The Instigator
kbub
Pro (for)
Winning
32 Points
The Contender
paigeb
Con (against)
Losing
23 Points

The Confederate Flag Is a Symbol of Racism

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 12 votes the winner is...
kbub
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/1/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 6,529 times Debate No: 43241
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (78)
Votes (12)

 

kbub

Pro

Hello! I strongly believe that the Confederate Flag is a symbol of racism, but am surprised to find that many people believe differently in this regard.

I usually don't like to debate things I think are based on factual rather than philosophical evidence, but I think it is important to make a thorough defense of my case, since there aren't many debates on the subject on DDO.

While I will not put any skill requirements on the debate, I would prefer that my opponent make an effort in her/his rounds. My opponent does not need to be skillful, but I would prefer that my opponent work hard on her/his rounds. Please to not forfeit rounds. If you wish to concede, please write your resignation in the debate.

First round is NOT acceptance: please move into your argument immediately. On the last round Con MUST say instead of a debate "As agreed, this last round is left blank" (or something to that effect). The reason I have set it up this way is that I would like to cater my debate to my opponent rather than vise-versa.

Please note also that this debate is NOT about whether the owner/bearer of the Confederate Flag is racist, but about whether is Confederate Flag is a symbol of racism in the contemporary United States of America.

I will support the position that the Confederate Flag is a symbol of racism.

Thank you so much for accepting! I'm looking forward to what I suspect will be a fantastic debate.
--kbub (Pro)
paigeb

Con

First, it is important to be aware of the history of the flag. The rebellion states did not want anti-slavery, since it was their majorly hurt the economy since slaves were depended on. For that reason, the states declared a rebellion. This was an act of rebellion against the Northern states, who were believed to be trying to enforce their overall political dominance, upon the Southern states in general. The concept of the flag symbolism, as depicted on the first flag, was to show the secession of the 11 Southern states from the Union. Later on, 2 more states joined and the flag's design had to be changed. It took up the new design of the X with 13 white stars. The meaning of this flag was clear from the thirteen stars, which in actuality represented the total number of seceded Southern states or colonies. The blue X represented their unified act of secession from the Union and other Northern states.
In modern times, many Southerners still continue to use the flag, as they believe it represents the distinct development of Southern culture. They believe it's a part of their right to free speech and expression. However, the collateral damage the Confederate flag being displayed, is that some feel disrespected and racially targeted. Symbols of the Confederacy, are still in use and have become an issue of dispute. In the 1990s, many Southern state legislatures attempted to allow the use of the Confederate flag as a part of its political and civic heritage, since they consider it a part of the American history and do not view the flag as a representation of racism or any form of superiority.
The main argument is it supports slavery. However, this is not true. While it did fly during slavery, the same can be said of the U.S. flag. The United States flag flew over slavery a full 70 years before the Confederate States of America came into existence. The Confederate flag never flew over the ships that brought the slaves over here. To top it all off, the Confederate States of America freed their slaves in 1863; the Federal Union did not until 1868 with the passage of the 13th amendment. The Confederate flag was a more egalitarian flag than the Federal flag, in that it had integrated troops. In the Federal army, the black troops served in their own divisions and served under white officers. The Confederate Army used African Americans both as soldiers and laborers. The Black Soldiers in the Confederate Army were paid the same rate as the White Soldier, they were paid more If they served as laborers. Plus if the Black Confederate soldiers found any Northern weapons or equipment, they could sell them to the Confederate Army for about twice what they were worth on the open market.
Debate Round No. 1
kbub

Pro

Agree:
A1: My opponent states that the reason why the states of the Confederacy rebelled was due to the fact ("For that reason...") that they wanted to keep their slaves. This saves me a lot of trouble. There is a popular myth that the Civil War was about States' rights and tariffs. I'm glad we can move past that and immediately recognize that the Confederacy was formed due to slavery.
A2: My opponent states that the flag symbolizes the Confederate States of America (CSA) ("meaning of this flag...represented...seceded Southern states...[and] secession from Union.") I agree with this point. It's also a bit obvious, since it is called the "Confederate Battle Flag."
A3: My opponent states that many Southerners still use the flag. I agree.

