Dixie Brewery to change name (2 Viewers)

[DavidM]

Yet the kneelers want us to separate the US flag from the military, which makes the sacrifices that give us the freedoms that the flag represents. Why the double standard?

Our flag flies as much for any American who wants to kneel in its presence as it does any other citizen of this country. It is a misconceived notion that the flag is being separated from the military. If we are going to reduce its primary significance to being a symbol of conflict in the pursuit of freedom, and not of freedom, itself, then we strip it of the actual meaning that distinguishes it from any other piece of cloth that has ever been hoisted in peace or conflict.

 

[Saintamaniac]

Yet the kneelers want us to separate the US flag from the military, which makes the sacrifices that give us the freedoms that the flag represents. Why the double standard?

The US military DOES NOT give us the freedoms the flag represents. The constitution of the United States gives us the freedoms that the flag represents. That same constitution makes the military possible and grants "the kneelers" the rights to protest in the manner that they chose at the time they choose. It also prohibits those who would seek to limit those freedoms from doing so simply because they don't agree with them.

 

[RebSaint]

You are so caught up in the need for the white hat/black hat narrative that you miss the step from secession to a war that killed over a half million Americans. You somehow accept that because there was secession there HAD to be a war and you, nor at t time, Reb Saint, will not confront Lincoln's repeated efforts to compromise to keep slavery in place. Slavery was going to be just fine if you preserve the Union.

I think your clear anger on this re-branding is a bit....odd.

There's a lot we agree on regarding this issue. I think our disagreement comes down to some semantics. I'll also point out a few historical fallacies your position is built on

Go ahead and pull the discussions if you'd like, but this nonsense (pardon the pun) is revisionist posting history. You are correct when discussing Lincoln's willingness to preserve slavery and the union if he could, but only up until late 1862. The war itself was the catalyst for Emancipation, ergo the war was about slavery, at least to the slaves and more and more northerners. You also seem to think that emancipation was just on (or about) Lincoln. Another fallacy.

What you and others are perhaps missing, here are the 1st and 2nd Confiscation Acts. http://projects.leadr.msu.edu/civil...tion-of-emancipation-/second-confiscation-act

So it was the United States military which actually pushed Lincoln more towards some executive order to begin ending slavery, which was what the EP was. So, more evidence here that slavery, yes was the centerpiece and reason for the war. Can't get away from it.

What you're doing with Lincoln is a common historical fallacy: not seeing his change over time. Yes, he can be labelled a "racist" early in his political career, esp. considering 21st century standards. But Abraham Lincoln changed his mind and was becoming more the man who was willing to sign the EP and eventually pushed the 13th Amendment through. Somehow you want to freeze-frame Lincoln as just a hypocrite who would have saved slavery to save the Union. And had the South re-joined the Union, you may have a leg to stand on--but it didn't happen.

I think you are on firm ground stating that Lincoln was a hypocrite in that he was willing to Preserve the Union over everything else, but once the war started, slavery was pretty much dead because wherever Union soldiers were, slaves ran away. Because you think secession was so important does not at all diminish the issue of slavery before or during the war. There's also a strong case that Lincoln knew slavery's days were numbered, but he had to exercise a careful political dance to prevent more states from seceding. Secession and slavery were joined at the hip. You seem to want to separate these issues.

And this whole discussion to is a bit non-sequiter for the thread anyway. I don't see how a discussion in the sementics of the war's cause diminishes the fact that a strong case can be made that the term/symbol of "Dixie" during the Jim Crow Era is reason enough for the re-branding. We don't need to look at the CW or its causes (same with the monuments) to see the racial symbols/connotations for words/monuments, etc.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

I was thinking ,And that's dangerous for me.

I wonder what percentage of people's opinions are changed by these threads?

I'm guessing it's pretty low.

They are debate for the sake of debate.

