Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Warning gone with the wind is being attack


28Silent

Recommended Posts

I need to post this for clarification.  My issue over the Confederate flag is NOT about the removal from GOVERNMENT institutions.  Of course its inappropriate to fly a flag of a nation whether divided or not that no longer exist   Makes as much sense as flying the red hammer and sickle over the Kremlin today.

 

My only concern is PRIVATE ownership/display, as I recently stated in another thread - it's about the 1st Amendment of Freedom of Speech/Expression/Thought.  Movies are the same,  people should have the right to buy, own, view controversial  ones i.e. The Song of The South, Birth of a Nation, etc. without those wanting them to become unavailable because of THEIR personal beliefs.

 

Same can be said about cowboy and Indian films where the history of the Native American has been a very sad one.  We as a nation should be ashamed of the past regarding them but films about the subject be restricted / banned (even SUGGESTING) - of course not.

 

For those who hates any icon whether flag or film then IGNORE it - don't watch/look at it, no one is forcing you to! If TCM airs such films then there is the channel selector that's what it is there for.

 

So FAR no film has been banned / restricted as Jazz pointed out, I want it to stay that way regardless if its offensive, hateful, vulgar or not. People like Lou shouldn't go on the attack after many went flag crazy because some crazed dysfunctional lone wolf decides to kill people. I hope he gets the needle!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I need to post this for clarification.  My issue over the Confederate flag is NOT about the removal from GOVERNMENT institutions.  Of course its inappropriate to fly a flag of a nation whether divided or not that no longer exist   Makes as much sense as flying the red hammer and sickle over the Kremlin today.

 

My only concern is PRIVATE ownership/display, as I recently stated in another thread - it's about the 1st Amendment of Freedom of Speech/Expression/Thought.  Movies are the same,  people should have the right to buy, own, view controversial  ones i.e. The Song of The South, Birth of a Nation, etc. without those wanting them to become unavailable because of THEIR personal beliefs.

 

Same can be said about cowboy and Indian films where the history of the Native American has been a very sad one.  We as a nation should be ashamed of the past regarding them but films about the subject be restricted / banned (even SUGGESTING) - of course not.

 

For those who hates any icon whether flag or film then IGNORE it - don't watch/look at it, no one is forcing you to! If TCM airs such films then there is the channel selector that's what it is there for.

 

So FAR no film has been banned / restricted as Jazz pointed out, I want it to stay that way regardless if its offensive, hateful, vulgar or not. People like Lou shouldn't go on the attack because some crazed dysfunctional lone wolf decides to kill people. I hope he gets the needle!

I agree with you, up to a point. But I must say -- freedom of speech, expression, etc. has been cheapened by contemporary excesses. If you want to be a fundamentalist regarding the Constitution (and I don't, as I think it's a living document), you should look at what was allowed during the time of its authors. Despite the document that they wrote, there was a hell of a lot less freedom of speech, expression, etc., in those days!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you, up to a point. But I must say -- freedom of speech, expression, etc. has been cheapened by contemporary excesses. If you want to be a fundamentalist regarding the Constitution (and I don't, as I think it's a living document), you should look at what was allowed during the time of its authors. Despite the document that they wrote, there was a hell of a lot less freedom of speech, expression, etc., in those days!  

 

Yes we do have more today because people had to fight for it. Bless them who DID!

Link to post
Share on other sites
This temper tantrum people are throwing over disrespected history, these uneducated comparisons to suppression of history and comparing the flag being taken down outside of state buildings is just plain idiotic. The Confederate flag belongs in a museum. The museum should accurately say what the flag represents in history. The same is true for these films that glory the revisionist fiction of Margaret Mitchell, and other revisionist fictions that do not account for the actual experiences of the slave versus what slave owners thought of their slaves.

 

I am assuming you are referring to every other media story about almost anything ever written about anything in our history, correct? Revisionism does not just take place within the confines of the American Civil War period, it has been used quite effectively in almost every other instance of American filmmaking.

 

We can view these films, we can view the flag, but we need to be responsible viewers and look at history honestly. We should be happy that TCM shows these films in an educational light for starters. We should be happy that TCM highlights these films in history and highlights performances in the film, as well as other filmmaking aspects worth noticing, but the social message needs to be looked at honestly and constructively. 

