ADVERTISEMENT

Here's some true PC hypocricy over the confederate flag

UCFKnight85

UCFKnight85

GOL's Inner Circle
Gold Member
May 6, 2003
99,553
104,896
113
Amazon, like many retailers, rushed to ban anything and everything confederate flag related from being sold via their stores or online websites.

However, you can purchase from Amazon at this very moment a Nazi swastika PS4 game controller:

51JBN7ZSF6L._SX425_.jpg


And while playing your Swastika branded PS4, you can also buy from Amazon a fancy Swastika ring to wear:

61%2BD%2BMR2zNL._UL1500_.jpg

And finally, for that skinhead sweetheart of yours, you can buy her a Swastika pendant necklace from Amazon:

51NVrYVdqXL._UL1500_.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: USFSucks and jetsaholic
Malthus Doctrine said:
Perfect example of a symbol found across many cultures that was destroyed by the Nazis. In India, it is a symbol of peace. In classic Nordic Mythology it was a sigil that protected against evil.

What are some other originally benign symbols that have become demonized due to an extrememist group?
Click to expand...

EC457.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: BCNHS and jetsaholic
lol

That graphic apparently didn't have room to explain that slavery was legal under the flag on the right for just 4 years, specifically because guys carrying the flag on the left defeated guys carrying the flag on the right and brought with them an end to slavery.

It's a cute graphic and probably works well with imbeciles who have literally no understanding of history or basic comprehension.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChrisKnight06, tribbleorlfl and Good Knight Sweetheart
Here's another insensitive logo that needs to be removed. I get offended every time I see it.

Honda-jpg.jpg
 
UCFKnight85 said:
lol

That graphic apparently didn't have room to explain that slavery was legal under the flag on the right for just 4 years, specifically because guys carrying the flag on the left defeated guys carrying the flag on the right and brought with them an end to slavery.

It's a cute graphic and probably works well with imbeciles who have literally no understanding of history or basic comprehension.
Click to expand...
Whut? 76>4 no matter the reason why it ended.
 
UCFRogerz said:
Whut? 76>4 no matter the reason why it ended.
Click to expand...

Uh, and how many years would slavery had continued if the Confederate states had won? It might exist today. How long slavery lasted under the "US" before the Civil War isn't relevant today, considering the war was fought largely in part because the US had an about face at that time and was seeking to end the practice of slavery.

The fact remains that one side was fighting to end slavery while the other was fighting to enshrine it as a guaranteed right.
 
UCFKnight85 said:
Uh, and how many years would slavery had continued if the Confederate states had won? It might exist today. How long slavery lasted under the "US" before the Civil War isn't relevant today, considering the war was fought largely in part because the US had an about face at that time and was seeking to end the practice of slavery.

The fact remains that one side was fighting to end slavery while the other was fighting to enshrine it as a guaranteed right.
Click to expand...
You can't just disregard related historical events to make a point or use "what ifs". I do'nt understand how pre-civil war history is irrelevant. The fact is slavery was AOK for 76 years under the US flag until they changed their mind.

That's like a company that dumps toxic waste into the ocean yelling at another company for dumping toxic waste into the ocean.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USFSucks and jetsaholic
Bob the Knight said:
The north wasn't fighting to end slavery. They were fighting to preserve the Union.
Click to expand...

lol

If that were really the case then they easily could have just voted to remove the Emancipation Proclamation, let the south keep their slavery, and in exchange reunify the country.

You're pushing one hell of a false, revisionist history here.
 
UCFKnight85 said:
Uh, and how many years would slavery had continued if the Confederate states had won? It might exist today. How long slavery lasted under the "US" before the Civil War isn't relevant today, considering the war was fought largely in part because the US had an about face at that time and was seeking to end the practice of slavery.

The fact remains that one side was fighting to end slavery while the other was fighting to enshrine it as a guaranteed right.
Click to expand...

You write something so absurdly idiotic like this and then have the gall to call others imbecile. Wow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USFSucks, 1ofTheseKnights and UCFRogerz
Good Knight Sweetheart said:
Dumb graphic.
There were 36 states in 1865.

