No, not necessarily. Rallying symbols are a central component to spreading any such message. They are the very symbols of such messages spreading and the mindsets behind it. As a matter of fact, without the revisionist history and without honoring symbols that stand for racism and slavery (as if they were good things), such attitudes would have died down a lot quicker. It's a vicious circle of racism propping up such sick symbols, and such symbols being used to prop up and spread racism.

So, no, those people may not be dead and the f...tard who shot them may not have grown up to be a f...tard.

Quite likely. But it's NOT "at (that) time" - it's 2015. And that is my point. Should we celebrate one of the darkest parts of our history as if it was something good? This isn't the 1800's. Google isn't going back in time to not promote racist flags from 1787-1865. They are doing it now. Going forward.

In their own words... slavery... blame it on your schools, but you're still wrong. Look it up in your own state houses - these words are in those documents housed therein.

http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html

So, according to you, the declarations of secession of the southern states are false? I don't think so.

And yes, most southerners didn't own slaves. That's not relevant. Most southerners thought (1) black people were inferior and that was their natural state - so they supported slavery, and/or (2) aspired to be one of the rich land owning slave owning elite one day - so they supported slavery. Look up their own writings.

Not quite... give this some thought. The government forces them to open those gardens and (the government) becomes tyrannical, or they do not, and things remain as they are.

Interesting catch 22... I've got no solution either.

Read this. Then say "gee, I was wrong! there it is in THEIR OWN words!!!"

http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html

Then, down south, your own states say your history books are stinking piles of crap. Or you are misremembering what those books say:

Please read this: http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html

LMAO idiot!!! And I quote...

"Who fought to ***just leave***. What is the definition of oppression?"

WRONG - according to the states' own words - they weren't fighting to "just leave" - they were fighting to maintain slavery. Someone who outright lies about the situation (totally ignoring slavery as a component) and doesn't think that fighting to maintain slavery isn't oppression (as the states claimed they were doing) is racist or an idiot or uneducated. I gave them the benefit of doubt and SPECIFICALLY said "might" be a supporter of racism and slavery. Seriously, learn to read.

While you are learning to read (instead of your copy/paste game), read this:

http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html

Wrong - as many states, including South Carolina (the cause of this latest debate on the issue) clearly stated, it was ALSO about their rights for slaves IN THE NORTH.

As for the economies, as MANY of those states ALSO clearly said, it was ALSO because of the fear of the damage "the north" was doing to their economies - you got that right - but you failed to FINISH THEIR THOUGHTS ON THE MATTER!!! They were afraid of the damage it would cause because of their LOSS OF SLAVE LABOR. They CLEARLY stated that.

Lincoln tried the "long haul" tactic of keeping the union together and then pulling apart slavery from the inside - it didn't work and we had war.

Here are the reasons, IN THEIR OWN WORDS.

http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html

No, history IS chiseled in stone. The STORY of history is not. Revisionism does not change the past, and the flag is one that symbolizes racism and slavery (as good things, no less).

In THIS day and age, there are STILL numerous people in those states who would love to see segregation re-instituted and/or interracial marriage banned again. The flag is a "celebration" of beliefs that never should have been, and (since sadly those beliefs happened) should have died ages ago.

Actually, Lincoln was a massive abolitionist, but knew he could not win the election, nor his moves against slavery by outright stating that. His own writings throughout show that. His ambiguous or contrary statements in the mid to late 1850's were because he was attacked earlier as an abolitionist. He knew what he was doing and saying - just like the deist separationist Jefferson who changed the demanded "endowed by the god of christianity" lines for the Declaration of Independence to the ambiguous "by *their* *creator* with certain unalienable rights".

"Enemy Oppressor" - enemy, heck yes, for fighting a war to not just retain slaves but to expand aspects of slavery back into the north. Oppressor - hell yes, as those who own slaves are definitely oppressors.