Sources critique: My opponent uses no sources for this historical debate. Therefore, all of my opponent's claims must be considered entirely unfounded. My opponent did not offer any way for either myself or the voter for evaluating whether my opponent's arguments are true or false.

My opponent:
R1: Southern state legislature: Uncited. If true, it demonstrates sentiment that Confederate flag is offensive. The fact that "it" did not pass fails is not evidence that the flag is not racist: only that the issue is questionable enough not to ban its use.

R2: American flag flew during slavery: Uncited but true, although it was a slightly different flag at the time [1]. However, because the American flag was the battle flag of the Union who eventually caused all slaves to be freed, and because the Union was not founded in order to keep slaves, and because the American flag was and is the symbol of United States (North, South, East, and West) during its entire history after the slaves were freed, it cannot be said that the American Flag represents slavery. And even if all the reasons I gave are false and the American Flag does represent slavery, it certainly does so to a lesser extent than the CSA flag.

R3: North did not free slaves before South: Uncited. Also, even if it were true, it would only be true due to a technicality. The abolitionist movement around the Civil War was also concentrated in the Union, especially supporting Abraham Lincoln (though he was considered a moderate, willing to allow slavery in the South rather than compromise the Union). [2]. By 1810, 75% of African Americans in the North were free [3]. By 1840, virtually all African Americans in the North were free [3]. There were still slight numbers of slaves in the North, because some states choose to release their slaves through a gradual process instead all at once [3].

R4: South had integrated troops. Black persons also owned slaves [4]. Opponent assumes racial unity, that if some black persons fought for the CSA then Southern black persons as a whole sided with the CSA. This is obviously untrue, and actually quite offensive, though I'm sure my opponent did not intend to be offensive.

R5: My opponent says that the northern states were believed to be enforcing "their overall political dominance, upon the Southern States in general," but does not say that this was the reason for the Secession, and also does not give any sources to back this claim, so this claim does not seem vital to the debate, and therefore I need not address it for now.

Outline:
Contention 1 (C1): The "cornerstone" of the CSA was slavery

In the Constitution of the CSA there is a passage that states that no law may be passed that would prohibit or inhibit slavery [5]. The Vice President stated that the CSA was founded on the notion of the "natural" white supremacy over blacks and the maintenance of slavery, the "cornerstone" of the CSA [6]. The Civil War was not founded on States' rights or tariffs but slavery [5, 7, 8]. The Southern States gave reasons for secession, and slavery was in all of them and states' rights (except the right to secede) was in none of them [8].

Contention 2: Good intentions of flag-bearer(s) are irrelevant to the flag's being a racist symbol

Since we are talking about whether something is racist, we must determine this from the perspective of a stranger observing the use of the flag, and not the owner of the flag. The stranger would not know that the owner had good intentions. Therefore, if the flag is often used as a racist symbol or if there is good historical reason to think that it is a racist symbol, than the "good intentions" of the flag bearer in no way demonstrates whether or not the flag is a symbol of racism. It would have to be the stranger who does not know the owner who decides.

Contention 3: Many flag-bearers are racist and use the flag as a symbol of white supremacy [9]

KKK and other white supremacist/hate groups use the Confederate Flag. While the swastika had many uses besides the symbol of Nazism, it became adopted as a symbol of that organization. Now, we can certainly all agree that the flying of the swastika in contemporary Germany cannot be taken as a symbol of German pride but of a symbol of Germany during the reign of Nazism, and therefore a symbol of hate. Similarly, the Confederate flag symbolizes the South during that unfortunate and embarrassing Pro-Slave movement of the CSA, as well as modern hate groups.

Contention 4: The Confederate Flag symbolizes not generic Southern pride but pride in the South during the time of the CSA

The CSA flag was the flag of the CSA. Before and after the Civil War the American flag flew. Therefore, the CSA cannot be taken to symbolize pride in the South any time before or after the Civil War, but only during the CSA movement.
(I think my opponent agrees to this point, but intends to show that the CSA wasn't that bad. Let us determine this during the coarse of the debate).

Contention 5: It is the perspective of the victims of racism due to the movement in question who are suited to decide what is racist (not the perspectives of white Southerners).

