I know that was the era before the Civil War.

Wealth, God and the Federal government allies in Slavery, liquid superiority .

it was a poor man's fight.

Peace to you.

But what is the % and are those %s mutable?

I believe they are.

Video & Lyrics

being taught it represented all that was wrong with the south, it really was about One mans journey during and following war, through his eyes, the writers were from Canada....

Good version by Baez

If you haven't you might enjoy it.

Based on a book by a white man? There have been so many fictionalized bullshit accounts of the south before and during the civil war it's a joke. The civil war was about slavery. Should we watch Gone With the Wind and Song of the South for a good account of southern heritage as well?

There's a great book that's new since about a year ago called The Half Has Never Been Told. I highly recommend it.

I've seen Roots, 12 Years A Slave and Django, does that mean I shouldn't watch a fictional movie about poor white Southerners caught up in the Civil War or I'm might become brainwashed?

Have you seen Cold Mountain?

but only due to the attraction I had at the time for Jude Law. It was a good story. It was also fiction.

when we're speaking about hundreds of thousand of soldiers fighting, I didn't believe it to be that far a stretch.

It wasn't fantasy in the sense of the Wizard of Oz nor did it glorify war, if anything it was an anti-war movie.

But it's weird to have a story about the civil war that pretty much ignores the existence of people of color.

Cold Mountain took place in the hill country and there were fewer slaves or free blacks than in the flat lands or deep South.

That's the state where it's set and 33% of the population was made up of enslaved African Americans.

There are also scenes in Virginia and South Carolina, which were also both large slave-owning states. In fact, I think Virginia might have had more enslaved people than any other state, but I'll have to check that.

Edit: OK, more in total but not highest percentage:

http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

this was also true in Eastern Tennessee, and the more mountainous West Virginia part of Virginia.

Furthermore, not every story about the Civil War or any other historical setting has to include every segment of that population to further the story.

The fictional movie; "Cold Mountain" was just a slice of what happened not an overall statement of everything that transpired.

is that some movies and or tales can become in a persons mind fact.

I've already discovered far too many times far too many people are easily led in such directions that allow themselves to believe a certain narrative not caring nor allowing outside challenges toward their pre conceived notions of what is fact or what is fiction...

In some cases and for certain individuals it's a losing battle to believe them willing and or capable to listen to reason.....

I seriously believe most humans in general lack the ability to see the truth, I believe it to be a disconnect in ones brain, I honestly do, nothing else makes sense....

There is a reason so many realty shows exist and have plenty of devoted and loyal fans believing them to be real life situations ....it's crazy I know but it is what it is, scientists need to find out what area of the brain determines the lack of common sense being displayed when one begins to speak...

File it under "war is hell." I imagine the timeless sentiment in that song is expressed thousands of times a day across the world.

General Stoneman was a patriot and to be admired. Whining about "old Dixie" is to be ridiculed, not applauded.

Was that suffering unjustified? Was the cause of slavery just?

During Reconstruction the white South won back most of what it lost, in relation to the black population. Suffer, indeed.

Whether the suffering was justified or not depends on your personal experience and reality, are you a newly freed slave, a rich slave owner, a poor, illiterate dirt farmer, or a small town person defending your community, family, friends, state and region from a perceived threat, an enlightened abolitionist fighting to free the slaves, a racist Northerner that still fought to preserve the Union, a conscripted Confederate with no choice to fight, a drafted Yankee that couldn't afford the bounty to have someone else fight for him?

The cause of slavery was not just.

The South in general still suffered from economic devastation up until and in some cases past FDR's New Deal including the TVA, much of the South didn't have electricity until the 1930s, Mississippi; the last time I checked was still the poorest state in the Union.

The South only won back white political power after Reconstruction because the North was getting tired of dealing with the ordeal and didn't want to fight another war.

No doubt, the black population suffered the worst from Jim Crow but the South in general, continued to suffer as well.

As the rampant lynchings show, the whites terrorized the blacks out of newly won rights.

I agree with your second sentence, hatred ruled the land, much of the South was consumed by it, the North wasn't particularly benign either.

