Man Murders Nine in Charleston Church

[Timsup2nothin]

Must be why they led the way to have the flag taken down.

No doubt. Gotta start somewhere in getting attention off the association with "southern." The Hispanic bloc is coming, and can't be stopped. If they don't generate some appeal across racial lines they are going to lose their grip.

 

[Formaldehyde]

A handful of prominent Southern Baptists who want to see the Confederate flag finally retired after centuries of endorsing it are now the only ones that count, never mind the vast majority of Baptists who now rationalize its continued use as a symbol of their "heritage".

 

[Kyriakos]

Shaming and trolling citizens is not the way things change for the better in any nation.

And i still do not see how a madman who killed 9 people was used as fuel for this different-issue kind of kneejerkism..

And in my view indeed the worst is that a state government hastily voted to take down the confederate flag, which raises the question on why they had it there for all this time if most of them in that gov viewed it as pro-slavery and racist?
Cause it looks like those gov people just reacted to a media campaign, and this is not going to help anyone.

 

[Bugfatty300]

And in my view indeed the worst is that a state government hastily voted to take down the confederate flag, which raises the question on why they had it there for all this time if most of them in that gov viewed it as pro-slavery and racist? Cause it looks like those gov people just reacted to a media campaign, and this is not going to help anyone.

The flag used to fly on top of the state's capital building (which was odd and inappropriate) but 10-15 years ago it was moved to a nearby war memorial as a compromise with protesters. And then everyone apparently forgot about it until this year.

Easy target, easy "fix" I suppose. It was an even bigger media deal back then so I don't think SC wants to deal with it again.

But don't rest yet America, there's still civil war graves and battlefields to cleanse! We're still no safe from flag-related violence by any stretch...

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Shaming and trolling citizens is not the way things change for the better in any nation.

And i still do not see how a madman who killed 9 people was used as fuel for this different-issue kind of kneejerkism..

And in my view indeed the worst is that a state government hastily voted to take down the confederate flag, which raises the question on why they had it there for all this time if most of them in that gov viewed it as pro-slavery and racist?
Cause it looks like those gov people just reacted to a media campaign, and this is not going to help anyone.

Representative government is supposed to react, though not to "media campaigns." It's a question of tipping points.

There have been people kvetching about that flag forever. There have been people squawking about "southern heritage" and honored dead ancestors forever. And there has been a huge contingent of people who frankly didn't pay any attention, also forever. But as of this moment those people who were not paying attention are confronted, and both the vocal groups are growing by leaps and bounds as the current circumstance batters people into choosing where they are going to stand.

Yes, the media is in fact forcing that to happen, but it really isn't forcing those previously inattentive people to line up on a particular side, it just is forcing them to line up one way or the other. Politicians in a representative government are actually accountable for looking at how the people are lining up and then "leading" by heading off in the direction most of them are going.

In this case, people who two months ago might have looked at the flag in question and shrugged are, in large measure, looking at it and seeing it for what it represented to Dylann Roof, and all the "southern heritage" and other stuff is not making that seem attractive on balance. Smart politicians saw where it was headed and lit out early. That's what defines a smart politician.

 

[Kyriakos]

Representative government is supposed to react, though not to "media campaigns." It's a question of tipping points.

There have been people kvetching about that flag forever. There have been people squawking about "southern heritage" and honored dead ancestors forever. And there has been a huge contingent of people who frankly didn't pay any attention, also forever. But as of this moment those people who were not paying attention are confronted, and both the vocal groups are growing by leaps and bounds as the current circumstance batters people into choosing where they are going to stand.

Yes, the media is in fact forcing that to happen, but it really isn't forcing those previously inattentive people to line up on a particular side, it just is forcing them to line up one way or the other. Politicians in a representative government are actually accountable for looking at how the people are lining up and then "leading" by heading off in the direction most of them are going.

In this case, people who two months ago might have looked at the flag in question and shrugged are, in large measure, looking at it and seeing it for what it represented to Dylann Roof, and all the "southern heritage" and other stuff is not making that seem attractive on balance. Smart politicians saw where it was headed and lit out early. That's what defines a smart politician.

I don't think this is about 'smart politicians'. And causing yet more division is not going to solve problems.. The South was actually annexed by the North, so it is not that strange to have people view the flag of the South as representing something positive, and of their own.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Well obviously using redneck is a classist term, and the targets of that term get to decide that.
HMM, I WONDER WHAT ELSE THAT REMINDS ME OF?

