Confederate Battle Flag.

[Sum Dum Gai]

I'm a little old fashioned. I would suggest that the racists subverting the meaning of the flag find a different symbol.

Even the original meaning had a whiff of racism to it. Like it or not the slave trade, and disagreements stemming from the opposition to it, were a large part of the lead up to the civil war. On some level that flag represents white Virginians taking up arms against their own country to protect their right to own black people. That's not all it represented, but that's in there.

So the people who want it to stand for it's original meaning have to admit there's some stink of racism attached to that meaning as well. That's why racists started using the symbol in the first place. Same reason they use the flag of the third reich, it was a symbol used by white people that firmly believed it was OK to oppress colored people. They're attracted to the symbols due to the inherent racism in their original meanings, even if it's just a small part of the overall meaning.

One could lump our beloved national flag in there as well. Early in our history that flag did fly over our army troops as they slaughtered the native brown people with government approval. If flew over the country that said black folks are only 3/5ths of a person in our original constitution. There's a reason they have this twisted idea that America was founded as a white christian nation and they think they're just trying to overturn the corruption of that which happened later. Honestly it's fairly similar to the justification the south used during the civil war.

We have a complicated and racist past as a country. Some of us can accept that without silly arguments about how our historic symbols aren't racist.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2016 14:12:55 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

I'm a little old fashioned. I would suggest that the racists subverting the meaning of the flag find a different symbol.

Even the original meaning had a whiff of racism to it. Like it or not the slave trade, and disagreements stemming from the opposition to it, were a large part of the lead up to the civil war. On some level that flag represents white Virginians taking up arms against their own country to protect their right to own black people. That's not all it represented, but that's in there.

So the people who want it to stand for it's original meaning have to admit there's some stink of racism attached to that meaning as well. That's why racists started using the symbol in the first place. Same reason they use the flag of the third reich, it was a symbol used by white people that firmly believed it was OK to oppress colored people. They're attracted to the symbols due to the inherent racism in their original meanings, even if it's just a small part of the overall meaning.

One could lump our beloved national flag in there as well. Early in our history that flag did fly over our army troops as they slaughtered the native brown people with government approval. If flew over the country that said black folks are only 3/5ths of a person in our original constitution. There's a reason they have this twisted idea that America was founded as a white christian nation and they think they're just trying to overturn the corruption of that which happened later. Honestly it's fairly similar to the justification the south used during the civil war.

We have a complicated and racist past as a country. Some of us can accept that without silly arguments about how our historic symbols aren't racist.

And yet while crying "racist symbol" in regards to that flag, the very same people vote Democrat. There was no mere "whiff of racism" or small backing of the slave trade from that party at that time, they were all for it. The racists can find another symbol to subvert.

[Sum Dum Gai]

They aren't subverting it though. The symbols from early America have a hint of racism. That is part of what they stand for. Historically we're a racist nation. So are most nations if we really study history. Humans have an innate distrust of the other. We've spent our whole history slaughtering people that don't look like us. The first light skinned cave man that came across a dark skinned cave man probably killed him. That's kind of who we are as a species. Some of us can both acknowledge that historical fact, while trying to do better going forward. I'm honestly not sure why the deniers have such a hard time with this. It won't cause so much mental dissonance that your head explodes, I promise.

My ancestors were racist. Your ancestors were racist. Yankees were historically racist. Look at how they treated the Irish, Italians, blacks, Chinese, etc. Southerners were historically racist. Look at how they treated the Irish, Italians, blacks, Chinese, etc.

Deal with it dude.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2016 14:48:07 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

They aren't subverting it though. The symbols from early America have a hint of racism. That is part of what they stand for. Historically we're a racist nation. So are most nations if we really study history. Humans have an innate distrust of the other. We've spent our whole history slaughtering people that don't look like us. The first light skinned cave man that came across a dark skinned cave man probably killed him. That's kind of who we are as a species. Some of us can both acknowledge that historical fact, while trying to do better going forward. I'm honestly not sure why the deniers have such a hard time with this. It won't cause so much mental dissonance that your head explodes, I promise.

My ancestors were racist. Your ancestors were racist. Yankees were historically racist. Look at how they treated the Irish, Italians, blacks, Chinese, etc. Southerners were historically racist. Look at how they treated the Irish, Italians, blacks, Chinese, etc.

Deal with it dude.

