Death of The General Lee: But what’s the big deal about the Confederate flag?

Warner Brothers, owners of the iconic Dukes of Hazzard franchise has reportedly terminated the licensing of “General Lee” toys. This follows a recent shooting incident in the US state of South Carolina in which nine African Americans were gunned down in a church by white gunman Dylann Roof.

The Dukes of Hazzard aired on the CBS television network from January 26, 1979 to February 8, 1985. The series was inspired by the 1975 film Moonrunners, which was also created by Gy Waldron and had many identical or similar character names and concepts. The General Lee was the iconic 1969 Dodge Charger that was at the centre of the hit show. It sported an image of the Confederate flag on its roof.


Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us.
Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider!
Learn more

The Confederate flag, which was flown by a confederacy of secessionist slave states that fought Union troops in the US Civil War, has long been regarded as a symbol of American slavery and general redneckery. On the other hand, southern Americans also see it as a symbol of their culture and heritage.

Because of the recent tragedy in South Carolina, the call to eradicate the flag from American culture and history has grown with big retailers like Walmart now refusing to sell the flag. But is the Confederate flag or, for that matter, any icon or image really that important a symbol of racism or (again for that matter) any social movement, belief, or tradition?

Perhaps, by focusing too much attention on what is really just a quaint symbol, we are highlighting more the reality that the winners (regardless of how right or wrong they happen to be) get to write history.

The 'General Lee' in action on the opening sequence of The Dukes of Hazzard.

The ‘General Lee’ in action on the opening sequence of The Dukes of Hazzard.

Like the swastika and, now arguably, the Confederate flag, the crucifix, for example, was also a potent symbol that rallied people to perpetrate hideous atrocities, perhaps at scales that likely dwarf the numbers of lives lost to Nazism and American slavery.

But unlike the swastika and (perhaps in the future) the Confederate flag, the crucifix still hangs at the altars and facades of the Catholic Church’s towering edifices. And why not? The Roman Catholic Church is one of the winners of centuries of genocidal religious warfare and ethnic cleansing. Why, for example, are Native Americans not offended by the crucifix when this was a symbol hoisted on poles and displayed in fluttering flags when Spanish conquistador Francisco Pizarro brought to bear the full force of the Inquisition upon the Inca people in the 16th Century in what is now modern-day Peru?

People who are quick to call indignation crusades against symbols need to be careful as they may (as in this recent case) unwittingly highlight inconvenient truths about their own histories, tradition, and heritage. In this day and age when words like “multiculturalism” and “diversity” are bandied around by Apple Watch-wearing hipsters, perhaps one would think people’s characters would now be a bit bigger than a flag — or a crucifix.

[NB: Parts of this article were lifted off and used in accordance with that site’s Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License consistent with the same license applied by Get Real Post to its content. Photo of the General Lee courtesy Daily Mail UK.]

31 Replies to “Death of The General Lee: But what’s the big deal about the Confederate flag?”

  1. i remembered the movie Lincoln by Steven Spielberg. Abraham Lincoln is the president at the time of civil war.

    “The best way to predict the future is to create it.” – abraham lincoln

  2. It just needs to be repeated, that the Civil War was NOT about Slavery.
    The Tariffs and Taxes imposed by D.C where not acceptable anymore to the Southern States and thus they decided to make use of their Constitutional right and secede from the United States. The Central Government did not want to allow this and the Civil War came to be.

    I certainly am not in favour of slavery but with these recent news about one crazy idiot bring up all these discussions about the Flag and the Civil War. Often falsely claiming the war was about Slavery (You did not and I hold you in high regards for that).
    While the end of Slavery was the one good effect of this war, it unfortunately also lead to a stronger Central Government and fear of States to try and secede..

    I will add two quotes from Lincoln below:

    “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.”

    -Abraham Lincoln

    “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause.”

    -Abraham Lincoln


    1. Clearly, historians will be arguing about the whys and wherefores in the same way that they will always argue about any major conflict in human history; events which, we should bear in mind, are highly complex and are hardly monocausal.

      But the context matters. In this instance, ‘observant nobody’ wishes to substitute one overall myth to account for something as complex as the American Civil War. This explanation is flatly wrong.


