Should Minnesota return Virginia's Confederate battle flag?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

brtd, can you give us an update on the status of this flag plz?

hopefully the enlightened minnesotans (mankato state grads, in particular) havent returned this artifact to the goddamned racist, backwards hicks.

Shut up about my state, Mitty.

[WalterMitty]

brtd, can you give us an update on the status of this flag plz?

hopefully the enlightened minnesotans (mankato state grads, in particular) havent returned this artifact to the goddamned racist, backwards hicks.

Shut up about my state, Mitty.

uh.  you couldnt tell my post was tongue-in-cheek?

i was born and raised in virginia.  my family goes back to 1754 in virginia.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

EMD's ignorance in this thread is a bit disturbing. We could argue this war for days and days, but there's no point. He's the type of person who thinks the south is full of dumb racists and the North was perfect and free of any kind of prejudices. The only reason the Civil War was fought was because Lincoln was determined to keep the union together. Freeing the slaves had nothing to do with it. Lincoln probably didn't care either way, as just recently, an amendment drafted by Lincoln was revealed that would've written slavery into the constitution forever.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

brtd, can you give us an update on the status of this flag plz?

hopefully the enlightened minnesotans (mankato state grads, in particular) havent returned this artifact to the goddamned racist, backwards hicks.

Shut up about my state, Mitty.

uh.  you couldnt tell my post was tongue-in-cheek?

i was born and raised in virginia.  my family goes back to 1754 in virginia.

I could not; sorry.  Try using a smiley next time

[War on Want]

EMD's ignorance in this thread is a bit disturbing. We could argue this war for days and days, but there's no point. He's the type of person who thinks the south is full of dumb racists and the North was perfect and free of any kind of prejudices. The only reason the Civil War was fought was because Lincoln was determined to keep the union together. Freeing the slaves had nothing to do with it. Lincoln probably didn't care either way, as just recently, an amendment drafted by Lincoln was revealed that would've written slavery into the constitution forever.

Yes I know this, it is funny you called me ignorant on this. I said that in the beginning most of the South and North's troubles came from slavery and wouldn't be as wide if it did not exist. I don't think the South is full of dumb rascists anyways, did most people in the 1860's everywhere rascists, especially in the South? Yes, do I hold a grudge against them no.

Also my post is more about modern day confederate sympathizers. There is nothing to be sympathetic about. Face it the Union did an okay job of handling things and everything turn out fine why would you want to agree with the South?

[??????????]

Also my post is more about modern day confederate sympathizers. There is nothing to be sympathetic about. Face it the Union did an okay job of handling things and everything turn out fine why would you want to agree with the South?

If the Union did such a great job at handling things and everything turned out fine why has it taken until the 1970s for the south to recover from the war? Lincolns idea of massive government which this country is currently dying from is a failure, plain and simple. His ideas of one government and ridding us of state sovereignty is going to be the death of the USA.

[War on Want]

Also my post is more about modern day confederate sympathizers. There is nothing to be sympathetic about. Face it the Union did an okay job of handling things and everything turn out fine why would you want to agree with the South?

If the Union did such a great job at handling things and everything turned out fine why has it taken until the 1970s for the south to recover from the war? Lincolns idea of massive government which this country is currently dying from is a failure, plain and simple. His ideas of one government and ridding us of state sovereignty is going to be the death of the USA.

It took that long because the south had an agrarian economy, mass poverty etc before the Civil War even happened. By the way we aren't dying at all, we are mostly having a rotten economy from the housing mess and our lack of alternative fuels which you could blame partially on a lack of larger government. Also why can't you just accept Democracy? Lincoln won fair and square and now most Americans liked his way of governance.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

[Tender Branson]

No, someone should burn it at the next GOP convention.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

EMD's ignorance in this thread is a bit disturbing. We could argue this war for days and days, but there's no point. He's the type of person who thinks the south is full of dumb racists and the North was perfect and free of any kind of prejudices. The only reason the Civil War was fought was because Lincoln was determined to keep the union together. Freeing the slaves had nothing to do with it. Lincoln probably didn't care either way, as just recently, an amendment drafted by Lincoln was revealed that would've written slavery into the constitution forever.

