Azure Needs an Opinion

[Azure_Angel]

So as some know from posts or conversations, I like to study and create flags. I also have a collection of national flags of countries I've been to. Having traveled to, through, and worked in many southern states, I've considered getting a Confederate States of America flag. First people think of is the Confederate Rebel Flag, which common knowledge and a quick search will find that it's more of a 20th century creation. I want historical accuracy. I still don't want the Battle flag cause it's just that, a battle flag.

Now for my dilema. There are 3 national flags of the CSA. I can't decide which one.

1. The Stars and Bars.

This was the first national flag of the CSA. It's probably the most widely known national flag due to it's inclusion in several state flags. It's visually appealing, and harkens back to good old glory. It also had the longest run from November 28, 1861 to May 1, 1863.

2. The Stainless Banner.

A beautiful flag that was the first "true" confederate flag. Gone was any resemblance to the union. It now had the battle flag as it's union, a symbol of the ongoing struggle for independence, and it was placed on a pure white field. The white represented purity, and simplicity of the CSA. Favourable at first, it later gained criticism for looking like a flag of truce when there was no wind, but it's also the only CSA flag to travel around the world. It lasted from May 26, 1863 to March 4, 1865.

3. The Blood Stained Banner

The third, and final national flag of the CSA. Proposed by Major Arthur L. Rogers, He defended his redesign as having "as little as possible of the Yankee blue", and described it as symbolizing the primary origins of the people of the South, with the cross of England and the red bar from the flag of France. The red bar was added to dispel any belief that the flag meant truce, and if the CSA had won, it'd most likely be the national flag today. It was the last symbol of the CSA, and was the last iteration of the national flag to be lowered after the war. However, it also had the shortest run; only flying from  Mar 4, 1865 to May 9, 1865.

One would say, "Azure, why don't you just buy the flags of the states you visited?" I won't for 2 reasons; the first is there are over 104 state flags between Canada, USA, and Mexico alone. That's more than half of the 196 recognized countries on the planet. If I started collecting state flags, I'd be up to my hair in fabric before the end of the year. The other reason is, America isn't the greatest when it comes to flag designs. The main purpose of a flag is identification. Yet half of the US’s states have flags that to the untrained eye, or from a distance, look identical.

I want a flag that represents all of the south, without any real negative connotation (like that of the Rebel Flag.) So which flag should I buy? I'm at a total loss. All 3 have their pros and cons. I want the right flag.

[Gasman]

I read the subject as you needing an operation and thought you were getting a sex change :-X. For what you want, personally, I'd pick the second or third flag because the first flag looks close to the US's current flag design, which sounds like the opposite of what you want.

Also, hi, I'm Gasman! I like cats, cooking and I'm a lurker here, posting rarely when I feel like.

[CaffeinePowered]

Why not go with the straight stars and bars?

[Dtrain323i]

Well as a bit of a Confederate sympathizer at heart, I like the blood stained flag.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[cbre88x]

The stainless banner represents what the southern states wanted most: economical freedoms and states rights. I propose that banner simply because it still carries the stars and bars without the negative connotation of the war. It's the blank slate the south wanted before blood and bullets ruined the true reason for southern desire of secession.

Also, I'm still pissed that the Georgia state flag was changed because of that bullshit of negative connotations.

[Didzo]

The stainless banner represents what the southern states wanted most: economical freedoms and states rights. I propose that banner simply because it still carries the stars and bars without the negative connotation of the war. It's the blank slate the south wanted before blood and bullets ruined the true reason for southern desire of secession.

I initially liked the first flag the best, but that's a very nice statement you made there. Second flag has the most appealing proportions as well.

[Azure_Angel]

Why not go with the straight stars and bars?

That was my first choice until I realized it's too much like the american flag, as Gasman stated.

Well as a bit of a Confederate sympathizer at heart, I like the blood stained flag.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Glad to hear from a true confederate

The stainless banner represents what the southern states wanted most: economical freedoms and states rights. I propose that banner simply because it still carries the stars and bars without the negative connotation of the war. It's the blank slate the south wanted before blood and bullets ruined the true reason for southern desire of secession.