I am dealing with it.  Even all the parties you listed are racist. They should find their own racist symbols.  Maybe all Democratic party symbols in those liberal states would be a good place to start.     

[Sum Dum Gai]

Even all the parties you listed are racist.

Exactly! Which also means the symbols that were historically used by those parties are racist. Ipso facto the battle flag of Northern Virginia is a symbol with a racist connotation. Argument over.

[gregintenn]

Jan 27, 2016 15:11:13 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Even all the parties you listed are racist.

Exactly! Which also means the symbols that were historically used by those parties are racist. Ipso facto the battle flag of Northern Virginia is a symbol with a racist connotation. Argument over.

Is Jesse Jackson a racist? How about Al Sharpton?

[dondub]

Is Jesse Jackson a racist? How about Al Sharpton?


No and no.



rac·ist


/ˈrāsəst/


noun

noun: racist; plural noun: racists



1.


a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

synonyms: racial bigot, racialist, xenophobe, chauvinist, supremacist More

"he was exposed as a racist"


•(racially) discriminatory, racialist, prejudiced, bigoted

"a racist society"

[Sum Dum Gai]

Is Jesse Jackson a racist? How about Al Sharpton?

Yes and absolutely. Or absolutely and you bet your ass. Or duh and even bigger duh. Does a bear shit in the woods and would a one legged man lose an ass kicking contest? Take your pick.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2016 15:12:53 GMT -5 gregintenn said:

Jan 27, 2016 15:11:13 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

Exactly! Which also means the symbols that were historically used by those parties are racist. Ipso facto the battle flag of Northern Virginia is a symbol with a racist connotation. Argument over.

Is Jesse Jackson a racist? How about Al Sharpton?

“There is nothing more painful to me … than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery, then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.”    Jesse Jackson

[dondub]

Remarks at a meeting of Operation PUSH in Chicago (27 November 1993). Quoted in "Crime: New Frontier - Jesse Jackson Calls It Top Civil-Rights Issue" by Mary A. Johnson, 29 November 1993, Chicago Sun-Times (ellipsis in original). Partially quoted in "In America; A Sea Change On Crime" by Bob Herbert, 12 December 1993, New York Times.

Is this proof Jesse is a racist?

[gregintenn]

Jan 27, 2016 15:47:27 GMT -5 dondub said:

Remarks at a meeting of Operation PUSH in Chicago (27 November 1993). Quoted in "Crime: New Frontier - Jesse Jackson Calls It Top Civil-Rights Issue" by Mary A. Johnson, 29 November 1993, Chicago Sun-Times (ellipsis in original). Partially quoted in "In America; A Sea Change On Crime" by Bob Herbert, 12 December 1993, New York Times.

Is this proof Jesse is a racist?

Jesse makes his living off spreading racism. How you can say otherwise with a straight face is beyond me.

[dondub]

Just because you choose to believe that doesn't make it so. I posted the definition of racist to make it easier for you. I don't expect you to get it.

[gregintenn]

Jan 27, 2016 17:55:41 GMT -5 dondub said:

Just because you choose to believe that doesn't make it so. I posted the definition of racist to make it easier for you. I don't expect you to get it.

The definition fits him like a glove. You don't need to be white to be a racist.

[dondub]

The definition fits him like a glove. You don't need to be white to be a racist.

Not really, but I'm sure all the magpies on talk radio have repeated this often enough for you to believe it. Did you go to public schools?

[gregintenn]

Jan 27, 2016 18:09:51 GMT -5 dondub said:

The definition fits him like a glove. You don't need to be white to be a racist.

Not really, but I'm sure all the magpies on talk radio have repeated this often enough for you to believe it. Did you go to public schools?

Did you?

[dondub]

I asked you first.

[gregintenn]

Jan 27, 2016 18:11:29 GMT -5 dondub said:

I asked you first.

I did. Why?

[dondub]

I think you referenced it somewhere in a derogatory fashion. Just wondered if a mirror was involved.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2016 14:48:07 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

They aren't subverting it though. The symbols from early America have a hint of racism. That is part of what they stand for. Historically we're a racist nation. So are most nations if we really study history. Humans have an innate distrust of the other. We've spent our whole history slaughtering people that don't look like us. The first light skinned cave man that came across a dark skinned cave man probably killed him. That's kind of who we are as a species. Some of us can both acknowledge that historical fact, while trying to do better going forward. I'm honestly not sure why the deniers have such a hard time with this. It won't cause so much mental dissonance that your head explodes, I promise.

