I think that it is time to fold the flag and put it up.
I have heard the arguments both pro and con. On the pro side is the argument that it is part of our heritage. Generally speaking that might be true, but the flag at the courthouse doesn’t represent that heritage. It is true that the last Confederate flag to come down was at that location, and that should be properly noted. The flag at the courthouse isn't there to commemorate that event.
I love history, and I love the history of our area. I love the history of my family and try to pass it down to the younger people in the family.
Three of my four great-grandfathers fought in the Confederate army.
But that flag doesn’t represent them, the history of the location or even of the era. That flag was put up in my lifetime, and it was put up in defiance of an ever growing civil rights movement.
There were things that had to change, and needed to change. The flag at the courthouse was put up in opposition to that change. Simply put, the change came and it is time to take it down.
Call me ignorant but until reading comments on facebook, I never realized the confederate flag meant so much to so many people. I personally have no strong feelings one way or the other about flying the flag. Unlike some on facebook, I do not consider the stars and bars to be the flag of my country and think those who do should rethink their position.
ReplyDeleteVery well said. I appreciate your coverage of this.
ReplyDeleteFlying the confederate flag on our courthouse is akin to hoisting a nazi swastika upon our public buildings. What the flag represents is a tragic event that should not be honored or remembered in any way. Let's not forget that the civil war, by far, had the highest death toll of any American war.
ReplyDeleteI think the biggest argument for removing the flag was because it prevented proper justice from being served.
ReplyDeleteThat's a flat out bullsh-t statement. No white person passes the flag, becomes enraged with hate and says, "Oooh yeah, I'm gonna go convict me a ni**er today." Conversely, I doubt any black person walks by and thinks, "those crackers gonna convict me because of that damn flag." Will the number of convictions change? No. Will the number of years sentenced change? No.
It's the job of the black community and the guilty whites to point out everything which could possibly be construed as racist, all the while ignoring the "dirty laundry" (as Bill Cosby called it) of their own community. There's no self-regulation and certainly little or no progress.
@A.J., that's a very ignorant statement.
ReplyDeleteThe civil war was not begun to end slavery. Slavery didn't even enter into it until 1863, which Lincoln used to keep the English from helping the Confederacy. When approached and given recommendations to free the slaves, Lincoln lashed out and had those advisers transferred out of the military and sent to Moscow as ambassadors.
The Emancipation Proclamation didn't free a single slave, only slaves who were under Confederate control, as an attempt to get the slaves to rise up against their owners.
Lincoln waged war against his own people because they refused to pay high taxes for out of control government spending. Lincoln was a Whig, and was a huge proponent stimulus spending at massive levels.
A.J., the Jackass avatar is very appropriate.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I don't care if they fly the Confederate Flag at the Caddo Courthouse, or not. I don't think it is akin to a swastika, which some jackass mentioned.
ReplyDeleteI understand the argument about it being a part of our Southern Heritage, too. But, I really don't care. It's a Caddo thing...and 11-1 is 11-1.
Anon @3:24 just scratches the surface on Lincoln (the third worst President in the history of our nation). Lincoln was a racist who really considered black folks inferior to whites. He often said so (you can GoobleSearch for racist Lincoln quotes and find them quickly). He was a political animal unlike many we've seen in our history.
I've rattled on endlessly about his great error in killing 600,000 Americans...the halt of progress it caused...the unConstitutionality (I know that's not a word) of it all...
All in an effort to get a Monument built to himself.
I guess it worked.
Like I said, I really don't care. To echo another poster...it won't make any difference at all in the crime rate, or judicial outcomes for black folks.
As a side note, Ole' Miss went PC...and look where they ended up.
Just sayin'...
I was born and raised up north. I had ancestors who fought for the Union Army, and I was always told that slavery was the sole issue for why the Civil War was fought.
ReplyDeleteOne day I actually decided to get away from main stream educational (liberal leaning) books and read a series of books on the subject. Guess what? I learned there were other issues, some of them were mentioned by Anon 3:24.