Remind me why the South seceded again?

[ProudModerate2]

I know this is an old thread, but who actually has the flag?
Is it in a museum in Minnesota?

[Fuzzy Bear]

No, it should not be returned.

It should not be burned, either.  It should be preserved in an appropriate museum environment.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

This battle flag is directly cited in the Medal of Honor citation of Private Marshall Sherman of the 1st Minnesota, and it was displayed at his 1896 funeral, which is probably how it ended up at the Minnesota Historical Society rather than being in the possession of the War Department when the 1905 order to return such banners to the rebel States was issued.

Given its history, the most appropriate place for this flag is as part of a museum exhibit honoring Marshall Sherman, and that certainly won't happen if it's returned to Virginia. So no, this flag should definitely remain in the care of Minnesota.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

EMD's ignorance in this thread is a bit disturbing. We could argue this war for days and days, but there's no point. He's the type of person who thinks the south is full of dumb racists and the North was perfect and free of any kind of prejudices. The only reason the Civil War was fought was because Lincoln was determined to keep the union together. Freeing the slaves had nothing to do with it. Lincoln probably didn't care either way, as just recently, an amendment drafted by Lincoln was revealed that would've written slavery into the constitution forever.

Remind me why the South seceded again?

In 13 years, the chances of Duke having revised some of his views on these matters is probably rather solid, though I will let him speak for himself on these matters.

It just demonstrate some of the casual acceptance of Lost Cause/Reconcialitionist mythology as recently as just a decade ago. Shifting of blame to Lincoln for the war happening, misdirecting by emphasizing the initial unionist goal (which was dictated by practicalities military and political at the time) as an indicator of motivation, reading into Lincoln a disinterested viewpoint and misattributing the Corwin amendment's drafting (though Lincoln gave some tacit approval to it, the emphasis on such by Lost Causers falls flat since their objective is to pierce some idealized balloon in the hopes that doing so will make their position look better. It doesn't work though).

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

EMD's ignorance in this thread is a bit disturbing. We could argue this war for days and days, but there's no point. He's the type of person who thinks the south is full of dumb racists and the North was perfect and free of any kind of prejudices. The only reason the Civil War was fought was because Lincoln was determined to keep the union together. Freeing the slaves had nothing to do with it. Lincoln probably didn't care either way, as just recently, an amendment drafted by Lincoln was revealed that would've written slavery into the constitution forever.

Remind me why the South seceded again?

In 13 years, the chances of Duke having revised some of his views on these matters is probably rather solid, though I will let him speak for himself on these matters.

It just demonstrate some of the casual acceptance of Lost Cause/Reconcialitionist mythology as recently as just a decade ago. Shifting of blame to Lincoln for the war happening, misdirecting by emphasizing the initial unionist goal (which was dictated by practicalities military and political at the time) as an indicator of motivation, reading into Lincoln a disinterested viewpoint and misattributing the Corwin amendment's drafting (though Lincoln gave some tacit approval to it, the emphasis on such by Lost Causers falls flat since their objective is to pierce some idealized balloon in the hopes that doing so will make their position look better. It doesn't work though).

TBH when I made that comment I had no idea how old this thread was. Someone necroed it that day and who even reads the date on posts.

[Badger]

EMD's ignorance in this thread is a bit disturbing. We could argue this war for days and days, but there's no point. He's the type of person who thinks the south is full of dumb racists and the North was perfect and free of any kind of prejudices. The only reason the Civil War was fought was because Lincoln was determined to keep the union together. Freeing the slaves had nothing to do with it. Lincoln probably didn't care either way, as just recently, an amendment drafted by Lincoln was revealed that would've written slavery into the constitution forever.

Remind me why the South seceded again?

