Rand Paul: Confederate flag is “inescapably a symbol of human bondage and slavery”

[ChristianAnarchist]

WOW!!! That is SUPER interesting that he became AMERICA's first slave owner in 1655. Especially when you consider that "AMERICA" didn't become a country until July 4, 1776!

Actually "America" (more specifically "the Americas") is a continent and not a country. The "United States of America" fiction was initiated on 7-4-1776.

 

[euphemia]

Here's the thing: Why do people think racism is confined to the South?

 

[Carlybee]

Here's the thing: Why do people think racism is confined to the South?

It's not but unfortunately due to groups like the KKK and other white supremacy groups residing mostly in the South, it gets the brunt of it. There are still pockets of racism in the South. I've seen it firsthand in the way some white people talk. Granted they are usually pretty redneck. I grew up in Texas but have lived in Georgia, Northern Florida and Louisiana. My ex in-laws were both college educated people from Georgia and they were both bigots. They freely used the n word in their home and talked down to their black housekeeper. They were an older generation though and I'm not sure it's so prevalent in younger generations like it used to be but judging by idiots like Dylann Roof, that would be hard to say. So while I support NOT removing the history and flag of the Confederacy, I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say racism is gone from the South. However there is a ton of black against white bigotry as well that seems to get a free pass as if it's poetic justice or something. It's bad no matter who does it. My parents taught us to take people at face value regardless of race.

 

[AuH20]

Here's the thing: Why do people think racism is confined to the South?

I don't think they have been to Boston or Philadelphia.

 

[alucard13mm]

The Confederate flag is a non issue to me.

The issue to me is, will Rand continue to allow himself to be led around by the nose by the social justice warriors if he does indeed get elected?

That's the question that all liberty movement members should be asking.

This.

In my opinion, rand should have said...

he may or may not agree on the confederate battle flag and its meaning, but supports a states right to decide if they want to fly it or not. He would definitely defend peoples rights to fly it on their cars or homes.

It should be a formula. I believe in X, but support states and individuals that believe in Z. I am anti abortion, but support horrible states that make abortion legal. Im anti pot, but support those pot head states that legalize pot. I believe in flying purple narwhals, but support a state not believing in it.

 

[AuH20]

Well, this is getting ridiculous........................

"There's even talk of them restricting the Confederate battle flag on private homes. It would be illegal to have that on the front of your house."

 

[AuH20]

Why don't the statists in this country just unite with ISIS and get it over with?

 

[RonPaulMall]

Rand seems to have an unfortunate knack of jumping in front of these SJW trainwrecks right before they derail. He visited Ferguson right before that whole thing went sideways and now he waited to denounce the flag until the the day before the issue goes full retard.

 

[kahless]

Here's the thing: Why do people think racism is confined to the South?

What is worse is why does the media portray it as only white on black. I have never discriminated against anyone in my life and I am not about to start. But living here in NY I have received my fair share of it from blacks in my life time. If I acted the way some blacks have treated me it would have been called a hate crime, possibly made the news, I would be ostracized and lose my job.

So I would even go so far as to say there is more black on white racism than the other way around. I wish companies that owned news media properties would pay their white anchors at the same rate as the average worker where they would have to deal with the locals in their own communities every day. Then after they experienced some black on white racism lets see how they deal with the race issue. Instead of the wealthy elites being so far removed from it being shuffled in and out in their limos every day.

 

[Todd]

Heck of a distraction operation ongoing. Well played, TPTB.

 

[kahless]

Rand seems to have an unfortunate knack of jumping in front of these SJW trainwrecks right before they derail. He visited Ferguson right before that whole thing went sideways and now he waited to denounce the flag until the the day before the issue goes full retard.

I am thinking he knows the only way to get elected is trying to beat them at their own game.

 

[Occam's Banana]

And I checked those "other" sources you cited and NONE of them point to any actual numbers or study to support the BS claim. One of those you cited further went on to say that the "highest" number of slaves rose to 20% of the population. How do you reconcile those two "statistics"? How can the greatest number of slaves be only 20% of the population and yet 43% of "households" had slaves???

It's BS, BS, BS, BS, BS!!!

I have no idea whether those numbers (20 & 43) are correct, but it would not be at all difficult to reconcile them.

For example, assume a population of 1000 people with 200 households (indicating an average of 5 people per household).