 

 

TCM is NOT showing these films for the educational needs or purposes of their viewers, they are showing these films because of their entertainment values. The social messages does not nor should it be something TCM should engage with. That should be left to scholars and or the general public.

 

End the revisionist romance, and tell the truth. I've always equated the Confederate flag with the Nazi flag, because to me, they both symbolize racist hatred and racist systematic violence and mass murder of innocents. Knowledge of heritage does meaning owning the negatives of history as well as the positives.

 

The following is just MHO....

 

Then I guess you really do not know much about American history? Many in pre-Revolutionary

times in America were British sympathizers or at least loyalists who wanted to remain British citizens. That even during the Revolutionary War, many American colonists still flew the British flag on their properties. The British were well known for their conduct pre-war that eventually led to war with the colonies.

 

The Confederate flag was a symbol for many reasons. Slavery being one of them. However four of the former federal states that joined the Confederacy in 1861 did not do so for what they felt was slavery issues, they did it for other reasons and joined the southern cause. Those states were Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas.

 

I do not believe that the flag that was lowered the other day was a flag of hatred. It was the main battle flag used during battles. The much larger rectangular "Stars and Bars" used in many films and depicted on the back of pick up trucks was a flag that was never adopted as a national flag by the Confederacy.

 

Now, you and others may disagree with me, but I do not believe that the flag that flew near the South Carolina capital was a racist symbol. It was meant to recall the glory days of southern battles of the Confederacy. And to honor those who died for those causes.

 

As far as Mass Murder of Innocents are concerned, this country should also be in this group as well. All one has to do is look back to August 1945 when two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, killing thousands of innocent Japanese. Also included should be the February 1945 fire bombing of Dresden, Germany resulting in the deaths of close to 25,000 German citizens.

 

And then there are the countless films about the American Calvary. All of those films made to create an illusion about how bad the American Indians were and how they had to be eradicated in order for this country to move further west. If American filmmakers really wanted to tell the truth, then they would have filmed those movies a lot differently because even thought here were many battle involving American calvary and Indians, most Indians of that time period died due to diseases brought in by foreign newcomers.

 

I could go on and on, but really when you look at the history of cinema here in this country, there is a certain way that film makers have gone out of their way to justify telling an American story not always on facts, and that there is always some level of BS thrown in for good measure.

 

Because lets face it... most Americans of today are too innocent and naive and not very well educated to understand the real causes and reasons why this nation has had to go to war or fight to protect it's interests.

 

In other words... not very compelling as far as film is concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I guess you really do not know much about American history?

There are always those who seek to ennoble the Civil War, or make it seem less offensive, by trying to say there were other reasons, diminishing the fact that it was a war fought by the South in support of slavery. But --

 

Here is one fact of American history that cannot be ignored. It's in the U.S. Constitution, plain for all to see, especially by those who are strict interpreters of the Constitution -- this is very clear:

 

By Section 110 of Article III. of the Constitution of the United States, it is declared that:"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

 

So, why ever the South fought the Civil War; however nobly some of their soldiers may have fought, however grandly theatrical the Southern generals may have been, there is one very clear fact: They were all, by definition of the U.S. Constitution, TRAITORS!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a little attempt at some "comic relief" here folks, as after googling something along the lines of "Films banned in the U.S." in hopes of finding a list of movies banned especially in the U.S. South before and during the Civil Rights movement that featured themes of racial equality AND so in efforts to show the complete and total hypocrisy of some if not MOST people in general...well...I laughed out loud at finding the following on the Wikipedia page titled "List of Films Banned in The United States".....

 

Released in1954, and banned in 1956: The Vanishing PrairieThe Walt Disney documentary was banned in New York because it showed a buffalo giving birth. The ban was lifted after a complaint by the American Civil Liberties Union.

 

LOL

 

Now tell me here folks! How could showing a freakin' buffalo(actually of course, most likely a BISON) being born POSSIBLY be considered "offensive" by ANYONE????

 

(...and ESPECIALLY by any of those "oh so sophisticated" people in New York City???!!!)

 

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Released in1954, and banned in 1956: The Vanishing PrairieThe Walt Disney documentary was banned in New York because it showed a buffalo giving birth. The ban was lifted after a complaint by the American Civil Liberties Union.

