No Eklipse you don't get to make a slave state named Eklipsistan and secede from the union. We've been over this before.

I realize you're likely trolling, but I'll go ahead and bite. I denounced slavery in my initial post, slavery is bad mmmmm'kay? This isn't about that.

To compare the modern era to that of one 200+ years ago is not sound. Allowing a nation to vote for secession would have been maddness during that time as monarchs were still a prevalent thing. People were trying to build empires. If Scotland demanded independence during the time frame of America's independence movements, Britain would no doubt put it down.

I was asking why modern day U.S can't hold a vote when modern day U.K does.

Why is it that the only forum posts I've seen by Eklipse have all been in defense of the Confederacy?

I've never outright defended the Confederacy. I've only supported the rights of people to fly the Confederate flag if they choose, and stated that the idea of secession should at-least be considered. Rather than laughed out of the building at any mention.

And why is he telling people to "stop being offended by a square piece of fabric" that symbolizes some of the vilest ideologies in recent history

Ironic. I very much recall you (Or at-least your clan mates) being on the defensive side of a very similar argument regarding that Imperial Japanese flag you're clan uses. In fact, I was on your side during that debate. It's strange how you're suddenly on the opposite side of the fence....

As for "vilest ideologies" in recent history, you do realize that nearly every other major world flag flew over a slave holding nation not long before the Confederacy existed(Or even after in some cases)? Just because they ditched slavery earlier doesn't make them better in any sense.

when he can't even stop whining about his own absurd views not being taken seriously by anyone?

Excuse me, but did I offend you somehow on another thread? I don't recall doing any whining about how seriously I'm taken. This thread wasn't me whining, it was me bringing up a legitimate issue for discussion. In fact, I don't hardly recall us interacting at all on the forums. You seem needlessly hostile.

Edited 6/26/2015 14:19:21

I was asking why modern day U.S can't hold a vote when modern day U.K does.

Because after the Civil War, articles were passed which made session unconstitutional. To be unconstitutional could easily be considered traitorous. Basically, when you're in the union you're in for life unless you can win a war against the Federal government.

Edited 6/26/2015 15:25:45

Ironic. I very much recall you (Or at-least your clan mates) being on the defensive side of a very similar argument regarding that Imperial Japanese flag you're clan uses. In fact, I was on your side during that debate. It's strange how you're suddenly on the opposite side of the fence....

Except the Rising Sun flag isn't solely associated with Imperial Japan. We are not flying it as a symbol of Imperial Japan but instead as a symbol of Japan. Unlike the Confederate Battle Flag, it has a history outside its usage by a rogue state.

As for "vilest ideologies" in recent history, you do realize that nearly every other major world flag flew over a slave holding nation not long before the Confederacy existed(Or even after in some cases)? Just because they ditched slavery earlier doesn't make them better in any sense.

Rome had slaves. Britian had slaves. The Union had slaves. Just like the Confederacy.

But none of them were founded (explicitly, read their secession charters) explicitly to protect slavery. None of them went to war solely for the sake of slavery.

Knyte could you outline the uses of the CORP/Imperial Japan flag?
EDIT: The Crimean Khanate was basically for enslaving people

Edited 6/26/2015 16:22:33

@Tupac:

1. It's not the Imperial Japanese flag. It's the Rising Sun flag which predates the Empire of Japan. You can find it in Japan today, too, on anything from commercial beer cans to calendars to newspapers, used to bring luck/fortune rather than refer back to the days of Imperial Japan. The reason we associate it with Imperial Japan is because we don't live in Japan so we haven't seen it used outside that one context, but it is a quintessentially Japanese symbol rather than an Imperial one.

2. CORP does not endorse imperialism or Imperial Japan. CORP does not welcome ethnic nationalism, imperialism, racism, sexism, and other forms of subjugation. We use this flag as a part of Japanese culture, similar to how it was used by daimyo during the Edo period. We specifically do not condone the actions of Imperial Japan or of any imperialist state throughout history.

3. The flag is also used as our Clan Icon as it lends itself to modification easily. Our previous yin-yang icon, on top of making us easy to confuse with the Yin-Yang clan, was also a bit annoying to change. The Rising Sun flag has obviously been modified a lot in real life. We need symbols that lend themselves to being altered because each of our Dojos has its own flag/icon and we change our Clan Icon monthly based on the winner of the previous month's Dojo Cup. For example, next month you might see this as our Clan Icon (if Scorpio Dojo wins the Dojo Cup):



Basically, it's disingenuous to compare us to a bunch of hillbillies flying the flag of the Confederacy. We're flying a flag that doesn't belong to imperialists, that is largely used outside imperialist contexts, and has little to do with Imperial Japan. There are US military units that fly this flag and incorporate it into their emblems, not to relate themselves to Imperial Japan but to symbolize good fortune. At the very worst, we're reclaiming a symbol that was stolen by imperialists.

While similar revolution and civil war are very different, and while they would have enjoyed representation, it was more of a rallying tool than an actual request, the US knew if it was represented it would almost always be overridden by other members of parliament, on top of that the British feel very similarly, about the Scottish call for succession throughout the 20th century

"I realize you're likely trolling, but I'll go ahead and bite. I denounced slavery in my initial post, slavery is bad mmmmm'kay? This isn't about that. " NO BITING. BAD EKLIPSE. *sprays with water bottle*

Basically, it's disingenuous to compare us to a bunch of hillbillies flying the flag of the Confederacy. We're flying a flag that doesn't belong to imperialists, that is largely used outside imperialist contexts, and has little to do with Imperial Japan.

The Confederate flag was flown by the Confederacy itself for 4 years, the total time that various people have flown it after that is well over a 100.

Also, the Rising Sun very much has a lot to with Imperial Japan since it was their official flag. It seems like you're just making convenient excuses.

However, I'll go ahead and clarify that I don't actually have a problem with you using that flag. My issue is the double standard you seem to have. You can't preach about how another flag should be banned while sporting a questionable one yourself.

"I realize you're likely trolling, but I'll go ahead and bite. I denounced slavery in my initial post, slavery is bad mmmmm'kay? This isn't about that. " NO BITING. BAD EKLIPSE. *sprays with water bottle*

You don't have enough badges to train me.

Edited 6/26/2015 19:37:55

A big issue not thought of:

You have to realize not everyone in the Confederacy was some rich land owner, or plantation owner.

Mostly, they were just middle class/poor white guys. They might have owned a farm or two. But that's it.

If the slaves were freed, they'd lose their jobs. You can see how one would be motivated to fight to the death when your living is at stake.

I do not agree that a state of America should attempt to forcefully secede for the sake of peace. The leftist East Coast people such as in New York and Colombia are so completely different on so many levels from those in the South or the North or the West. In fact, I believe that Alaskans and Texans have greater similarities to each other than their East Coast cousins. If Scotland deserves a vote to determine whether or not she should secede from the Act of Union, despite actually inheriting England themselves rather than visa versa, American states so far alienated by far-flung overlords should be given the same right.
The only difference I can personally see between the two situations is that Scotland would have remained a part of the Crown, but would have simply removed the Prime Minister which is kinda like Texas staying in the union and the dollar but having its own elections and presidents and constitution and laws.

American states so far alienated by far-flung overlords should be given the same right.

See, this is what most people (Especially on the left) don't seem to understand about the modern call for secession. It's not because an African American was elected president, only a very small minority of racists actually cared about that part. The problem is this: The right-wing side of the political spectrum is getting more and more alienated and marginalized. Especially on social issues.

Personally I'm against any idea of secession. However, I understand quite well where the sentiment is coming from. If the U.S continues to tilt heavily to one side the whole ship is eventually going to tip over and sink.

Edited 6/27/2015 03:30:02

The problem is this: The right-wing side of the political spectrum is getting more and more alienated and marginalized. Especially on social issues.

Yeah... that's the reason y'all gave last time too. "Oh no we're not going to get our way anymore when it comes to social issues like slavery! Time to exit the Union!"

No. Fuck you. You don't get to do that. Most of your conservative shitholes are net receivers of tax money. You also have a shitload of military installations belonging to the federal government. It's like a psycho girlfriend breaking up with you and keeping the house she didn't fucking pay for.


But you do realize that the US is majority conservative, right? Until the old people die, of course, but even then conservatives have a much higher turnout, and have their votes inflated in most states thanks to gerrymandering.

Look, you can't tell me that the conservative side is being marginalized when you control the majority of state-level legislatures, governorships, both houses of Congress, and the Supreme fucking Court.

You guys are just being little bitches because you can't have your way all the time. Great- you know what that's called? A FUCKING DEMOCRACY.

Mostly, they were just middle class/poor white guys. They might have owned a farm or two. But that's it.

If the slaves were freed, they'd lose their jobs. You can see how one would be motivated to fight to the death when your living is at stake.

Yeah, I mean there were obviously economic reasons. "Hmm... my job... or the individual rights and persoonhood of another human being?"

Still an incredibly fucked up thing to do. But we're doing the same thing today:

"Hmm... my cheap T-shirt... or the individual rights and personhood of an exploited third-world child laborer?"

Yeah, fuck that.

Edited 6/27/2015 03:44:52

Typical response from your type knyte. Just start screaming out curse words and insults because you don't know how to actually be civil.

Yeah... that's the reason y'all gave last time too. "Oh no we're not going to get our way anymore when it comes to social issues like slavery! Time to exit the Union!"

This is different. The conservatives at that time were in the wrong. However, this is a different time with different issues. Also did you skip over the part where I said I don't personally support secession?

Oh, and who is "y'all"? My state stayed with the Union last time.

No. Fuck you. You don't get to do that. Most of your conservative shitholes are net receivers of tax money.

This is the exact kind of sentiment that's stirring up these modern secessionists. ALL they hear from your side is "Fuck you". If you treat a group with nothing but contempt for long enough they'll eventually feel nothing but the same for you.

But you do realize that the US is majority conservative, right?

If that's true then it only further validates what I said. The U.S is supposed to be majority rule. A lot of the major decisions that have happened recently have been about as liberal as you get. So Conservative majority plus liberal policies can only mean that we're actually experiencing minority rule. Which is cause to get riled up.

when you control the majority of state-level legislatures, governorships, both houses of Congress, and the Supreme fucking Court.

Control the Supreme Court? Hardly. The Supreme Court is the reason why liberals are gaining ground on every front despite the conservative control in other sectors of government. Can't do anything if SCOTUS will just overrule you at the drop of a hat.

You guys are just being little bitches because you can't have your way all the time. Great- you know what that's called? A FUCKING DEMOCRACY.

I have to wonder if you'd have the same attitude were the situation flipped.

Edited 6/27/2015 03:57:03

Typical response from your type knyte. Just start screaming out curse words and insults because you don't know how to actually be civil.

It was responsive. I didn't intend to be civil. If that bothers you, go ahead and discard the responsive parts too.

This is different. The conservatives at that time were in the wrong. However, this is a different time with different issues. Also did you skip over the part where I said I don't personally support secession?

Advocating for the denial of rights to a minority is also wrong.

I understand that you don't support secession. However, you keep defending those viewpoints so that's what I'm responding to.

Oh, and who is "y'all"? My state stayed with the Union last time.

Mine didn't. :P Best 5 years of Texas history- hyperinflation, losing tens of thousands of people, illegal state-sponsored execution of Unionists who lived on Texan soil, and about 70 years of being a backwater shithole after that (until no less than FDR bailed us out during WWII by building military installations primarily in the South). Pretty solid, eh?

If that's true then it only further validates what I said. The U.S is supposed to be majority rule. A lot of the major decisions that have happened recently have been about as liberal as you get. So Conservative majority plus liberal policies can only mean that we're actually experiencing minority rule. Which is cause to get riled up.

And it is. But you don't win all the time. Moreover, American democracy is bounded by civil rights. You can't simply vote to violate a civil right.

It's not "liberal rule" when the president has to use executive actions to implement any policy and where Congress can't pass anything liberal. Moreover, whenever something liberal does get passed, it's now ignored by the states. I don't think you've been to a Southern/conservative state recently- policies like prison privatization, school vouchers for religious schools, creationism being taught in school, historical revisionism, union-busting, etc., have been incredibly conservative ones implemented in the near past.

The Supreme Court, again, is not supposed to be implementing what the majority of Americans want but rather limiting democratic behavior based on the Constitution- i.e., telling us when we've done something unconstitutional. Their decisions can't be used to determine whether the US is under minority rule, but even then the SCOTUS's biggest cases- Hobby Lobby and Citizens United sided with conservative views.

Control the Supreme Court? Hardly. The Supreme Court is the reason why liberals are gaining ground on every front despite the conservative control in other sectors of government. Can't do anything if SCOTUS will just overrule you at the drop of a hat.

5 of the 9 justices are conservative and were appointed by conservative presidents. They're also the 5 that supported Hobby Lobby and Citizens United, which likely wouldn't have happened had there been 1 more liberal justice.

I think you've missed the biggest cases of the Roberts Court and instead have been looking at the tiny ones about social issues. Ironically, you were the one claiming in another thread that people can't seem to focus on more than social issues- maybe it only seems like that to you because you're so interested in social issues to the tune of ignoring Hobby Lobby/CU and virtually every SCOTUS decision beyond this one, King v. Burwell, and the other Obamacare one with the individual mandate.

I have to wonder if you'd have the same attitude were the situation flipped.

I do. I'm a socialist; I'm probably not going to be living in a socialist society within the span of my lifetime. I've had my Congressional Rep tell me that he wants to kill 100 million people (Iran + North Korea) without provocation- a policy I find odious and imperialist, but has massive support in the United States. This country also frequently violates human rights in the War on Terror. I disagree with most of its actions and wish it were replaced by a less imperialistic and capitalistic government- which, again, I will probably not live to see happen.

But I still live here, and I oppose secession (even of a small socialist commune). I'm not going on the forums of a site where people play online Risk to complain about these policies.

Edited 6/27/2015 05:36:26

Come on Eklipse, it's over. You lost :/

Knyte, your liberal viewpoint obscures historical fact.

While we're taking about the supreme court, let's not that they viewed slaves as property and not people. So, you say that a job is less important than another person, but they were in fact not a person.

Your modern day sweatshop example is so ignorant that it constipates me. People work at sweatshops because it's the only job they have that isn't simply awful work and little pay. It may not be the best quality, or very safe, but it's just an economic phase all nations have gone through. Look at China and south Korea. These nations are better off for it.

Put simply, by buying products from sweatshops,you're supporting a family in need that is less fortunate than you, you putrid swine.

Knyte, your liberal viewpoint obscures historical fact.

Again, I am not a liberal. I am as socialist. There is a massive difference between the two.

While we're taking about the supreme court, let's not that they viewed slaves as property and not people. So, you say that a job is less important than another person, but they were in fact not a person.

Which is even worse. Someone who is obviously a person is (as I said) literally denied their personhood. And if you think that they somehow didn't notice that Africans were people by 1861, well, then that makes it kind of weird that they outlawed slavery (on the basis of human rights) two years later.

People work at sweatshops because it's the only job they have that isn't simply awful work and little pay. It may not be the best quality, or very safe, but it's just an economic phase all nations have gone through. Look at China and south Korea. These nations are better off for it.

Again, that's what I have a problem with. Capitalism creates artificial scarcity by restricting access to the means of production and promoting class oppression of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie. That's why they're essentially forced to work in a sweatshop and have no better options.

These are people who will be living completely shitty lives because first-worlders aren't willing to pay more for clothes (and because we live in a system that rewards human exploitation).

We are consciously making the decision to oppress people so we can have an easier life. That's horrible.

Put simply, by buying products from sweatshops,you're supporting a family in need that is less fortunate than you, you putrid swine.

Alternatively, buying textiles produced by worker collectives supports the replacement of that system with one in which workers are no longer being exploited. In a capitalist society, each consumer decision is a vote- and I'm going to go ahead and keep voting for the less shitty system so that it replaces the really, really bad one. I'd rather give $10 to a laborer at a third-world collective than $1 to a sweatshop laborer, so that sweatshop practices lose a little bit their advantage and, with enough luck, die out someday.

You keep looking at the symptoms and just accepting the system that creates them. It's the system that needs to be destroyed.

Let me rephrase that : 50 years of sweatshops = century of economic growth and new job opportunities.

Capitalism isn't about oppression, it's about opportunity. If someone is rich, it's because they worked their asses off to get there.

The problem with capitalism in the current world is that there isn't opportunities for everybody. But, it's a situation being remedied.

Hitler's doctrine in this matter isn't that bad : If you don't find a job, don't accept a job we make available to you, you will be shot.

Hitler's doctrine in this matter isn't that bad

Can't argue with Hitler.

from a guy in the USSR clan and who has communist in his name? yes. I did expect that. Not to mention that Communism would never exist without rebellion.

The Communist manifesto itself defended rebellion and even ENCOURAGED it. So yeah. It is entirely expected that a communist would support rebellion.