Plan B Forum

The American flag is a racist symbol that should be banned. Vote to ban this racist symbol.

Other — Keep the American flag and ban liberty because he is a shit-stirring ass-half.
It would take TWO of him to make an ass-whole.

-"BB"-

Bicycle Bill wrote:Other — Keep the American flag and ban liberty because he is a shit-stirring ass-half.
It would take TWO of him to make an ass-whole.

-"BB"-

You are going against Colin Kaepernick you are a racist. You didn’t vote to ban the American flag you are racist.

Bicycle Bill wrote:Other — Keep the American flag and ban liberty because he is a shit-stirring ass-half.
It would take TWO of him to make an ass-whole.

-"BB"-

That is pathetic that is the best can you do? Do I have to give you ammunition? OK, here is one: I was born a bastard when that word really meant something. Now come on hate until you feel it tearing your guts.

So in other words Liberty, you are for using the American flag as an advertising icon on a shoe? What's next, American flag toilet paper? You, sir, are no patriot.

Well, I am generally pissed about this issue. Certain people of influence seem to be able to define the meaning of words or visuals and the rest of us have to accept it. I cannot say I am 'gay' when I am feeling generally positive emotions. The most recent such change my behavior is the 'Tea Party' has made it their own, so I can no longer display my Gadsden flag. I bought it and put it up in the afternoon of Nine Eleven, right after I learned that my son had survived the attack on the Pentagon, although some of his friends did not and his clothing smelled of burning jet fuel.

Why should the 'Betsy Ross' flag be a symbol of only what was bad in America in 1776? Like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Nancy Pelosi and Chris Coons, I too want to Make American Great, but we can't wear a red hat that says that.

snailgate

Big RR wrote:So in other words Liberty, you are for using the American flag as an advertising icon on a shoe? What's next, American flag toilet paper? You, sir, are no patriot.

I think I am more of a patriot than you are. What did you do during the Cold War? Did you fight for or against the communist?

Big RR wrote:So in other words Liberty, you are for using the American flag as an advertising icon on a shoe? What's next, American flag toilet paper? You, sir, are no patriot.

I did the best I could but the communist won anyway with the help of a lot of liberals. But what really pisses me off is that I do not have the right to say what I want in public without being assaulted by a gang of liberals. But I will say what I want here and I will say in spades to make up for the fact I can’t say it in the real world. I am not allowed to have my own culture or heritage. I am not allowed to be proud of my ancestors. I have to go back thousands of years to have ancestor I can be proud of and Meade can say nothing bad about.

The American flag is a racist symbol. It is used by racist groups. It was flown on slave ships that transported slaves to America. It was flown over slave auctions where slaves were sold. It was flown over government project where slaves were used to do the work. So the American flag is a racist symbol and should be banned.
Replace it with a white rag with the names of the states listed.

How horribly oppressed you are; no wonder you want to use the flag as little more than a trademark on a shoe. But tell me, where are these roving gangs of liberals who routinely assault you for what you choose to say in public--I want to avoid them as well, but then I have never encountered one. Maybe they're limited to only one area near you? And, FWIW, how are these roving gangs of liberals in any way preventing you from having your own culture or heritage? What sort of threats are they making that have so intimidated you into renouncing those aspects of your family history? what tremendous power these liberal gangs must have, and what a shame that they didn't exercise it to prevent the election of Trump.

I think Kaepernick is mistaken about the meaning of the Betsy Ross flag.

Odd that Liberty wants the right to say whatever he wants and wishes to deprive those who hear him of the same right.

Well rubato, being the Betsy Ross flag was one of the flags flown in 1789, when the US Constitution officially endorsed slavery in its recitation of how state populations were to be calculated (counting each slave as 2/3 of a person), Kaepernick certainly has a point. Is that all it meant? Certainly not (at least IMHO), but from the dropping of the anti slavery language from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution, slavery was clearly tolerated, if not endorsed, by the early governments.

but in any event, I personally do not believe the flag (even an early variation of it) should be worn as clothing, and certainly not be used as any form of a trademark for an article of commerce.

Other.

Big RR wrote:I personally do not believe the flag (even an early variation of it) should be worn as clothing, and certainly not be used as any form of a trademark for an article of commerce.

3/5ths

It is unreasonable to say that a national flag symbolizes every action taken and decision made in its presence. The flag symbolizes the union, imperfect and very fragile as it was. No moral division in our history has been deeper nor as steeped in blood as the issue of slavery. The 3/5ths compromise, proposed by Franklin, was an assertion that the preservation of the Union was more important. Lincoln famously and clearly agreed with that. Any counter-factual has to be imagined and one cannot say for absolute certain but the if the 3/5ths compromise was the mandatory price of our national existence it was worth it.

I think it should be a lesson to us today not to allow even passionate differences to cross over from civil argument to civil war.

In sum, it is pernicious to distort the meanings of symbols merely because they have been seen together with something or to allow perverted groups to redefine their meanings. In part it is a matter of language. Symbols are an important part of our vocabulary and we muse resist redefining them or the past and the future will be incoherent to each other.

yrs,
rubato

The flag symbolizes the union, imperfect and very fragile as it was.

