I agree, this was the big misconception that is happening right now.  All of the media outlets don't even discuss this at all, they just run with the idea that the confederate flag = slavery.  We can't just throw away history because we don't like any reason for it.  THe current rights that we(US citizens) all have were strengthened by the civil war, not weakened.

I've always thought having confederate flags was trashy, but having a bunch of pc northerners bitch about something that hasn't been a problem for my entire life makes me angrier. I agree that government buildings shouldn't fly them, but you can't erase the past just because it upsets you.

Was that a particular right that was focussed on at the time? It's funny as just before all this kicked off in the US last week we had this:

http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/revolution-bar-prompts-anger-huddersfield-9388344

If you banned all the flags that have been part of regimes that used slavery, pretty much every European flag along with the US flag should surely be equally offensive? As they've all been complicit at some stage.

The Swastika is slightly different, in that it represented nothing beyond the Nazi regime.

My knowledge of the US Civil war isn't spectacular, but from what I've read, and common sense would surely dictate that "we want slaves, we're going to war!" isn't exactly what happened, though many people now seem to say it did. I suspect most people getting their history from films such as Lincoln probably helps purpetuate such views as such a focus is placed on that aspect of the politics of the time.

I mean many people seem to think the reason Scotland is part of the UK is because the Evil English conquored and oppressed them, when the reality is they bankrupted themselves on a failed New World outpost and sought a bail out from England in exchange for Sovereignty.

they should ban the bible first.  the bible is not just pro slavery, it gives a lot of tips and rules how to be a slaveowner.

Regarding the Swastika I seem to recall something about it being a symbol for peace prior to the Nazi regime using it.  Since then though it is universally seen as a negative, so there's that.

The unfortunate thing with history is that the cliche is true; it is written by the victor.  The idea that "the South" rose up against "the North" because they wanted more general freedoms to govern themselves within the Union is a much less sexy reason to have had the war than the idea that they wanted to own other humans.

As someone who has lived in a rural area of the Southern United States all their life, I've never understood why it was allowed to be flown on government property. The Confederacy turned traitor against the United States. It makes no sense.

The other funny thing to me is how many people tell me that the Confederate flag stands for the South. Well, sure, I guess, if you were a rich landowner. A poor farmer conscripted into the Confederate army for a cause you cared nothing about, though? Not likely. The Civil War was all about money. Hundreds of thousands of deaths for the sake of wealth.

As for the flag itself, it's pretty much become the symbol for bigotry and ignorance in redneck America. I see it all over the place. The people who display it around here aren't necessarily racist but, honestly, most of the time they are. It's pretty obvious why people want to be disassociated from it. As a kid, my father had it up everywhere. I wore hats with it, shirts with it, there is still a couple in the gun cabinet and my tackle box, but I seriously want nothing to do with it.

There are a lot of things I like about the South. Listening to racist rednecks rant about the glory of a state that refused to stop treating human beings as animals is not one of them.

The confederate flag, and that particular flag was never the official flag of the confederacy, was only used by a country that existed for a brief period of about half a decade that was established with the expressed purpose of protecting the instituation of slavery.  

Some of the declarations of secession are as follows.

"...A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction. This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety."

From Mississippi...

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. 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."

From Louisianna

"As a separate republic, Louisiana remembers too well the whisperings of European diplomacy for the abolition of slavery in the times of an­nexation not to be apprehensive of bolder demonstrations from the same quarter and the North in this country. The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery."

From Texas...

...in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states....

From the President of the Confederacy...

"If slavery be a sin, it is not yours. It does not rest on your action for its origin, on your consent for its existence. It is a common law right to property in the service of man; its origin was Divine decree." 

"African slavery, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing."

"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts."

"My own convictions as to negro slavery are strong. It has its evils and abuses...We recognize the negro as God and God's Book and God's Laws, in nature, tell us to recognize him - our inferior, fitted expressly for servitude...You cannot transform the negro into anything one-tenth as useful or as good as what slavery enables them to be."

So, no.  It's not a matter of revisionist history.  Preservation of slavery was the explictly expressed reason for the confederacy's existence.  

The Swastika was actually a symbol that has a history of thousands of years, and generally stood for prosperity and good luck.  It has a richer history and there is far more room for interpretation.  That being said, it would be silly to say that in modern times, it represents anything other than Aryan supremacy.

Private people can still use it.  And that's their choice.  Nobody is forcing TV Land to ban it.  They are simply reacting to the market forces, and making decisions in their best interest.  Besides, Dukes of Hazard sucked anyway.

That is really extreme at this point. It's not like they go around running over minorities with the General Lee. People are getting a bit too touchy feely and companies are way too afraid of any sort of bad PR.

The most hilarious thing about all this is that the confedrate flag isn't even the one banned. lol The original flag used during the civil war was a completely different design/color.

First of all, no confederate flag is banned.  Just not allowed on government property.

Secondly, the other flags are rarely used.  Why would people be worrying about flags that are never used?