If you really want to know what most northerners felt about fighting to end slavery look up the New York Draft Riots in July 0f 1863 (this was after the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation, there's clue.)
The Emancipation Proclamation was a tool used to keep Great Britain out of the war. It was a common belief that Great Britain was going to enter the war on the side of the south. Great Britain had earlier abolished slavery. The thinking was that if the slavery issue was introduced it would keep Great Britain from entering to avoid looking hypocritical.
Slavery was a horrible institution and a scar on our nation that will never go away. But I do wish people would educate themselves a little.
As for me, being a northerner by birth and heritage but knowing some history behind it, I don't find the Confederate flag offensive.
A.J. is the jackass to tell us your political leanings? With the statement you made about swastikas make me believe it more about personality.
ReplyDeleteIt should be as simple as that the winners get to fly their flags over the country, and not the losers. I agree that the so-called Civil War was an end to constitutional government in America, and it remains a pretense that the Constitution of 1789 is still in effect to this day. The government established by that constitution was not the one giant superstate based in Washington, D.C., but a union of free, soveign states, with states rights being respected, while any rights not specifically given to the federal government were reserved to the states. Having said all of that, whatever it took to end slavery was right. Those who are trying to say that slavery had nothing to do with it, maybe they never even heard the words of The Battle Hymn of the Republic, which the yankees sung to glorify their killing of my ancestors. I can't say anthing in defense of my own ancestors when they were holding other humans in captivity as slaves, but they were right as far as their legal rights for their states to secede from the United States. The flying of an invalid flag by descendants of those who were so thoroughly defeated does not seem relevant to anything important.
ReplyDeleteNow that the flag has been taken down what will the NAACP come up with next that they feel is racist. No matter where you go in this country there is more black on black crime than anything else. Shreveport is no exception. But I guess it was the flag's fault.
ReplyDeleteI remember in school learning about the civil war. I too thought the war was fought over slavery. It never made sense to me that all these whites from the north starved and died on the battlefields just so blacks could be free in the south. I learned later that was just a small footnote for going to war. We must start teaching that period of our history different. And by the way, I learned much later christopher Columbus didn't discover America either. Damn Bossier schools
Just a side note - everyone check out Chaile's blog, Sheveport Bites. It's about food and it is now in the blog feed on the right sidebar of My Bossier.
ReplyDeleteChaile seems to be a fine young woman with a passion for beef.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, I am a vegetarian, so I MUST abstain.
Crud.
Maybe the NAACP should look at changing their name. Their name itself screams racism. A national orginazation thats sole purpose is to help only the colored people with no reguard for any other race. History is History and the Confederate flag is a part of that history. I remember in high school being forced to learn only black history during Feburary. Why can't history just be history. I hate the fact that the NAACP can force their agenda of anyone.
ReplyDeleteI thought the Civil War was about states rights and slavery became a focus as a strategic move by Lincoln.
ReplyDeleteTo those who mentioned my avatar -- yes, I am a liberal democrat and proud to be one!
ReplyDeleteGet the torches! Storm the village! There's a liberal Democrat in here!
ReplyDelete@8:33 PM - The south wanted all new states to be slave states, and they wanted the Federal government to force northern states to return fugitive slaves. Not very states rightsy there. The Mississippi Ordinance of Secession starts out by saying:
ReplyDelete"In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world." Others are similar. That kind of lays it out there.
Anon @ 8:33
ReplyDeleteThe civil war was primarily caused by tensions between abolitionists and slave holders. Historical revisionists will tell you that the southern states seceded because Lincoln was against state's rights. Let me clear this up for you. The southern states seceded BEFORE Lincoln had even become President. That's right, they seceded before Lincoln had any power -- their argument rests on the idea that Lincoln abused his office to deny state's rights. Nay, Lincoln was not even in office at the time. It was James Buchanan in the White House.
The historical revisionists will tell you that the states seceded because Lincoln denied southern rights. In reality, they seceded because the 1860 election was about a single issue -- slavery. It was the end of Buchanan's reign, and soon an anti-slavery president would be in office.