Indeed, and I'm sure Kaepernick would say a union that was "preserved" or even "formed" at the cost of the enslavement of a people based solely on the color of their skin and a pernicious belief that they were less than human--a belief that is perpetuated in some groups even to this day, hence the black lives matter movement--is not something to be celebrated or revered. How you come down on the importance of this "compromise" is based, IMHO, mainly on which group you fall within, and Kaepernick is as entitled to his opinion as Mr. Franklin or anyone else was.

Indeed, if the "Union" is what is represented and, as you state, the preservation of slavery was "the mandatory price of our national existence". then I think the linkage Kaepernick is claiming has been clearly shown. And it's far easier for white Americans to say it was "worth it" than for people of color.

A symbol, IMHO, can mean multiple things, but I think Kaepernick might well agree with you as to what the flag of that time means.

The flag was first flown in 1777, the constitution only came about in 1789. I do not think a symbol can be retroactively interpreted like that. The flag was never flown specifically to celebrate or defend slavery And the union which it symbolizes made possible the liberation of the slaves and later on the civil rights movement. It was merely coincident.

It is possible that we might have succeeded without allowing slavery. But the fact that we went to war over it70 years later on suggests no.

The remarkable thing about slavery is that it is nearly universally rejected today when it formed the basis of all civilizations (in one form or another) until recent history.

Indeed, if the "Union" is what is represented and, as you state, the preservation of slavery was "the mandatory price of our national existence".

You missed a word:

but if the 3/5ths compromise was the mandatory price of our national existence it was worth it.

No one can say that it was mandatory for certain and I did not.


The passions of the contemporary Black Lives Matter movement do not re-write history. The Vichy government does not make the tricolour a symbol of anti-semitism. Nor does its creator Jacques-Louis Davide make it a celebration of the evils of the Reign of Terror. Or a celebration of French colonialism. It is only the symbol of France. In order to communicate we need to not distort the meanings of symbols and twist them to mean something else.

A different example of an attempt to abuse the meaning of a symbol is the stars and bars. Some contemporary southerners want to say it honors the "noble and gallant sacrifice". Or that it is part of their history. But it was first flown over the southerners (and others) who were fighting to keep people in slavery . And it was used through the civil rights movement and to the present as a terroristic threat to black people. It was flown (for example) to celebrate the acquittal of the two men who murdered Emmit Till.

All countries have their own burden of history to be ashamed of.

Kaepernick is wrong.

yrs,
rubato

The flag was never flown specifically to celebrate or defend slavery And the union which it symbolizes made possible the liberation of the slaves and later on the civil rights movement. It was merely coincident.

Please; England abolished slavery well before we did, if we had remained part of the British Empire we would have abolished slavery before the US ever did; the Union did not make the abolition of slavery possible. And let's not forget the language which condemned slavery that was cut out of the Declaration of Independence in 1776, again showing that the keeping of slavery was necessary to achieve the union that was wanted. Was it worth it; IMHO it depends which race you a--it's easy to sit back and say "look at what we've done" and gloss over the fact that the founding fathers were willing to sacrifice the "creator endowed" rights of black human beings for political expediency when your ancestors were on the non-slave side of the equation, and not quite so easy when your ancestors were (or could have been) the people who were condemned to slavery.

But the fact that we went to war over it 70 years later on suggests no.

What war was that? It was a war to preserve the Union, not the war to end slavery (at least until emancipation became politically convenient, and even then the Union still permitted slavery in the border states until after the war was ended). Read Lincoln's writings about preservation of the Union being paramount, and how he woudl preserve the Union even if it meant he didn't release even one slave.

I am not saying I agree with Kaepernick, but he has a point that is clearly defensible in light of our history. That you disagree with it does not make him wrong.

Big RR wrote: But tell me, where are these roving gangs of liberals

Roving gangs of liberal thugs are mostly in liberal fascist states and some traitor cities in the south or in other words enemy states and locales. The enemies of liberty and freedom are on the rise. Have you noticed they hate the word liberty? They don’t attack people here because it is possible that they couldn’t get away with it.

There sure are a lot racist here that want to keep a racist symbol. What would be wrong with replacing the flag with a simple white rectangle with the words “United States of America” across the top and the states listed below?

Someone call Kaepernick and see if that would be acceptable.

My oh my oh my. "liberal fascist states" I will never understand the twisted language in Mr. Liberty's posts here. He must have very idiosyncratic understanding of historical and contemporary political discourse. Now I once again reveal my own personal idiosyncratic bias.
Perhaps his handle here is because he is a proud graduate of Liberty University. That would explain much of his posts.

snailgate

Lib told us:

Roving gangs of liberal thugs are mostly in liberal fascist states and some traitor cities in the south or in other words enemy states and locales.

Which are the "liberal fascist states" of which you speak? I think we should be told. And the "traitor cities" - can you give me an address or two so I can send money so I can tell them what I think of them?

Everyone - this is alarming news and clearly a waste of our resources. We need to redirect these roving bands of thugs. We don't need them in the 'traitor cities' because those places already support the cause. We want them in those cities which need re-education.