Also, I'm still pissed that the Georgia state flag was changed because of that bullshit of negative connotations.

Those are the exact reasons why I threw it in the mix. At first I was going to leave it out. I'm leaning towards one of the stained banners..

I read the subject as you needing an operation and thought you were getting a sex change :-X.

I read the name as (or)Gasam. So we're good.

[K2]

[quote author=cbre88x link=topic=6400.msg248136#msg248136 date=1340508887]
The stainless banner represents what the southern states wanted most: economical freedoms and states rights. I propose that banner simply because it still carries the stars and bars without the negative connotation of the war. It's the blank slate the south wanted before blood and bullets ruined the true reason for southern desire of secession.

I initially liked the first flag the best, but that's a very nice statement you made there. Second flag has the most appealing proportions as well.
[/quote]

Just from an aesthetic standpoint I think the second one looks really weird. The battle flag is a little taller and a little thinner than the kind of standard top-left region of most flags, which makes it look strange, and the pure white background just feels empty and awkward. When I first saw I thought it looked like someone took the battle flag, pasted it into MSPaint, and saved it without fixing the borders. I like the concept but feel like the execution was poor. I'd go with the third one, since it has the same basic concept, which I like, but the battle flag proportions are much better, and the red edge gives it a more interesting look.

[StolenToast]

Pick numba 3, m'lord.

Actually don't.  I don't like it.  And it's lame.
Number one looks the best and is the most recognizable, even if it is similar to the Union flag.  I really don't like the second one, but it sounds like the most significant, so I guess that would be best.  


I think the CSA was totally justified and the USA was hypocritical to try to take them back.

[Eschatos]

1 is best, 2 is pretty good too. Something about 3 just seems off to me.

[Neptune]

I would get the first one and save the others for later.  The other two seem to need to be described in context of the first one, given their short runs and the fact that they didn't seem to have settled on a design.

[matter11]

I like the second one because not many flags have that much white. Seems like a good trait to have for a flag collector.

[cbre88x]

[quote author=Didzo link=topic=6400.msg248137#msg248137 date=1340509333]
[quote author=cbre88x link=topic=6400.msg248136#msg248136 date=1340508887]
The stainless banner represents what the southern states wanted most: economical freedoms and states rights. I propose that banner simply because it still carries the stars and bars without the negative connotation of the war. It's the blank slate the south wanted before blood and bullets ruined the true reason for southern desire of secession.

I initially liked the first flag the best, but that's a very nice statement you made there. Second flag has the most appealing proportions as well.
[/quote]

Just from an aesthetic standpoint I think the second one looks really weird. The battle flag is a little taller and a little thinner than the kind of standard top-left region of most flags, which makes it look strange, and the pure white background just feels empty and awkward. When I first saw I thought it looked like someone took the battle flag, pasted it into MSPaint, and saved it without fixing the borders. I like the concept but feel like the execution was poor. I'd go with the third one, since it has the same basic concept, which I like, but the battle flag proportions are much better, and the red edge gives it a more interesting look.
[/quote]

Yea, aesthetically it looks better. Simply from symbolic view..I had to shove a bit of my southern heritage into my choice.

[rumsfald]

The stainless banner represents what the southern states wanted most: economical freedoms and states rights. I propose that banner simply because it still carries the stars and bars without the negative connotation of the war. It's the blank slate the south wanted before blood and bullets ruined the true reason for southern desire of secession.

Also, I'm still pissed that the Georgia state flag was changed because of that bullshit of negative connotations.

Seabreeze, Georgia's Declaration of Seccession mentions slavery some 35 times, starting with the second sentence. And it closes with this gem:

[tt]Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property in the common territories of the Union...[/tt]

Let's not pretend it was about some higher purpose.

Southern sympathizers can no more reclaim a CSA flag any more than African-Americans can fully reclaim the "n-word" and free it from negative associations. Anyone who wields either risks engendering significant and horrible associations among their fellow citizens.

