The Civil War: A Conspiracy of Amnesia

[Roland]

I'll be the little girl, it suits my "Over sensitive" demeanor...

Anyway, I think we're talking about two different things, you're talking about the people flying the flag, who do have a right to do so, and I'm talking about the people who could be offended by the Confederate flag. In my opinion, it is more a symbol of slavery than Southern pride, regardless of the intentions of those flying it, who probably don't intend it racist at all.

As for banning it, that would clearly be a breach of free speech, but I do wish I didn't have to see it every time I drive through my neighborhood.

And in case you are just being sarcastic, as your new signature may imply, there's no voice inflection on the internet, I can't tell. Maybe I'm stupid and oversensitive, but that's my problem.

[TheEconomist]

I'm talking about the people who could be offended by the Confederate flag

Who's going to be offended by it? Black people? Apparently not. Just oversensitive white people who feel unnecessarily guilty.

I do wish I didn't have to see it every time I drive through my neighborhood.

Boo-hoo, I wish I didn't have to hear people whine every time I got on the internet. Doesn't mean I'm asking for you to be banned.

as your new signature may imply

I'm dead serious this time.

[Lupino]

To say the Civil War was over slavery only is a misconception.

Except that was the only issue which mattered, it was the very core of why the South fought. The rallying cry wasn't just "State's rights!" or "They're passing unfair laws" as apologists want it, it was "State's rights to keep slaves" and "They're passing unfair laws to keep slavery from spreading".

Namely, the fact that most people don't only think of the Confederate flag as a symbol for slavery; only overly sensitive people, like you, do. When they glorify the Confederate flag, it's only to say that they're proud to be from the south. And, not even politically, just means, I like my culture.

A culture based upon slave labor is hardly something to be proud about, but whatever. So long as the South keeps thinking that way they will continued to be viewed as backwards by the rest of the country.

Who's going to be offended by it? Black people? Apparently not. Just oversensitive white people who feel unnecessarily guilty.

I guess the 41% of black people who are offended don't exist, amirite? As for the few who do, proof positive that ignorance knows no racial bounds and/or a consequence of the fact most minorities aren't wealthy enough to send their kids to better schools.

[TheEconomist]

1) It's not a culture based on slave labor and very little of the South is actually proud of the confederate flag in that way. *sigh* You’re probably just another ignorant foreigner making wild assumptions about things they don’t know about because their mommy told them their opinion is important.

2) Negative reaction =\= "I am offended and want that damned thing banned!"

3) School quality has very little to do with how much a kid learns or how much they can learn or where they will go in life. The desire and ability to learn is within the person. Since learning comes from standardized practices and materials, even if a teacher wasn't at all present or was completely incompetent at explaining the material, a child who is willing and capable to learn will learn. What, you're going to try to say that never happens? I'm "proof positive" of that.

Socialists will always interpret or skew information in ways that justifies the easier. Motivated, ambitious, and self-reliant individuals will never give into to that and, naturally, tend to go further in life. I get tired of saying this, but, if that’s not the case, please explain to me why my family and I come from worse environments and circumstances than the majority of the Western world (including the people you're trying to defend) and yet we come out faaaaar ahead.

[Family business deleted since Lupino responded.]

I guess it was because we were given lots of opportunities by a stable, supportive environment and lots and lots of welfare. Oh wait, what kind of background does my family come from again? Oh yeah, coal mining towns (dirt poor) and "A"-housing during the TVA era (the equivalent of Section 8 Projects of the time). That’s less opportunities than Nolia Projects have today yet they do nothing with it. They aren’t even really poor, just horrible at prioritizing money. My brother was a high school drop-out. His father (different from mine) was murdered when he was 14 and that had a profound effect on him. My father spent most of his late-teens helping his family support the family of eight since he was the oldest son. Likewise, when I was in high school, I had close to a dozen friends and a cousin killed while I was in high school [since Miami Gardens is the second worst place in the civilized world (behind New Orleans ) to get murdered] and grew up in quite possibly the worst environment you could pick in the western world yet, here I am, going to college and making a 4.0 GPA. But, how is that possible? I never learned a thing in high school since I was busy surviving and catching up on sleep and I had far less opportunities than you, the peope you’re trying to defend, or 98% of the people that are still poor to this day.

***“Proof positives” for the above will be sent to your PM. Don’t like family ties on the interwebs. I’ll probably delete the above paragraph since my brother is a StarCraft fan and I’d hate for him to see me talking about him in such a way.