That term is a perfect example of what I am talking about. It wouldn't be used to offend me, whether intended in a derogatory way or any other way, so it is not up to me to determine whether its offensive or not. I am going to defer to whites, rural whites in particular, and even more particularly, the kind of people who would find themselves being described by that term. Its up to them and ONLY them to decide whether the term is offensive. If they say "Nah we like it! We don't mind if people call us that!" then fine, but if they say "You shouldn't use that term, its offensive" then that's the end of it, I wont say it... and I will go even further, and say that if the majority of rural whites were saying "Look, that's OUR term... WE can say it, but we don't want anyone else saying it", then I would respect that as well and stop saying it.

Reminds me of the fact that one class that gets shat on regularly can legitimately find historical harm caused under a symbol and a different class that gets shat on regularly can legitimately find some measure of comfort in the same symbol as an identifier of self(hi JR!) rather than superiority.

That is precisely the difference. To rural whites the symbol is seen as something that boosts them up, praises their heritage, race, whatever, so it makes sense that they like it. But that is precisely why they aren't in a position to decide whether its offensive... Of course they don't find it offensive! Of course they like it and find comfort in it... Because its a big thumbs up directed at them... But meanwhile its a huge middle finger directed at blacks... Of course some rural whites don't see it that way, precisely because its not that way...towards them.

Shaming and trolling citizens is not the way things change for the better in any nation.

This is a completely circular argument and thus not persuasive at all... Because the Confederate Flag shames and trolls blacks every time it is displayed.

And i still do not see how a madman who killed 9 people was used as fuel for this different-issue kind of kneejerkism

You are not from the US correct? So it is completely understandable that you don't get the relevance... Are you asking for an explanation or just making a statement?

 

[Kyriakos]

^Yeah, i agree that for me, not being from or in the US, indeed the context of the 60s civil rights movements (for minorites such as Black people in the US) is not very clear. I know it gets alluded to all the time, but wasn't it far less an issue in the 90s? (or was this just a false impression due to distance?)

 

[Manfred Belheim]

This is a completely circular argument and thus not persuasive at all... Because the Confederate Flag shames and trolls blacks every time it is displayed.

So fight fire with fire then? Yes, that always works so well.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Shaming and trolling citizens is not the way things change for the better in any nation.

Then you should be for its removal instead of against it. This isn't a difficult matter to understand unless you simply don't care or want to ignore that blacks continue to be oppressed in much of this country, and the symbol for that oppression is the Confederate flag.

And i still do not see how a madman who killed 9 people was used as fuel for this different-issue kind of kneejerkism..

And in my view indeed the worst is that a state government hastily voted to take down the confederate flag, which raises the question on why they had it there for all this time if most of them in that gov viewed it as pro-slavery and racist?
Cause it looks like those gov people just reacted to a media campaign, and this is not going to help anyone.

It is no different than if the fascists in your own government got the Nazi flag to be flown from your parliament.

The flag used to fly on top of the state's capital building (which was odd and inappropriate) but 10-15 years ago it was moved to a nearby war memorial as a compromise with protesters. And then everyone apparently forgot about it until this year.

It wasn't a compromise with the protesters. The legislators themselves insisted upon it, as well and demanding that it required a 2/3rds vote of both houses to even move it to half staff. (They had wanted 3/4ths vote.)

And nobody forgot about it. It has always been an indelible stain on Southern states ever since it was first raised in the 50s in protest to desegregation and giving blacks civil rights. There are even numerous threads in this forum where the matter has been repeatedly discussed.

 

[Sommerswerd]

^Yeah, i agree that for me, not being from or in the US, indeed the context of the 60s civil rights movements (for minorites such as Black people in the US) is not very clear. I know it gets alluded to all the time, but wasn't it far less an issue in the 90s? (or was this just a false impression due to distance?)

False impression, the Confederate flag has always been a flash-point issue in this country. But it doesn't get more local than our own national Civil War does it? So yes, clearly the distance, and moreover the fact of being in a completely different country, helps explain why issues related to our Civil War are super-important to us but completely confounding and esoteric to you.

Manfred made a statement that illustrates this point... he said: "he (the shooter) had a Golds Gym shirt on in the picture (of him waving a Confederate flag) as well. So why not ban that?" Now putting aside the fact that we don't fly "Golds Gym" flags in front of government buildings... his legitimate point was... why focus on one symbol displayed by the shooter and not the other? Perfectly understandable coming from someone who did not grow up learning about US history, Civil War, reconstruction, segregation etc.