 

(...and ESPECIALLY by any of those "oh so sophisticated" people in New York City???!!!)

 

LOL

Lots of films have been banned around the country -- porn to a certain extent; snuff films; even tamer stuff. The Catholic Church used to have a lot of influence in the State of New York. Just a few years ago, there was an outcry because a work of art by an African artist (Brooklyn Museum) depicted what the Church considered to be a not-very-nice image of the Virgin Mary. Mayor Giuliani threatened to withdraw funding from the Museum!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Swithin.  Been saying that for years concerning this Confederate flag nonsense.  I truly feel that if that angle had been more strenuously argued, that nasty rag would have been long gone by now.


 


But, I also have to agree somewhat with Ham's point about individual private ownership.  Now, there might be an allowance for munincipalities to pass ordinances prohibiting the display of the flag within the city limits.  Even on private property.  But I can't argue the legalities.  However....


 


If someone thinks the waving of this treasonous banner is a form of "freedom of expression" then they should be aware it also means I'm granted the "freedom of expression" to publicly call him a j a c k a s s! 


 


 


Sepiatone


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Lots of films have been banned around the country -- porn to a certain extent; snuff films; even tamer stuff. The Catholic Church used to have a lot of influence in the State of New York. Just a few years ago, there was an outcry because a work of art by an African artist (Brooklyn Museum) depicted what the Church considered to be a not-very-nice image of the Virgin Mary. Mayor Giuliani threatened to withdraw funding from the Museum!

 

Yeah, I remember that, Swithin.

 

And so speaking of THAT, here's yet ANOTHER little entry on that Wiki page...

 

 

Released in1979: Monty Python's Life of BrianBanned in several towns for showing controversial themes about Christianity

 

 

(...bottom line here yet again being the thought that there will ALWAYS be people out there who will demand the removal of expressions in art that "offend their tender little sensitivities" and what they hold as "sacred"...and so the BEST thing people with an IQ in triple digits can do is CALL those morons OUT for what they ARE and make FUN of 'em and by LAUGHING at 'em!!!...well, at least that's always been MY "motto" anyway...though "somehow" I've found that doin' this doesn't seem to "please" a lot of folks!) LOL

 

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(...bottom line here yet again being the thought that there will ALWAYS be people out there who will demand the removal of expressions in art that "offend" their "sensitivities" and what they hold as "sacred") 

And we have to keep in mind that there's a difference between violating a law and exercising judgement. People who run theaters make decisions all the time, based on what they like and what they don't like, or what they think their audiences will like. As Debra Monk sang so well in the Broadway musical Curtains, "It's a Business!"

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Gone With The Wind is being attacked, nor do I think it needs to be banned. It just needs to stop being framed as a romantic nostalgia of days dreamed of what the antebellum South was like. Gone With The Wind, The Littlest Rebel, and other classic films were made in a time when Jim Crow was still alive and when most slave owners were, at least those old enough to remember when they owned another human being outside of their own wives. 

 

This temper tantrum people are throwing over disrespected history, these uneducated comparisons to suppression of history and comparing the flag being taken down outside of state buildings is just plain idiotic. The Confederate flag belongs in a museum. The museum should accurately say what the flag represents in history. The same is true for these films that glory the revisionist fiction of Margaret Mitchell, and other revisionist fictions that do not account for the actual experiences of the slave versus what slave owners thought of their slaves. 

 

We can view these films, we can view the flag, but we need to be responsible viewers and look at history honestly. We should be happy that TCM shows these films in an educational light for starters. We should be happy that TCM highlights these films in history and highlights performances in the film, as well as other filmmaking aspects worth noticing, but the social message needs to be looked at honestly and constructively. 

 

End the revisionist romance, and tell the truth. I've always equated the Confederate flag with the Nazi flag, because to me, they both symbolize racist hatred and racist systematic violence and mass murder of innocents. Knowledge of heritage does meaning owning the negatives of history as well as the positives.  

