Context is everything.
First, as was pointed out be some before, that is not the Confederate Flag. It was the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, as well as the Battle Flag of the Confederate Navy.
The actual flag(s) of the Confederacy were pretty bland. Maybe that's why the Battle Flag grew later in popularity. However, a few State flags still contain elements of the old real Confederate flag... not to be confused with the so-called Rebel flag.
General Robert E. Lee was asked by President Lincoln to lead the Union Army. But he decided to lead the army of Virginia instead because he was more loyal to his home State than that of the United States; it had nothing to do with slavery. He made the Army of Virginia battle flag his own ensign. Doesn't mean that he was any more an oppressor than other notable people of his time.
As with other battle flags, it represents those soldiers who fought and died under it. So respect is desirable in that context.
Only 10% of Southerners owned slaves, while a lot of Northerners, including 12 US Presidents (including General Ulysses S. Grant) himself owned them. So why did so many fight for the Confederacy? Maybe for the Southernern way of life, or the affirmation of State's rights?.
As for the British, a lot of money from Britain went to fund the Confederacy, in the hopes that they would win, continue with slavery, making cotton from the South cheaper for the cotton and textile mills in England during the industrial revolution. This was a reason why there were calls for the victorious and huge Union Army to invade British North America in retaliation. The threat was very real, and this spurred the Canadian Confederation.
In the context of the 'General Lee' car, it is obviously associated with a popular TV show depticting stereotypical 'good old boys' that I never found racist. In this case, owning and displaying am accurate replica of the car is not inappropriate. The car represents the values of the show, and not the slavery practises of a now-defunct country.
However, there would be no legitimate reason for a Canadian or other foreigner for that matter, to display the Battle Flag;It would not be for the Confederate war dead, and not to remember the Souhern way of life, so it could only be in support of white supremacy. It's what white supremacists later adopted as a symbol of their beliefs. But association should not result in baning the flag, just because a goup happened to adopt it for their own motives.
The car is a replica of the one used in an old popular TV show. It is acceptable in context for that. This SJW business is going out of control. HOw far will this historical revisionism go? 12 US presidents owned slaves, including George Washington. Does this mean that they should eliminate any reminder of him, such as books, paintings or statue of him?
First, as was pointed out be some before, that is not the Confederate Flag. It was the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, as well as the Battle Flag of the Confederate Navy.
The actual flag(s) of the Confederacy were pretty bland. Maybe that's why the Battle Flag grew later in popularity. However, a few State flags still contain elements of the old real Confederate flag... not to be confused with the so-called Rebel flag.
General Robert E. Lee was asked by President Lincoln to lead the Union Army. But he decided to lead the army of Virginia instead because he was more loyal to his home State than that of the United States; it had nothing to do with slavery. He made the Army of Virginia battle flag his own ensign. Doesn't mean that he was any more an oppressor than other notable people of his time.
As with other battle flags, it represents those soldiers who fought and died under it. So respect is desirable in that context.
Only 10% of Southerners owned slaves, while a lot of Northerners, including 12 US Presidents (including General Ulysses S. Grant) himself owned them. So why did so many fight for the Confederacy? Maybe for the Southernern way of life, or the affirmation of State's rights?.
As for the British, a lot of money from Britain went to fund the Confederacy, in the hopes that they would win, continue with slavery, making cotton from the South cheaper for the cotton and textile mills in England during the industrial revolution. This was a reason why there were calls for the victorious and huge Union Army to invade British North America in retaliation. The threat was very real, and this spurred the Canadian Confederation.
In the context of the 'General Lee' car, it is obviously associated with a popular TV show depticting stereotypical 'good old boys' that I never found racist. In this case, owning and displaying am accurate replica of the car is not inappropriate. The car represents the values of the show, and not the slavery practises of a now-defunct country.
However, there would be no legitimate reason for a Canadian or other foreigner for that matter, to display the Battle Flag;It would not be for the Confederate war dead, and not to remember the Souhern way of life, so it could only be in support of white supremacy. It's what white supremacists later adopted as a symbol of their beliefs. But association should not result in baning the flag, just because a goup happened to adopt it for their own motives.
The car is a replica of the one used in an old popular TV show. It is acceptable in context for that. This SJW business is going out of control. HOw far will this historical revisionism go? 12 US presidents owned slaves, including George Washington. Does this mean that they should eliminate any reminder of him, such as books, paintings or statue of him?