In 13 years, the chances of Duke having revised some of his views on these matters is probably rather solid, though I will let him speak for himself on these matters.

It just demonstrate some of the casual acceptance of Lost Cause/Reconcialitionist mythology as recently as just a decade ago. Shifting of blame to Lincoln for the war happening, misdirecting by emphasizing the initial unionist goal (which was dictated by practicalities military and political at the time) as an indicator of motivation, reading into Lincoln a disinterested viewpoint and misattributing the Corwin amendment's drafting (though Lincoln gave some tacit approval to it, the emphasis on such by Lost Causers falls flat since their objective is to pierce some idealized balloon in the hopes that doing so will make their position look better. It doesn't work though).

I'll Echo the sentiment that Duke is one of the most grown posters on Atlas since he started here. Perhaps that stems from him having been either late high school or early college when he started and now, goodness me how time flies, I guess around 30. Perhaps that's my own biases talking as he's become a never Trump moderate, although I think he might still be a registered Republican.

On that note, right up there among the most grown posters in that period is NC Yankee as well.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

EMD's ignorance in this thread is a bit disturbing. We could argue this war for days and days, but there's no point. He's the type of person who thinks the south is full of dumb racists and the North was perfect and free of any kind of prejudices. The only reason the Civil War was fought was because Lincoln was determined to keep the union together. Freeing the slaves had nothing to do with it. Lincoln probably didn't care either way, as just recently, an amendment drafted by Lincoln was revealed that would've written slavery into the constitution forever.

Remind me why the South seceded again?

In 13 years, the chances of Duke having revised some of his views on these matters is probably rather solid, though I will let him speak for himself on these matters.

It just demonstrate some of the casual acceptance of Lost Cause/Reconcialitionist mythology as recently as just a decade ago. Shifting of blame to Lincoln for the war happening, misdirecting by emphasizing the initial unionist goal (which was dictated by practicalities military and political at the time) as an indicator of motivation, reading into Lincoln a disinterested viewpoint and misattributing the Corwin amendment's drafting (though Lincoln gave some tacit approval to it, the emphasis on such by Lost Causers falls flat since their objective is to pierce some idealized balloon in the hopes that doing so will make their position look better. It doesn't work though).

I'll Echo the sentiment that Duke is one of the most grown posters on Atlas since he started here. Perhaps that stems from him having been either late high school or early college when he started and now, goodness me how time flies, I guess around 30. Perhaps that's my own biases talking as he's become a never Trump moderate, although I think he might still be a registered Republican.

On that note, right up there among the most grown posters in that period is NC Yankee as well.

Duke was always a "moderate Republican" being for both abortion and "gay rights" as it was termed back then in 2009. He also supported comprehensive immigration reform and supported Rudy for President in 2008 (at a time when being pro-Rudy was a quick way to be defined as a RINO). But even so as a Charleston area person from a high end background, one would expect a lot of this sentiment to have been percolating especially among teachers and other such person's of influence.

I know of one teacher at my High School that constantly referred to Lincoln as a war criminal and my college history teacher embraced the bs tariff argument right down the whole "south paid 80% of the taxes".

[beesley]

Do you remember all the threads you've started even from 12 years ago? If so, impressive.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

As a deep rooted southern, heck no. If Virginia wanted it’s flag it should have succeeded

[lfromnj]

The 1st Minnesota's flag lost five men carrying it. Every time another man dropped his weapon to carry it on. The 47 survivors rallied back to General Hancock under the command of their senior surviving officer, Captain Nathan S. Messick. The 82% casualty rate stands as the largest loss by any surviving U.S military unit in a single day's engagement ever. The unit's colors are displayed in the rotunda of the Minnesota Capitol for public appreciation.

Was reading some history and just wow!.
The day before they captured the flag.