Excellent post, my friend. But I think you are missing one tiny point-- revisionist romance has a history all its own, and in a way it exists outside museums. What we really need is tolerance to allow others to interpret history in the way that works best for them. That also means having tolerance for excessive political correctness which is a challenge for many of us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are always those who seek to ennoble the Civil War, or make it seem less offensive, by trying to say there were other reasons, diminishing the fact that it was a war fought by the South in support of slavery. But --

 

Here is one fact of American history that cannot be ignored. It's in the U.S. Constitution, plain for all to see, especially by those who are strict interpreters of the Constitution -- this is very clear:

 

By Section 110 of Article III. of the Constitution of the United States, it is declared that:"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

 

So, why ever the South fought the Civil War; however nobly some of their soldiers may have fought, however grandly theatrical the Southern generals may have been, there is one very clear fact: They were all, by definition of the U.S. Constitution, TRAITORS!

 

In Texas v. White (1869) the United States Supreme Court ruled that Texas had remained a state ever since it first joined the Union, despite claims that it joined the Confederate States of America; the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null", under the constitution.

 

As far as the word TRAITOR is concerned I think you and many others should read the following:

 

http://www.patriotshistoryusa.com/teaching-materials/bonus-materials/american-heroes-general-robert-e-lee/

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thank you Swithin.  Been saying that for years concerning this Confederate flag nonsense.  I truly feel that if that angle had been more strenuously argued, that nasty rag would have been long gone by now.

 

But, I also have to agree somewhat with Ham's point about individual private ownership.  Now, there might be an allowance for munincipalities to pass ordinances prohibiting the display of the flag within the city limits.  Even on private property.  But I can't argue the legalities.  However....

 

If someone thinks the waving of this treasonous banner is a form of "freedom of expression" then they should be aware it also means I'm granted the "freedom of expression" to publicly call him a j a c k a s s! 

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Everyone has the right to exclaim some silly form of expression around here....

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are always those who seek to ennoble the Civil War, or make it seem less offensive, by trying to say there were other reasons, diminishing the fact that it was a war fought by the South in support of slavery. But --

 

Here is one fact of American history that cannot be ignored. It's in the U.S. Constitution, plain for all to see, especially by those who are strict interpreters of the Constitution -- this is very clear:

 

By Section 110 of Article III. of the Constitution of the United States, it is declared that:"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

 

So, why ever the South fought the Civil War; however nobly some of their soldiers may have fought, however grandly theatrical the Southern generals may have been, there is one very clear fact: They were all, by definition of the U.S. Constitution, TRAITORS!

 

And while I can understand your logic here Swithin, AND certainly agree with your earlier thought that "the U.S. Constitution is a living document"(nope, not a "fundamentalist" in this regard EITHER here, sir), allow me to remind you that our "oh so infallible" Founders(and who wrote that most grammatically incorrect passage, "a more perfect union") had ALSO placed within this document the provisions for allowing slavery to exist within these "United" States and in order to get the southern slave holding states to sign onto the "deal".

 

And so I ask: Can you BLAME those southern yahoos back then(and for THAT matter, all these southern yahoos today AND all these poor misguided people TODAY who believe in a "strict" and "fundamental" interpretation" of that document AND in the "infallibility" of the Founders for thinking that it was the Abolitionists of the North who were "in fact" the "real traitors" to the Constitution?

 

(...and THUS of course the VERY reason I AGREE with your thought that our Constitution IS a "living document", and that at those who "believe" that ALL the Founders' thoughts and what they wrote were and/or are somehow "sacred" should WISE THE !#$&**$#! UP and realize that said Founders WERE indeed FALLIBLE and that EVERYTHING they said and wrote and did were NOT and SHOULD not be viewed as "sacred"!!!!!!!!!!!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been trying to avoid this thread, but...

I probably have more connections to the Confederacy than 90% of flag supporters and I have always believed it was inappropriate to have it in the S.C. House and Senate Chambers and to fly it on any government property.  All of the "battle" flags went up in the late 50's and early 60's to show Southern resistance to civil rights and integration.  I know because I was here when they went up.

GWTW should not be banned because it is "revisionism" as all movies and tv shows are revisionism.  Even documentaries take a specific point of view.  That is the way life is and has always been.  

GWTW is a part of American history, just as is Birth of a Nation.  I have read the book and seen the movie a few times, but not in 30+ years.  To me, it is just an overboard romantic movie. Thousands (millions?) of them out there, not counting TV movies.

As for the treason post, technically the Southern states did not engage in treason.  They seceeded from the Union and then established a new nation.  The New England states had threatened secession before the Civil War over Federal laws.  It was an unresolved theory that if states voluntarily joined the Union, they could therefore leave the Union.  Also, the South did not invade the North; the North invaded the South.

That is why even though the Radical Republicans controlled the US government after the war and Lincoln's death, they did not prosecute anyone for treason.  They only prosectuted one person for war crimes, the commander of Andersonville prison.

There were many reasons for the Civil War, with slavery being the chief one.   The war was inevitible because of many unresolved issues re: conflicting beliefs on a strong or weak central government; supremacy of states over Federal government; conflicting socio-economic factors and many others.

College courses have been taught about these subjects.  Not to mention the hundreds of books on the topic.

Don't forget our first several Presidents were slave owners while serving as President, as were many of the Founding Fathers.

Incidentally, there is absolutely no legal way for municipalities or other governments to prohibit displaying flags on private property.  And there shouldn't be.  That is what separates America from dictatorships.

Regardless, the flag needed to come down and it did.  Let's move on.  It's a Great Day in South Carolina!  Y'all come on down and enjoy our tourist destinations (and bring money).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am assuming you are referring to every other media story about almost anything ever written about anything in our history, correct? Revisionism does not just take place within the confines of the American Civil War period, it has been used quite effectively in almost every other instance of American filmmaking.

 

 

TCM is NOT showing these films for the educational needs or purposes of their viewers, they are showing these films because of their entertainment values. The social messages does not nor should it be something TCM should engage with. That should be left to scholars and or the general public.

 

 

The following is just MHO....

 

Then I guess you really do not know much about American history? Many in pre-Revolutionary

times in America were British sympathizers or at least loyalists who wanted to remain British citizens. That even during the Revolutionary War, many American colonists still flew the British flag on their properties. The British were well known for their conduct pre-war that eventually led to war with the colonies.

 

The Confederate flag was a symbol for many reasons. Slavery being one of them. However four of the former federal states that joined the Confederacy in 1861 did not do so for what they felt was slavery issues, they did it for other reasons and joined the southern cause. Those states were Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas.

 

I do not believe that the flag that was lowered the other day was a flag of hatred. It was the main battle flag used during battles. The much larger rectangular "Stars and Bars" used in many films and depicted on the back of pick up trucks was a flag that was never adopted as a national flag by the Confederacy.

 

Now, you and others may disagree with me, but I do not believe that the flag that flew near the South Carolina capital was a racist symbol. It was meant to recall the glory days of southern battles of the Confederacy. And to honor those who died for those causes.

 

As far as Mass Murder of Innocents are concerned, this country should also be in this group as well. All one has to do is look back to August 1945 when two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, killing thousands of innocent Japanese. Also included should be the February 1945 fire bombing of Dresden, Germany resulting in the deaths of close to 25,000 German citizens.

 

And then there are the countless films about the American Calvary. All of those films made to create an illusion about how bad the American Indians were and how they had to be eradicated in order for this country to move further west. If American filmmakers really wanted to tell the truth, then they would have filmed those movies a lot differently because even thought here were many battle involving American calvary and Indians, most Indians of that time period died due to diseases brought in by foreign newcomers.

 

I could go on and on, but really when you look at the history of cinema here in this country, there is a certain way that film makers have gone out of their way to justify telling an American story not always on facts, and that there is always some level of BS thrown in for good measure.

 

Because lets face it... most Americans of today are too innocent and naive and not very well educated to understand the real causes and reasons why this nation has had to go to war or fight to protect it's interests.

 

In other words... not very compelling as far as film is concerned.

I have had this discussion on other parts of this board, but revisionism is not an equal opportunity as it is made out to be, and people can analyze history as subjectively as they choose, but when revisionism creates a dominant narrative that society parlays as fact, which is what Gone With The Wind and Birth of a Nation has done, and people see the harm in that, particularly if they are of a party commonly harmed, like Americans of color and GLBT Americans, for example, then there comes a moment where the other party needs to be held personally responsible for that harm. 