[A. Crow]

So, I spent half my formative years in Texas, and the other half in Ohio; I've gotten a good mixture of viewpoints of on this one.  It's funny, I encountered more racist motherfuckers in rural Ohio, where a more homogenous population I have yet to encounter (my high school had ~900 students, four were black, one of those only half.)  That's worse than the college I went to, that has 11% population of "multicultural" students.  (This is a verbage change from the original brochure from nearly a decade ago I read which was something to the effect of "We maintain a 15% share of minorities in the student population."  Which always struck me as an incredibly racist policy to begin with, and once you got into the meat and potatoes of how they maintained this percentage was down right insulting, they were paying black kids to come to the school, whether they belonged there academically or not.)  

But I digress, it always came down to perception.  In the South, a confederate flag is viewed (among most white people) as a symbol of southern pride, something of their heritage, something that has been fought and bled over- that makes it important.  In the North, the first time the issue came up, someone asked me why I supported slavery by liking anything about the Confederacy, right before calling me a racist asshole.  I found this funny, as I had grown up in a half black, half white school system in Texas, had black friends, and was pretty sure this cornfed simpleton had only seen black people on TV.  So, true to fashion when you introduce the baseless aggressiveness of Texas into the passive aggressiveness of rural Ohio, he made some vague threat about egging my parents house while we were asleep, and I went straight to throwing punches on the spot.  

But as Rummy arrived at much more succinctly than I, Symbols are alive, they evolve, and they mean different things to different people.  And people can feel very strongly about them.  Azure, if you go out and display a flag associated with the Confederacy, be prepared to bear the brunt of the feelings it evokes.  Granted if you go with the stars and bars, most people won't know what it is, as colloquially the "Confederate Flag" / "Battle Flag of the Confederacy", whatever the fuck you want to call it, is the most widely known symbol associated with the Confederacy.  

Oh noes, he's said "black people" and "white people."  Get the fuck over it.  

[Dtrain323i]

[quote author=cbre88x link=topic=6400.msg248136#msg248136 date=1340508887]
The stainless banner represents what the southern states wanted most: economical freedoms and states rights. I propose that banner simply because it still carries the stars and bars without the negative connotation of the war. It's the blank slate the south wanted before blood and bullets ruined the true reason for southern desire of secession.

Also, I'm still pissed that the Georgia state flag was changed because of that bullshit of negative connotations.

Seabreeze, Georgia's Declaration of Seccession mentions slavery some 35 times, starting with the second sentence. And it closes with this gem:

[tt]Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our property in the common territories of the Union...[/tt]

Let's not pretend it was about some higher purpose.

Southern sympathizers can no more reclaim a CSA flag any more than African-Americans can fully reclaim the "n-word" and free it from negative associations. Anyone who wields either risks engendering significant and horrible associations among their fellow citizens.

[/quote]

Slavery as a practice was on its way out in the south before the civil war even started and Abraham Lincoln himself didn't really give a rats ass about it. The Emancipation Proclamation was just a tactic to throw the south in to disarray when they were winning the war. Bear in mind, that the Proclamation only freed slaves in states that were in open rebellion. Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, and Missouri didn't succeed but were largely slave owning states. The Proclamation didn't free the slaves in those states.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery.

What the North was really afraid of losing was the tax dollars that the very wealthy south would have taken if they'd been allowed to succeed. The southern states were making bank trading with the English and the French

[Saxxy]

My opinion: Close this thread, read "Lies My Teacher Told Me".  It's available online for free in pdf form

specifically, chapters 5 and 6, but you can start at the beginning too

[rumsfald]

Dtrain,

Previously, I linked to the Declarations of Secession for four of the initial 7 states that separated from the Union, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas. I consider these documents, written by the leaders of the southern states, endorsed by the population of their states, to be representative of the true state of slavery in their states at the time. Let's compare those words to your positions.

Slavery as a practice was on its way out in the south before the civil war even started

Here's what Mississippi had to say about slavery:

• [tt]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.[/tt]

Doesn't sound like it was "on its way out" there.

and Abraham Lincoln himself didn't really give a rats ass about it.

