this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
458 points (96.5% liked)

politics

18898 readers
3839 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The president’s speech at a South Carolina church did not go over well with the GOP candidate.

Joe Biden gave a speech in South Carolina on Monday, and Nikki Haley isn’t happy about it. Specifically, she’s not happy about the part where the president called her out for her extremely cringeworthy comments about the Civil War, saying, “Let me be clear, for those who don’t seem to know: Slavery was the cause of the Civil War.”

The issue of the Civil War—and her commentary on it—has come up for Haley in the past. While running for governor of South Carolina in 2010, she described the war as a matter of two sides fighting over “tradition” and “change,” adding that the Confederate flag was “not something that is racist.” She also claimed there was no reason to take the flag down from the statehouse grounds (until five years later, after the mass shooting at the Charleston church). After Haley’s gaffe in December, Jaime Harrison, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, said that her failure to mention slavery was “not stunning if you were a Black resident in SC when she was Governor.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 123 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

Here’s the thing about the states that seceded - they drafted ordinances of secession with a declaration of causes for secession, and they all say they’re leaving the union because they want to enslave black people.

There is no debate about this. It was written down by the confederates.

Georgia’s first paragraph in their declaration of causes:

The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property

Mississippi, second sentence:

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun.

South Carolina, first paragraph:

The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D., 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right. Since that time, these encroachments have continued to increase, and further forbearance ceases to be a virtue.

Texas, 3rd paragraph in after babbling about dates and tranquility:

She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy.

Virginia, first paragraph:

the Federal Government, having perverted said powers, not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern Slaveholding States.

[–] deezbutts@lemm.ee 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Just a note, I think secession instead of succession?

[–] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 21 points 8 months ago

secession

Thanks. Dyslexic guy here. So I make stupid typos like this a lot. 😅

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Can I ask where you found this? I want to learn where I can look this up in the future when some doofus claims a different reason for the civil war

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They're readily available, if you Google any state followed by letter of secession they will pop right up.

Here's Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina', Virginia, and Texas:

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states#georgia

There isn't a letter for every state, some didn't write a letter and just passed a law saying the union is dissolved or something like that.

Here also is the confederate constitution: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_csa.asp

I will direct your attention to this line -

(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

For anyone parroting states rights nonsense. Literally banned the ability of a state to choose on whether or not to allow slavery

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Sweet, thanks for that!

[–] TheActualDevil@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not the same person but I googled "causes for secession" and clicked the first link.

First link.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ericisshort@lemmy.world 112 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Yes, Nikki, you’re right that it was about “tradition” and “change,” but what you’re conveniently neglecting is the fact that the tradition that these states didn’t want to change was owning slaves.

[–] WashedOver@lemmy.ca 14 points 8 months ago

She might really enjoy how in Florida they have Prager U make books and videos on how Slavery was beneficial to the slaves for the masses to get their edumications from...

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] loopedcandle@lemmynsfw.com 56 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Tradition to do WHAT EXACTLY?? TO DO WHAT ...???

[–] billiam0202@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] toasteecup@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

And things, like whips

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] spider@lemmy.nz 46 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (16 children)

adding that the Confederate flag was "not something that is racist."

Imagine what might've happened if Haley was a university president and had parsed her words like that.

[–] hansl@lemmy.world 32 points 8 months ago (2 children)

“The flag can’t be racist, it has black flag friends.” - Haley probably (note she’s used that excuse for herself already)

[–] spider@lemmy.nz 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

token black flags, that is

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 32 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

There’s nothing a Republican politician hates more than the facts!

Edit: also taxes and minorities

[–] mrcleanup@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

And the government, unless it's them, in which case you should swear absolute loyalty immediately.

[–] slaveOne@reddthat.com 5 points 8 months ago

Alternative facts are okay though

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 30 points 8 months ago (1 children)

she described the war as a matter of two sides fighting over “tradition” and “change,”

Yeah, the south was fighting to keep their tradition of owning slaves, and the north fought to change that tradition.

It amazes me how hard rightoids work to not acknowledge the plain as day fact from the documents detailing states' secession documents and the constitution of the confederacy.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"Tradition" is one of the shittiest reasons I've ever heard of to maintain slavery.

[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

You ain't wrong, but at the same time, if we define "tradition" as "doing certain things certain ways because we've always done those things those ways, and we don't want to change", then I guess they're not wrong either...but by the same rationale, that same social inertia is also the reason we have climate science deniers, racists, homophobes, misogynists, xenophobes, and bigots of all other shapes and sizes. Basically: they're used to it being accepted to do things we now know to be problematic, and rather than change, they'd simply rather not change...for no better reason than not changing means continuing to do things the way they've always done them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] butt_mountain_69420@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh you mean Nimarata Randhawa?

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Isn't it weird how the right always like to deny what we all know, and that is that the Southern Strategy is a real thing, and/or pull out that old chestnut about Robert Byrd and how democraTs aRe thE Real Ku Klux KlaN, but if you pull down a few statues of racist traitors (or even threaten to), or remove the flag of the racist losers, they start getting all teary-eyed about "heritage" and "preserving history"?

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 6 points 8 months ago

Ahh yes our long lasting heritage of... (checks notes) 4 years... Yes. I too have fond memories of my highschool heritage. I'm I using that correctly?

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

adding that the Confederate flag was “not something that is racist.”

You know that this idiot that ignores that she's not white until it's convenient, would fly a Nazi flag if they gave her enough money and power and claim the exact same thing for the Nazi flag.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 17 points 8 months ago (5 children)

The Confederate flag isn't even a flag, it's a war banner.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Actually, the cross-form of the confederate flag is a battle flag. (the actual confederate flag was too similar to the US star's and stripes flag for identifying forces.)

So flying it is technically identifying yourself as an enemy of the US.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Battle flag, war banner, same difference.

Although I'm sure CGPGrey would chew me out just as much if not more than you have.

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

just making the point that, as a battle flag, flying it is literally identifying yourself as a member of armed services of an enemy of the US. That was always it's purpose, and outside of reenactments... we should probably be inclined to treat them as such.

When the flag is carried into the capital building during election proceedings with the intent of of overturning an election, we should probably consider the hostilities actively renewed... (or, you know, just lock the fuckers up. that works.)

just as flying the Jack of the United States or the Ensign (which for the US is the US national flag,) identifies a ship as a ship of the US (USN, coast guard, Sealift command... NOAA).

[–] WashedOver@lemmy.ca 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Correction it's a Southern Surrender Flag now

[–] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

The flag of twice-failed insurrection

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 12 points 8 months ago

She should be ecstatic anyone is noticing her at all.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

That's not why she's mad. She's mad because she's a c***.

[–] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

Good on Joe here, I hope other people keep roasting her racist ass.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (9 children)

adding that the Confederate flag was “not something that is racist.”

"The Confederate flag was simply the primary symbol of the Confederacy, a movement primarily driven by the desire to maintain the brutal institutional slavery in the USA. That doesn't mean the flag itself was racist. The flag itself is no more racist than KKK hoods, Jim Crow laws, or Redlining in regard to financing for black prospective homeowners." - Haley probably

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Trump called her out about her waffling in using 'slavery'.

load more comments
view more: next ›