 

Regarding your point of TCM's educational value, seeing their programming I would have to disagree with you because new viewers turn on all the time, many viewers who socialize on this media and other media the site provides and outside the site, have equated it to a film course they don't have to pay much for. TCM is always bringing experts in to provide academic commentary on films and film periods and issues in film. They balance it with just film fans and famous film fans so as to balance the education and the entertainment. 

 

I took Advanced Placement U.S. History and Advanced Placement Modern European History in high school, as well as took two semesters of African-American History in college, and a Womanism/Feminism course. I love history, I love learning about history. Recently, I've dived into suppressed history and uncovered a lot of things that have been accredited and verified. But history is just as subjective as well, and the dominant narrative constitutes what history is learned and what isn't learned. The gap of what is and what isn't is huge as the dominant narrative is not inclusive towards Americans of color, GLBT Americans, women, and everything intersectional between them. 

 

The Civil War was fought over states' rights over the right to own slaves. There is no denying that, those that do are only excusing the biproduct of racist attitudes they hold onto. Another biproduct of those attitudes is the hyper-sensitive whiners who whine about political correctness. In my experience, and this isn't true of everyone who whines, but those who whine do not want to respect a history that isn't their own. The ones who complain about the culture of victimhood are usually the ones to claim victimhood when they feel personally attacked by an idea that challenges their own and they cannot muster the mental energy to think beyond their comfort. 

 

It is not that most Americans are too innocent and naive, it is that they have been made naive by the media who only provides confirmation bias porn. In this scenario, "most Americans" translates to white Americans in reality who are afraid to confront their own social privileges that come with being white in America. White Americans are afraid to take personal responsibility for the attitudes they still believe regarding the Confederacy. They believe the myths perpetuated by Gone With The Wind and other racist literature that purports the idea that it was the white South that suffered the most out of the Civil War, and that people of color were happier when they were considered 3/5ths a person by our own Constitution because of their property value. Now, we can look at that honestly and deal with it, as we had two centuries to deal with it, or we cannot.

 

The people affronted by the taking down of the Confederate flag should look into the history of that flag, I agree. They should look into the feelings of pride they have for it. I don't believe that one should feel pride for something that symbolizes the systematic oppression of human beings. I don't believe one should feel pride for their ancestors who once owned human beings. They shouldn't be afraid to say my great-great grand pappy owned 40 slaves because at least they own their history by saying that. If they could say "but I don't believe my white skin makes me superior to people to color" then that would be wonderful. But, people still believe it. They may feel uncomfortable saying that out loud, and probably go down that path of self-victimhood when talking about out "politically correct" culture, but white people still believe themselves superior, and they apply that attitude in countless ways in our society over many race-related issues. Not all white people, mind you, because everyone is their own individual and it manifests differently. Consciousness is a different story.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, slavery should count as a mass murder of innocents because it involved stripping human beings of their home, their families, their sexual identity, and their dignity. There are many unmarked graves of slaves in this country, as they did not even have the dignity of their death granted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I heard on the grapevine:

 

     Barack Obama wants to ban the Confederate flag in all 57 states, including Kenya and Prince Edward Island (I know, I know.  It's in Canada and our Navy corpse-men are buried there).  Continuing on . . . George W. Bush says he's happy to know there's 57 states now so he can go rustle hisself up some cattle and feed the illegal migrants who've been installing a Cheyne-link fence around his nucular swamp site in Texas, USA.  (No one knows what a "nucular swamp site" actually is, but so what?  There's minion onions to be fed!).  Meanwhile, Bill Clinton is licking his pervy chops after reading this joke ▬ What kind of guy has 2,000 girlfriends?  A shepherd!  ▬  Ewe've got to be kidding me!  No, Bill, we're not.  Dem sheeple's is waitin'!   Says Bill:  "After Monica blew me off in '98 I've been lookin' again for alternatives to Hillary.  I'm so happy right now I could dry hump a sand dune!!"  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent post, my friend. But I think you are missing one tiny point-- revisionist romance has a history all its own, and in a way it exists outside museums. What we really need is tolerance to allow others to interpret history in the way that works best for them. That also means having tolerance for excessive political correctness which is a challenge for many of us.

