Attack on the Confederate Flag?

[passing_through]

We have a awesome heritage of service to our homeland and no one is going to dim that honor by saying the Battle Flag was about hate and slavery it was about them defending their families.

I completely agree. Two of my great-great-grandfathers fought in the Civil War/War Between the States -- on opposite sides. One was ambushed by townies on his own farm while putting up hay after returning from the Battle of Pea Ridge, where he served his Confederate Unit as a captain in the cavalry.

On Memorial Day, I drive 120 miles north to put a Confederate battle flag, and his regimental flag over his grave. When I pass on, my son will continue to do so. That war was absolutely a war of aggression aimed at killing States' Rights. It worked.

Since it's end, there have been fewer and fewer instances in which the federal government hasn't won a fight to usurp them, making all the states beholden to the great white (now black) father in D.C. It's disgusting.

 

[Omni]

Walmart to stop selling Confederate flag merchandise - CNNPolitics.com

Sears, Kmart, Ebay, many are joining..

Commercial form of censorship, or national hysteria?

Confederacy is inextricably linked in the wider social conscience with slavery. Obviously Wal-Mart recognize that. It's like shops in Northern Ireland who won't stock Union Jacks or Irish Tricolours because they're associated with violent sectarianism. It's smart.

 

[Dude653]

Confederacy is inextricably linked in the wider social conscience with slavery. Obviously Wal-Mart recognize that. It's like shops in Northern Ireland who won't stock Union Jacks or Irish Tricolours because they're associated with violent sectarianism. It's smart.

I agree. I think they made a wise business decision by separating themselves from this symbol of racism and bigotry.

 

[crossnote]

Confederacy is inextricably linked in the wider social conscience with slavery. Obviously Wal-Mart recognize that. It's like shops in Northern Ireland who won't stock Union Jacks or Irish Tricolours because they're associated with violent sectarianism. It's smart.

Funny thing, Walmart, Kmart, Ebay never had a problem with the flag since their inception...it is simply hysteria and mind manipulation.

 

[Omni]

Funny thing, Walmart, Kmart, Ebay never had a problem with the flag since their inception...it is simply hysteria and mind manipulation.

It seems like if anybody does anything you don't agree with it's some conspiracy. It's far more likely that Walmart and Co. decided to stop selling this flag because it's a smart business decision. If you want a flag that's inextricably associated with racism and slavery, I'm sure there are other places that you can find it.

 

[crossnote]

It seems like if anybody does anything you don't agree with it's some conspiracy. It's far more likely that Walmart and Co. decided to stop selling this flag because it's a smart business decision. If you want a flag that's inextricably associated with racism and slavery, I'm sure there are other places that you can find it.

Well that sure didn't answer why all of a sudden they all woke up and seen it was a racial issue, when they had been selling the flags all along...since they started their business.
It's not that it is linked with racism etc., rather it's linked with $$$.

 

[Omni]

Well that sure didn't answer why all of a sudden they all woke up and seen it was a racial issue, when they had been selling the flags all along...since they started their business.
It's not that it is linked with racism etc., rather it's linked with $$$.

Isn't all business??

The reason they stop selling the flag, is because they obviously did the calculations and found out that they'd lose more custom by seemingly supporting racism, than they would ever gain from selling the flags. It's a simple risk/reward calculation.

The potential loss of business that they would incur from the sensible majority thinking that Walmart support racists, is more money than Walmart would make from selling confederate flags to the minority who are racist.

 

[passing_through]

I agree. I think they made a wise business decision by separating themselves from this symbol of racism and bigotry.

Rasism and Bigotry? You are without a clue.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Rasism and Bigotry? You are without a clue.

Nor does he have the honesty and intellectual depository to buy one, either.

 

[crossnote]

Isn't all business??

The reason they stop selling the flag, is because they obviously did the calculations and found out that they'd lose more custom by seemingly supporting racism, than they would ever gain from selling the flags. It's a simple risk/reward calculation.

The potential loss of business that they would incur from the sensible majority thinking that Walmart support racists, is more money than Walmart would make from selling confederate flags to the minority who are racist.

That's right, so it hasn't been about racism all along. If the flag was in vogue you'd see it all over their webpages.