.
Click to expand...
Lol Confederate influences were prevalent under the American flag even after the Civil War - but since the war wasnt won by them its convenient to call out hypocrisy on the Union flag as not racist.
 
Last edited:
I don't know what some of you bafoons are talking about but the Emancipation Proclamation was NOT passed "at the end of the war". It was signed into law by Lincoln on January 1, 1863.

The Civil War did not end until May 9, 1865. It began on April 21, 1861.

This means the EP was signed as an executive order almost smack dab in the middle of the war. And this does not account for the fact that Lincon and the Republicans ran a campaign in 1860 on the very basis of opposing any further expansion of slavery into new territories and rolling back slavery in the existing territories and states. Before he was even inaugurated, 7 slave states formed the Confederacy due the explicit threat that Lincoln and the north posed to their slave trade.

Only someone devoted to revising the entire history of this conflict would suggest that ending slavery only became an issue towards the end of the war.

It's so ridiculously out of synch with every single documented historical fact that it's laughable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tribbleorlfl
UCFKnight85 said:
I don't know what some of you bafoons are talking about but the Emancipation Proclamation was NOT passed "at the end of the war". It was signed into law by Lincoln on January 1, 1863.

The Civil War did not end until May 9, 1865. It began on April 21, 1861.

This means the EP was signed as an executive order almost smack dab in the middle of the war. And this does not account for the fact that Lincon and the Republicans ran a campaign in 1860 on the very basis of opposing any further expansion of slavery into new territories and rolling back slavery in the existing territories and states. Before he was even inaugurated, 7 slave states formed the Confederacy due the explicit threat that Lincoln and the north posed to their slave trade.

Only someone devoted to revising the entire history of this conflict would suggest that ending slavery only became an issue towards the end of the war.

It's so ridiculously out of synch with every single documented historical fact that it's laughable.
Click to expand...

boob is going to reload and come back with, "the EP was by far the most unpopular decree of Lincoln's administration. To the north, the war was about keeping the country together. The moment Lincoln made it about slavery, he was toast. For the south it was all about state's rights and no one telling them what they could and could not do."

Of course, this whole axiom of what to do and not to do had everything to do with slavery, but I digress.
 
The sooner you guys come to the realization that I'm infinitely smarter than you your lives will be much better. You won't have to keep chasing your tails trying to form cognitive arguments.

"Yes, Bob is right about pretty much everything and constantly rolls over me in debates."
 
UCFKnight85 said:
I don't know what some of you bafoons are talking about but the Emancipation Proclamation was NOT passed "at the end of the war". It was signed into law by Lincoln on January 1, 1863.

The Civil War did not end until May 9, 1865. It began on April 21, 1861.

This means the EP was signed as an executive order almost smack dab in the middle of the war. And this does not account for the fact that Lincon and the Republicans ran a campaign in 1860 on the very basis of opposing any further expansion of slavery into new territories and rolling back slavery in the existing territories and states. Before he was even inaugurated, 7 slave states formed the Confederacy due the explicit threat that Lincoln and the north posed to their slave trade.

Only someone devoted to revising the entire history of this conflict would suggest that ending slavery only became an issue towards the end of the war.

It's so ridiculously out of synch with every single documented historical fact that it's laughable.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter how right you are, people have already decided what they want to believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crambone and UCFKnight85
But but I thought the North abolished slavery after the war out of kindness and it wasn't used as a tactic to weaken the South during the war... Uh oh.

KnighttimeJoe said:
The amendment to abolish slavery officially was done when the war was well in the North's hands. To say it was a last resort is disingenuous.
Click to expand...

UCFKnight85 said:
The war, and more specifically the North winning, essentially set in motion the beginning of the end of the absolute worst period in American history where human beings were treated as property and stripped of all dignity and human rights.

To answer your question: yes. There were many lingering implications for America after the war, but the absolute biggest and most important was the end of slavery as a result of the North winning and reuniting the United States of America.

Trying to boil the Civil War down to most anything else is just side stepping this fac.t
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back