Flags and the Thought Police

Posted by robgambrill 9 years, 10 months ago to Culture
170 comments | Share | Flag

I never really cared for the confederate flag, but I heard today that E-bay had banned their sale.

Just to see what would happen, I decided to try and order one off of Amazon, just as they decided not to allow the sale of rebel flags as well.

As they were taking down the offerings, I noticed that other historical flags were being pulled as well. The picture is from my "Wish List". Not sure the web masters knew which flags to pull off the site.

I eventually managed to order both a "Don't Tread on Me" flag and a small rebel flag as a souvenir of the day the thought police decided I shouldn't be able to buy a flag because of somebodies idea of what it stands for.

I could be mistaken, but I think for a lot of people, the confederate flag has to more to do with a wish to be free of the federal government than history or race issues.


The seller shipped the rebel flag right away, guess he didn't want to get stuck with the inventory.

. I guess I am not comfortable with banning the sale of flags, even unpopular ones.

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 4.
  • Posted by XenokRoy 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No disagreement.

    Were I too be completely forth right I have only two flags that I would fly at my home. One is my family coat of arms and the other is the 13 stars and 13 strips of the revolutionary war. Both represent something I can fully support; no other flag I know of shares that same full level of support.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Uh, that was 30 YEARS earlier! To say Lincoln and the Republicans were responsible for that is disingenuous. The Republican Party didn't formally exist until 1854 - just a few years prior to Lincoln's election.

    From everything I can read, there is no question that the Southern States certainly were disproportionately impacted by tariffs and duties that started just after the War of 1812 and which were perpetuated until the Civil War. But you are trying to make the argument that the secession was Lincoln's doing, and I can find no support for that argument. His election may have been the straw which broke the camel's back, but before he had actually even done anything, the South had seceded - some even prior to Lincoln's election!

    If you want to blame a President, I'd start with John Quincy Adams and Buchanan.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, preservation of slavery and other institutions that defined the South's way of life and the States' ability and right to determine those for themselves without the interference of the Federal government. It would be interesting to find the records, if they exist and haven't been suppressed, of the position of the Black slave owners at the time. Keep in mind that most Whites in the South did not own slaves, yet fought for the Confederacy for the right to determine their own future. In a way that you and I would never burn an American flag, yet would defend others' right to do so (not sure about you...). Freedom is often a very sticky point, especially in this case. But it is plain wrong to judge people of another era by the standards that did not exist at the time.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Lincoln's election brought in the tariff that Lincoln and the GOP promised. The South would be paying the majority of tariffs under the bill and the north would be receiving. The tariff of abominations had almost caused a secession crisis years earlier and Lincoln (the GOP) knew exactly what they were doing.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_of_...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree. However, that legacy of taint is and will be forever linked to the Confederate flag. As such, if it were up to me, I would abandon it and choose something untainted like the Gadsden flag. No mixed messages, no meanings left up to interpretation.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by kkeen842 9 years, 10 months ago
    I'm against the retailers decisions to not sell the flag, but agree with taking the flag down from STATE properties - it represents oppression to many, and symbolizes what was to be the perpetuation & expansion of slavery, according to the Confederate Constitution!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Correct. The South was upset by the cronycapitalsim of the North that prevented their doing business except via the government-approved middlement. The South succeeded, it did not rebel. Major difference. The 13 colonies succeeded, too, from England. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a state may not leave. When then Supreme Court Chief Justice Taney told Lincoln (informally) it was legal for the South to leave, Lincoln had an arrest warrant issed by a magistrate to arrest Taney. It was never served, but to this day Lincoln is the only president to try to get a Supreme Court Justice arrest for a difference of opinion. There was no rebellion against society.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by XenokRoy 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Read the confederate constitution and it will be difficult to continue to make that argument. The south makes it very clear that an element of the war for them was the preservation of slavery.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by XenokRoy 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If the cause was to protect slavery I would agree it was not a just cause. That was only a piece of what the cause was. That piece was unjust.

    The other major piece was the right of states and by extension the rights of individuals to live for themselves and not for the federal government.

    The two were in contradiction in the south. That does not make the first any less wrong and the second any less right. Since they were connected the victory of the north condemned them both to no longer exist
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Not relevant to the point you were making. Your arguments here are about justifying the South's secession. My comments were about flying an enemy flag.

    I find it interesting that there is so much vitriol against Lincoln, however - a man who failed in every election until that of President. This wasn't a man of vast political power. And if one reads the texts of the Lincoln-Douglas debates, it becomes pretty difficult to reconcile the Lincoln you seem to want to portray with the one in those debates. Reading Lincoln's other writings, too, such as the Gettysburg Address (which was never written as a monumental speech) tells me much more about the man than a historian from 150 years after the fact. I'll take your comments with a very large grain of salt.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ sjatkins 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Confusing the Confederate flag with racism and hate shows rather poor thinking abilities.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Would you also burn Mein Kampf in a public library? I congratulate you, sir, on your very straight and unwavering thinking...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Actually, the Civil War did not start over slavery. Slavery was part of the problem, but not the primary issue. MD, MO, DC continued to have slavery until after the Civil War, although part of the Union. Slavery became a rallying cry for the Union only a year into the war after embarrassing loses. The Confederacy should have recognized the power of propaganda and freed the slaves at that point, defanging the Union. Hindsight...
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo