Bad Reactions to W&L ?

[Drosselmeier]

<p>

Of course a private institution can do whatever it wants; however, I tend to think that banning things that make people uncomfortable is not a good idea.

I think perhaps if we could somehow mutually nail down the meaning of private property, we might together see how banning things that make people uncomfortable can be a good idea. Because of how I view the concept “private property”, I think I have the right to deny expressions of racism in my home, for example. I don’t think I have such a right in your home, or in the home of some other. For this reason I think it is perfectly acceptable for W&L or any other private institution to ban or promote ideology as it wishes. It seems to me the private aspect of its nature gives it the right to build whatever culture it thinks is best.</p>

<p>

Frankly, I disagree - STRONGLY - with the idea that the Confederacy was all about oppression of blacks. The North, for those of you who would just love to pretend that it is a bastion of equality, had slaves for hundreds of years. Only when it was sufficiently industrialised - i.e. had no need for extraordinarily cheap labour - did it get rid of slavery.

I understand this, but I am not sure this gets us where we need to be. For example, we cannot legitimately support an argument favorable to the South, by arguing how pro-slavery the North was. Secondly, while I agree with you that Northern motives against slavery were not always or even usually honorable, the best Angels against slavery still largely existed in the North, beginning with folks like the Quakers (official anti-slavery declaration in 1696). Thirdly, and most importantly, the issue here does not really concern whether the North had slaves or were pro-slavery. It concerns which of the two regions deliberately fought for the preservation of the right to own slaves. That dubious honor belongs to the South alone, and it crafted the Confederate Flag to help achieve that goal. Surely the South had several other issues with the North during the mid-1800’s. But [“the</a> chief and immediate cause”]( <a href=“http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761567354/Civil_War_American.html#p53]“the”>http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761567354/Civil_War_American.html#p53) of the civil war was slavery. For this reason, I think there is no legitimate right to force the support of the Confederate Flag on public property. It is a patently anti-American symbol.</p>

<p>

I’ve noticed that racism in the North is quite an amazing thing. Everyone loves to pretend that they are all about equality, but heaven forbid that they actually let black people move into their nice suburbs. I grew up in a town that is 98% white but scorns the South as a backwards region. My hometown friends spaz every time I date someone who isn’t white and born in the USA (which is a fairly frequent thing - you think they would get over it).

Yeah. As a black guy, I certainly know that everything you say on this point is true. Please understand that my position here only concerns public support for symbols of oppression. I do not think Northerners are inherently less racist than Southerners.</p>