Forums - Politics Discussion - Question for Confederate Supporters

I've argued with friends, family and others online for the past few weeks about this and they usually circle around the premise below.  So I've started asking 2 groups of questions based on that premise. I'll present it here as well.  If you're not from the US, strap in.  The cognitive dissonance and mental gymnastics are incredible.



Let me get this straight. We only know about the Civil War and slavery because of statues and monuments. And we're doomed to repeat a civil war and slavery if we remove the statues and moments?


2 things.


1. So we can expect a new civil war and slavery between cities/towns with Confederate monuments and statues versus cities/towns without Confederate statue and monuments? And it will be the cities/towns without them that start the civil war and enact slavery?


2. Those espousing this concept will be at the front lines to stop the new civil war and slavery? Right?



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Around the Network

I have become fairly interested in this matter, and I love history. Went in depth into the matter of the American civil war and I have a few points to make clear.

- Statues of confederates

How is it that statues have become the prime source of historical education now? I find this odd. We already have a useful tool to learn about history, it's called a book. It is pretty clear what the deal is. A statue has only one function, to honor a person or a group of persons. By erecting a statue of a general at the head of a slavers army, you are honoring that person. It's crystal clear in what the use of the statue is.

- The lost cause, or the loser cause is a myth

It came into being when a lot of ex confederate rebels came back home to find out that they had lost really bad, with no gain. What was it all for? And so the slow development of the lost cause myth started that culminated in racial tensions you see even today. 

What is the lost cause? It is a certain set of beliefs set up to basically white wash the confederacy and their actions. primary examples of these are:
- Believing that that war wasn't fought over slavery.
- Believing it was a defensive war (often called the war of northern aggression).
- Believing slaves had it good in the south before the yanks set em free.
- Giving God status to its generals, like General Lee and Stonewall Jackson, while these were very flawed men, both personally and militarily.
- Believing that the soldiers in the confederate army didn't care about slavery, only about states rights.
- Believing the north only won cause of more men and resources.
- Misrepresenting Lincoln

So on and so on. But the thing is, in academical sense, there is no debate. There is historical fact, and they all disprove these lost cause myths and agree over one important thing, that the confederacy fought to preserve the institution of slavery.

Coming to present day, there are a lot on the right who talk of civil war. It is so far from reality that it is laughable. Several things have to come ahead for a civil war can happen. For the American civil war, there was a long period of hostility leading up to it, like slave powers trying to keep the administration in their hands to fight the abolitionists. Or the violence in Kansas, which is called bloody Kansas. There was so much leading up to it, and the US is nowhere near that. 

The truth is that a lot on the far right are foaming at the mouth at the idea of a civil war. They are fash larpers of the highest degree and basically it's no different from a doomsday cult.

Last edited by OTBWY - on 10 July 2020


I don’t know where this idea of statues became an important topic. And I don’t know who came up with the logic in your premise. But I suggest you stay away from those people.

We need to get rid of Racist Systems, like Biden’s 80s and 90s crime laws that created all these Prisons and Laws that place higher sentences for drugs used in black communities. Stop worrying about Racist Symbols, removing them only gives you a symbolic gesture.



snyps said:
I don’t know where this idea of statues became an important topic. And I don’t know who came up with the logic in your premise. But I suggest you stay away from those people.

We need to get rid of Racist Systems, like Biden’s 80s and 90s crime laws that created all these Prisons and Laws that place higher sentences for drugs used in black communities. Stop worrying about Racist Symbols, removing them only gives you a symbolic gesture.

Stop worrying about racist symbols on public land.....   This is the USA.  I grew up in Ohio and now live in Texas.  Fuck the confed and there shouldn't be statues of traitors that fought for slavery.  They are traitors and don't deserve to be on public land.   If you care so god damn much about them put them in a museum or private land.  

I agree with you wanting to get rid of racist laws but that didn't start with Biden.  It's been part of USA history for a very long time.  After alcohol probation they switched to weed because they wanted to boot as many Mexicans out of USA and they along with blacks were blamed for most of the weed use.  Then came Nixon.  Then came Reagan with war on drugs.   Sure the 90s crime bill that Clinton along with a bunch of other politicians from both sides pushed through because they wanted to look tough on crime didn't help at all.  To merely single out Biden is complete bullshit and skips past the numerous decades of previous administrations and politicians.



Confederate statues/flags have been symbols of hate for a very long time. History has little to do with it at this point. They are rallying cries for groups like the kkk. The confederate cause was a cause for the subjugation and imprisonment of black man.

However, I do think the movement to get rid of those statues tends to take things too far sometimes. Wanting to remove every statue of somebody that owned slaves for example. People like George Washington or Thomas Jefferson were great men that deserve to be remembered and immortalized for their deeds. They were also products of their time though, which means both men practiced the vile act of slavery. There needs to be a line drawn in these arguments between the figures that fuel the hate and the truly historic figures.



Around the Network

I'm from the South, and it's clear that racism has never gone away. I've never known someone who flies the Confederate flag and supports Confederate imagery to not have some sort of racist tendencies. It just continues to get passed from generation to generation. People ranging from my age to my grandparents' age have done everything from disapprove of interracial relationships to refer to MLK Day as "National N-word Day" to generally complaining about and making racist remarks about non-whites. They think the Confederate States were the good guys, mere victims of big-government "Northern aggression." My own father thinks that everything he thinks is wrong with this country can, ultimately, be laid at the feet of Abraham Lincoln.