If the number of slaves is 20% of the population, then there would be 200 slaves (1000 people x 0.20 = 200 slaves).
If 43% of households own slaves, then there would be 86 slave-owning households (200 households x 0.43 = 86 slave-owning households).

This would mean that there would be an average of about 2.3 slaves per slave-owning household (200 slaves / 86 slave-owning households = 2.3).

 

[hells_unicorn]

As true as this fact is, what does it matter? A black guy owned slaves? Ok? And?

Nice to meet you Hillary Clinton, allow me to introduce you to the real world where correlation to past events can teach us about the present. If a black man was the first person to pioneer the concept of owning someone indefinitely in the Western hemisphere in legal terms, it may clue us in on why black on black slavery is still a massively popular thing in Africa and why the United States' black communities have such massive problems with self-inflicted violent crime. Admittedly this alone doesn't fully explain why this problem exists and continues to persist, but it definitely casts doubt on the notion that whitey is responsible for black America's woes.

You wanna cough up that hard drive and maybe come clean on Benghazi now former madame secretary?

I don't think they have been to Boston or Philadelphia.

Having spent about half of my life either in or around Philadelphia, I can testify that race relations in said city are no picnic. Whenever I've go there I always make sure I visited the ATM before entering the city.

 

[twomp]

Do you think the term "America" was invented on July 4, 1776?

Oh I see, so when you posted that picture, you didn't mean United States of America, you meant the entire continent? Why stop there though? Might as well post a picture of the first slave owner in the entire world while you are at it. Because those are all relevant to the South Carolina flag too!

 

[hells_unicorn]

Oh I see, so when you posted that picture, you didn't mean United States of America, you meant the entire continent? Why stop there though? Might as well post a picture of the first slave owner in the entire world while you are at it. Because those are all relevant to the South Carolina flag too!

The incident of the first permanent slave owner being black occurred in Virginia, and Virginia was the state where the flag in question originated. If it isn't a relevant point, I have no idea what would be.

 

[phill4paul]

Oh I see, so when you posted that picture, you didn't mean United States of America, you meant the entire continent? Why stop there though? Might as well post a picture of the first slave owner in the entire world while you are at it. Because those are all relevant to the South Carolina flag too!

No, because I actually read the link I posted. Did you bother to before starting on this diatribe? And if you cannot see how this is relevant to the current issue then I cannot help you. Those who wish to remain ignorant will remain ignorant.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

That is different from what I said, which is that slavery was an important reason for the secession. I'm not claiming that it would have remedied anything, other than achieving independence, and perhaps make it easier in general to escape northern influence, which would have helped allow the south to deal with slavery on its own terms.

Do you or do you not believe that the South seceded (at least in part) for the purpose of preserving slavery?

...That the preservation of slavery was the end, for which seccession was the means?

...That the conscious motive of the South, in seceding, was to preserve slavery?

If not, then I don't know what you're arguing.

If so, then - again - I'd like to know what you think the South's rationale was (i.e. how would secession have helped preserve slavery).

Or is your position that, indeed, secession wouldn't have helped preserve slavery, but the Southerners were stupid/crazy and somehow inexplicably thought it would?

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Yes, the war hastened the end of slavery, but that's neither here nor there.

You believe that the South seceded in order to preserve slavery, right?

So, explain the logic of that alleged motive.

How could the South have thought that secession would preserve slavery?

"If we secede, then...[something]...and thus slavery will be preserved." Fill in the missing logical step.

If they secede, they get most of the territories and Latin America.

Any evidence that the South wanted war with the union (as opposed to peaceful secession)?

Because I could show you considerable evidence to the contrary...

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

Slavery was never seriously threatened.

Clearly, the elected officials of Mississippi thought that it was.

And why are the reasons that North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee and Arkansas seceded never mentioned, 3 of which provided almost all of the Confederate fighting force?

I believe that Virginia was included in my link. I can't find North Carolina, Tennessee, or Arkansas.

Are you kidding me? The Morrill Tariffs were spoken about heavily in conjunction with secession in both Georgia and South Carolina, and a clear reading of Georgia's declaration on the link you've provided shows that manufacturing industrialists and Republican politicians were in full collusion on undermining what Georgia saw as its economic security through legislation. The Morrill Tariff itself was not mentioned by name, but the general demeanor of the declaration cites economic concerns well beyond slavery, though it also includes content dealing with slavery. Again, why are only 4 states considered as valid opinions when there are 7 other states involved? Probably because it suits a particularly historical bias me thinks.

