BF2S Forums Should we name things after Confederate leaders?

heggs wrote:

I don't mind them naming places and ships after notable Confederate people. I do, however, have a serious problem with the Confederate Flag. In my opinion, THAT should not be allowed to be waved in this country at all.

The flag you have a problem with is the Confederate battle flag. The flag(s) of the CSA (there were a handful) would probably not be recognized by anyone other than a history buff.

i do

that's what happens when you major in chicano studies

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

that's what happens when you major in chicano studies

i majored in your moms buttcheeks

hurri is a spic, yes.

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Don't really get the point, do you.

Hey man, I was just having fun. 

1stSFOD-Delta wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

The U.S. Navy has named a bunch of ships over the years after Confederate leaders including Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson. I'm sure there are plenty of cities, roads, landmarks and other things named after them too. Do you think the U.S. government or we as a people should avoid or have a de facto ban on naming things about Confed leaders? No matter how good of generals they were or honorable or anything, they were still traitors who rebelled against their government and country. I'm leaning pretty strongly towards stripping them of any and all posthumous honors.

What do you think?

Now before someone chims in with "what are we supposed to name things after?!''. How about we name things after people who didn't nearly rip the country apart?

Shouldn't name anything after anybody American, you are all traitors who rebelled against our government.

eat shit and die

Point was just because somebody lost doesn't mean they were evil and all traces should be removed from history. There are 2 sides to everything with both good men and bad men on each side.

Still traitors that rebelled against government as stated in OP as reason for pretending they didnt exist.

Spearhead wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Look, did we reintegrate the south or didn't we? Loyalty to your state was more of a driving force than loyalty to the union. I can see how federal loyalists would have an issue with the confederate flag (history painting things as it has), but not the people caught up in the civil war. What about all the land and homes razed by Union forces? Should we blacklist northern leaders as well? Remove Lincoln from US currency?

1. No, we didn't reintegrate the South.  Hence the vast network of military bases, and Jim Crow.  Good article http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic … 69,00.html

2. Loyalty to the Union was always the driving force behind the Civil war.  Kmar already explained it was a war between people who considered themselves Americans.  Loyalty to your state was more of a driving force?  Where'd you ever hear that?

3. People have an issue with the confederate flag because it is a message to others that says "the second the Federal government does something I don't like, or the second a President gets elected whom I think will do something I don't like (Lincoln), I'm going to violently attempt to take over federal property". (Fort Sumter).  And of course, the whole slavery thing.

4. No one has ever said the Union did not do bad things.  You, on the other hand, seem to believe "history painting things as it has" is the reason people associate the Confederate flag with slavery.  As if it's just an artificial "painting" over some higher truth.

5. Blacklist the abolitionists?  Blacklist a President?  Because people have an issue with naming things after a fake President?  Okay, dude, lol...

1. I thought I was being fairly facetious on that point. Look, the CSA is a non-entity. The south has been reabsorbed into the union, regardless of cultural differences throughout the US.

2. lol @ "where'd you ever hear that." While you're being snippy, can I ask you if you've ever read anything on the history of American culture? Back then, it was common to see people identify themselves as citizens of a state before being called "Americans." Robert E. Lee himself refused a union command because he didn't want to take up arms against Virginia. A civil war being what it is, many of those who eagerly threw their lot in with the south didn't consider themselves to be committing treason against anything. National identity grew in time, but it wasn't always like that.

3. I've already said I can see where people would have an issue with the confederate flag nowadays, being avowed federal loyalists. However, the civil war is over, and it's important to not hold grudges against the American people and families involved, nor deprive the descendants of "repatriated" Americans their heritage if you don't want to drive the wedge between the "north" and "south" in farther. If you still want to call the "president" of the south a butthead, go ahead; he was.

4. I seem to believe that? Winners traditionally paint history in their favor. The confederate flag is associated with slavery because that's what the media focus on the American civil war is. That said, see 3. Also, go read about slavery in the north, if you can find a book that doesn't skip all the unpleasant facts.

5. I was making absurd suggestions to highlight the absurdity of this entire issue.

Should things be named after people?

No, it smacks of North Korean personaility cultism.

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Still traitors that rebelled against government as stated in OP as reason for pretending they didnt exist.

I think the English should tear down any sign that says "Washington."

There's still discussion about whether or not secession was rightfully treason or not. The US then was more of a decentralized union, with emphasis on state vs federal power.

there is also still discussion of whether the moon landing was a hoax

so do a lot of others

he supported it enough to own black people