But they never want to own up to the slavery issue. They keep wanting to evade the topic or engage in rhetorical trickery or whataboutism. They live in denial, trying to convince themselves and others that they're not racist despite, among other things, actively supporting a long-dead nation that was founded for purely racist reasons. And they deny history, engaging in flat-out attempted negation of the facts. They want to whitewash the legacy of the Confederacy because it's so ingrained in their conception of "Southern pride" and because deep down they know that the broader society will never truly accept the morally bankrupt values of the Confederacy. And if there are people who honestly do think that Confederate iconography really is just an innocuous expression of "Southern pride," then they are simply ignorant, and there is no excuse for such ignorance, especially here and now in the Internet Age where you have a world of information at your fingertips.

No matter what, it is a simple fact of the matter than you cannot extricate the symbols of a nation from that nation's values. You cannot extricate communism from the Soviet hammer & sickle. You cannot extricate anti-Semitism and fascism from Nazi iconography. And you cannot extricate slavery and white supremacy from Confederate flags and monuments. All of these symbols exist to send a message, and in the case of Confederate symbols, that message is: "We will never regard the black man as equal to the white man." Confederate symbols are a direct reflection of the racist and atrocious value system of the antebellum South. Confederate leaders themselves explicitly spelled out why they seceded from the Union.

Here they are, in their own words.

First, let's take a good look at the "Declarations of Causes" that several seceding states issued outlining their reasons for leaving the Union. I recommend reading them in full, but if you're pressed for time do a Ctrl+F search for "slave." You'll get 83 results. Searching for other terms like "tax" or "trade" reveals that such reasons were not even a factor. The state governments of the newly-formed Confederate States made it abundantly clear that they were seceding over the issue of slavery.

The Confederate Constitution also gives explicit protections for the "right" to own other human beings as property. Here are the relevant clauses:

"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed." — Article I, Section 9, Clause 4

"The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired." — Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1

"No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs, or to whom such service or labor may be due." — Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3

"The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States." — Article IV, Section 3, Clause 3

And the cherry on top of this racist pie is the "Cornerstone Speech," written by Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephen. Here's an excerpt:

"But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

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."

Emphasis added.

It's all there, black-and-white, clear as crystal. The Confederate States were formed, and initiated & engaged in armed rebellion against the United States, solely to preserve and protect the institution of slavery. After their loss, as soon as they were able to bring an end to Reconstruction those former Confederate states immediately set out to ignore the 14th and 15th Amendments, instituted Jim Crow laws that would stand for over 80 years, and erected monuments to honor racist traitors, and their descendants would continue to follow in their stead.

If anyone supports Confederate iconography, then this is what they are defending. Try as they might, they cannot run from it, hide from it, deny it, or ignore it. Confederate flags and memorials have no place on taxpayer property. The Confederates and their failed racist nation do not deserve to be honored or memorialized in any way, shape, or form. Tear the monuments down and rip the flags from their poles. Sell them to a museum or some other private buyer. But their continued presence on public lands is an outrage and needs to end. Iconoclasm has been a response to statues and other symbols dedicated to tyrannical regimes the world over. Why should such iconoclasm be viewed any differently here?

Last edited by Shadow1980 - on 10 July 2020

As someone who has lived in the north my entire life, hate the Confederacy, and is married to a black man, I do not support destroying these statues. I feel your summary of being against removing these statues are too simplistic. It isn't about avoiding a very specific type of civil war that you talk about, but rather a display/showcase that good their time can be wrong, and what we can take away from that. In these cases, the ideas of how people can view their fellow humans, and perhaps a self reflection of ones self. I think as a good middle point moving these statues to a more historical site, such as Civil War battlefields, local museums, etc. is a good middle ground that I could get behind.



Systems I own: Switch, Wii U, Wii, N64, Retron 5 for my Ness, SNES, Genesis, Gameboy line games, Dreamcast, PS2, New 3DS.

K98632 said:

As someone who has lived in the north my entire life, hate the Confederacy, and is married to a black man, I do not support destroying these statues. I feel your summary of being against removing these statues are too simplistic. It isn't about avoiding a very specific type of civil war that you talk about, but rather a display/showcase that good their time can be wrong, and what we can take away from that. In these cases, the ideas of how people can view their fellow humans, and perhaps a self reflection of ones self. I think as a good middle point moving these statues to a more historical site, such as Civil War battlefields, local museums, etc. is a good middle ground that I could get behind.

So we should aggrandize, memorialize, glorify things that we did wrong merely to reflect on their wrongness?

But I do agree with their reassignment to a museum or battlefield.  That's where these things should have been put top begin with.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

K98632 said:

As someone who has lived in the north my entire life, hate the Confederacy, and is married to a black man, I do not support destroying these statues. I feel your summary of being against removing these statues are too simplistic. It isn't about avoiding a very specific type of civil war that you talk about, but rather a display/showcase that good their time can be wrong, and what we can take away from that. In these cases, the ideas of how people can view their fellow humans, and perhaps a self reflection of ones self. I think as a good middle point moving these statues to a more historical site, such as Civil War battlefields, local museums, etc. is a good middle ground that I could get behind.

Not really clear what you are saying.  Are you saying the statues stand as a symbol of a time and its wrongs.  The problem with this view is that at no time in no country and definitely not in the US have we ever erect statues and monuments of people that reflect a bad time.  We erect statues and monuments to glorify people we respect and honor for what they stand for.  If you go to another country, with no knowledge of its history and you see statues and monuments of people, would the first thing come to your mind that this is a display showing what was wrong.  I highly doubt it.  Instead, if you were interested you would wonder, what did this person do that people wanted to honor that person.

I can agree that they do not all need to be destroyed but they all definitely need to be removed from public places paid for by the taxes of the citizens who live in those states.  Since they do have some historical significance as you suggested a historical site would be good for some and for the those mass produced statues they can be auctioned off since they were only erected for a totally different purpose.



They are traitors and deserve no place on US public land. Put them in shitty museums or private land but not public land.