Here's what George thought about Lincoln's position on slavery:

• [tt]The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state.[/tt]

Here's what South Carolina thought about Lincoln's party taking winning the executive branch

• [tt]On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.[/tt]
  

Aaand, Texas:

• [tt]For years past this abolition organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding States.
  
  By consolidating their strength, they have placed the slave-holding States in a hopeless minority in the federal congress, and rendered representation of no avail in protecting Southern rights against their exactions and encroachments.
  
  They have proclaimed, and at the ballot box sustained, the revolutionary doctrine that there is a 'higher law' than the constitution and laws of our Federal Union, and virtually that they will disregard their oaths and trample upon our rights. [/tt]
  

So, while it may be true that in his private thoughts, Lincoln didn't "give a rats ass" about slavery*, clearly the some of the confederate thought he did care. Which is why 7 states declared to leave the Union before he took office.

*which, itself is not supported by the historical record, in 1954 Old Abe saying,"...the spread of slavery. I cannot but hate it. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world..." (footnote 87)

What the North was really afraid of losing was the tax dollars that the very wealthy south would have taken if they'd been allowed to succeed. The southern states were making bank trading with the English and the French

That's a completely different issue. I'm talking about why some of the Southern States declared Secession, which for the ones that I've quoted is quite obviously slavery. You're talking about why the North wouldn't let the South secede.

[Azure_Angel]

So, I spent half my formative years in Texas, and the other half in Ohio; I've gotten a good mixture of viewpoints of on this one.  It's funny, I encountered more racist motherfuckers in rural Ohio, where a more homogenous population I have yet to encounter (my high school had ~900 students, four were black, one of those only half.)  That's worse than the college I went to, that has 11% population of "multicultural" students.  (This is a verbage change from the original brochure from nearly a decade ago I read which was something to the effect of "We maintain a 15% share of minorities in the student population."  Which always struck me as an incredibly racist policy to begin with, and once you got into the meat and potatoes of how they maintained this percentage was down right insulting, they were paying black kids to come to the school, whether they belonged there academically or not.)  

But I digress, it always came down to perception.  In the South, a confederate flag is viewed (among most white people) as a symbol of southern pride, something of their heritage, something that has been fought and bled over- that makes it important.  In the North, the first time the issue came up, someone asked me why I supported slavery by liking anything about the Confederacy, right before calling me a racist asshole.  I found this funny, as I had grown up in a half black, half white school system in Texas, had black friends, and was pretty sure this cornfed simpleton had only seen black people on TV.  So, true to fashion when you introduce the baseless aggressiveness of Texas into the passive aggressiveness of rural Ohio, he made some vague threat about egging my parents house while we were asleep, and I went straight to throwing punches on the spot.  

But as Rummy arrived at much more succinctly than I, Symbols are alive, they evolve, and they mean different things to different people.  And people can feel very strongly about them.  Azure, if you go out and display a flag associated with the Confederacy, be prepared to bear the brunt of the feelings it evokes.  Granted if you go with the stars and bars, most people won't know what it is, as colloquially the "Confederate Flag" / "Battle Flag of the Confederacy", whatever the fuck you want to call it, is the most widely known symbol associated with the Confederacy.  

Oh noes, he's said "black people" and "white people."  Get the fuck over it.  

I know that there will be people who object to me having it, but I won't be flying it out my window. I display all my flags in my living room in order of when I visited them. Thank you for the insight though. Being a Kiwi living in Canada, I am limited in american history (though that's one of my alibis for having a flag)

Also might I remind people that this thread is about which flag best represents the CSA, not about why the south seceded, or what Lincoln did to win the war, or anything along the lines of the civil war. Please don't turn this into a race debate. If you guys want to argue over who was right, go create your own fucking thread.

[A. Crow]

Also might I remind people that this thread is about which flag best represents the CSA, not about why the south seceded, or what Lincoln did to win the war, or anything along the lines of the civil war. Please don't turn this into a race debate. If you guys want to argue over who was right, go create your own fucking thread. [/color]

Happens everytime.  We (as a country) can't ever talk about the symbols of the war without talking about the war, and then it's reasons and ramifications.