It why I usually avoid them

Sometimes I think Scorpius' and my fights are just as useful.

it's a journey not a destination
% of posters whose opinion has changed based on a single thread/post = .03%
% of posters who have evolved some positions based on exposure to new ideas/data/ways of thinkings = <> 50%

personally i do not engage in 'checking' posters with the hope of changing their way of thinking. i do it so those who are lurking will see the fallacy in certain arguments
(also engage bc sympatico posters' better arguments will help my arguments in the future)

and just to address the status quo meta of your premise (as i see it)
through gerrymandering, voter suppression and certain media propaganda, we have stagnated into a majority-minority kleptocracy which is only propped up by very narrow margins
if we can get enough people to participate then we might actually be able to get a democracy back in this country and start catching up with the rest of the civilized world

 

[DaveXA]

I think your clear anger on this re-branding is a bit....odd.

There's a lot we agree on regarding this issue. I think our disagreement comes down to some semantics. I'll also point out a few historical fallacies your position is built on

Go ahead and pull the discussions if you'd like, but this nonsense (pardon the pun) is revisionist posting history. You are correct when discussing Lincoln's willingness to preserve slavery and the union if he could, but only up until late 1862. The war itself was the catalyst for Emancipation, ergo the war was about slavery, at least to the slaves and more and more northerners. You also seem to think that emancipation was just on (or about) Lincoln. Another fallacy.

What you and others are perhaps missing, here are the 1st and 2nd Confiscation Acts. http://projects.leadr.msu.edu/civil...tion-of-emancipation-/second-confiscation-act

So it was the United States military which actually pushed Lincoln more towards some executive order to begin ending slavery, which was what the EP was. So, more evidence here that slavery, yes was the centerpiece and reason for the war. Can't get away from it.

What you're doing with Lincoln is a common historical fallacy: not seeing his change over time. Yes, he can be labelled a "racist" early in his political career, esp. considering 21st century standards. But Abraham Lincoln changed his mind and was becoming more the man who was willing to sign the EP and eventually pushed the 13th Amendment through. Somehow you want to freeze-frame Lincoln as just a hypocrite who would have saved slavery to save the Union. And had the South re-joined the Union, you may have a leg to stand on--but it didn't happen.

I think you are on firm ground stating that Lincoln was a hypocrite in that he was willing to Preserve the Union over everything else, but once the war started, slavery was pretty much dead because wherever Union soldiers were, slaves ran away. Because you think secession was so important does not at all diminish the issue of slavery before or during the war. There's also a strong case that Lincoln knew slavery's days were numbered, but he had to exercise a careful political dance to prevent more states from seceding. Secession and slavery were joined at the hip. You seem to want to separate these issues.

And this whole discussion to is a bit non-sequiter for the thread anyway. I don't see how a discussion in the sementics of the war's cause diminishes the fact that a strong case can be made that the term/symbol of "Dixie" during the Jim Crow Era is reason enough for the re-branding. We don't need to look at the CW or its causes (same with the monuments) to see the racial symbols/connotations for words/monuments, etc.

Holy sheet, a RebSaint post! Awesome!

Thanks for the history lesson. Seriously.

 

[DaveXA]

I’ll bite

Food, festivals, hospitality and music are a few of the things I think of when I think of the positive aspects of the south. There's more, but i think this would suffice.

 

[UndeadSnoopy]

it's a journey not a destination
% of posters whose opinion has changed based on a single thread/post = .03%
% of posters who have evolved some positions based on exposure to new ideas/data/ways of thinkings = <> 50%

personally i do not engage in 'checking' posters with the hope of changing their way of thinking. i do it so those who are lurking will see the fallacy in certain arguments
(also engage bc sympatico posters' better arguments will help my arguments in the future)

and just to address the status quo meta of your premise (as i see it)
through gerrymandering, voter suppression and certain media propaganda, we have stagnated into a majority-minority kleptocracy which is only propped up by very narrow margins
if we can get enough people to participate then we might actually be able to get a democracy back in this country and start catching up with the rest of the civilized world

Been away from the laptop.

But you make good points.

I may have jumped the gun with that post.

Plus I remembered First Time Poster changed my mind on "educational" Plantation tours.

Some posters were hostile.

But he just had a way of explaining the problem without being nasty.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Food, festivals, hospitality and music are a few of the things I think of when I think of the positive aspects of the south. There's more, but i think this would suffice.

Those are VERY general
Can you parse them a bit?