Let us look at other more obvious symbols of racism to determine how we should evaluate the CSA flag. Were a swastika to be displayed in modern Germany, we would not ask the flag-bearer whether s/he thinks it is racist (this is unlikely because modern racism tends to be less overt [10]).

Conclusion: The CSA flag represents the CSA, which was almost entirely based on pro-slave and racist ideals. The flag does not symbolize the South before or after the Civil War. Even if one ignorantly thinks it does and waves the flag, this person's "pure intentions" do not make the flag any less racist, since it was the symbol adopted by the Confederacy (Obviously. It is in the name.). Though my opponent attempts to portray the North as equally supporting slavery to the CSA, this is thoroughly untrue. The use of the CSA flag in contemporary society would therefore be symbolizing support for the ideals of the CSA, which were thoroughly racist in nature. Contemporary hate societies and historical hate societies both use the CSA flag, and thus an outside perspective has good reason to believe the flag is racist.

Lastly, my opponent's arguments tend to come from the perspective of a white person who bears the flag rather than a person of color who sees it.

My opponent also has no sources.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2]http://americanabolitionist.liberalarts.iupui.edu...
[3]http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4]http://www.theroot.com...
[5]http://www.britannica.com... (written by a professor of history)
[6]http://teachingamericanhistory.org...
[7]http://www.washingtonpost.com...
[8] http://www.theatlantic.com...
[9] http://asagordon.byethost10.com...
[10]http://en.wikipedia.org...
paigeb

Con

http://www.lib.odu.edu...
The above source tells you exactly why I did not site. It was generalized information. I think it is important to point out that your argumentation was on the basis that I did not cite the generalized facts I said from prior knowledge. In that case, it is very important to note that deciding if the confederate flag was or was not racist does not come from the argument of if I did or did not cite something correctly. In regards to all of your citation comments, I disagree, but find it is better to move on then reason about the citation reasons that you otherwise think are correct.

First, I want to disagree with my opponents first argument. I made the anti-slavery argument because that was my opponents main reason in the first round. However, the Confederacy rebelled over other reasons besides disagreeing with anti-slavery. They seceded for financial reasons, as they wanted to repel northern aggression and invasion [1]. I will cover more of this topic in the paragraphs following.

Secondly, I would like to point out I did not, in anyway, state the American Flag was used to represent slavery. Your comment was false and you accused me of something I never said. Although I did, in my argumentation, say that it was present during the time of slavery, I never said it was promoting slavery. Neither does the Confederate flag.
That brings me to my third point. The Confederate Battle Flag was never a National Flag of the Confederacy. It was carried into battle by several armies such as the Army Of Northern Virginia and the Army of Tennessee. In fact, the flag was similar to the United States flag. At the time, there was still feelings of allegiance to the original US flag, and popular opinion was lining up in support of a flag that was similar to the familiar United States flag [2]. The only reason a separate flag was made because it would cause confusion on the battlefield [2]. My opponent even said that it cannot be said it represents slavery. If I decided my opponent was, in fact, correct, then the Confederate Flag was based off of it, therefore not symbolizing racism.

I am disregarding your argument that the American flag was and is a symbol of the United States during its entire history after the slaves were freed. First of all, the reason the American flag was still flown was because the Confederacy lost. Secondly, I never stated that it was a symbol if racism. My opponent is insufficiently analyzing my arguments.

I do agree that the North made an abolitionist movement before the South. However, my statement that all slaves were freed before the North is valid and true information that we can take into account.

Regarding my opponents comment about how my comment about racial unity was quite offensive, my opponent insufficiently analyzed my argumentation. I was aware that African American people of higher rankings could own slaves. However, I wanted to point out that African Americans were being treated more fair in the Southern army than the North financially and status wise in the army. Racial unity and everyone siding with the CSA was not my point. In fact, it was far from it.

Lastly, Northern states were enforcing political dominance over states[3]. That was one reason for secession.

Now, after getting historical disagreement out of the way, the Confederate flag was not a sign of racism. Rather than a symbol of racism, it was a sign of unity over political dominance and invasion from other states. The GOP was anti-southern. For the first time in the nation"s history, a political party was based on location rather than just different views. The south was demonized. Their future of political influence was questioned because they had slaves [3]. In the 1830s, the US government passed tariff essentially forcing the South to buy products from the North. Meanwhile, the South had to compete against the global market. The tariff laws were written in such a way as to force the South to enrich the North [3]. Nullification and other "state sovereignty" rights were essentially run down, ignored, or made impossible " this means the original government the South agreed to did not exist. The strong central government idea had become more powerful than the state-sovereignty idea. Refusing new slave states to be created was essentially a political move that destroyed Southern influence, while northern influences could continue to grow and get more of an influence in congress. The North was soon to completely overpower the North in the federal government. The South rightly believed that there simply was not a reason for the South to need the North. Since they were being politically isolated and economically exploited, they believed there was nothing keeping them to stay in the North. They also believed that leaving the Union at any time was their contractual right [3]. The South seceded for many different reasons, and not the myth of just anti-slavery.

In conclusion, I want to make a comment on your last statement. "...tend to come from the perspective of a white person who bears the flag rather than a person of color who sees it." I find this a very generalized comment that was targeted at my ethnicity and find it is a very degrading comment and hope that anyone who reads it would disregard that. I am taking my personal experiences and relationships out of this argumentation, and using my arguments on the basis of factual evidence.

1) http://www.rulen.com...
2) http://www.sonofthesouth.net...
3)http://www.capitalisminstitute.org...
Debate Round No. 2
kbub

Pro

I wish to apologize for seeming to attack my opponent's ethnicity. I explained to my opponent in comments and message that it wasn't meant to be personal.

Refused to Cite
My opponent had the chance to justify the evidence s/he gave in her/his first round, but refused to do so. For a second time s/he did not offer a single source for her first set of arguments.

"Common Knowledge(?)"
Instead, s/he stated that all of her/his arguments stemmed from "common knowledge." S/he offered a website to demonstrate that common knowledge does not need to be cited. According to my opponent's own source, however, common knowledge must be "obvious," "factual," and "easy to confirm" information. The example in the website is "'George Washington was our first [P]resident.'"

Rebuttal Review
The information of my opponent to which that my rebuttals referred were neither "obvious" nor "easy to confirm," and sometimes not even "factual." R1 talked about Legislature referring to the flag. It's not obvious, since I didn't know about it and it wasn't famous. It's not easy to look up. I have no idea the years, which legislatures, and a whole bunch of other information. I have no idea if it is factual. My opponent dropped my R1.

R2 talked about the American flag flying during slavery and might be the only common knowledge, but I agree that this happened, and my opponent and I agree that the Union/American flags do not represent slavery in any way.

R3 talked about my opponent's claim that the South freed their slaves before the North. I explained that this is not strictly true, that the North freed virtually all their slaves nearly twenty years before the South [3]. There were very slight numbers of slaves in the North in certain states who had laws that freed slaves gradually, and that was all [3]. I should also add that rather than the South freeing their slaves willingly, it was the Union that forced the South to free their slaves [3]. If the Confederacy had their way, the slaves would never have been freed, since the CSA constitution forbid writing laws that hindered slavery. Therefore, saying that in general the South freed their slaves before the North is untrue, since almost all were freed in the North many years before and the South did not autonomously free the slaves but were forced to do so by the North. This info is not obvious and probably not factual.

R4 My opponent agrees that black persons' fighting for the CSA does NOT demonstrate that the CSA was good to black persons. Here, however, I found the most grievous mistake of my opponent. My opponent says that black persons in the CSA were paid more and treated better and were integrated better than in the Union army. First of all, how is that "common knowledge?" My opponent does not give a single scrap of evidence for the wages of black person in the CSA army.

Even worse, I found out that my opponent was radically mistaken. I found out why troops of "colored" soldiers in the CSA were integrated: *THEY WERE STILL SLAVES* [11]. Forty percent of the entire CSA army was made up of slaves [11]. They did the vast majority of the manual labor for the CSA, and were generally not trusted to fight [11]. There were one or two examples of groups of free black persons in the CSA army, and they were part of segregated troops, in direct contrast to what my opponent claims [11]. Additionally, they were used as honor guards and never officially trusted to fight [11]. There was only one black officer in the CSA, for an extremely short period [11].