And when they tell you that it was Lincoln who went on the offensive, denying state's rights -- one should remember that the Confederate Army actually started the Civil War by attacking Fort Sumter.
The civil war was about slavery. The election of 1860 was about slavery. When the slave states saw an anti slavery man about to enter the white house, they seceded. They formed an army. And then they attacked Fort Sumter. The civil war was begun by their paranoia. A year later, the President issued his Emancipation Proclamation -- which freed all slaves.
I related news ft worth government votes to remove five of the six flags at six flags over Texas citing" it's time to move on. We need to forget the Alamo and our history because although it makes us who we r it offends some people." when asked why the Mexican flag would be the remaining flag?" he stated, "we are teaching our kids it was wrong to fight them for the land, so at this time in history political correctness dictates that it should be the one to remain. "
ReplyDeleteThe flag taker downers were heard saying" that UN building is next!!"
A.J., you are correct that many of the Confederate States seceded before Lincoln was inaugurated. For reference: http://americanhistory.about.com/od/civilwarmenu/a/secession_order.htm
ReplyDeleteBut, that does not change the reality that while it was not written in stone in the Constitution, it was generally understood by most (if not all) of the framers that U.S. Statehood was a voluntary cooperative, in which no State would be forced to remain, should they choose not to voluntarily cooperate.
When Confederate forces fired on Ft. Sumter, they were not trying to start a war. They were simply telling the US to "Get off our lawn! We're no longer a part of you, and we demand that you leave!" BTW, if my rememberer is working right, not one soldier on either side was killed in the fighting there.
Lincoln's escalation of hostilities after his inauguration lead to what really became the most horrific chapter in our grand history.
The shame of it all is that a generation (or two) of productivity was wiped out over Lincoln's obsession with preserving the union. And, I'm here to tell you that it would have been just fine if the Confederacy had survived.
The reality is that slavery was on the decline worldwide, having proven to be inefficient...it would have eventually disappeared in the South. And, I suspect that some time in the future, cooler heads would have prevailed, and the States would have reunited. But, that's just a guess.
And, Lincoln was no saint when it came to his view of the black man.
Regardless, secession should have been allowed, and honored...not warred against. Every time I think about those some 600,000 boys and men that died, and their families, and what they could have done...well, it makes me ill.
A.J., one other point...and it's a minor one. The Emancipation Proclamation didn't happen until 1863, deep in to the horrific destruction...not the next year as you mentioned.
ReplyDeleteAnd, it was so full of exemptions that it didn't really "free" many slaves. If you'll do a little research on it, you'll find that it was a bucket full of holes, and Lincoln knew it. It didn't even make the few slaves that were freed US citizens. The 13th Amendment was what truly abolished slavery.
Regardless, the subject of the post is the Confederate flag at the coathouse. Personally, I don't think it matters if they fly it, or take it down.
What I'd really like to see is the modern-day slave traders (like the NAACP & Sharpton's cabal) run out of power, so that their modern-day slaves can get a taste of freedom. But sadly, a great number (of all races) like being enslaved to dependency.
Yes, there were a handful of abolistionists who went to Kansas and riled up anti-slavery sentiment which caused slavery to become an issue (not the main issue) of the Civil War. The main issues were monetary: taxes and tariffs. Some historians believe it was a continuation of European hostilities between the English descendants who settled in the north and those with Scottish and Irish ancestors who settled in the south.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of the cause of the Civil War, I'm sick and tire of organizations like the ACLU and the NAACP.
I don't know history as well as some so I will not try to argue that with you. I agree with Andy about Sharpton, Jackson, and the NAACP but believe you can also say that the democratic party is doing the same thing.
ReplyDeleteKartman, you may not know history but I will tell you this, if the left and people and organizations like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, ACLU, NAACP...keep pushing you will see the South Rise again, only this time you'll see places Montana and other conservative strongholds rise along with it. Then you'll get to see history in the making.