As I stated in my response to fixeyman, it is a challenge because white people still profit off of racism and don't want their privileges challenged. I should also point out that, not to take away from the African-American struggle, but Irish-Americans were for a long time sold as slaves as well. My ancestors were sold equally along with African slaves to the Americas. When Anglo-Americans found out the Irish were white, they stopped accepting slave ships from Ireland and my ancestors settled in the Midwest. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been trying to avoid this thread, but...

I probably have more connections to the Confederacy than 90% of flag supporters and I have always believed it was inappropriate to have it in the S.C. House and Senate Chambers and to fly it on any government property.  All of the "battle" flags went up in the late 50's and early 60's to show Southern resistance to civil rights and integration.  I know because I was here when they went up.

GWTW should not be banned because it is "revisionism" as all movies and tv shows are revisionism.  Even documentaries take a specific point of view.  That is the way life is and has always been.  

GWTW is a part of American history, just as is Birth of a Nation.  I have read the book and seen the movie a few times, but not in 30+ years.  To me, it is just an overboard romantic movie. Thousands (millions?) of them out there, not counting TV movies.

As for the treason post, technically the Southern states did not engage in treason.  They seceeded from the Union and then established a new nation.  The New England states had threatened secession before the Civil War over Federal laws.  It was an unresolved theory that if states voluntarily joined the Union, they could therefore leave the Union.  Also, the South did not invade the North; the North invaded the South.

That is why even though the Radical Republicans controlled the US government after the war and Lincoln's death, they did not prosecute anyone for treason.  They only prosectuted one person for war crimes, the commander of Andersonville prison.

There were many reasons for the Civil War, with slavery being the chief one.   The war was inevitible because of many unresolved issues re: conflicting beliefs on a strong or weak central government; supremacy of states over Federal government; conflicting socio-economic factors and many others.

College courses have been taught about these subjects.  Not to mention the hundreds of books on the topic.

Don't forget our first several Presidents were slave owners while serving as President, as were many of the Founding Fathers.

Incidentally, there is absolutely no legal way for municipalities or other governments to prohibit displaying flags on private property.  And there shouldn't be.  That is what separates America from dictatorships.

Regardless, the flag needed to come down and it did.  Let's move on.  It's a Great Day in South Carolina!  Y'all come on down and enjoy our tourist destinations (and bring money).

 

Were people NOT coming to South Carolina before the flag came down? Am I to assume that the general tourist industry had suffered because a few Americans chose not to come to the The Palmetto State for a vacation only because of the Confederate battle flag?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I need to post this for clarification.  My issue over the Confederate flag is NOT about the removal from GOVERNMENT institutions.  Of course its inappropriate to fly a flag of a nation whether divided or not that no longer exist   Makes as much sense as flying the red hammer and sickle over the Kremlin today.

 

My only concern is PRIVATE ownership/display, as I recently stated in another thread - it's about the 1st Amendment of Freedom of Speech/Expression/Thought.  Movies are the same,  people should have the right to buy, own, view controversial  ones i.e. The Song of The South, Birth of a Nation, etc. without those wanting them to become unavailable because of THEIR personal beliefs.

 

Same can be said about cowboy and Indian films where the history of the Native American has been a very sad one.  We as a nation should be ashamed of the past regarding them but films about the subject be restricted / banned (even SUGGESTING) - of course not.

 

For those who hates any icon whether flag or film then IGNORE it - don't watch/look at it, no one is forcing you to! If TCM airs such films then there is the channel selector that's what it is there for.

 

So FAR no film has been banned / restricted as Jazz pointed out, I want it to stay that way regardless if its offensive, hateful, vulgar or not. People like Lou shouldn't go on the attack after many went flag crazy because some crazed dysfunctional lone wolf decides to kill people. I hope he gets the needle!

 

I agree that no flag, film,  art etc.. should be banned.    As for the moron Lou;   Well like you said "it's about the 1st Amendment of Freedom of Speech/Expression/Thought",    Lou was just expressing his POV.      

 

Where we disagree is that today we as a nation and our associated political system are closer to banning a film than we were, say,  50 years ago.    What is true is that private enterprises may 'ban' a film (e.g. what Disney is doing with Song of the South),  but that is just another example of a company practicing their 1st Amendment rights.     