In contrast, the "colored troops" in the Union were free [12]. They were trusted to fight in their own regiments with their own officers. Eighteen black Union soldiers were awarded the Medal of Honor (the highest honor) [12]. Many of the regiments became the famous Buffalo Soldiers, who continued to fight for the Union elsewhere [12].

My opponent's information was deceptive in claiming that the Southern soldiers were "integrated" and outright false in claiming that they were better treated and better paid. My opponent underhandedly or ignorantly suggested that this information is "common knowledge." Voters may want to consider this deception as worthy of marking my opponent down in both the "Sources" and "Conduct" sections. Additionally, the fact that even the black soldiers were slaves is evidence for the Confederacy being founded on slavery, so consider it in the "Arguments" section.

R5: Oppression. My opponent claims in the second round that the CSA secession was caused by Northern oppression. This is contrary to her/his earlier statement that the Civil War was caused by slavery [A1]: "The rebellion states did not want anti-slavery...For that reason, the states declared a rebellion." Con is contradicting her/himself. Because of this, I now have to adjust my arguments.

My opponent "justified" this claim by citing a Radical Right-Wing website obsessed with attacking liberals, and another one that is obviously Pro-CSA with no credentials. This website does not show where it gets its information, so it cannot be trusted. In contrast, I offer three sources that suggest the opposite. The Vice President of the Confederacy, and the legislatures of the Southern States claim that their succession is due to slavery, as well as the writings of a Professor of History and a trusted news cite [5, 6, 7, 8]. The CSA was founded by its own admission several times due to slavery, not tariffs, states' rights, or Northern Oppression (except for threatening slavery). My opponent does not refute these sources.

R6 (new): The CSA flag does not represent the CSA? My opponent claims that the CSA flag was only from a few states (uncited), but later claims that it symbolizes CSA "unity." My opponent also admits that it was carried into battle. Therefore, it does symbolize the CSA nation. Also, in contemporary times it also refers to the CSA, which my opponent implies repeatedly; therefore, for practical purposes it does represent CSA. Please recognize that my opponent did not cite this (again). I never said the CSA flag doesn't represent slavery. The fact that it was similar to the Union flag is irrelevant: it was intentionally different, and unified the CSA troops on the battlefield.

If you find that my opponent's links don't work, it is because they don't. I had to message my opponent.

Contention 1: My opponent uses sketchy sources , but I have the original documents showing the Confederacy was all about slavery, including the VP (see R4, R5).

Contention 2: My opponent drops that the good intentions of flag bearers don't matter. Goes to me.

Contention 3: CSA is used by racist organizations like the KKK: Dropped. Therefore, a stranger has reason to think racist already.

Contention 4: My opponent "disregards" my argument about the United States flag being flown before and after Civil War. Of course it is because the Union won. The national flag of the Southern states only changed during the Civil War, therefore the flag represents the CSA. Therefore, I win that symbolizes CSA.

Contention 5: By this I mean that we must consider whether POC would be offended rather than whether white persons think it ok. It was not personal, so my opponents' criticism was somewhat misplaced. Because this argument flows through, we must decide if stranger has reason to be offended.

Conclusion: The CSA flag has been demonstrated to be a symbol of the CSA ideals. These ideals have been demonstrated to be slavery and white supremacy with excellent sources. Therefore, the CSA flag to a stranger would be a symbol of racism in contemporary USA. Even more, the symbol was adopted by hate groups (uncontested), so there is certainly good reason for a stranger to find it to be a symbol of racism for that alone.
Con had bad cites

[11]http://en.wikipedia.org...
[12] http://en.wikipedia.org...
paigeb

Con

As a wish from my opponent, I can not rebuttal any comments made, otherwise I would have another round. I do find it unfair, as they had more chances to attack my position, but will agree with my opponents wishes.

In conclusion, the Confederate flag is not a symbol of racism. My websites listed in past rounds are credible and very reliable. The Confederate flag does not represent and never has represented racism. It is a symbol of southern heritage, representing freedom, states rights, individual responsibility, and resistance to an overpowering government, proven by factual evidence provided from past rounds. I urge you to vote con, as there is an overwhelming amount of factual evidence that proves the flag was not a symbol of racism in the past, nor is it in the present United States.