So, don't give me that shit about ignorance being because of schooling or the system or whatever. There's a reason Europe is decreasing in influence while Asia is increasing. They don't blame society for their failures; it's all on them individually. People like you are killing the Western world and it's a crying shame you can't see it.

Why do I even bring these things up? Every time I even say a few words of the above, I'm bombarded with bullshit, so I'm pre-emptive striking now while I have time to spare. Plain speaking doesn't get through your thick skulls so I have to be harsh. Let's cut the bullshit, shall we? There are more than enough examples of highly motivated people succeeding despite their circumstances that is enough to prove (“positive”) that the system works. Just because it's a far too rare occurrence doesn't mean anything. For some reason, socialists believe that because the average person doesn't work hard enough to escape their circumstances that it’s a problem with the system. It’s not. It’s just not easy to do and that discourages weaker willed people. How do you do these things? My God, it's so simple I can't believe everyone doesn't do it. Drive. Ambition. Self-reliance. All of the things capitalism teaches and everything socialism tries to kill. There's a reason capitalist countries do far better than socialist countries. This basic knowledge is sadly something a socialist will never understand because they will never hold themselves responsible. It's always a problem with the system; not them. Why work hard? Just bitch and complain until the government gives you something because your mom pushed you out of her vagina and you were instantly given such human rights. You would think Europe/Socialists would learn from England in the 70’s or modern-day France. Socialism does not work.

[Rake]

What do I mean you ask? My brother is the owner of one of the internet's largest knife retailers, my father is a successful stock broker and martial arts hall of famer, my uncle is a head of curriculum at the University of Florida, another uncle is a real-estate agent working on million dollar lands, and my great granduncle was a four-star general with a movie made about his career?

Congratulations on working your way out of poverty. It is one of the single most difficult and worthy things anyone can do. I guess the question now is, do you only want extraordinary people to leave poverty behind, or everyone.

To move populations out of poverty you need widespread, quality education, social support for the wider community and investment in infrastructure. All of those things could be considered socialist. However, the simplest definition of socialism is for goods and services to be provided by the government for the benefit of the people. That means that the fire brigade and the police force are also socialist institutions. My point is that the question should not be 'is something socialist' but 'does something work'? If something then does work you need to ask 'How well does it work?' In the case of poverty reduction it needs to work for large percentages of the population, not just the extraordinary individuals.



On a different note, the change in the relative power between Asia and the rest of the world is because of the current industrialization of Asia (including India). Asia is in fact catching up to Europe, the US and Japan and because of their larger population, they will eventually exceed them. My point is, it has nothing to do with specific policies of particular countries.

[TheEconomist]

Everyone (barring obvious disabilities) already can escape poverty My point was that my family and I had less than most of what people today come from, made it to success, and yet they bitch and moan as if it was impossible. In fact, everyone could escape poverty long ago before when it was much harder. It's just that since the 60's or so, people have lost that self-reliance and so they blame others instead of actively helping themselves. For example, the only requirements I see at the moment to succeed is discipline. You need to deny certain social pressures and stay focused on the academic path. Too many kids in Miami get distracted by drugs (because it brings respect) gang (for the comradery), and girls (obvious reasons ) and completely neglect academics. It's this kind of laziness I'm talking about. The main thing that allowed to me to "escape" was simply being able to deny myself. I practically disowned my high school friends so that I could focus on school. That's it. I didn't bust my ass with three jobs in order to pay for college or what not. In fact, even if I needed to pay $200K in medical school bill, I could through grants for good grades or through the military. There's so many options, yet too many people assume its impossible because they're told that it is and its harder than they can discipline themselves to do. During the depression of the 40's, people helped themselves and relied on themselves. Despite the fact that that depression was almost entirely the fault of the system (because there was no previous precedent), they still believed that only they could help themselves. And, they did. Sure, there was some help from the government. That's not what I'm against. I'm against the mentality.

Furthermore, I'm using the standard post-French Revolution definition of Socialism. Otherwise, like you said, everything could be Socialist or nothing could Socialist. Socialism is not as easy to define as Capitalism or Communism since it’s somewhat of a malleable half-way marker between them. So, here's my definition:

1. The desire to remove class conflict - Good to a certain extent, there needs to be certain kinds of people that struggle harder because that keeps motivation alive. Mexicans, for example, if raised in a typical picket fence environment, would not have the same work ethic.