My ancestors were racist. Your ancestors were racist. Yankees were historically racist. Look at how they treated the Irish, Italians, blacks, Chinese, etc. Southerners were historically racist. Look at how they treated the Irish, Italians, blacks, Chinese, etc.

Deal with it dude.

Ohhhh you mean the US Flag (Old Glory)... the Cross... The US Constitution... those things? All of which supported slavery, yet no one has a problem with them (hell the "anti-racists" even PROUDLY display/wear them!).

Sorry. The Confederate flags are no more "Racist" than those other things I gave examples of.

The "That's a racist symbol" people are the ones that need to "deal", dude.

[Sum Dum Gai]

In my personal opinion the southern symbols are slightly more racist although I realize that's a subjective statement. At a time when the federal government and the northern states were trying to abolish the worst form of institutionalized racism that a society can have, slavery, the south decided that was a step too far, the government was overreaching, etc., and went to war over it. Symbols used by the white people defending their right to literally own brown people is pretty frigging racist. Much worse than say allowing brown people to live here but keeping them from voting. Just one guy's opinion, although polling shows that a pretty large segment of America agrees with me on this one.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2016 15:18:19 GMT -5 dondub said:

Is Jesse Jackson a racist? How about Al Sharpton?


No and no.



rac·ist
/ˈrāsəst/

noun

noun: racist; plural noun: racists
1.
a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
synonyms: racial bigot, racialist, xenophobe, chauvinist, supremacist More
"he was exposed as a racist"

•(racially) discriminatory, racialist, prejudiced, bigoted
"a racist society"

Wrong and wrong. Both of them are racists. In their case they believe the black race to be superior AND they are prejudiced against white people. Seems to me that they fit your provided definition quite well.

[dondub]

According to you. I have never heard any racist comment from either. It's not like they try to use racist symbolism on message boards and then post stupid justifications or anything.
If they are prejudiced against white people, go ahead and show me. As Black leaders they probably harbor some trepidation about whites, but wouldn't that be normal considering history, both past and present?

[Sum Dum Gai]

rac·ist

/ˈrāsəst/



noun



noun: racist; plural noun: racists

1.

a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

synonyms: racial bigot, racialist, xenophobe, chauvinist, supremacist More

"he was exposed as a racist"



•(racially) discriminatory, racialist, prejudiced, bigoted

"a racist society"

See that bolded bit. What would you call somebody that jumps on every breaking news story where a black person is harmed or killed by the police and is on national TV accusing the police of intentional murder before any of the facts are in? They only step in when the police officer is white and the victim is a person of color, and they accuse the white person of wrongdoing based solely on the color of the their skin and the color of the victims skin? To me that sure sounds like they're prejudging the situation, without waiting for any facts, and they'd doing so based on a bigoted belief that all white people hate all black people. That would make them (racially) discriminatory, racialist, prejudiced, and bigoted. Hat trick plus, they hit all four points.

I realize your post wasn't addressed at me, but come on dude. You're going to tell me with a straight face that those two aren't racist? Really?

I find this tangent just as ridiculous as the people arguing that a symbol used by white slave owners that went to war to protect their right to continue owning black people isn't inherently racist either.

[dondub]

Considering the egregious history in America of police action brought to bear against the Black citizenry, usually for the simple fact they have different skin pigmentation, I'm not surprised that these 2 gentlemen might consider each additional 'event' as just more proof therein. And just in the last 12 months, how many of the police versions of events have been proven to be a complete fabrication? And how many times do the police get off scott free while a Black person is left dead.

That they rush to judgment under all of these historical circumstances is no surprise. But are their mistakes worse than the ones they decry? No. Do those mistakes, when they do occur, make them racists? No. Do they think they have a right to push an agenda regarding civil rights and black/white relations in this country? Yes. is their activism wrong? No. Is it sometimes proven to be misguided? Yes. Is it racist...no.

[Sum Dum Gai]

Is it racist...no.

That's where we disagree I guess.

I don't deny pretty much anything else you posted. However, I'm not sure that fighting racism with more racism is a winning strategy. They would have a lot more traction with white Americans, and possibly get more done to address the problem, if they took a tone of let's wait for the facts then only condemn the police and politicians involved after wrongdoing on their part was proven.