Vote con.
Debate Round No. 3
78 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by neuronAnomaly 3 years ago
neuronAnomaly
I do feel that a rather good debate was ruined due to focus on a lack of citations on every claim. I do feel it is possible to have an enjoyable and smooth debate in a more conversational setting. Though the blunder was on paigeb's part, kbub's excrescent groveling became downright annoying and took away from his overall appeal. I do also feel that kbub expressed a tendency to twist his own facts and substituting opinion for fact a bit to much to not be noticeable, and it seems that kbub leapt at every gap to tear out paigeb's throat. I feel as if I must remind the reader that this website is not for verbal boxing matches but for intellectual discussion and debate.
Posted by spiderman12345 3 years ago
spiderman12345
I don't understand what is wrong with it
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Actually the nazi swastica is a reverse of the hindu swastika. It is technically a different symbol.
Posted by bubbatheclown 3 years ago
bubbatheclown
Here is something that Pro has overlooked: symbols can have multiple meanings throughout time.
Consider the Swastika. It is remembered as the flag of Nazi Germany, a symbol of the most barbaric regime in modern history. However, it was used in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism long before Nazi Germany.

In the same way, the Confederate flag was once used by racist slave-owners who seeked to secede from the Union. However, today it is usually not used to represent slavery. It is usually used today to represent the South, state rights, and independence.
If this is the way the confederate flag is being used, then I don't see why anyone should be offended by it. Those who suffered in the name of that flag are long dead, and today's users of the flag aren't necessarily racist.
Posted by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
Made a forum specifically for this topic: http://www.debate.org...

Sorry about being so harsh on you about the plagiarism thing. Thanks for the offer of resignation, but no thanks; please don't worry about.
Posted by Samiam 3 years ago
Samiam
Sorry for double posting.

Additionally, and this is a facet that endlessly annoys me about Pro and many others, they assume that because the south had slaves, they were the only racists. Honestly, even many abolitionists didn't consider blacks equal to whites, they just thought that even subhumans, like how they viewed blacks, did not deserve to be enslaved. In fact, the Union fought the Confederacy to preserve the Union. Most northerners actually didn't care, and feared that an inundation of slaves would compromise available jobs for whites.

Thus, the fight against the Confederacy really began because cotton was crucial to the Union's economy, as much of the northern economy hinged on processing southern cotton and exporting that to Europe. The "War Against Slavery" was actually a South that was heavily Pro-slavery, and small minority of affluent abolitionists, and a great amount of Americans who didn't care, or did care but cared about the availability of jobs more. In fact, I theorize that the Emancipation Proclamation was not intended to truly free the black population, but to weaken the Confederacy. However, with the precedent set and the Confederacy soundly thrashed, the abolitionists were able to convince the majority that this issue which divided the country should be removed. Hence, why the slaves were freed, but there was not legislation passed to grant any sort of equality. Northerners were just as racist as the Southerners, they just didn't rely on slave labor for economic prosperity.
Posted by Samiam 3 years ago
Samiam
Honestly, the resolution should have been rephrased as "The Confederate Flag is Necessarily a Symbol of Racism". With the current wording, it only addresses that it can be a symbol of racism. Well, the swastika was a symbol of good luck, and a very positive emblem in its original incarnation, but since it was used by Nazi Germany, it is seen as purely an evil symbol. Thus, your resolution leaves it subjective, whereas a debate over whether it is necessarily racist would open up an entirely different avenue for arguing, as the debate would then have to address the issue of the symbol as possibly standing for states' rights (which the Civil War was about. It was a war for the southern states' rights to have slaves (which I do view as highly immoral)), or for a person's heritage, or even because it's a pop culture icon! With the way the world is heading, it wouldn't surprise me if people began to associate the flag less with slavery and more with the Dukes of Hazard.
Posted by miketheman1200 3 years ago
miketheman1200
Wow. Pro really should not have won this one. Wish I could have accepted.
Posted by paigeb 3 years ago
paigeb
My apologies. I honestly thought I said in the debate in reality, in debate for my school. we put in our sources after writing it out. I was wrong. Even though I do have the two sources I did not write in my debate, I will willingly forfeit, as it would only be fair to my opponent. I guess this will be a learning experience. I need to be more careful when actually typing out and posting things online.