      During the nadir of post-civil-war race relations — the years after 1890 when town after town across the North became all-white ‘sundown towns’ and state after state across the South prevented African Americans from voting — ‘anything but slavery’ explanations of the Civil War gained traction. To this day Confederate sympathizers successfully float this false claim, along with their preferred names for the conflict: the ‘War Between the States’ and the ‘War of Northern Aggression.’

      High tariffs had prompted the Nullification Controversy in 1831-33. President Andrew Jackson threatened force after South Carolina demanded the right to nullify federal laws or secede in protest. NO state joined the movement, and South Carolina backed down. Tariffs were NOT an issue in 1860, and Southern states said nothing about them. Why would they? SOUTHERNERS had written the tariff of 1857, under which the United States was functioning. Its rates were actually LOWER than at any point since 1816.

      With regards to the second quote from President Abraham Lincoln — again, it is important to consider the context and refrain from using snippets which seem to prove one thing but actually refer to something else. The quote is from a letter Lincoln wrote to the New York Tribune, dated 22 August 1862. In the same letter, the president writes: “I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.” The fact of the matter is Lincoln’s own anti-slavery sentiment was widely known at the time. A month later, Lincoln combined official duty and private wish in his preliminary Emancipation Proclamation.

      Gradually, as Union soldiers found help from black civilians in the South and black recruits impressed white units with their bravery, many soldiers — and those they wrote home to — became abolitionists. By 1864, when Maryland voted to end slavery, it was soldiers’ and sailors’ votes that made the difference.

      Historical evidence (including the FULL CONTEXT of the two Lincoln quotes cited above) suggests that the North initially went to war to hold the nation together. ABOLITION (of slavery) came later as the war was being fought. IT WAS NOT ABOUT TAXES.

      1. @ SAINT & O.N., the Civil Way in the USA was about both. Lincoln wanted the war to end slavery,Yes. and The Emancipation Proclamation proves that. BUT the taxation on the wages the potentially freed slaves earned would have to come from somewhere and thus was a huge concern of the Southern Plantation owner’s of that time.

        So, you see………
        BUT forget that shit, fact is:
        If you were a Black Man that lived in Georgia,USA during the 1850’s? You’d have wished you were a White Man.

        Maybe you do now, IDK !

        1. As I said previously, you should not ascribe overly simplistic, mythical causes to complex historical events without context.

          Regarding taxes during the American Civil War:

          In 1861, the US Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1861. This law is significant in that it included the FIRST US Federal income tax statute. The act was motivated by the need to FUND the Civil War. It levied a flat rate of 3% “upon the annual income of every person residing in the United States, whether such income is derived from any kind of property, or from any profession, trade, employment, or vocation carried on in the United States or elsewhere, or from any other source whatever [….]” This income tax provision was replaced by the Revenue Act of 1862, which introduced a progressive income tax. This was highly significant in that it was explicitly TEMPORARY, specifying termination of income tax in 1866.

          There were no specific tax provisions dealing with persons of colour.

          Our culture to-day regards SLAVERY to be a destructive, comprehensively EVIL institution. We are right to condemn it.

          And while the white majority of the American South in the nineteenth century believed in the ideology of ‘white supremacy,’ it should be noted that the FIRST TRUE SLAVE OWNER: that is, the FIRST person to hold a BLACK AFRICAN SERVANT AS A SLAVE in the mainland American colonies was A BLACK AFRICAN MAN.

          Anthony Johnson was an Angolan held as an indentured servant by a merchant in the Colony of Virginia in 1620, but later freed to become a successful tobacco farmer and property owner. By July 1651 Johnson had five indentured servants and owned some 100 hectares of land. A court case was brought against Johnson in 1654 which contested the freedom of a servant, John Casor. Johnson won the suit and retained Casor as his servant/slave for life. The case made Casor the first true slave in the continental United States.

        2. @ SAINT, you make me laugh. I said nothing, mythical ,and I was the one that pointed out that it was more ‘complex’ than both of you suppossed. Go look in Wikipedia for what was passed by who in what year all you want.

          If you think you are ‘RIGHT’ to condemn something, great. But slavery still exists. Its almost everywhere people live. Especially in the Philippines.

          Think your free? Think again, oh great wise man.

        3. Typical. Since Ebola Ray’s conspiracy of taxing newly freed slaves does not stand up to even a cursory examination, he resorts to personal attacks, more irrelevant fragments of information and a pathetic attempt at self-aggrandizement.

        4. @ SAINT O S, maybe you have decided not to take the bait or did not read the response, but your mention on taxing of labor in 1861 or low tariffs, where did you get that shit from?

          The Federal income tax was established in 1916, was what I was going to say….blah blah….and then was going to inform you that it was NEVER ratified and never actually became law blah blah.American citizens are actually NOT Federally mandated to pay taxes on their income, as it was suppossed to be tax on corporations for goods produced by labor, but was ‘FLIPPED'(maybe you thought ‘Flippin the script was originated in the Philippines,well no they copied it,imagine that?)and then enforced by the IRS which, well that is a subject for another time & IDC enough to explain it.

          Point being, you just really do not know what your talking about,when it comes to most things outside th RP and listening to you two is actually funny. MAYBE,Stick to the Philippines or maybe tell us all about your many excursions to the EU/USA where you have felt the pulse of the people rather than repeat some BS you read on wiki-numbskullia. Revisionism.

        5. Still more irrelevant tangents from the pretentious and wilfully ignorant.

          As a reminder: the essay above explores the meaning and power of symbols — in particular, the Confederate flag — and how those symbols come to be integrated into human culture. Because of the flag’s origins, it was inevitable that the American Civil War would be mentioned in connection with it and what it represents. Neither the original essay nor the war have anything to do with a discussion of US Federal Income Tax or the creation of the US Internal Revenue Service.

          “…but your mention on taxing of labor in 1861 or low tariffs, where did you get that shit from?”

          Apparently, ‘Ebola Ray’ relies on rumour, propaganda and Wikipedia as his sole source of information instead of an actual education. Try the archives of the US Congress. They have the original Tariff of 1857 documents. Or try reading a real book for a change. Instead of repeating myths you heard second hand. Then you might actually be capable of discussing the IRS instead of claiming you don’t care. The truth is your ignorance renders you incapable of repeating more than “…blah blah…” This pathetic attempt at pretending you are informed about American history and culture is laughable.

        6. @ Saint, what an idiot you are, is seen in the ‘rumours’, U R serious too,I Know IT. BUT I wasn’t there, 155 yrs. ago, so how could I have heard a rumor? When you live in the Southern USA and stop quoting Wikipedia sources, you can tell us all about whatever it is you THINK started the civil war.
          Fact is,It was about slavery and was about taxation and it was about arms sales for ‘Remmington Rifles’ as it was about ‘Winchester Cannons’ as it was Virginia horse breeders and West VA. tobbacco plantations and about tensions between Sherman and Grant and Stanton and how they aspired to the nations highest office….and much much more too. Wrapping your head around complex situations doesn’t seem to be your forte, and neither does anything you say about matters outside of the R.P..
          Wikipedia warrior…PPPFFFFF………

          and it is not a rumour that if you were a Black Man in Georgia ,USA in the 1850’s you’d wish you were a White Man (as you probably do now!) or you’d wish you were never born, that is how bad it was for many.Gonna ask me how I know that too, Captain Know-It-all?

          A typical FLIP U R, never been wrong once in her life and the times you have been you can’t admit…… make me laugh.

          Now, get back to your future, oops, wait ! I forgot, you don’t have one.

        7. In the absence of any real defence for the notions he insists are gospel truth, ‘Ebola Ray’ resorts to juvenile name calling, casting aspersions and dumping irrelevant facts taken out of context in a pathetic attempt to impress anonymous people on an Internet forum.

          The American Civil War was a horrendous, tragic event that cost the lives of an estimated 750,000 soldiers and an untold number of civilian civilian casualties. It is arguably the most horrific war the United States has ever experienced. The causes of the Civil War have been a point of contention since the war began. Worse, the issue is made more confusing by revisionists like ‘Ebola Ray’ who introduce conspiracy theories about weapons sales — à la Michael Moore and Oliver Stone — as reasons for the war.

          The fact remains that the debate over SLAVERY was the central political issue of the period leading up to the war. The victory of the Republican Party (founded primarily by ANTI-SLAVERY activists and former Whig Party members) in the presidential election of 1860, in which Abraham Lincoln won without a single vote from the South, convinced many Southerners to secede. They felt that the loss of representation would prevent them from maintaining pro-slavery policies.

          All this occurred against a backdrop of a global economic downturn. ‘Ebola Ray’ likes to promote the idea that the Northerners’ insistence on raising tariffs in order to compete with cotton growers in the South was the actual cause of the war. The economic power of Southern planters was such that they were largely responsible for the industrial revolution in the US, accounting for around 60 percent of exports. Nearly US$200 million in 1860. The fact is, in 1860-61, FEW Southerners considered the tariff issue as important as the preservation of slavery. The fact is, NO historian considers the tax/tariff issue as one of the primary motivations for war.

          Once again, it should be noted that this isn’t even the main focus of the original essay. It’s a tangent that ‘Ebola Ray’ keeps bringing into the discussion. And does a really poor job defending his position.

        8. @ OS & SAINT,

          After the ‘lies and propoganda’ blurt I stopped reading your response’s(Saint). BUT , Digest this
          ‘Capitan Know-it-all’, in Europe nothing has changed since 1066 A.D. and the ‘Battle of Hastings’.NOTHING( barring names,technologies). Say all you want, but NOTHING has changed.The same can be said for the ‘Republica de Pilipinas’ since 1948….and you can throw in the USA since July 4 ,1776. The ‘serf’s go out into the fields in the service of their King’s on a daily basis.’.

          Documents like the ‘Magna Carta’ abolished, or attempted to abolish, the ‘Divine Rights of Kings’ BUT have had little-to-no effect on the daily lives of ‘the people'( A.K.A. ‘Massa’ ‘Serf’s’ ‘Indentured Servants’ ‘middle-lower-class’ etc…). You can quote the document Lincoln penned and quote Wikipedia all day long, dip-shit….but you can’t deny the above named facts.I did not have to look it up in Wikipedia either.

          So you can attempt to character assassinate me all day long as well, but you can not deny this one prediction:If there is no major dismantling of the current rapacious situation going on in the R.P. since 1948, you will have little more than what is your hand right now. Your future has been stolen, Sonny.You might as well elect a fuckin ‘Karadong Kalabow’ OX to lead that country as it will not make one bit of difference who the next ‘Man(HA!) in charge’ is.

          As far as freedom goes? IMO, the OS or whoever it was that had the first comment about the issue of ‘slavery’ in this essay was more accurate than Saint’s comments. A little more to it than that but ,slightly more accurate.Money,resources,Gold,Silver,Oil…etc… trumps people any day of the week.AND 50 yrs. from now, if the above mentioned does not occur? SAINT,if she is alive, will be an old shrew of a Woman, and no better off than the day she lost this rather boring argument, whether she realizes it or not.

          A ‘Fart-in-the-wind’ has more brains than Captain ‘Know-it-all’ but is not as good at making me laugh !
          BWAH HA HA HA !!!!! NO FUTURE FOR YOU,
          Dippa-Shit !

      2. And again…more irrelevant rambling. Incapable of supporting the fragments he blurts out of context, ‘Ebola Ray’ turns to dumping more factoids and ‘end-of-the-world’ predictions that have absolutely nothing to do with the original essay or even the discussion that he’s taken off tangent.

        And for some unfathomable reason, a continuous stream of advertising for Wikipedia. Apparently ‘Ebola Ray’ just can’t help projecting his blatant shortcomings onto everyone else confronted with them. This is becoming irrational.

        1. Thats better, dip-shit, back down when you’re beaten.A quick look at freedom, which you do not have, and never will, as long as you live in the Philippines is tough to swallow,it isBut ,no I am …..neither rambling nor tangential, you got the TRUTH and you can’t handle it.

          So dippa-stik:Get off your 2005 DelL PC and get back on your Pedi-cab, NO FUTURE !!! NO FUTURE FOR YOU !!! (YOU will be exactly where you are today, in 30 years, remember!!!! you were informed ! w/fewer prospects, YOU !!!!!

  3. It’s also funny that here in the US they’ve practically banned the display of the crucifix on every public building. Even the nativity scene is pretty much banned from public display during the Christmas season. But that didn’t stop the world’s largest Jewish menorah from being lit on the White House lawn in Washington DC every year. The menorah is the symbol of Hannukah, which celebrates a military victory of Jewish extremists against the Greeks in Jerusalem. In addition to slaughtering Greeks, these radical fundamentalist Jews also murdered other Jews that had assimilated into the Greek way of life. This is what Hannukah really commemorates.

    If today’s America can’t openly tolerate the Christian crucifix or the Confederate battle flag because they are “hate symbols” then why allow the Jewish menorah to be displayed in the nation’s capital right outside the US President’s home? That’s because whatever symbols are deemed acceptable depends on the powers that be and what political leverage they can gain. For instance, the US government and officials are heavily influenced and financed by the Jewish lobby. The truth is it honestly doesn’t matter how hateful or racist a symbol is, those in firm control of the outcomes of history will have the final say in how it will be perceived.

    1. That last sentence says it all, nice one.

      I still say “Merry Christmas” to people I know are Christian, and ‘Happy Holidays’ or whatever else is required for non christians, but of course I am labeled a racist for such vile actions.

      as my middle finger protrudes upward from the rest of my fingers.

  4. I wish I could say that racism and prejudice were only distant memories. We must dissent from the indifference. We must dissent from the apathy. We must dissent from the fear, the hatred and the mistrust. We must dissent because America can do better, because America has no choice but to do better.

    1. Im so ashamed that the current state of affairs in America,and the world for that matter,have produced such an ugly event….what has happened to us? Where is this leading us? What is the root of all the hatred that is so ubiquitous today? Shame on all of us for not overcoming our own human nature,for not rising and determining a loftier destiny….

  5. The Northern States, preserved the Union, won the U.S. Civil War. However, the Confederate States, continued to wage a hidden war against the African Americans, Jews, other minorities, and colored people. There was the Jim Crow Law in the Southern States; that required all colored people to be Separate, but Equal.

    Blacks and Colored People were required to: sit at the back of any bus; they cannot go to restrooms, restaurants,hotels, etc…that are just for Whites. They cannot attend White Schools , Colleges, or Universities…

    They are reserved the lowest menial jobs on work places (sounds like the Filipino OFW)…

    There was a Ku Klux Klan (White Supremacist), that continued to harass Blacks , Jews, other minorities, and colored people. Until now, they are there. Segregation and Racial Discrimination were practiced, on a hidden basis.

    It was not like South Africa; where, at the end of Apartheid(Black and White Segregation). The great President , Nelson Mandela, enacted the :”Truth and Reconcilliation Program”. To heal the wounds committed by the South African Whites, on the largely Black population.

    In the U.S., racial enmity, continues , in a hidden basis. It is slowly coming out on the surface, again. Wounds that are slowly healing; are being opened up, again and again…

    1. america can’t go to war. it’s afraid on it’s own land. it may self-destruct anytime soon. i want to see that.

    2. There was nothing “great” about Nelson Mandela. This man was a communist and a terrorist who ordered the killings of many innocent whites and even blacks whom he thought “collaborated with the enemy”. The purpose of apartheid was to separate the races and allow people to build their own societies. Under apartheid South Africa was considered the safest country in Africa with an unemployment rate of only 5%. Under Mandela’s presidency unemployment shot up to 50%, homicides and crime increased, and suddenly South Africa becomes the murder and rape capital on the continent. Today the genocide and ethnic cleansing of South African whites continues to go unnoticed. The majority of South Africans today believe life was better under apartheid. This glorification propaganda of Mandela was all a completely fabricated lie by the liberal anti-white media, nothing more.

      1. White supremacy finds a roost to nest here? Well, can’t say I’m totally surprised.

        “The purpose of apartheid was to separate the races and allow people to build their own societies.”

        If in the process of doing so white Afrikaners enjoyed the highest standards of living in southern Africa and blacks lived like crap in the shantytowns on the outskirts of Johannesburg or on the “nations” the South African government “generously” gave them — if South African apartheid is not much different from American post-Civil War segregation — well, at least you were living the life !

        “Under apartheid South Africa was considered the safest country in Africa with an unemployment rate of only 5%.”

        I’ll bet that number was determined by checking up on the standards of living of white upper-class Afrikaners to the exclusion to vast segment of the South African population.

        “Under Mandela’s presidency unemployment shot up to 50%, homicides and crime increased, and suddenly South Africa becomes the murder and rape capital on the continent.”

        Or far more likely: South African blacks can only be treated like shit based on something so patently ridiculous as a hierarchy of skin colors for so long before they snap. So I don’t know — maybe blame whitey for being so stuck up? Or praise Mandela for being so sublimely skilled a politician that he headed off the worst of post-apartheid scenarios, a race war?

        “Today the genocide and ethnic cleansing of South African whites continues to go unnoticed.”

        When Idi Amin shooed Asians off Uganda in the ’70s the media reported it. When Robert Mugabe went completely apeshit in his old age and terrorized white ranchers off their lands in Zimbabwe during the last decade the media reported it.

        Maybe your “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” has gone “unnoticed” because it hasn’t happened?

        1. I lived in Africa in the 1980s. You don’t know what the hell you’re talking about, and moreover you’re not even QUALIFIED to discuss such a topic because the Western liberal media has shielded you from the truth. All of your responses are nothing but blanket statements and speculations with ZERO facts given. Why don’t you look up facts instead of talking out of your ass. There are more deaths occurring under black majority rule than under white minority rule. Life expectancy has gone down from 64 to 56 since the end of apartheid while corruption, AIDS, murder, rape, and unemployment have all gone up. Anyone can look this information up, as well as the white genocide. If all you’ll do is respond with a bunch of half-baked remarks then you’re wasting your time. Life got worse and more unequal under black majority rule under Mandela. No surprise there. Look what happened to Zimbabwe after Mugabe took over from the English minority. Heck, look what happened to Detroit. Same patterns.

        2. @Pallacertus: Straightaway you play the “white supremacist” card without first understanding the nuances of the arguments tabled here. That’s just so typically bleeding-heart of you.

        3. “I lived in Africa in the 1980s.”

          Oh goodie. Where in Africa exactly?

          “… you’re not even QUALIFIED to discuss such a topic because the Western liberal media has shielded you from the truth.”

          As anything I’ll say in retort will carry the inevitable tinge of my bleeding-heart liberalism and my Western liberal sources, which will cause you to blanch from all the pro-black sentiment and benign0 to wince from the lack of subtlety though I don’t see where the nuance goes in citing statistics and recent developments under white Western eyes, let’s do it your way.

          So where do I go for info then? Do clue me in, why don’t you?

        4. Well then why not surprise us and say something a bit less predictable so that you can catch us flatfooted without a pre-packaged counterargument? By your own admission you already see your arguments as readily-retortable. So do a bit of thinking and come up with an original off-left-fielder for a change rather than your textbook drivel.

      2. “Straightaway you play the “white supremacist” card without first understanding the nuances of the arguments tabled here.”

        Where’s the “nuance” in saying Mandela destroyed the Afrikaner segregationist dream? Or in citing statistics pointing to a worse life for South Africa in the post-apartheid era? All I see here are declarative statements to the effect of “black bad, white good but in danger of miscegenation, media liberal” — lend me your eyes, yes?

        “That’s just so typically bleeding-heart of you.”

        Because it’s not like there ain’t much in human history for my heart to bleed upon, eh? No mistakes whatsoever? Slate completely untainted with human gore, as some forger would put it?

        1. If you can’t find the nuance there, you need to look harder and present sound arguments about its existence or non-existence rather than go around stomping your feet crying about not being able to see it. And, see, there you go again. Were the words “black” used anywhere in @staser’s relating of his observations about Mandela in his comment? Again, the notion of race seems to have been introduced by you, and no one else here.

  6. Banning the Condeferate flag has a meaning! No to rebellion as it will not be tolerated by the Federal Government! Fast track of TPP! Same sex marriage or “marriage equality”.Obama pushing for stricter gun controls! Whats next Martial Law and other states may revolt like, Texas and Utah to name a few!

  7. I lived sometime, in Detroit, Michigan, U.S.A. ; when I worked in the Auto industries; in the ’90s.

    I asked some of my friends, what happened to Detroit, Michigan, U.S.A.
    There was a “racial riot”, in the ’60s. The Whites refused to let the Blacks into the city.
    So, they rioted; because of lack of opportunities; especially jobs. All went to the Whites.

    So, the Blacks moved into the city, slowly. The Whites moved to the suburbs of Detroit, Including the industries.

    The late Mayor Coleman Young was elected, as Mayor of the City of Detroit. More Blacks moved into the city. There was an exodus of Whites, out of the city. Houses were abandoned, as the Blacks moved in…

    The City of Detroit, Michigan, U.S.A., deteriorated, because the Blacks moved into the city…and nothing else…It was a “race war”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.