[Santander]

Ralph Northam just needs to borrow it for some pictures.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

It's cool that some 13 years later, I can look at my horrible, mangled writing and see little that bothers me that isn't stylistic. It does concern me that I described Robert E. Lee as "anti-slavery" even though he disregarded his father-in-law's will, which manumitted his many slaves, to pay for upkeep for his sisters-in-law. Robert E. Lee, annoyed that the slaves disliked this, proceeded to sell the most "uppity" slaves after putting them in slave jail, which was a grave violation of his mother-in-law's desire to never break-up families. In short: Robert E. Lee deserved to be killed via firing squad for torture and abuse.

One reason why I've maintained strident pro-Unionism over all of these years is that I frequently encountered Confederate apologists, sympathizers and other "Lost Cause" BS as a teen, as Confederate nonsense was normalized 15 years ago. So I still have some residual sense that it's transgressive to argue against the Confederacy and that it's very important also.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It's cool that some 13 years later, I can look at my horrible, mangled writing and see little that bothers me that isn't stylistic. It does concern me that I described Robert E. Lee as "anti-slavery" even though he disregarded his father-in-law's will, which manumitted his many slaves, to pay for upkeep for his sisters-in-law. Robert E. Lee, annoyed that the slaves disliked this, proceeded to sell the most "uppity" slaves after putting them in slave jail, which was a grave violation of his mother-in-law's desire to never break-up families. In short: Robert E. Lee deserved to be killed via firing squad for torture and abuse.

One reason why I've maintained strident pro-Unionism over all of these years is that I frequently encountered Confederate apologists, sympathizers and other "Lost Cause" BS as a teen, as Confederate nonsense was normalized 15 years ago. So I still have some residual sense that it's transgressive to argue against the Confederacy and that it's very important also.

Robert E. Lee revisionism is the American equivalent of the "clean Wehrmacht" myth.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

It's cool that some 13 years later, I can look at my horrible, mangled writing and see little that bothers me that isn't stylistic. It does concern me that I described Robert E. Lee as "anti-slavery" even though he disregarded his father-in-law's will, which manumitted his many slaves, to pay for upkeep for his sisters-in-law. Robert E. Lee, annoyed that the slaves disliked this, proceeded to sell the most "uppity" slaves after putting them in slave jail, which was a grave violation of his mother-in-law's desire to never break-up families. In short: Robert E. Lee deserved to be killed via firing squad for torture and abuse.

One reason why I've maintained strident pro-Unionism over all of these years is that I frequently encountered Confederate apologists, sympathizers and other "Lost Cause" BS as a teen, as Confederate nonsense was normalized 15 years ago. So I still have some residual sense that it's transgressive to argue against the Confederacy and that it's very important also.

Robert E. Lee revisionism is the American equivalent of the "clean Wehrmacht" myth.

What's remarkable about it is that it was widely accepted as fact by fairly serious people even though his actual views were hidden in plain sight. Such was the commitment of the US to American Civil War revisionism!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's cool that some 13 years later, I can look at my horrible, mangled writing and see little that bothers me that isn't stylistic. It does concern me that I described Robert E. Lee as "anti-slavery" even though he disregarded his father-in-law's will, which manumitted his many slaves, to pay for upkeep for his sisters-in-law. Robert E. Lee, annoyed that the slaves disliked this, proceeded to sell the most "uppity" slaves after putting them in slave jail, which was a grave violation of his mother-in-law's desire to never break-up families. In short: Robert E. Lee deserved to be killed via firing squad for torture and abuse.

One reason why I've maintained strident pro-Unionism over all of these years is that I frequently encountered Confederate apologists, sympathizers and other "Lost Cause" BS as a teen, as Confederate nonsense was normalized 15 years ago. So I still have some residual sense that it's transgressive to argue against the Confederacy and that it's very important also.

Robert E. Lee revisionism is the American equivalent of the "clean Wehrmacht" myth.

What's remarkable about it is that it was widely accepted as fact by fairly serious people even though his actual views were hidden in plain sight. Such was the commitment of the US to American Civil War revisionism!

Then there's General Sherman, who happened to be a white supremacist who was the first President of the Louisiana state university.