To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 19014
19013  |  19015
Subject: 
Re: What the Confederate flag stands for. (was Re: Just wh...)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 14 Feb 2003 18:02:06 GMT
Viewed: 
557 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:

Slavery was central but it was the secondary issue. The primary issue was the
states right to secede, that is why the war was fought. Of course in this case
the states tried to exersice their right to secede because the Federal
Government outlawed slavery.

Interesting.  I'm not sure I can reconcile that claim with Stephen's
statements (which assert outright that the institution of slavery is of
paramount importance), but at least I understand your view better now.
Thanks for the clarification.

I would have to argue that Mike isn't quite understanding what he wrote.
Slavery was central but a secondary issue?  No, it is either not central, or
it wasn't a secondary issue.  The chain of events over the previous decade
makes it fairly clear that slavery was a very central issue.  The right to
secede (politically correct speak for the right to revolt against an
authority you no longer agree with) was simply the mode of expression.  The
reason is the core (the "why"), not the mode of expression (the "how").

Now, why an individual may have fought is something else entirely.  As Mike
noted, Robert E. Lee felt a greater loyalty to his state than a central
government.  The state as nation was a much stronger notion, then.  The
common man did not perceive he was fighting for slavery so much as fighting
for his state (regardless that his state was asking him to effectively fight
for slavery).  And therein lies the anomoly of the Confederate flag: many
(white) southerners feel it was about states rights, because their ancestors
fought for their state, not slavery directly, without really facing that the
state itself had seceded over slavery (directly or indirectly).

-->Bruce<--



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: What the Confederate flag stands for. (was Re: Just wh...)
 
(...) Bruce, I thought I told you before--If you're going to reply to my posts, I'm going to have to require you to agree with me blindly and absolutely. Don't ask for clarification when I've already decided to say I understand, even if I don't (or (...) (21 years ago, 14-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: What the Confederate flag stands for. (was Re: Just wh...)
 
(...) I guess I was thinking something along the lines of Slavery was the reason for the reason. (as silly as that sounds.) (...) Well that was a much better explanation than mine. :-) -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 15-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: What the Confederate flag stands for. (was Re: Just wh...)
 
(...) Interesting. I'm not sure I can reconcile that claim with Stephen's statements (which assert outright that the institution of slavery is of paramount importance), but at least I understand your view better now. Thanks for the clarification. (...) (21 years ago, 14-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

16 Messages in This Thread:






Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR