Why does everyone virtue signal their hate against the Confederacy?

i mean outside of Veeky Forums

they seceded so the land was rightfully theirs
plus lincoln won the presidency by winning ONLY the northern states, he didnt win a single southern state

>implying all this land doesn't automatically and forever belong to the Injuns
Check your fucking privilege.

Dude the Ottomans are heavily demonised in many places

i hope this is bait

not really, i mostly see people denying the Armenian genocide and they nobody ever talks about the Barbary slave trade or states like Qatar and Malaysia that still have forms of slavery

I can tell by the fact that you even posted that that you must be an American from well below the Mason-Dixon line

Libs quote Washington and Jefferson all the time without realizing they were rich, white, landowners who had many Slaves

Why does everyone virtue signal their hate against the Ottomans?
They weren't really that bad, yes they owned slaves but everybody else did also.
You never hear "Those damn Confederates" or "That guy had a nova scotian flag i cant believe it"

Not to mention that most of his lurks pol on the regular

My brother is a Lost Cause apologist and it is fucking crazy.

Virginia is the only state where you could argue it wasn't about the states right to own slaves. Barely.

Every time he gets cornered on how the issue was clearly over slavery he just says
>well not exactly, I disagree

It is really quite retarded

Yes a lot of other countries owned slaves, but the sole reason the Confederacy existed was because of slavery. The country represented slavery in the war that ended slavery in the US. That is why it is hated.

>yes they owned slaves but everybody else did also.

Not in the context of the US. It was literally abolitionist states vs slave states.

It should not be shocking to you that Americans are amerocentric.

>virtue signaling meme

People are allowed to hold different opinions than you do without it being some kind of conspiracy, or psychological disorder, or "just fitting in". Get out of your echo chamber.

1) They were entirely based on keeping slavery even though it was becoming apparent that it wasn't going to last
2) they were traitorous whores who fought against their own nation

Because over time, the legality of slavery in the former CSA has been accepted as an un-American ideal by much of the American people.

Are you a Turk?

I've always hated this reasoning. How was slavery unamerican? or racism, inequality, and bigotry for that matter. The founding fathers were slaves owners.

But that's the South's fault

Because things that stagnate die out.
T. Person who believes the south had a right to secede and the North had a right to reconquer them.

>they seceded so the land was rightfully theirs
They had no legal right to secede, all the land they controlled was legally US territory

And the colonies had no legal right to secede from the British.
I don't think there has ever been a rebellion or revolution considered "legal" by the body being revolted against

1) like it or not their entire economic system was dependent on slavery, so it wasn't exactly a simple or bloodless task to just extricate it from society in the South. It's clear that most troops fought to protect the Southern economic structure, which just happened to be based on slavery, which at that point in American history simply wasn't seen with the revulsion and contempt that it rightfully is today
2) they left the Union, they didn't kill or even capture anyone at Fort Sumter, it was the North who invaded the South

>And the colonies had no legal right to secede from the British.
Correct, and no one claims the british started the revolution by refusing to allow independance

The Confederacy started the war by seceding, not the US by refusing to acknowledge secession

I despise the Confederacy because it was formed out of a literal temper tantrum. The initial states seceded because Lincoln became president, because of a democratic vote. It's why I spit on those who want California to secede. Any state that secedes deserves a Sherman march to their state capital

No the confederates started the war by firing on union aligned soldiers.
If you forget until that point there wasn't a war despite the succession being said and done.

From the moment of secession that were rebels in arms against their legitimate government. While the actual active war didnt start until later a state of war existed by default

But I see your point and other than arguing semantics I agree

>tfw telling some libshit that if she thinks she can secede from the union I think I can make a march to the coast.

No, everyone is aware of this.

>It was literally abolitionist states vs slave states.
That's not quite true, there were slave states in the US during the civil war.

Yeah my entire point was the legal argument because I think that's particularly weak point, especially when you add things like the Republic of Texas (who legally reserved the right to secede until after reconstruction) to the mix

Sure, but both of them opposed slavery and Washington freed his slaves in his will. Most people will agree that it was wrong of them to hold slaves regardless but there's a pretty significant difference betwern them and Confederates.

The war ended over 150 years ago, but they still can't admit that they lost.

Agreed. I wonder how things might have turned out for Texas if they had become an independent republic allied with the Confederacy rather than a member state?

Its conceivable they could have maintained independence after the defeat

>the republic of Texas retained the right to secede
No it didn't, that's a myth
>T. 8th generation Texan

If it didn't then why did they have to have a Supreme Court case after the war to affirm that?

Quit your bullshit. I bet half of all Americans couldn't even tell you what office he held or what time period he lived in.

Can you explain to me this significant difference between the founding father's slavery and that of the confederates?

If you want to cherry pick stories of southern slave owners being cruel and inhumane, I can cherry pick stories of southern slave owners being very generous in pay, leisure time, and giving their slaves freedom.

Washington didnt fight a war to keep his slaves

No, but he fought in a couple of other wars where he was utterly merciless, at one point making soldiers from the same group of soldier-strikers that were protesting for bread during a time of famine shoot their comrades.

Not to mention that he led a raid on a French/native camp during the fur wars in which he and his troops slaughtered every living thing and then floated the dead women and children down river to the next French/Indian outpost

There are a bunch of places in Europe where people would be triggered by an Ottoman/Turkish flag. I don't know about the Brazilian Empire though.

