Driving down Hardy St, drove past the Federal Credit Union and noticed a Rebel flag flying on an empty lot. I don't know how long its been up but noticed it today.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
Somebody needs to take this down
- Thread starter BoxingEagle
- Start date
Been there at least 10 years. Usually you see three flying, American Flag, Mississippi Flag and Battle Jack.
This post was edited on 10/29 3:55 PM by Lanny Mixon
This post was edited on 10/29 3:55 PM by Lanny Mixon
I remember it being there a long time ago and assumed it was gone. Certainly does not reflect positively on our city
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]
many of us are proud of our ancestors who died fighting under that flag. it only represents hate to hateful people. i am very proud of the progress in race relations, but that flag was about so much more than race. and before you guys start, i detest ole miss and all they stand for. it's a very complicated issue that is not fairly served by blanket statements or pc platitudes. peace.
Hey Noodles:
using your justifications then you should have no problem with a Nazi flag ( because it only represents hate to hateful people!) -- it's about much more than race right? I guess that I should be proud of my ancestors who died also fighting for their state's rights under their flag.
This anachronistic mentality keeps us on the bottom and the rest of the country laughing at us.
This post was edited on 10/29 7:10 PM by ArztEagle
This post was edited on 10/29 7:11 PM by ArztEagle
This post was edited on 10/29 7:12 PM by ArztEagle
This post was edited on 10/29 7:16 PM by ArztEagle
using your justifications then you should have no problem with a Nazi flag ( because it only represents hate to hateful people!) -- it's about much more than race right? I guess that I should be proud of my ancestors who died also fighting for their state's rights under their flag.
This anachronistic mentality keeps us on the bottom and the rest of the country laughing at us.
This post was edited on 10/29 7:10 PM by ArztEagle
This post was edited on 10/29 7:11 PM by ArztEagle
This post was edited on 10/29 7:12 PM by ArztEagle
This post was edited on 10/29 7:16 PM by ArztEagle
Funny to see this thread today, because I was moving my grandmother earlier and was unloading boxes from a truck at her new apartment complex when I came across one full of old rebel flags (she is an Ole Miss fan).
There were kids playing on the sidewalk and people sitting on their porch around the area watching us unload the truck, and I was genuinely too embarrassed to pull it out because I know the negative connotation it carries. I know it means different things to different people, but I was still too embarrassed to pull that box out.
I too had relatives that fought for the South and died in the Civil War, before anyone asks. Not proud of that, either.
To the Hub with this post!
There were kids playing on the sidewalk and people sitting on their porch around the area watching us unload the truck, and I was genuinely too embarrassed to pull it out because I know the negative connotation it carries. I know it means different things to different people, but I was still too embarrassed to pull that box out.
I too had relatives that fought for the South and died in the Civil War, before anyone asks. Not proud of that, either.
To the Hub with this post!
I too had relatives that fought for the South and died in the Civil War, before anyone asks. Not proud of that, either.
To the Hub with this post!
Very sad, I too had a relative that fought for the South and I'm very proud. He was dirt poor and wasn't fighting so some rich guys could keep slaves he fought because soldiers from the north stole every possession he had and burned his home to the ground...I'm not running around waving some stupid flag, but I'm also not ashamed of my ancestors that fought on the losing side of that war.
To the Hub with this post!
Very sad, I too had a relative that fought for the South and I'm very proud. He was dirt poor and wasn't fighting so some rich guys could keep slaves he fought because soldiers from the north stole every possession he had and burned his home to the ground...I'm not running around waving some stupid flag, but I'm also not ashamed of my ancestors that fought on the losing side of that war.
20% of antebellum southerners owned slaves. The vast majority of civil war vets from the south did NOT own slaves. And no proud southerner (alive today) is arguing that salve ownership is or ever was right. History is never as simplistic as liberals try to make it. The civil war was very complicated for a number of reasons.
I am directly descended from a Confederate soldier who died at Vicksburg of dysentery. Proud doesn't even begin to describe it. That war was about slavery just like this one is about WMD's.
You equate the Confederacy with Nazis? Really? Let's see, PROPERTY RIGHTS vs. GENOCIDE. Ok. I can see that.
Political correctness has been taken too far.
The Marxist have hijacked American history and dumbed us all down to the level of their minions. "Rebel" offends those who view the American Civil War solely through the prism of slavery.
The slavery only argument is overly simplistic and ignores several factors....
*** Mississippi never declared war on the federal government, the federal government made war on Mississippi.
*** Slavery itself was only a component of the true cause of the war which was the ongoing power struggle between the central government versus the state.
