery. So, wtf else could that flag stand for??

marcus says

Actually you're missing the point. When I said "some historical pride" you have to know I wasn't referring to grits or saying "howdy" or "yes mam." Or maybe even now, I give you too much credit.

OK great--I've asked a few times. What do you mean by "some historical pride"? Tell me what you mean and there won't be any misunderstandings.

I already attempted some explanation with the questions you refused to answer. We are talking about how people feel about things, which is nt always easy to break down into logic. You take a simplisitic approach that goes someting like this:

1)The South Seceded from the US mostly because of Slavery, their new country was called the confederate states.
2)THere was a huge war for independence (that the South lost) in which 100s of thousands were killed
3)SOmehow anyone who honors those who fought in the war on the side of the south, or has feelings about the confederacy, monuments or sculptures referencing confederate soldiers, or the Navy Jack Flag, is saying something about their current beliefs (150 years later) about relations between African Americans and white folk.

YOu haven't given anything close to a proof that #3 is true. But it's somehow on me to explain why it's not, by giving you logical explanations for how people feel about something.

I speak from my own ambivalence. I grew up in the north, but am descended from someone who died in that war on the side of the south. I have nothing but respect for my great great grandfather. The politics behind the war do not affect that respect for him any more than the fact that Washington and Jefferson were slave owners takes away from my respect for them.

Reading this might help, if you actually wanted to gain insight rather than only being about winning some stupid internet argument.

http://letterstotheeditorblog.dallasnews.com/2015/07/the-confederacy-slavery-wasnt-so-black-and-white-dont-destroy-the-past.html/

marcus says

1)The South Seceded from the US mostly because of Slavery, their new country was called the confederate states.

If by mostly, you mean entirely, then I agree.

marcus says

3)SOmehow anyone who honors those who fought in the war on the side of the south, or has feelings about the confederacy, monuments or sculptures referencing confederate soldiers, or the Navy Jack Flag, is saying something about their current beliefs (150 years later) about relations between African Americans and white folk.

Please forgive me for this analogy as I know the first person to bring up the Nazis loses the argument. But, couldn't you just as easily by your logic say it's OK to honor the swastika and statues of SS soldiers? They have respect for their ancestors and the fact that they were racist against Jewish people doesn't take away from their respect. But you don't see it because it's obvious that the flag represents a dark time in German history and is offensive to many people.

I'm not trying to win an argument any more than you are-I just don't understand your perspective--and you seem unwilling to answer even the simplest question.

tatupu70 says

and you seem unwilling to answer even the simplest question

I've actually tried pretty hard. Explaining emotions isn't easy. It's the same reason you cant prove #3 is correct. You didn't ever try. But I'm not going to act like a child about it.

SO I'm left to assume that you think the founding fathers, including Jefferson and Washington, were evil scumbags, because they owned slaves.