2. The desire for the "proletariat" to control the means of production - Superb, give the people the opportunity to help themselves. That’s the core of my beliefs.

3. The desire to reduce or completely remove competition - Never, under any circumstances, even remotely positive. Competition makes the world go ‘round and as long as we’re under these natural laws, competition will always be necessary no matter how harsh this reality is and how many people become sympathetic towards this basic human condition. Socialism provides a "pillow" in case a person loses in this competition. Not good for the system.

These are the basic principles socialism is founded upon. There've been some changes here and there, but, for much of the socialist world, these are the ultimate goals they have in mind. Sure, America might have some governent programs to help the poor or things such as police departments, and I agree with that, but, recently, America has started to take it too far and its making the people lazy (along with, of of course, cultural changes from the baby boomers, not blaming it entirely on the government). When you don't even have to work hard at all in order to survive, people stop working hard and get lazy. Bad for the system. However, keep the struggle alive and under eustress conditions, and the natural stress reponses of the body will keep the person performing optimally, which is good for the system. It's just that as animals and the makers of our own system, we're too sympathetic to our own situation and want to take away ours and each others pain. A noble desire but it just doesn't work under natural laws where resources are limited.

To reiterate, I'm not completely against all forms of socialism. Karl Marx, for example, had some good ideas even though he was socialist and they needed to be implemented. But, really, much of what he said has much in common with modern capitalism today. Capitalism today and capitalism following the industrial revolution are very different (only the deepest core principles are the same) and the previous form very much so needed to be changed. Same with Socialism.

Now, however, too many people have lost that self-reliance and they blame everything on the system. It’s a form of mental slavery which keeps people poor. If they knew and believed they could help themselves, they would be more likely to do so. I could even call it a crime against humanity to continue to tell people it’s not their fault and that there’s nothing they can do. Much like telling someone they're too stupid to do something, they probably won't. Same with telling them the system won't work with them. The implementation of the system has made it so that, if you work hard enough, you WILL succeed. It's just that people have become lazy and the more extreme socialists have convinced these people that there's no way to improve their circumstances. It's a sad predicament.

Hope that cleared things up.

I just remembered this wasn’t a Socialism topic. I didn’t mean to get it off-track but whenever I mention a small bit of capitalism ten or so posters swoop down and throw big huge walls of text at me. I just wanted to get that out of the way so that this topic can stray on track and I can continue with my exams.

-- Oops, forgot the Asian thing. I war referring to Japan and South Korea. It's a bit of a joke that China has enough people to out populate America, Europe, Canada, AND Japan and yet they have about half the wealth of America or Europe alone. I tend to forget about them when I'm hurriedly talking about other things. It's Japan and South Korea that I'm fond of. Not China But, yes, you are right on the other accounts as well. My post did make it seem as if I though that Japan/South Korea'ss work ethic was the only factor. I guess I was getting a bit emotional at that part and I didn't catch it during my re-read because of exams next weeks

[Rake]

Thanks for the considered reply. Good luck with your exams! No doubt you will do well.




Regarding the original topic, I don't know anything about it. Except to say that, as a general comment, all forms of nationalism have selective forgetting and half-truths attached to them.

[TheEconomist]

Except to say that, as a general comment, all forms of nationalism have selective forgetting and half-truths attached to them.

Very true

Just thought I'd put that in the open in case someone thought I disagreed.

[Lupino]

1) It's not a culture based on slave labor and very little of the South is actually proud of the confederate flag in that way.

Might as well say German culture during the 30s and 40s was in no way based upon Nazism and Germans who fly the swastika aren't proud of it in that way. Slavery was very much integrated into Southern culture, from those who got rich off their backs and used that money to pursue other activities, to the poor white trash who was constantly told how much better racially he was than those slaves so they wouldn't team up against the rich.

2) Negative reaction =\= "I am offended and want that damned thing banned!"

Definition of OFFEND
intransitive verb
1
a : to transgress the moral or divine law : sin <if it be a sin to covet honor, I am the most offending soul alive — Shakespeare> b : to violate a law or rule : do wrong <offend against the law>
2
a : to cause difficulty, discomfort, or injury <took off his shoe and removed the offending pebble> b : to cause dislike, anger, or vexation <thoughtless words that offend needlessly>

The fact that you're nitpicking semantics to backtrack what you said is damning enough.