The Confederate flag has historically been used in the US as a symbol of the power by white-supremacist movements. It was put up on government buildings in the southern states as a protest against racial integration and Civil Rights for blacks. So the continued presence of it was an indication that white-supremacists continued to have enough power that their symbols of power could not be removed from prominent official display. The fact that the flag has been taken down does not mean that there are suddenly less white-supremacists or that they are less racist all of a sudden, indeed not. But what it does mean, is that they are no longer powerful enough to keep their symbols prominently displayed by the government (at least in SC, we will see about Mississippi). Taking the flag down is a demonstration that white-supremacists are less powerful than they once were.

The connection to the shooter, is that he was a white supremacist. That is also probably why he was taking the kinds of photos he took displaying the flag in the way he did. Leaving the flag flying after that would have indicated that people like the shooter were still powerful enough politically that their beloved symbol of power could not be removed. The fact that it came down was a statement to them, and everyone that they don't own/run SC anymore.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The connection to the shooter, is that he was a white supremacist. That is also probably why he was taking the kinds of photos he took displaying the flag in the way he did. Leaving the flag flying after that would have indicated that people like the shooter were still powerful enough politically that their beloved symbol of power could not be removed. The fact that it came down was a statement to them, and everyone that they don't own/run SC anymore.

But, unfortunately, they still do own/run South Carolina. They just can't fly their favorite racist symbol from the capitol grounds anymore. That has finally now become politically incorrect. In that sense, Kyriakos is correct. This really doesn't change anything, at least right now. But it does mean that their grandchildren may eventually be able to stop fighting the Civil War.

 

[Sommerswerd]

So fight fire with fire then? Yes, that always works so well.

No that's not the point (well that does work sometimes, but I know that's not your point so I wont be an @$$ and start arguing that issue) so thanks for bringing that up. My point to Kyriakos was that his argument (shaming people who display the Confederate flag won't improve the nation) was circular, because the mirror image could be made in response, regarding displaying the Confederate flag (shaming black people by displaying the Confederate flag wont improve the nation). But because that is just circular, the argument goes nowhere, and thus isn't worth making as the arguments just cancel each other out. Your statement about fighting fire with fire is making a very similar point, so in that sense we agree... circular arguments aren't good to make a point.

 

[BvBPL]

A handful of prominent Southern Baptists who want to see the Confederate flag finally retired after centuries of endorsing it are now the only ones that count, never mind the vast majority of Baptists who now rationalize its continued use as a symbol of their "heritage".

Your statement on the number of Baptists who want to retire the flag versus those who do not is total supposition on your part. Generally you are very good about providing links that document your position but you can't and you wouldn't here. You know damn well that Russell Moore help led the charge on this and that the SBC leadership is on the side of the angels here. Instead you persist in drinking your own damn Kool Aid by maintaining your BS narrative.

Nobody is denying that the Baptist church has an unfortunate history when it comes to slavery. the contemporary Baptist is trying to fight the good fight here, just as some of its leaders have the last fifty years. I don't know what kind of myopia causes someone to deny his allies on issues like this, but thank God, thank God most of us don't have it. It is hard enough to fight against the haters without denying your allies as well.

 

[Kyriakos]

False impression, the Confederate flag has always been a flash-point issue in this country. But it doesn't get more local than our own national Civil War does it? So yes, clearly the distance, and moreover the fact of being in a completely different country, helps explain why issues related to our Civil War are super-important to us but completely confounding and esoteric to you.

Manfred made a statement that illustrates this point... he said: "he (the shooter) had a Golds Gym shirt on in the picture (of him waving a Confederate flag) as well. So why not ban that?" Now putting aside the fact that we don't fly "Golds Gym" flags in front of government buildings... his legitimate point was... why focus on one symbol displayed by the shooter and not the other? Perfectly understandable coming from someone who did not grow up learning about US history, Civil War, reconstruction, segregation etc.

The Confederate flag has historically been used in the US as a symbol of the power by white-supremacist movements. It was put up on government buildings in the southern states as a protest against racial integration and Civil Rights for blacks. So the continued presence of it was an indication that white-supremacists continued to have enough power that their symbols of power could not be removed from prominent official display. The fact that the flag has been taken down does not mean that there are suddenly less white-supremacists or that they are less racist all of a sudden, indeed not. But what it does mean, is that they are no longer powerful enough to keep their symbols prominently displayed by the government (at least in SC, we will see about Mississippi). Taking the flag down is a demonstration that white-supremacists are less powerful than they once were.