Really, nobody will get offended by Confederate symbols outside of the U.S. If anything, most of the third world likes the Confederacy and even use their symbols in some cases, to represent the idea of ''South'', or general rebellion.

>You never hear "Those damn Ottomans
>i mean outside of Veeky Forums
You expect american normies to know about the Ottoman conquest?
From Athens to Vienna to Warsaw everyone hates the Ottomans (except for the Bosniaks)

Because they started acting like bitches when they started losing, after talking a big game

wtf i hate washington now

both of them opposed slavery and Washington freed his slaves in his will. Most people will agree that it was wrong of them to hold slaves regardless but there's a pretty significant difference betwern them and Confederates.

It is the main source of white guilt, tjeain tool by which blacks in America get their victim card even though they were never slaves and is the lefts way to keep blacks divided from mainstream America and dependant on the gov dole this assuring their votes. .
It also is a way to ignore or insult southern people any argument or statement can be ignored as racist because over a hundred years ago there were slaves there so they are automatically racist to any liberal

Seceding when you didn't get the president you wanted is like a child having a tantrum when he got something he doesn't want

The FF would have banned slavery but had to compromise to ensure the Republic could even exist in the first place

If it was just used as a flag for Southern people and Southern culture like any other regional flag I doubt most people would care about it, but people who aren't even from the South use it as a symbol of their "redneckhood", the fact that they're conservative, or as a replacement swastika in countries where it is banned, and it ruins it for everybody else. All of these things trigger me to no end. I wish I could fly one outside my house to celebrate the fact that I'm southern without both libtards or right wing loonies thinking I'm trying to signal some political stance. In reality I'm a moderate to conservative Democrat who is very liberal on social issues and not a supporter of the actual historical Confederacy.

The reddit invasion is real.

Forgot that this board was basically Veeky Forums lite now

Get out of my country statist fuck

>You never hear "Those damn Ottomans"

no they say "Those damn roaches" instead

>rightfully theirs
This is like saying my household is going to secede so I'm entitled to taking my neighbor's car. Fort Sumter wasn't theirs to take, even if the state of South Carolina had a legal right to secede, the firt wasn't a part of South Carolina you fucking nigger.

...

>Why does everyone virtue signal bla bla bla

Right, because it's impossible that people might have some actual aversion to slavery.

>yes they owned slaves but everybody else did also.
Not in the 1860s, you idiot.
>You never hear "Those damn Ottomans"
I do. As another user said, the only ones who like them are (((Bosniaks))).
>"That guy had a brazilian empire flag i cant believe it."
Stop the presses, user realized that people don't know a lot about history.

And the fact that people who have these flags tend to be bigoted doesn't help their reputation.

Get out of my country libertarian fuck.

The Confederacy was literally founded for the purpose of preserving slavery. That's what the flag stands for. That's why it's different from Brazil or whatever.

This is the biggest reason I hate the confederates. Ottomans and the Brazilian Empire don't produce faggots willing to torture logic to prove their cause still (unless you talk to Turks, and why the fuck would you do that?)

Technically Brazil had slavery until the 1880s. Not that I'm defending the Cuckfederates.

If you have virtue and you get fucked then you deserve pity
if you are strong enough to defeat all opposition, then you don't need virtue

Confeds have neither, they whine about "muh freedoms" while treating their fellow men as livestock. Since they were all fond of taking away the liberties of others they should be fine when someone took away theirs.

[citation needed]

>Why does everyone virtue signal their hate against the Confederacy?
Indoctrination by the victors.

Winners write history.

Liberal SJWs run all the schools since the 1960s.

2 + 2 =

I'm as /pol/ as they get but some of the folks on the right worshipping the Cuckfederacy are fucking absurd. It's basically saying "I don't wanna live around niggers so I'm gonna fetishize a shithole that was 60% nigger and even started a war so they could keep their niggers!"

This isn't even mentioning how it had a medieval tier economy and that "white" southerners have by far the largest percentage of black blood in their veins out of all white Americans, since they loved their niggers so much they just kept fucking them. This also explains why Southern whites maintain the developmental level of niggers to this very day.

You can always fuck off to Africa or Brazil if you love blacks so much.

Yeah, but nobody says that because they used to own slaves. People say that because modern Turks are seen as bad.

Modern Turks are seen as bad because ancient Turks were bad.

people are more butthurt on their imperialism

Well shit try being a european who supports the battle flag it's fucking cancer and i'll have to buy one quickly before they ban them desu

>Technically Brazil had slavery until the 1880s.

I know, and it's embarrassing. But Brazil has a long history. The confederacy literally existed only for the purpose of slavery.

>You never hear "Those damn Ottomans"

What

Have you EVER talked to someone from the Balkans?

>"secede"
>no one recognizes
>fire shots on federally owned land that the state of SC had no rights to at all
>wonder why you're still a backwards shithole 150+ years later

what kind of ameriboo european would want a confederate battle flag?

It may be bait but it's true. It is and always will be Indian land.

>2) they left the Union, they didn't kill or even capture anyone at Fort Sumter, it was the North who invaded the South
I'm going to put this very fucking simply.

the state of south carolina fucking sold that land to the federal government.
They didn't own it. They hadn't owned it for fucking decades.

The south started the war. They fired first at the white star liner, then fired again at a federal fort they had no legal claim to.

And?
None of that is relevant.