What Georgia saw was it's economic security was slavery. That's what most of document is about.

I'm not disagreeing with you that South Carolina bears some level of responsibility for the Civil War as they were so agitated that they took Lincoln's bait and shelled Fort Sumter rather than waiting for a sizable plurality of northern journalists who were anti-war (rightly so) to undermine Lincoln's tyrannical designs and power consolidation. By the way, arguing that Virginia should have omitted the word slavery from their declaration with regard to the other states is ludicrous, as it would be a historical falsehood and would like draw even more ire from self-righteous historical revisionists like yourself. The fact that Virginia didn't list slavery itself as its reason for getting involved disqualifies them as being part of the Big 4 that you are so obsessed over.

I would be inclined to believe you if Virginia had said something like "Tyrannical designs of President Lincoln to subjugate free Americans." But no, Virginia didn't like that Lincoln was going after fellow slave states. I highly doubt that Virginia would have lifted cared if some Southern fire-eater was elected President and fought a war to keep seceding Northern states in the union.

"self-righteous historical revisionists". I love history and want to become a history teacher in the near future. So I approached this issue as I would any other, I did my research, read primary documents, and came to a conclusion based on the evidence. And the evidence points to the argument that the driving force behind secession was the preservation of slavery.

Nice to meet you, I'm a 6th generation Pennsylvanian who has no roots south of here and my ancestors were northern anti-war Copperhead Democrats, mostly Irish, who died in great numbers because they couldn't buy their way out of Lincoln's draft, my great (x3) grandfather supported McClellan in 1864 and witnessed what the Union army did to people who either tried to avoid the draft or desert the army they were forced into. While many of the people who died that came fresh off the boat from the old country could barely tell a Democrat from a Whig/Republican, my family knew full well what the newly born GOP was about, and also how the corrupt banking interests and rail companies that bought much of the coal they mined helped put Lincoln in power.

I'm sorry for what your family went through. I don't see what this has to do with why the southern states seceded.

Also, how do you know what your ancestors thought about banking interests and railroad companies? My pro-union ancestors, to my knowledge, didn't write about their experiences.

PC is not unique to sodomites and hippies, it's actually pervasive in most of modern conservatism, which has been heavily infiltrated by Trotskyites and remnants of the fanatical transcendental movement that came out of New England Unitarianism. You may not think you're views on Civil War history are tied in with cultural Marxism, but the people who printed the textbooks you built them off of are a different matter altogether. And for the record, absent of your views having anything to do with PC, they are still wrong.

I didn't build my ideas of the civil war off of any textbook. For the record, I was home-schooled during elementary schooled and was exposed to a lot of neo-Confederate propaganda in middle school by at least one teacher and several students.

Never been to a segregated state for more than a week's time, though my parents knew a few who moved up to Philadelphia in the 1970s. They were generally upright and decent folks who had jobs. However, most of the people who were bused into my schools growing up were products of the post-Civil Rights period, and were largely self-entitled at best, and gang-banger types looking to stick it to whitey the rest of the time, which was a major catalyst in forming my views on the "so called" Civil Rights movement insofar as what it accomplished, though I'm not fully sold on Martin Luther King Jr. being some commie plant the way segregationists suggest, I'd wager he was probably just a heretical Baptist minister with an idealistic streak that got in bed with the wrong people.

I've known black people who went to segregated schools, including one pastor who hates Obama. He wouldn't share your views on civil rights though.

I wish the Confederacy had won, we would be inconceivably freer had we lived under it's constitution. I would bet that slavery would have come to a much more peaceful end.

You mean the one that interfered on states' rights to not have slavery.

There is overwhelming evidence on this thread debunking all the Unionsuckers, I haven't seen the Unionsuckers post one single solitary shred of evidence in this entire thread supporting their position, the only thing they use is emotion and their personal opinion. I see pages and pages and thousands of documents supporting the neo-Confederates here. Am I missing something?

And the declarations of secession from several of the seceding states.

 

[phill4paul]

I believe that Virginia was included in my link. I can't find North Carolina, Tennessee, or Arkansas.

Please read the link in post #494 and get back to me.

For the record, I was home-schooled during elementary schooled and was exposed to a lot of neo-Confederate propaganda in middle school

Meh, skip it. Your mind is closed to the subject. You'll make a great teacher.