*** Sherman's march to the sea, among other war crimes vindicated the Southerners who favored secession. They feared the federal government would be hijacked by a radical element and they were proved correct.
There were no Union casualties during the firing on of Fort Sumter. The first blood was on Lincoln's hands when he invaded the sovereign state of Virgina.
*** The party of Lincoln was not egalitarian and had no interest in fighting a war for such aims as the slavery only argument claims. Tell native Americans how egalitarian the Republicans were in the 19th century.
Thomas Jefferson's grandsons were Rebels, not Yankees. ( Davis' Sectary of War 1862). Many claim the North's war was to uphold Jefferson's ideal of all men created equal. not so !
*** At the very beginning Lincoln made it clear that war's aim was preserve the Union, not end slavery. The "slavery only" crowd have to claim Lincoln reached an epiphany mid-war to make abolition a cause.
*** The federal government more or less abandoned the US Constitution in the war. We were an republic at the time and in a republic states have rights. Again vindicating the Southern secessionist fears. Habeas Carpus was denied, those who disagreed with Lincoln jailed, special war powers proclaimed. States invaded...property destroyed.
*** after the war, few in the North actually wanted these freedmen. Why fight a war for someone you want nothing to do with?
*** Those who proclaim the Southern leaders as tyrants or radicals never read much on the founding fathers of the USA.
To deny the South their collective memory of the American Civil War is nothing short a bigotry.
The Marxist have hijacked American history and dumbed us all down to the level of their minions. "Rebel" offends those who view the American Civil War solely through the prism of slavery.
The slavery only argument is overly simplistic and ignores several factors....
*** Mississippi never declared war on the federal government, the federal government made war on Mississippi.
*** Slavery itself was only a component of the true cause of the war which was the ongoing power struggle between the central government versus the state.
*** Sherman's march to the sea, among other war crimes vindicated the Southerners who favored secession. They feared the federal government would be hijacked by a radical element and they were proved correct.
There were no Union casualties during the firing on of Fort Sumter. The first blood was on Lincoln's hands when he invaded the sovereign state of Virgina.
*** The party of Lincoln was not egalitarian and had no interest in fighting a war for such aims as the slavery only argument claims. Tell native Americans how egalitarian the Republicans were in the 19th century.
Thomas Jefferson's grandsons were Rebels, not Yankees. ( Davis' Sectary of War 1862). Many claim the North's war was to uphold Jefferson's ideal of all men created equal. not so !
*** At the very beginning Lincoln made it clear that war's aim was preserve the Union, not end slavery. The "slavery only" crowd have to claim Lincoln reached an epiphany mid-war to make abolition a cause.
*** The federal government more or less abandoned the US Constitution in the war. We were an republic at the time and in a republic states have rights. Again vindicating the Southern secessionist fears. Habeas Carpus was denied, those who disagreed with Lincoln jailed, special war powers proclaimed. States invaded...property destroyed.
*** after the war, few in the North actually wanted these freedmen. Why fight a war for someone you want nothing to do with?
*** Those who proclaim the Southern leaders as tyrants or radicals never read much on the founding fathers of the USA.
To deny the South their collective memory of the American Civil War is nothing short a bigotry.
"This anachronistic mentality keeps us on the bottom and the rest of the country laughing at us. "
HUH ???
Nationwide, people don't know much about Mississippi and those who "laugh" have never visited the state and therefore have never seen a flag on Hardy Street. Well traveled people are not so prejudice towards us.
As for these statistics that proclaim Mississippi last...
How many quit school because of a flag ?
How many go to prison because of a flag ?
How many get fat because of a flag ?
How does a flag cause teen pregnacy?
How are ANY of these stats related to a a flag ?
If one understood anything about statistical demographics, then they would understand that it isn't "Bubba Earl" and his rebel flag who are quiting school or putting Mississippi last in any of those categories.
HUH ???
Nationwide, people don't know much about Mississippi and those who "laugh" have never visited the state and therefore have never seen a flag on Hardy Street. Well traveled people are not so prejudice towards us.
As for these statistics that proclaim Mississippi last...
How many quit school because of a flag ?
How many go to prison because of a flag ?
How many get fat because of a flag ?
How does a flag cause teen pregnacy?
How are ANY of these stats related to a a flag ?
If one understood anything about statistical demographics, then they would understand that it isn't "Bubba Earl" and his rebel flag who are quiting school or putting Mississippi last in any of those categories.