Thank you for this debate. Hopefully we can debate on a different debate, where I will be more experienced, and more aware. Again, my apologies.
Posted by LayTheologian 3 years ago
LayTheologian
Black Squirrel, I disagree with giving conduct to pro. Condescension is not nearly as serious as plagiarism, in my opinion.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by MyDinosaurHands 3 years ago
MyDinosaurHands
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G: Sentence structure and grammar was better for Pro. If somebody wants a detailed list I can provide that. Sources: Pro used more sources, and better sources, that did a better job of strengthening his argument. As for the argument, I find symbols to be subjective, and so therefore you cannot say the flag "is" a symbol of anything. If Con had gone for that argument I would've been compelled to vote Con for more convincing argument, but with the way the debate went, and with the arguments presented, I will be refraining from providing points to either side based on argument.
Vote Placed by black_squirrel 3 years ago
black_squirrel
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made a convincing case that, both historically and in the present, the CSA flag has sometimes symbolized racism. Conduct goes to CON because PRO was condescending. PRO was also a bit pedantic about sources. That one is a tie for me.
Vote Placed by DudeStop 3 years ago
DudeStop
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm the worst person to ask to vote on this debate, as I know little of the subject. Upon research, I did find that Con plagiarized for her first round case. Conduct to Pro for plagiarism. I show the source of the website in the comments, which Con had obviously failed to do. Con also barely sites anything, which leaves to much doubt. I'm also partially taking this away because of plagiarism. Kbub ended up meeting her BoP in this debate, and receives arguments. Pro has some mistakes in her grammar though, which is why I award it to a Con. Great debate.
Vote Placed by johnnyvbassist 3 years ago
johnnyvbassist
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed in showing how the flag is a symbol of racism. Pro only proved that is is commonly perceived as racist, which is an important distinction. Con could have argued stronger but she got the points necessary.
Vote Placed by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Sources to Pro since Pro used twice as many sources. Arguments to Pro since Pro showed how the Confederate flag is a symbol of history, pride, and culture and not racism. Con had many opinions but not as many arguments.
Vote Placed by Juris_Naturalis 3 years ago
Juris_Naturalis
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: In order to make the argument that the confederate flag is racist because they believed in slavery, then the original American flag is a symbol of racism as well. Which it's not.
Vote Placed by jnedwards11 3 years ago
jnedwards11
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't prove to me how a flag is automatically racist. You seem to show how someone could percieve it as such, but to no more specificity than any other flag that has flown over santioned slavery.
Vote Placed by Adam2 3 years ago
Adam2
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: It's difficult, but while both had good sources, pro didn't prove why the CSA flag was racist. As a matter of fact con stated that the US flag has way more of a brutal and vicious history stained in the blood of injustice than the Dixie flag. She gave more reasoning.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: I was actually shifted in my perspective by this debate. Conduct and sources go to Con because of the source issue - kbub is right, there's simply too much here that's unsourced and not at all obvious. Pro did a far better job sourcing her points and ensuring that we all understood where they came from. So how did I decide arguments? The topic doesn't say that the Confederate Flag is solely a symbol of racism, it says that it can be perceived as a symbol of racism. The lack of response to the importance of minority racial views is problematic here, but all I really need to do is look at whether it's agreed that a) slavery is at least partially represented by the flag, and b) that slavery was racially insensitive. Since the latter is agreed, I just have to see if the former is true. Con has a wavering position on this, but Pro argues it well, at least swaying me to believe that it partially does represent slave-owners. That's why I vote Pro.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
kbubpaigebTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro definitely had better sources and gets a point for that. I didn't feel pro made a good case for the confederate flag being racist. Con showed the reasons for the war were very complicated and couldn't be boiled down to a simple racist people vs freedom fighters. I felt that pro to win her argument would need to show that the flag was used to represent racism. She provided no historical facts to show it is what the flag symbolized. Pro had the burden of proof here and she failed to meet it. So arguments goes to con. I gave conduct to pro because con did not keep with the agreements of the debate. Though the conduct point I'm still a little on the fence about because cons final argument didn't really add anything it was just a small summary.