Racism filled the ranks of both armies and nothing breeds hatred like war, especially as devastating as the Civil War was.

that failed nation.

Using the "equivalent of 30 million killed" that would be over 100 million in slavery, have I got the math right?

then moved on to fear the "Yellow Peril" after the "savages" had been subdued. And while the "Yellow Peril" scare was still in full swing, 7 members of the Supreme Court, most of whom were from the North, voted to uphold segregation in Plessey vs. Ferguson. And two years after that, we freed "our little brown brothers" in the Philippines from their Spanish masters, only to put down their insurrection when they wanted their full independence from their new masters.

I recommended a great book to Uncle Joe, but another great book, about post-civil war racism, and largely northern racism, is Sundown Towns. It's worth a look. Living and having grown up in Michigan, I knew there was racism here, but I was shocked by the history.

But we need to face up to things as they were, and as they are.

Look up "white man's burden" and get back with me.

Also look up "yellow peril" and the anti-Asian laws that were enacted in the US in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

For example, "In the USA xenophobic fears against the alleged "Yellow Peril" led to the implementation of the Page Act of 1875, the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act, expanded ten years later by the Geary Act. The Immigration Act of 1917 then created an "Asian Barred Zone" under nativist influence."

And that's just for starters.

with no incentive to improve conditions because there was always someone else who could come along and replace a dead or injured worker.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carnegie/sfeature/mf_flames.html

at all levels.

What I am suggesting is that 30 million Americans killed in a four year war will leave some major emotional scars, there can be no denying this either.

One other point, many Confederate Soldiers were drafted or conscripted, especially late in the war as the South was running out of manpower.

but they are still not at all equivalent. And you talk about how you as a southerner need to have this sense of heritage, to be understood for your people's suffering, but you want to be "color blind" as far as African Americans go. They also have a history of suffering, and much worse suffering, for a much longer period of time.

means to many Southerners from a sociological point of view, not that I can totally distance my emotional self from it but I try.

Yes I do want our whole society to be color blind to the point that we can live with our scars, interracial marriage never causes someone to bat an eye or make a derogatory remark, when everyone of every race is fairly represented, when voting rights are protected, when women of all races get equal pay for equal work, when race can cease to be an issue for every race, not just the white race.

I know we have along way to go but my dream seems to me to be in perfect alignment with that of Martin Luther King and I will not give up good words to the Republicans.

He was not "color blind" and didn't see that as an idea. It's wrong to co-opt him for your argument when it wasn't his. You are taking that quote out of context.

Peace to you.

It's clear that he did not think "color blindness" was an ideal. Sometimes things are true or false. Not everything is a matter of opinion.

just that people won't discriminate based on their color. I think the problem is that you're choosing bad wording. No one can be color blind because we're too visual a species. And to ignore the heritage of people of color is to erase their history. "Neutral" means white in our society and to become "color blind" would be to neutralize people of color, their experiences, their histories. I think you mean "anti-racist."

people will still notice people of other races just as they notice different hair or eye color, but they won't be judging the character of another person based on that visual image.

I'm not speaking of ignoring our historical scars or anyone's heritage, but rather embracing them as being all too symptomatic of the human condition.

MLK was NOT espousing 'color blindness', he was saying the opposite, imo. Accept diversity and look to the content of one's character in order to know them, to judge them.

The celebration of diversity instead of pretending it doesn't exist is how progress is made.

and input your own context for purposes of expediency, you do MLK a grave disservice, imo.

It might help if you actually read his works rather than use "brainy quote" as your source. I strongly recommend the King Center site archive if you REALLY want to understand the context around the "brainy" quotes.

http://www.thekingcenter.org/archive/list?field_term_genre_tid=12616

I use Brainy quotes to illustrate a larger point, what MLK fought and died for was Civil Rights and an ideal vision, he didn't use the specific word "colorblind" but that's essentially what it is, a color blind society.

I'm not suggesting we're there by any stretch of the imagination but that's the goal.

It is often a lazy way to find just the 'right' quote to back up an argument without having to consider context. If you have read his works, listened to his speeches then you would not be putting forward this rather bizarre notion his goal was to see a "color blind" populace, imo.

Peace to you.

it's defection. White Southerners today do not need to feel guilty but they are trying to avoid it by deflections that the North was just as bad (it wasn't - it was not having slavery as an institution). The North might have been racist but it did not insist on or go to war to retain an evil institution.

And to this day the states of the south have higher black populations than others. That makes it all the more disgusting there are white Southerners insisting on this symbol and their "heritage." Like the Germans they need to disavow their heritage and move on past it.

with my OP.

I won't argue about the moral purity of North.... I know better than that, but the Confederacy was a ntsion founded on the principal of white supremacy and the right to own other human beings as property.

Southerners, if they feel any connection to that "heritage," should be ashamed of it. And they should regret the massive amount of death and destruction their "cause" wrought.

FWIW, my paternal ancestors are from the South, though they immigrated after the war.

approving of the principal actors' policies, in this case whether it be secession or slavery.

Do you love, revere, care about or feel loyalty to the United States or the American People despite it or their many "historical moral impurities?"

FWIW; My family was torn apart and fought on both sides of that conflict.

He has no connection to the flag issue, and I've yet to to see any intelligent and informed rationale for it's use.

Anyone I've engaged on the subject is uninformed on the causes of the Civil War or the use of the flag after the war.

The flag is an inanimate object, nothing but a colored piece of cloth, the interpretation of what it means is dependent on the prism from which the viewer sees it, the same as skin color.

Slavery was the definitely the primary issue of the day, and as I stated up thread, the less than 1% dominated both regions, if they hadn't, slavery would've been abolished many years before the Civil War.

Cotton back then was as oil is today, cotton was king and too many people had a stake in making money from it.

No one is, in relation to race. The concept is offensive
You haven't the understanding of MLK to invoke his name like this.

Unless you're aware of him advocating for black superiority or white superiority.

I'm not aware of any.

If you know of any MLK's quotes or writings that dispute my OP or thread, please present them.

Claiming to be colorblind in racial relations is a negative thing., not a positive thing. This concept of colorblind allows one to never really to get to know the other at all. It is a potent method of denial.

It also has nothing to do with asserting the superiority of one race over another as it's opposite. I don't where that comes from.

And unless you have a quote from MLK on the Confederate flag, you have no connection.

only then can racism and bigotry be overcome.

I have no doubt the vast majority of interracial couples would prefer for society at large to not see or notice their differences in skin color.

My published quote from MLK comes closer to addressing the situation and you have nothing.

Flags are symbols and nothing more, a symbol's interpretation is dependent upon the prism from which the individual is viewing the object, the same holds true for skin color, some people are so filled with hate or fear, they prejudge by instinct and learn nothing from the object of their hatred.

I suggest you visit the African American group and ask what they think of the concept.

Colorblind is to be blind. I am a white man married to a black woman. We see each other's color difference and appreciate that difference.

If you can't see color differences, you might need to see an optometrist. Everyone sees color. MLK saw color everyday.

I am still waiting for the MLK quote on the Confederate flag. Until you have that, you have no connection.

with your wife and some people stare or perhaps even make derogatory remarks?

If those people were colorblind, that would never happen.

Everything I've said to you on this concept goes right past you.

I suggest you read up on this... this is not just my idea on the subject of being racially colorblind. Google the subject. Race critical studies.

is never going to happen, because people have eyes.

Color, or difference, *appreciation*, that works.

For example, I'm of an age that I can remember when TV commercials were lily-white. Every time I see otherwise nowadays, I appreciate it.

That's what I'm talking about.

hate. Period. No prism is necessary to understand that. Southern heritage is a prism distorted by skin color and has eyes that are not nor ever will be blind to skin 'color. That is impossible in a society that has built privilege, or not, around the color of ones skin. White people made this mess with enslaving black people in the first place. No ifs, and's or buts. White people made this mess after the civil war with Jim Crow laws and white terrorists killing and destroying the hopes of the newly emancipated blacks and black people all the way up to the Civil Rights Movement led by MLK and many other brave souls in the 50's, 60's and 70's.

The south was not and is not the victim here. A Robert Byrd, Strom Thurmond, George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Jessie Helms, dylaan roof, Hugo Black, Harry Truman, Lee Atwater and Nixon, Ron Reagan have never been color blind and 200 years from now wouldn't be still. The CCC, KKK, White Citizens Council, Storm Front racist will not ever respond with love to a person of color no matter how much love that POC may show to that enemy. Quit using Dr. Martin Luther King to explain away your inability to see the hypocrisy and inanity of your trying to hold on to a "heritage" that represents hate of the highest degree for POC and that represents a last gasping stab at holding on the the white privilege that many on here deny but know they enjoy daily.

Actually this post represents the highest of insults to the intelligence and patience that black people have and have shown, respectively, in the face of bigotry, racism and white privilege that americans north, South, east and west to this day continue to flaunt in the faces of POC. That racist flag and the southern heritage it allegedly represents flaunts white privilege. Be damned the insult it causes to POC you say, it's "heritage". Read more. Your south is victim meme is not going to wash clean. In fact the blood of slaves still staining the flag of southern heritage will never come clean with no amount of alleged victimhood claiming of southerners still flaunting their racist, bigoted hateful heritage and symbols.

in good faith but the use of "color blind" is problematic because it could be a view of being blind to the racism & bigotry that occurs. Plus it is illogical to claim blindness for colors because unless you're are literally blind you're not blind so people do see color it exists, I see Al Gore in your avatar, I see he is also white I don't care if he is or not but I do see his 'color'. I was formerly in an interracial marriage and divorce had nothing to do with differences in skin color but her family could 'see' I was white and vice versa. I wish society at large didn't hate if that is what you mean, I noticed a lot of hate I wasn't aware of how common it was because I could see.

Treat people based on fairness & equality with only their qualifications certainly but colorblind or those who infamously say "I don't see color" are often controversial talking points and best should be avoided.

American psyche than eye or hair color in judging a person's character.

It's a goal but I'm not suggesting by any stretch that we're close to reaching it, there are far too many racial inequities to address to level the playing field, whether it be affirmative action, voting rights or civil rights.

My point is don't run away from a benevolent ideal such as color blind just because some asshole Republicans are trying to hijack the word for their nefarious schemes, we ran away from the word "liberal" for far too long for the same reason.

We fight them on it now as to what it means and not accepting their definition.

Perhaps I'm thinking of a utopian society but I believe that's what Martin Luther King was dreaming of as well, even in his day.

I probably classify the section of the party that serves business over the people as 'not liberal' but generally what it means like progressive though progressive mostly means more of putting people first to me than left of center so I probably use that a more when making the 'putting people first' but I probably say "populist wing" more.

All I was saying color-blindness & the controversy over the use of the term. To be honest most of criticism over "colorblind" or "I don't see color" or Chris Matthew's infamous "I forgot he was black" appear to come mostly from African-Americans though Tim Wise, a white "anti-racist commentator", used the term in a title of a book which is critical of the use of the term or the "pitfalls" of colorblindness but I imagine probably a whole lot more as well.

Colorblind: The Rise of Post-Racial Politics and the Retreat from Racial Equity (City Lights Open Media)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0872865088?ie=UTF8&isInIframe=1&n=283155&redirect=true&ref_=dp_proddesc_0&s=books&showDetailProductDesc=1#iframe-wrapper

Much more than that is all I can say on the appropriateness of the term or not but fully support the ideals. I simply see no other reason but to treat individuals as individuals as we are truly different and people are people. I certainly support that and believe your goals are the same or pretty much similar in the sense of fairness & respect.

when "liberal" became a dirty word, beginning with Reagan and the corporate media all but solidified the Republican definition.

This in turn caused many Democrats to run away from the word and its best ideals, if said Democrat wanted a realistic chance of winning the White House, or even a Senate seat, there were some notable exceptions but they were few and far between.

As of late I do believe the word "liberal" has making a turnaround for the better again in large part because of the growing influence of the Internet.

long disagreed with the strategy of fear from the Democrats. It was really bad in '04 when Democrats were constantly defending themselves of not being "cowards", it was incredibly ridiculous to where criticizing Bush was labeled "unpatriotic" particularly "in a time of war" or especially on "foreign soil" (Dixie Chicks) "freedom fries" "support our troops&quot this one particularly bugged me) there was a climate of fear I remember very well which is why I think Howard Dean appealed to a lot of people.

Generally when something politics or just anything related current or recent historical events that is brought up I simply inject a fact without making an argument one way or the other and suddenly conservatives (I don't run into liberals often around here where I live) are bothered by it and accuse me of being a "liberal" more to themselves than to me or other insults(don't consider liberal an insult but they used it as one) as I don't get it. I even remember times where saying I was a liberal or could fairly consider me as one was treated as some shocking revelation.

"I get a big kick out of them using the word progressive. My gosh, they’re just straight old dumbass liberals anyway," - Orrin Hatch

What I do think is the reason I'm left is because I think the best solutions to the problem tend to come from that side and simply truth is accused of being liberal I figure that the truth is on our side and we should embrace it, not run away from it.

Though the one term that really rubs me the wrong way with the constant use of "the far left" from Bill O'Reilly my BP would rise just seeing "far left" at DU though haven't seen it in a way. Like the "far left" is in loony land the use of his ridicule when using it simply to describe anyone he considered foolish to oppose the Iraq war. "far left" though I probably am close too was dirtied up by Bill O'Reilly.

or deserve it, and as African Americans were most in need of redress after ages of being set back due to slavery, Jim Crow and voting rights violations, it became a codeword to give cover or legitimacy in passing or supporting racist policies.

Ronald Reagan did it with a smile.

I live in Mesa, AZ (the most conservative city of +250,000 people) but also one hit harder than most by the housing crisis (larger city than Atlanta but all it is a sprawling suburb with nothing to do) so everyone around me is on economic hard times and usual places are retail jobs of what is left most of what used to be closed down and check cashing or loan places took their place. Taxi company and telemarketing firms (which are a pretty major employer in this area with Directv & Dish. Outside of that is PCC which telemarkers there solicit donations to the state Republican party. Anyway, a lot people here struggling but notice a lot people look all the way back fondly to the Reagan days. A lot of hate here not just of anyone different but anyone at all it seems. The world just seems a lot more cruel in my neighborhood and hate people who talk about the things we talk about.

What people here or some people here anywhere have an impression based on what they look for online, recently, have a belief that there is a secret government plot with the use of transporting military equipment in underground tunnels and internment camps will be opened up because after they come for the guns, Texas & oddly Utah are considered "hostile states" but the plan includes carving up Arizona and Nevada. All I did was say it doesn't make sense because DynCorp which is under an investment firm that also has an investment on "The Freedom Group" which manufactures civilian weapons such as the AR-15 and I was accused of being a liberal for simply that.

I think another time I said something that wasn't political or argument even about surge it was unrelated about data systems and algorthyms that someone mentioned was correct and noticed that Senturion was used to predict events based on prior events and Bush on a January 17th or close, 2007 speech "correctly predicted an increase in both US & Iraqi casualties" which is what happened during "The Surge" then a guy with him was grilling me over the name of the program I couldn't remember the official name but said it was well known as "The surge" and grilling about this or that was simply saying the guy was right there is a data system for forecasting armed conflicts so I went on way to the mail there I overheard like yelling and the word "reality" so I walk back out the entrance

and say simply he said something that I found to be true and that it was used for planning of "The Surge" and Bush made a correct prediction that there would be an increase on causualties for both sides but the reality was I was in Iraq in 2007 up until June 30th or so. 1 person died total from the unit April 13th from an EFP hitting the passenger side door (he started grilling me what an EFP is and said he "never heard of it&quot I'm like I gotta go and he calls me a "Jew" (which is a first as any religious accusations tend to be Morman though I'm none) and a Saddam gay lover though with a different word -- this was a few years ago. This was a few weeks ago so it was a surprise to find a Iraq war supporter in 2015 but the hate bothers me more than anything, didn't like what I had to say so they reflex with hate. Some places like here we have a long way to go.

There are two primary reasons why I have Al Gore as an avatar.

1. He more than any other single political leader magnified the American Peoples freedom of speech power since the First Amendment was put into effect over two hundred year ago when he championed opening up the Internet, his reward for his visionary leadership was to be castigated, slandered and lied about courtesy of the corporate media. They did it of course because they knew the growing influence of instant, mass communication threatened their power, wealth and ability to filter the news unhindered and shape the peoples perception to their own corporate desires. Of course they would go to enable Cheney/Bush to power, lead the nation to a war based on lies and obfuscate or cover up torture. However if it hadn't been for the Internet, Obama would've had a much greater struggle to reach the White House, the Occupy movement wouldn't have made the splash that it did and police brutality wouldn't have gained as much notice by the American People either.

2. The second reason is Gore's long time advocacy in trying to bring the American Peoples attention and awareness to the growing crisis of global warming; in the long run threatening life as we know it.

3. On third thought, Gore coming to the rescue of the victims of Katrina by flying out two planeloads of trapped patients and doctors in a New Orleans Hospital while Bush was playing with his dick, only solidified my admiration of Gore's character.

in seeing or not seeing color, I wasn't trying to imply he was racist because he was white or anything negative. Just that I could merely 'see' he was white. I didn't get that sense from him personally, I remember in the campaign he often made of point in addressing discrimination, affirmative action, hate crimes, etc. The only problem w/ HCL I have is 10 seems arbitrary but given the level of proof you need to establish a hate crime motive it could be reasonable but there is a bias in application as hate crimes against Muslims have risen to 5 times to level it was after 9/11 (in East Mesa like right after two guys killed a Sikh in a convenient store) that is with a low under-reporting as particular police departments share the same hate. My point was nothing was intended nothing other than to say I could see he was white when it fact respected his efforts.

The Sergeant from Jamaica was a former Marine and if there was one place he loved to talk about it was DC. He enjoyed the city but can't remember the full details of his detail but tells me a story of where he was standing somewhere and Bill Clinton was walking by (unexpected or like the feelings of seeing a celebrity) he saluted and said Clinton said "Hello Marine" with the salute returned. Can't remember all the details except the quote (2006 was when I heard it)

Peace to you, JonL

And as a former Marine myself, if you speak to that Sergeant from Jamaica tell him I said, Semper Fi.

Speaking of Jamaica, I had a fantastic week long vacation down there in the early 90s, my brother and his wife even got their hair braided. They were selling buds as long as your arm, on the beach...good times.

but he has an incredibly common last name which I'll assume it is safe to say 'Thomas" but can't remember first name just Sgt. If I can find my BCT friend I can probably find him lost contact when the MySpace died.

in seeing or not seeing color, I wasn't trying to imply he was racist because he was white or anything negative. Just that I could merely 'see' he was white. I didn't get that sense from him personally, I remember in the campaign he often made of point in addressing discrimination, affirmative action, hate crimes, etc. The only problem w/ HCL I have is 10 seems arbitrary but given the level of proof you need to establish a hate crime motive it could be reasonable but there is a bias in application as hate crimes against Muslims have risen to 5 times to level it was after 9/11 (in East Mesa like right after two guys killed a Sikh in a convenient store) that is with a low under-reporting as particular police departments share the same hate. My point was nothing was intended nothing other than to say I could see he was white when it fact respected his efforts.

The Sergeant from Jamaica was a former Marine and if there was one place he loved to talk about it was DC. He enjoyed the city but can't remember the full details of his detail but tells me a story of where he was standing somewhere and Bill Clinton was walking by (unexpected or like the feelings of seeing a celebrity) he saluted and said Clinton said "Hello Marine" with the salute returned. Can't remember all the details except the quote (2006 was when I heard it)