The connection to the shooter, is that he was a white supremacist. That is also probably why he was taking the kinds of photos he took displaying the flag in the way he did. Leaving the flag flying after that would have indicated that people like the shooter were still powerful enough politically that their beloved symbol of power could not be removed. The fact that it came down was a statement to them, and everyone that they don't own/run SC anymore.

Aren't there similarily large numbers of so-called (or real) 'race related hate-crime' in the North US?
Cause places like Detroit and Chicago are as north as can be, and racial crime/violence seems to be at least as notable there.

Ie if racial crime/warfare was as tied to the flag of a nation annexed in a war by the North, then surely it should be a much much smaller issue in the actual North?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Your statement on the number of Baptists who want to retire the flag versus those who do not is total supposition on your part.

It isn't "total supposition" to know the obvious fact that Southern Baptists comprise much of the region where they just voted overwhelmingly that the Confederate flag isn't a symbol of racism, but one of "heritage".

the contemporary Baptist is trying to fight the good fight here, just as some of its leaders have the last fifty years.

What utter nonsense and "total supposition on your part" on both grounds. it wasn't until 1995 that some of the Southern Baptist leadership were finally shamed into finally changing their opinions in this matter. And they obviously have a long way to go before the much of rest of their practitioners finally end this absurd charade that this is a matter of "heritage" instead of blatant racism.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Aren't there similarily large numbers of so-called (or real) 'race related hate-crime' in the North US?
Cause places like Detroit and Chicago are as north as can be, and racial crime/violence seems to be at least as notable there.

Ie if racial crime/warfare was as tied to the flag of a nation annexed in a war by the North, then surely it should be a much much smaller issue in the actual North?

First, I don't see the relevance... I wasn't talking about "race war"... Please let me know where, in your impression, there is a race war going on in the US? I am interested to see how perceptions are fueled overseas.

Second, a few southern states don't even have laws against "race-related hate-crime" so they wouldn't have accurate statistics on such a thing, so without that data, there is really no way to support such a claim because you can't even measure "racial crime/violence" in the south for comparison..

Third, things actually work in precisely the opposite way as you suggest. Just imagine a country where people are very sensitive and vigilant about domestic violence and now imagine a country where people believe that a husband can do whatever he wants to his wife. Where do you think there will be more domestic violence incidents reported? Where do you think there will be more domestic violence occurring? Northern and West-Coast states report more hate crimes because they are more vigilant about hate crimes.

Why is the South less interested in prosecuting/stopping etc "race-related hate-crime"? Because white-supremacists are more powerful in the South. Well how do we know that? Because southern States fly the Confederate flag, for one thing.

 

[Kyriakos]

First, I don't see the relevance... I wasn't talking about "race war"... Please let me know where, in your impression, there is a race war going on in the US? I am interested to see how perceptions are fueled overseas.

Second, a few southern states don't even have laws against "race-related hate-crime" so they wouldn't have accurate statistics on such a thing.

Third, things actually work in precisely the opposite way as you suggest. Just imagine a country where people are very sensitive and vigilant about domestic violence and now imagine a country where people believe that a husband can do whatever he wants to his wife. Where do you think there will be more domestic violence incidents reported? Where do you think there will be more domestic violence occurring? Northern and West-Coast states report more hate crimes because they are more vigilant about hate crimes.

The point is just that black vs white and/or white vs black crime is not lower in the North, and in the North i trust that not many people care about the Confederate flag in the first place.
So it casts some doubt on the correlation between keeping or banning the flag and trying to make racism/racism-related phenomena diminish, if those are actually more common in violent (or overall?) form in the actual North.

(by race-war i mean the kind of brooding antipathy that apparently exists in the US with issues of minorities; prevalence of such campaigns in the media might be overplaying it of course)

 

[Sommerswerd]

Why is the South less interested in prosecuting/stopping etc "race-related hate-crime"? Because white-supremacists are more powerful in the South. Well how do we know that? Because southern States fly the Confederate flag, for one thing.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

Next time some kid with a bad haircut and a horrible yearbook photo decides to start slaughtering people, don't expect anything to happen in the way of gun safety. Look how much drama it took to lower a silly old flag after a church massacre.