3) School quality has very little to do with how much a kid learns or how much they can learn or where they will go in life. The desire and ability to learn is within the person. Since learning comes from standardized practices and materials, even if a teacher wasn't at all present or was completely incompetent at explaining the material, a child who is willing and capable to learn will learn. What, you're going to try to say that never happens? I'm "proof positive" of that....

Oh hell, I forgot you were one of those lolbertarians. Look, it's good that you were able to escape from and all, but anecdotal evidence does not make for a compelling case. Statistically, people who were born poor are most likely to stay poor. You can see here a graph which shows more than half of poor people stayed poor, and the majority who escaped only moved up to lower middle class levels. Here's a PDF from the National Bureau of of Economic Research which exams this problem; figures 4A and 4B especially relate to the slim chances people have of escaping from the bottom rung of society. Here's another PDF from the OCED which shows American social mobility in comparison to other countries. Even that bastion of communist socialist thinking The Economist agrees that if you're poor you're more likely to stay poor. The best way to combat this poverty is with education, but since these people are poor to begin with then someone has to pay for it. *gasp* Socialism!!!111

Although I have no idea why you tried to hijack this thread for your little Birch Society rant; shouldn't you be out trying to warn people about the plot to sap our precious bodily fluids through fluoridation?

[TheEconomist]

I knew I'd regret conversing with you. You're an absolute chore to readon with. Your reading comprehension and thought process just isn't up to par with what I'd expect in order to have a debate go smoothly. Afterall, you're that same person that just will not admit he's wrong no matter what. All one need to do to prove that is to look at that topic where you tried to backtrack out of an argument you lost by saying you switched who were you talking to mid post without noting such a change

1) This isn't the 30's and 40's and Nazism is far from the problem it used to be today. You are proving my point. Just because some years ago a culture was based around something, doesn't mean it is today. To use your example, Germany is no longer Nazi controlled. Proves my point. Likewise, the south is no longer based around slavery and, therefore, the flag has evolved to mean something completely different. Something that even black people can be proud of.

2) Roland made the argument that the flag should be banned because it offended people enough for this to be justified. I argued with it didn't. You brought in some irrelevant statistics saying that black people are offended by the flag. I never made the point that black weren't offended by the flag, only that banning the flag was not the correct path to take because not that many people were that disgustingly sensitive.

*sigh*

Your reading comprehension failure is soooo deliciously ironic given your signature.

3) Lolbertarian? I assume you mean libertarian. What's the matter? Can't argue my points so resort to ad hominem and old, unoriginal jokes? LOL! Well, if you knew anything about politics, you would know that libertarians are, well ... liberal. And, as any monkey can see from my post, in this instance, I am extremely conservative.

4) Like I said, it is an all too rare occurrence. But, it's not that fault of the system; it's mostly the fault of the people. All one need to do to have access to success is to get a diploma. All you really need to get a diploma is self-discipline. None of them have it. Minorities in Miami are practically guaranteed a spot and financial aid for colleges thanks to lolzy affirmative action programs. Yet, they still find a way not to. Too busy killing each other. Like you would know if you read my post, my family and I come from less than these people. And, yet, we made it farther. Community college here costs a whopping 100$ per class hour. That's 1200$ for the average class load. That's without a dime of financial aid. Wow. These "repressed minorities" spend more than that on weed, Hennessey, and rims in a month. As if that weren't easy enough, if you're black, you basically get in free as it's between 5$-15$ a class to cover basic materials. That's an outrage for other minorities. That's why two year ago some Romanians shot up the board system. Black minorities are the worst for graduation rates so they recieve the best benefits and, yet, they do nothing with it. There's no economic brick wall for them; only a mental and cultural one. And, most of them never get past it so the statistics stay low. Has nothing to do with the system especially since other minorities has less help and make it farther.

5) If you had read my post, you would know that I was not against certain forms of financial aid. I won't clarify my post because either you didn't read it or you lack the mental tools to comprehend it so a recap wouldn't help you there either. But, even without financial aid, it is more than possible to succeed. Hence, the example of my brother who was a junior in high school when he dropped out, yet, through drive, intelligence, and confidence, he made himself a success.

6) Didn't hijack the thread. Just commented on your post. That is how discussion works and its still somewhat relevant to the topic. You're free to get back on topic any time you'd like.