ReplyDeleteAnon 1:13
ReplyDeleteI did not say that I did not know history. I said I was not as knowledgeable as some others. I too am a conservative who has never agreed with the people and organizations you mentioned. As far as an uprising taking place, I think that it is happening now led by the tea party. I believe they have the right approach for changing the direction of the country.
Jim, you know how you did an article about the margaritaville amendment? Could you please provide some info on the other amendment thats on the ballot? It's something about prohibiting taxes when land is being bought and sold. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteA.J., I'll have to look it up. I thought it was just a renewal on funding to operate the prisons. I'll check it out.
ReplyDeleteJim, Wiki has got this: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Louisiana_Immovable_Property_Tax,_Amendment_1_%282011%29
ReplyDeleteOoooops! It ain't Wiki. It's BallotPedia. Crud...
ReplyDeleteThey got a "Pedia" name for everything now.
A.J., I was thinking about the local props, sorry. Andypedia provided a link . . .
ReplyDelete@Jim
ReplyDeleteWell, even if you can't, that's fine. I appreciate it.
http://www.la-par.org/Publications/PDF/9-9_Amendments_Final.pdf
ReplyDeleteLouisiana Public Affairs Research Council explains amendment number 1 in detail. They are a non-partisan research group.
In response to Jim's point about the Mississippi Ordinance of Secession:
ReplyDeleteRead further: "These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. "
Abolition of slavery was simply the means through which weakening the South could be achieved.
Also pointed out in the Mississippi Ordinance:
"It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better...It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives.
It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security.
It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system.
It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause.
It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood. "
Finally, if abolition was Lincoln's goal, why was he the only one to use scorched earth against his own people when 30 other countries had already abolished slavery through peaceful means? I believe it was John C. Calhoun who suggested letting the South secede peacefully, then working out the slavery issue and reuniting with the rest of the states in the future.
Two takeaways -
1. The end doesn't justify the means.
2. "To preserve the Union" is not at all supported in the Constitution, and I would argue is even contrary to the intent of the founders as they themselves seceded from England because the English government no longer represented the interests of the Colonists.
I am not patriotic, and I pledge allegiance to the Lord Jesus Christ, and unto Him alone do I pledge allegiance. But the government of the United States is the government, they won the war, and it is their flag that should fly at the courthouse rather than the flag of the Confederates.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Mr. Sciba's neo-Confederate defense of the Confederacy. First, Lincoln tried in every way possible to avoid the war. It was the Confederacy that opened fire, rather than negotiate.
ReplyDeleteAs for the other reasons for secession. That issue was covered rather completely by Confederate VP Alexander Stephens in his "Cornerstone Speech" his explanation was:
"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.
This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago.
Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails.
I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal."
Just as a side note, and to stir the pot a little bit, if the Stars and Bars is so offensive due to the "representation of racism and hate", then why is the Democratic Party still in existence?
ReplyDeleteThe same argument can be made for the Democratic Party and its history, or do we need a reminder and refresher course on that?
I personally don't care whether the flag is taken down, as long as it's on "government" property and they have the authority to do so; however, I can't stand hypocrisy.
www.conservativedrink.com
If the Confederacy had abandoned the philosophy expressed by Stephens, freed the slaves and taken a completely different position, the situation might be entirely different.
ReplyDeleteYou are correct about the legacy of the Democratic Party in the South. But in the same spirit of pointing out hypocrisy, I must ask to which party did those now almost vanished Democratic racists of the South flee when the party mended it ways?
Man, you sure get a lot of spam on this post!
ReplyDelete[url=http://www.kindboots.co.uk][img]http://www.kindboots.co.uk/images/ugg-boots.jpg alt="cheap ugg" title="cheap ugg"[/img][/url] ugg glitter boots http://www.firstboots.co.uk
ReplyDelete[url=http://www.firstboots.co.uk/#m3s49g25w][b]www.firstboots.co.uk[/b][/url]
[url=http://www.likeboots.co.uk/#q5z24z15x][b]ugg uk[/b][/url]
[url=http://www.wholeboots.co.uk/#i5f67n22f][b]ugg online[/b][/url]