 

[Omni]

That's right, so it hasn't been about racism all along. If the flag was in vogue you'd see it all over their webpages.

It's about racism insofar as being seen to support racism would lead to a heavy loss of business. It's more cost effective for WalMart be seen as not racist, and as not endorsing racism. Yes, it's a business decision, but it's a business decision made out of a necessity to facilitate an ever evolving moral conscience -- Americans who purchase from WalMart are the people who keep WalMart open, and slavery and racism are no longer things that most Americans want to propagate; in fact, racism and slavery are things that most Americans now want to vehemently oppose. So it pays WalMart to change with the times. Smart business-people, particularly ones who aside from the wider social conscience have an astute social conscience of their own, will make smart business decisions that reflect such.

Society has a great power in shaping big corporate business, and vice versa. WalMart could have opposed this decision and incurred the wrath of consumer boycott for the sake of some ill-focused pseudo-nationalist pride, but that both wider society and big business are on the same page in regards to this issue is encouraging, at least in my eyes.

 

[crossnote]

It's about racism insofar as being seen to support racism would lead to a heavy loss of business. It's more cost effective for WalMart be seen as not racist, and as not endorsing racism. Yes, it's a business decision, but it's a business decision made out of a necessity to facilitate an ever evolving moral conscience -- Americans who purchase from WalMart are the people who keep WalMart open, and slavery and racism are no longer things that most Americans want to propagate; in fact, racism and slavery are things that most Americans now want to vehemently oppose. So it pays WalMart to change with the times. Smart business-people, particularly ones who aside from the wider social conscience have an astute social conscience of their own, will make smart business decisions that reflect such.

Society has a great power in shaping big corporate business, and vice versa. WalMart could have opposed this decision and incurred the wrath of consumer boycott for the sake of some ill-focused pseudo-nationalist pride, but that both wider society and big business are on the same page in regards to this issue is encouraging, at least in my eyes.

"To facilitate an ever evolving moral conscience"???
Who's morality? Who decides what is moral? Apparently according to your statement...morality is always changing/evolving.
Read a good history book lately?

 

[Dude653]

I despise walmart with every fiber of my being but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand why they did that. when simething is that controversial, any smart business person will cut ties with it

 

[pwrnJC]

While all of this debating rhetoric is going on around the nation, I hear this song in the background: "GLORY, glory, hallelujah, glory glory hallelujah, glory glory hallelujah, His truth is marching on!.

 

[jennymae]

While all of this debating rhetoric is going on around the nation, I hear this song in the background: "GLORY, glory, hallelujah, glory glory hallelujah, glory glory hallelujah, His truth is marching on!.

What song is that...never heard it...never will...

 

[passing_through]

What song is that...never heard it...never will...

It is the "Battle Hymn of the Republic".

 

[jennymae]

It is the "Battle Hymn of the Republic".

I was being sarchastic...

 

[passing_through]

I was being sarchastic...

Sarcastic or fictitious, or Just joking, it's all right.

 

[Omni]

"To facilitate an ever evolving moral conscience"???
Who's morality? Who decides what is moral? Apparently according to your statement...morality is always changing/evolving.
Read a good history book lately?

This morality: Is slavery wrong? Yes. Is the Confederate flag inextricably linked in the social conscience with slavery? Yes. Is the flag therefore considered by most people to be a hate symbol? Yes. Do WalMart think it's thus morally sound to sell the flag? No.

Slavery, at one stage in human history, was considered morally justified by wider society. Now it isn't. Morals change.

 

[crossnote]

This morality: Is slavery wrong? Yes. Is the Confederate flag inextricably linked in the social conscience with slavery? Yes. Is the flag therefore considered by most people to be a hate symbol? Yes. Do WalMart think it's thus morally sound to sell the flag? No.

Slavery, at one stage in human history, was considered morally justified by wider society. Now it isn't. Morals change.

But you brought up 'evolving morality' and now morals change.
True slavery is immoral, especially if it is brutal slavery, compared to freedom.
We have laws that prevent the brutal thug from enslaving the weak.
Do you think those laws are evolving from the rule of the barbaric to the rule of justice?
What is your 'vision' of the last stage of this 'evolving morality' as you call it?