 

[DaveXA]

Been away from the laptop.

But you make good points.

I may have jumped the gun with that post.

Plus I remembered First Time Poster changed my mind on "educational" Plantation tours.

Some posters were hostile.

But he just had a way of explaining the problem without being nasty.

FTP has probably been the one to open my eyes the most about ongoing racism. Oye has been very helpful as well in unveiling the problem of systemic racism that remains alive in many parts of the country and how it permeates multiple levels of the criminal justice system in the US.

In my 20 years of being a part of SR, I've changed my position on a wide variety of issues, not so much because anyone tried convincing me. But rather because they stated their case well.

 

[DaveXA]

Those are VERY general
Can you parse them a bit?

They are, but I'm not sure that parsing will make all that much difference. I guess, like with a lot of things, it's gonna be a mixed bag. I mean, I think of Mardi Gras, Cajun food, Zydeco music, Southern hospitality, hosting Super Bowls in New Orleans, Ragin Cajuns sporting events. There are hundreds of festivals across Louisiana every year. Some may have origins in the old CSA, but many others have different origins. That's just off the top of my head. Sure there are aspects of the South that are racist, but I'm just talking about those things that aren't.

 

[UndeadSnoopy]

FTP has probably been the one to open my eyes the most about ongoing racism. Oye has been very helpful as well in unveiling the problem of systemic racism that remains alive in many parts of the country and how it permeates multiple levels of the criminal justice system in the US.

In my 20 years of being a part of SR, I've changed my position on a wide variety of issues, not so much because anyone tried convincing me. But rather because they stated their case well.

Yes, My post was off.

I'm with Bill Maher on PC though.

It's out of hand and it has been.

But I like to think I have an open mind.

Not making excuses but I'm from North LA. My high school was the West Monroe Rebels.

I heard "the N word" all the time growing up.

I'm ashamed that I said it just to fit in sometimes, though I knew better.

I mentioned people flying rebel flags from their trucks in another thread.

I knew some of these people.

It wasn't about heritage with them.

It was about hate.

 

[UndeadSnoopy]

Now if someone likes Dixie beer?

Drink it under another name.

I promise you will get just as drunk.

 

[LAhotsauce]

Food, festivals, hospitality and music are a few of the things I think of when I think of the positive aspects of the south. There's more, but i think this would suffice.

I'm pretty sure the food and music at this place in Natchez (Mammy's Cupboard) are wonderful too. But it's kinda hard to separate it's exterior. I think for MANY americans the same applies to "Dixie."

And it boggles my mind that this place can still operate in 2020.

Mammy's Cupboard

This racially troublesome eatery thought a new coat of paint could erase its offensive connotations.

www.atlasobscura.com

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

They are, but I'm not sure that parsing will make all that much difference. I guess, like with a lot of things, it's gonna be a mixed bag. I mean, I think of Mardi Gras, Cajun food, Zydeco music, Southern hospitality, hosting Super Bowls in New Orleans, Ragin Cajuns sporting events. There are hundreds of festivals across Louisiana every year. Some may have origins in the old CSA, but many others have different origins. That's just off the top of my head. Sure there are aspects of the South that are racist, but I'm just talking about those things that aren't.

tbc you’re contention was about southern cultural expressions that were not ‘rooted in racism’
That is a very different thing than ‘nowadays seems fairly open and inclusive ‘
My point is that it is nearly impossible for any Southern culture to not have roots that grow out of slavery/Jim crow and all of the appropriation/ theft that entails

 

[DaveXA]

I'm pretty sure the food and music at this place in Natchez (Mammy's Cupboard) are wonderful too. But it's kinda hard to separate it's exterior. I think for MANY americans the same applies to "Dixie."

And it boggles my mind that this place can still operate in 2020.

Mammy's Cupboard

This racially troublesome eatery thought a new coat of paint could erase its offensive connotations.

www.atlasobscura.com

Of course there will be examples of racism in just about everything. We're not going to ban music because someone sings a racist song, or ban restaurants because someone has a racist restaurant. My point is that there are aspects of southern culture that are quite good and don't have anything to do with racism. It strikes me as throwing out the baby with the bathwater to do so.