It is so true that the history revisionist have been at work here. I have great grandfathers and great-greatgrandfathers that fought for the south and and very proud. And YES slavery was evil. However the revisionist don't want the truth to be told. It was a war of contradictions. There were many blacks that owned slaves, especially in the deep south were maybe more than 8% of the black population owned slaves. The picture of the slaves welcoming the northern troops is not always true. In Natchez they ran into the woods to hide in terror. In Columbia the northern troops raped the slave women on the streets in daylight until the people of the town protested. (the northern officers apparently didn't care). Lincoln only freed the slaves of the southern states in rebellion, those states in the north and those areas under northern control still had slavery. (so Lincoln did not free the slaves, Congress did) Lee freed his slaves before the war ended and Grant was the one to own slaves throughout the war. Grant even said later in life that if the war had been about slavery he would not have fought. And the list goes on and on. That said, slavery was evil and needed to be ended. History tells us that it was on its way out. In the 1830's there were more abolitionist societies in the south than in the north. Then a couple of sad things happened, but that is another history lesson.
That's right Tampa.
Our history is being dumbed down and it's sad.
An example is comparing the Confederacy to Nazi Germany. Jeffersonian democracy to Adolf Hitler ? According historian Thomas DiLorenzo Hitler admired Abe Lincoln for destroying states rights by asserting central power. So much for the rebel=Nazi comparison !
Slavery is another issue that the typical American knows next to nothing about. The Egyptians had it, the old Testament had it,the New Testament has it, the Greeks had it, the Romans had it, the Middle ages had feudalism, serfdom wasn't outlawed in Europe until the 19th century. Black Africa suffers from it today.
When our country was founded, slavery was well entrenched so our founding fathers didn't decide to be a slave country...that decision was already made for them. The Atlantic slave trade actually started with Africans enslaving each other then selling their neighbors into the Atlantic slave trade. Slavery was not simply a US problem, it all over the new world.
I know I'm preaching to the choir here
, but it's a worthy topic anyway.
another aspect of the slavery issue that get's ignored is mechanization. We live in a mechanized world so much that it has become a paradigm of our mindset. Exploitation of cheap labor was a necessity up until the time that technology could mass produce in a non-labor intensive way. That's what ended slavery in the developed world, not morality. ( in my opinion).
In 1850...The total abolition of slavery might seem logical in an all white New England village that doesn't need mass manpower. Most of the radical abolitionist seemed to be from these sheltered enclaves.
If we were in Natchez Mississippi of 1850, the idea of an egalitarian society would seem foolish. I think that the radical abolitionist were no more sensible that modern day Green Peace Hippies who would close down all power plants and automobiles. All ideals...no logic.
From my understanding , Lincoln and others were a more pragmatic abolitionist...who favored ended slavery by 1) democratic & constitutional means, 2) gradually, 3) with compensation for "property owners". Certainly in 2010 we can prefer to forgo the "gradually" and "compensation" parts, but the technology of 2010 affords us the luxury. 1860 didn't !
An example is comparing the Confederacy to Nazi Germany. Jeffersonian democracy to Adolf Hitler ? According historian Thomas DiLorenzo Hitler admired Abe Lincoln for destroying states rights by asserting central power. So much for the rebel=Nazi comparison !
Slavery is another issue that the typical American knows next to nothing about. The Egyptians had it, the old Testament had it,the New Testament has it, the Greeks had it, the Romans had it, the Middle ages had feudalism, serfdom wasn't outlawed in Europe until the 19th century. Black Africa suffers from it today.
When our country was founded, slavery was well entrenched so our founding fathers didn't decide to be a slave country...that decision was already made for them. The Atlantic slave trade actually started with Africans enslaving each other then selling their neighbors into the Atlantic slave trade. Slavery was not simply a US problem, it all over the new world.
I know I'm preaching to the choir here
another aspect of the slavery issue that get's ignored is mechanization. We live in a mechanized world so much that it has become a paradigm of our mindset. Exploitation of cheap labor was a necessity up until the time that technology could mass produce in a non-labor intensive way. That's what ended slavery in the developed world, not morality. ( in my opinion).
In 1850...The total abolition of slavery might seem logical in an all white New England village that doesn't need mass manpower. Most of the radical abolitionist seemed to be from these sheltered enclaves.
If we were in Natchez Mississippi of 1850, the idea of an egalitarian society would seem foolish. I think that the radical abolitionist were no more sensible that modern day Green Peace Hippies who would close down all power plants and automobiles. All ideals...no logic.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
What happened to some of these baseball signees for the 2024 season?- Latest: Heath Hinton
-
-
-
-