In much of the recent discussion (here and in the larger blogosphere) regarding the confederate battle flag, many of the anti-south articles and posts frame their position with an opening statement about how the secession and subsequent war were a "treasonous uprising" and similar derogatory language.

As we approach the anniversary of our declaration of independence from Britain, is everyone bashing or celebrating the "treasonous uprising" and secession and war those led to?

There are lots of parallels between the two, including
-- both seceding nations supporting slavery at the time
-- both seceding nations having a wealth of natural resources
-- both seceding nations generating huge GDP the parent country wanted to retain
-- both seceding nations upset with lack of self-rule / self-determination

One obvious difference is that the Colonies won their war, but the South did not.

Are the Brits entitled to view the American flag with as much disdain as many northerners and blacks view the Confederate battle flag?

Should a Southern Man's affection for this symbol be any more offensive to Northerners than an American's affection for the Stars and Stripes could be to a Brit?

Mexico lost their war with the US, but is anyone calling displays of the Mexican flag here symbols of hate? (Obviously not on state buildings, duh, but a large contingent of Mexican people do harbor resentment toward Americans)

Native American "Indians" and their wars with the US?

I have no particular loyalty to the confederacy or their flags. I was born and raised in the south by transplanted Yankee parents, but my allegiance is pledged to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which is stands.

However, I do believe that much of the fiercely independent spirit attributed to the confederate flag is also contained in and represented by the American flag, and that if one can inspire hate, so can the other. (Thus the recent increase in flag burnings?)

Many of you are more well-versed as historians than I am, but doesn't there seem to be a good bit of irony and hypocrisy in these discussions?

Thoughtful, reasoned comments are appreciated; flames, not so much.

Cheers, and Happy Independence Day.

Edited: 07/03/2015 at 07:52 AM by RegularJoe

Recent increase in flag burnings? Is that supported by evidence or your impression?

I think the key difference is the cause for rebellion. One was to fight for freedom, one to preserve an economy founded on human bondage. Dress up the confederacy as much as you (not you personally) like, it was still an evil cause to fight for.




-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".

The American flag has not been co-opted by hate groups as the battle flag has.

I realize that today many who display the battle flag love black folks too, but in the past that was very much not the case.  Note the connection between the end of segregation and the rise of the flag.  I'm not sure how it would be possible to remove that connotation.

Probably most important is to show grace and kindness to a minority (assuming you are not) whenever you get the chance.  That's the ultimate in improved race relations.

-------------------------

Wiki wiki

There's a reasonable argument that the American Revolution was bad, or at least that you can make a strong distinction between the rebellion in New England and the slaveholders' revolt in the South.  

The American Revolution just barely succeeded.  In part it was because British authority was overturned in New England, and never got re-establlished (there was a reason for Washington keeping his army in Rhode Island).  In Pennsylvania, rural towns like Reading and Lancaster provided revolutionary strongholds and centers for food and equipment supply.  The South, until late in the game, was mostly one calamity after another for the rebels.  

The signers (and important non-signers like John Dickinson of Delaware/Pennsylvania) were acutely aware that they wer likely to be hanged.  

The Civil War seems to have produced few hangings.  One was the commander of the Andersonville prison camp in southern Georgia.  He was hanged in front of the Capitol, roughly where the Supreme Court is today.

You could argue it was the national paroxysm needed to rid of us slavery.  That's what it took.

Not sure why we can't look on it objectively now.

-------------------------

Wiki wiki

It really as is simple as: "It's not treason when you win".

-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

Similar to today, which is why we need to roll back the minimum wage or better yet, do away with it.

Viva la corporation, Fox News and Neil Cavuto who almost blew a gasket about overtime pay for workers making under 50k, and rightfully so!

As a conservo, I believe anyone making over $8.00 per hour should be a junior manager to the assistant manager of the manager, I love that golden word.....EXEMPT!

Impeach, impeach, impeach!

Paid for by the SWA (Shulb Workers Association) for a strong corporate America and Fox News.

That raises a good point.

If you fly the Gator flag, you are a supporter and you root for them to win.

If you fly the Rebel battle flag, do you support the southern cause and in-turn wish they would have won the war?





-------------------------
I was right.

Well, it's not exactly saying the same thing, but the winners do tend to write the history books.



Well, it's my impression based on the evidence I see, but I can't say I see all the evidence because of how web search engines steer content toward whatever profiles they have formed of you. But my various news/blog feeds are showing more flag burnings, usually associated with Occupy and similar movement events, and events in Ferguson, Baltimore, Dallas, and places where blacks have been protesting police brutality.

Edit: I found an example of flag burning at Ferguson.

I think it's pretty rare, at least in the US. Even occupy protests I don't recall flag burning.

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".

Edited: 07/04/2015 at 05:46 AM by RustyTruck

The square confederate battle flag and rectangular second confederate navy jack possibly had some place at cemeteries on Decoration/Memorial Day, but really got going in 1948 when Strom Thurmond set up a Dixiecrat Party to protest president Truman integrating the U.S. military.  That made it easier for Dwight Eisenhower to become president.  He of course kept the military integrated and supported the Supreme Court.  

A fresh wave of confedrate flags came along during the civil righrts struggle of the 1960s.  Check St. Augustine, 1964.  Also check "A Stone of Hope:  prophetic religion and the death of Jim Crow" from UNC Press. 

I don't go looking for them, but articles about such incidents seem to be popping up with greater frequency of late. I just got a laugh out of this one:

wow, that's some of the quality journalism that the NY Post is so famous for.

-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

If it wasn't to preserve free labor, what was the reason the South tried to secede from the US?

Were they unfairly taxed?

Did they not have fair representation in the Federal Government?

It must have been something?





-------------------------
I was right.

In 1860 Abraham Lincoln won the presidential election without being on the ballot in ten (10) of the southern states.  History often omits this fact.  This alone triggered the imediate call for secession in South Carolina and a call for the restoration of state's rights as specified in the Constitution.  All in pretty much the same way as "Taxation without Representation" started the Revolutionary War.  Partisan politics and economics were the main reasons leading up to war.  Slavery was both a political and economic issue, but was not the initial casue.

Seems Partisan politics, economics and race are at it again too huh?

"Slavery was both a political and economic issue, but was not the initial cause."

Nope. It sure was.

Slavery was the reason he wasn't on those ballots.
Slavery was the reason for succession.
The end of slavery was the cause of the war.

Seems revisionism is at it always.


-------------------------
"The truth is incontrovertible.
malice may attack it,
ignorance may deride it,
but in the end,
there it is." -Sir Winston Churchill

Not just existing slavery as I understand it, but the desire to SPREAD slavery into the new territories and states.

Even Lincoln wasn't sure that it was constitutional to free existing slaves as that would be the taking of property by the government without consideration.


-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".

What a bubble.

-------------------------

Wiki wiki

Confederate Flag bit

Lincoln won the 1860 election with 40% of the popular vote but a narrow majority in the Electoral College.  That's almost as good as some recent elections.

In most of the southern states, no one volunteered to serve as Republican electors.  South Carolina didn't hold an election--its state legislature chose the electors. I think they could still do it that way.  

It was Oregon's first election.  Lincoln won, 3 electoral votes.  

On the county by county election map, the Maryland/Delaware-Pennsylvania border (Mason-Dixon lines) show up clearly.  

The Republicans played exceedingly smart politics, but it sounds as though they didn't take threats of secession seriously.  

Edited: 07/06/2015 at 07:57 PM by ww