 

We see the same thing with the stores refusing to sell the confederate flag.   If a city or state was to pass a law that outlawed the ownership or display of the flag,   I believe even the liberal SC members would vote that this is a violation of the 1st Amendment.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, slavery should count as a mass murder of innocents because it involved stripping human beings of their home, their families, their sexual identity, and their dignity. There are many unmarked graves of slaves in this country, as they did not even have the dignity of their death granted. 

 

I disagree. What happened to them was as a direct result of British colonialism at it's worst, which continued to exist in colonial America only because the original supporters of the Declaration of Independence needed the southern delegates to approve the passage of the declaration, so the slavery issue was taken out of the declaration.

 

Unfortunately you make it sound as if slaves were the only group to have had such repressions thrown against them. What about all of the native Indians that were killed during ALL of the conflicts on the North American continent? Or hows about all of the native Mexican's in their country who have been killed and who rest in unmarked graves? Where does this end?

 

It can not all be JUST about the black experience in this country. What about the untold millions of Jews who perished in Germany and other locations throughout Europe during the Holocaust? What graves do they have? None.

 

As you have so eloquently written, this is a topic that goes far beyond film studies and this message board.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. What happened to them was as a direct result of British colonialism at it's worst, which continued to exist in colonial America only because the original supporters of the Declaration of Independence needed the southern delegates to approve the passage of the declaration, so the slavery issue was taken out of the declaration.

 

Unfortunately you make it sound as if slaves were the only group to have had such repressions thrown against them. What about all of the native Indians that were killed during ALL of the conflicts on the North American continent? Or hows about all of the native Mexican's in their country who have been killed and who rest in unmarked graves? Where does this end?

 

It can not all be JUST about the black experience in this country. What about the untold millions of Jews who perished in Germany and other locations throughout Europe during the Holocaust? What graves do they have? None.

 

As you have so eloquently written, this is a topic that goes far beyond film studies and this message board.

Yet, France freed their slaves as soon as they were free of Great Britain's ruling. We can romanticize the Founding Fathers as much as we want to, but they participated in the slave system, and were complicit to the mass murder. Just like the North was before 1863. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. What happened to them was as a direct result of British colonialism at it's worst, which continued to exist in colonial America only because the original supporters of the Declaration of Independence needed the southern delegates to approve the passage of the declaration, so the slavery issue was taken out of the declaration.

 

Unfortunately you make it sound as if slaves were the only group to have had such repressions thrown against them. What about all of the native Indians that were killed during ALL of the conflicts on the North American continent? Or hows about all of the native Mexican's in their country who have been killed and who rest in unmarked graves? Where does this end?

 

It can not all be JUST about the black experience in this country. What about the untold millions of Jews who perished in Germany and other locations throughout Europe during the Holocaust? What graves do they have? None.

 

As you have so eloquently written, this is a topic that goes far beyond film studies and this message board.

And, I'm sorry if you are offended like I am singling out a single group of people- at least I am looking at history honestly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet, France freed their slaves as soon as they were free of Great Britain's ruling. We can romanticize the Founding Fathers as much as we want to, but they participated in the slave system, and were complicit to the mass murder. Just like the North was before 1863. 

 

What does France have to do with this conversation?

 

As far as the signers of the Declaration of Independence is concerned, you are correct that many of them participated in the slavery issue. Many of the southern delegates having been slave owners themselves especially Jefferson who wrote the document.

 

But seeing how you took advanced American History in high school, they must have passed over the part where to get the darn document passed and ratified, the section dealing with slavery was deleted from the document to get the southern delegates to approve it.

 

From http://www.blackpast.org -

 

When Thomas Jefferson included a passage attacking slavery in his draft of the Declaration of Independence it initiated the most intense debate among the delegates gathered at Philadelphia in the spring and early  summer of 1776.  Jefferson's passage on slavery was the most important section removed from the final document.  It was replaced with a more ambiguous passage about King George's incitement of "domestic insurrections among us." 

 

Decades later Jefferson blamed the removal of the passage on delegates from South Carolina and Georgia and Northern delegates who represented merchants who were at the time actively involved in the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. 

 

Jefferson's original passage on slavery appears below.



 

"He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither.  This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the Christian King of Great Britain.  Determined to keep open a market where Men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce.  And that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he has obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed again the Liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another".

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...