As to the general claim that it's not racist when they do it. I would say that assuming all white police officers are racist is just as racist as white police officers assuming all black people are criminals. They're both equally stupid and damaging to the local community.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2016 19:09:45 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

In my personal opinion the southern symbols are slightly more racist although I realize that's a subjective statement. At a time when the federal government and the northern states were trying to abolish the worst form of institutionalized racism that a society can have, slavery, the south decided that was a step too far, the government was overreaching, etc., and went to war over it. Symbols used by the white people defending their right to literally own brown people is pretty frigging racist. Much worse than say allowing brown people to live here but keeping them from voting. Just one guy's opinion, although polling shows that a pretty large segment of America agrees with me on this one.

Bolded Italics:
You have a right to that opinion (as everyone has a right to their opinion). What no one has a right to though, is forcing that opinion on others. Especially since it cannot be backed up by facts (the "southern symbols" actually, in provable fact, are not "more racist" than the Cross or Old Glory or the Constitution).

Bolded Underlined:
The south didn't secede over slavery. There was even a Constitutional Amendment introduced By Ohio Representative Thomas Corwin (from the North) that passed both Houses of Congress and Lincoln stated in his inauguration speech that he accepted as "implied constitutional law" just awaiting ratification by the appropriate number of states that would have institutionalized it FOREVER as unrepealable and unamendable. Google "Corwin Amendment".

The Corwin Amendment:

“No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.”

Lincoln's reference to The Corwin Amendment in his inaugural address:

I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution--which amendment, however, I have not seen--has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

Unfortunately for the Corwin Amendment, The South seceded (I guess slavery being guaranteed for all time wasn't what they wanted after all, huh?) before it could be ratified by the required number of states and it was all but forgotten.

Italicized Underlined:
A "pretty large segment" can agree on something and all be wrong, you know. I've given examples before, and I'll give them again in the future... I'll also give some now:

• A pretty large segment at one time believed the planet was flat
• A pretty large segment at one time believed the universe revolved around the Earth
• A pretty large segment of America (until recently) believed marriage should be reserved to one man+one woman.

In all cases those "pretty large segment" of people were wrong. The "pretty large segment" of people that believe the symbols of the Confederacy to be racist are also wrong.

[Deleted]

Jan 27, 2016 19:20:48 GMT -5 dondub said:

According to you. I have never heard any racist comment from either. It's not like they try to use racist symbolism on message boards and then post stupid justifications or anything.
If they are prejudiced against white people, go ahead and show me. As Black leaders they probably harbor some trepidation about whites, but wouldn't that be normal considering history, both past and present?

If that's true you must not have seen many of their interviews or press conferences or speeches... most of them are rife with racist rhetoric.

Who here uses racist symbolism? I know I don't... And I haven't seen anyone else use any...

[dondub]

I don't deny pretty much anything else you posted. However, I'm not sure that fighting racism with more racism is a winning strategy. They would have a lot more traction with white Americans, and possibly get more done to address the problem, if they took a tone of let's wait for the facts then only condemn the police and politicians involved after wrongdoing on their part was proven.

I don't think they are "fighting racism with more racism" because I don't think they are racist.



As to the general claim that it's not racist when they do it. I would say that assuming all white police officers are racist is just as racist as white police officers assuming all black people are criminals. They're both equally stupid and damaging to the local community.

I doubt either man assumes that all white police officers are racist. Maybe the ones that shoot unarmed kids 16 times, or choke someone to death over cigarettes, or some of the other crimes committed by police. But all? I didn't know you knew them well enough to say that.

[dondub]

If that's true you must not have seen many of their interviews or press conferences or speeches... most of them are rife with racist rhetoric.

Who here uses racist symbolism? I know I don't... And I haven't seen anyone else use any...



I know you don't think you do and you are entitled to that opinion, but you are wrong and another board reminded you of that. Doesn't mean you won't make an additional 437 posts justifying. Just sayin'.


I have never heard either man express any thoughts that Black people are superior to other races.

rac·ist


/ˈrāsəst/


noun

noun: racist; plural noun: racists



1.


a person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

[Sum Dum Gai]

A "pretty large segment" can agree on something and all be wrong, you know.

I do know. Right now in America a pretty large segment of the population doesn't believe the battle flag to be racist. They're wrong.