Apple Removes Civil War Games From App Store Over Confederate Flag Usage [Updated]

[kd5jos]

It goes exactly to your point. You have a right to not be prevented from expressing an opinion by THE GOVERNMENT.

We agree here, no problem.

You DO NOT have a right to feel good

Never said anything about feelings.

about your opinion and get it displayed by everyone everywhere because you have that opinion.

Never said this either.

You DO NOT have the right to NOT be mocked, criticized, called a bigot for your opinion.

Completely agree.

You DO NOT have a right for your opinion or symbols of that opinion to be displayed by others.

Again, completely agree. Thankfully no one can force me to support a dixie cross.

THAT is the ethics of freedom of speech.

Agreed... thats PART OF IT

Another part is allowing the marketplace of ideas to shut down bad ideas. THAT is an integral part of the ethics of the freedom of speech. Instead, what happened here is someone with an agenda interceded and interfered with the market place of ideas.

But, just tell me I'm wrong and go back to Fox News and your Conservative blogs. It's safer there.

Is it all the same to you if I don't waste my time in front of T.V.? I know you needed to think you were being snarky, but I don't spend much time on conservative blogs either.

You just can't get it right for trying, can you?

 

[numlock]

apple playing world police again.

i find it strange that a company that adheres to market principles has to step in.

 

[BuffaloTF]

You seem to be contradicting yourself - do you care to explain?

He's not contradicting himself whatsoever. The specific "states right" they noted was to decide if slavery should be legal or illegal, in direct response to the law passed that all new states admitted to the Union would be non-slave by law. Not a single state made a secession document stating they were seceding for states rights... they actually opposed states rights by and large, specifically, the right of Northern states to not return fugitive slaves.

Mississippi's Declaration reads:

In the momentous step, which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth.

And it continues, justifying its position on slavery and its relation to commerce.

Georgia:

The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery.
{snip}
... policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia.

South Carolina:

...an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution.

We can continue this through each state... or you could read them yourself, and note for yourself that it was over slavery.

http://www.civilwar.org/education/h...fcauses.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

The issue of slavery is also why the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to rebelling states, not Union states... who had Kentucky in their ranks... where slavery was legal throughout the war.

 

[KdParker]

God, one knee jerk over emotional reaction after another. The Confederate Flag is not a racists symbol like the media would like you to be believe. I lived in the South for 5 years. All my friends displayed the flag as a symbol of southern pride. That's it. Nothing to do with racism.

Ok. So if your neighbors fly the ISIS flag next you and say it is only about muslim pride, your cool with that regardless of how it has been used as a symbol of the attack on Christians?

 

[KdParker]

You got your wish, everyone in that church was unarmed except the killer. You saw what happened in that scenario.

Btw, he would have got a gun regardless of what laws got in the way. Also murder is illegal and he did that too.

So are you saying that we should all be armed because of the threat from white racist terrorist?

 

[doelcm82]

Another part is allowing the marketplace of ideas to shut down bad ideas. THAT is an integral part of the ethics of the freedom of speech. Instead, what happened here is someone with an agenda interceded and interfered with the market place of ideas.

Apple is a player in that marketplace. To have a market, you need someone willing to buy and someone willing to sell.

In the case of these games that Apple find use the Confederate flag in a way that violates their terms of service, Apple is not willing to sell.

For those wanting to buy, they aren't buying just because it's available. They need to want the thing you're offering. Just because Apple puts something out there (Ping, for example) doesn't mean people will buy into it. Both sides have to be willing. In the case of these games, Apple is not willing.

A marketplace where a seller is required to sell certain items is not a free marketplace.

 

[omenatarhuri]

Ok. So if your neighbors fly the ISIS flag next you and say it is only about muslim pride, your cool with that regardless of how it has been used as a symbol of the attack on Christians?

Well, it's not exactly a fair comparison. ISIS is a current terrorist threat, if you see the flag you should arm yourself quick or run. On the other hand (at least before the church attack) the Confederate flag was nothing of the sort right, more of a historic remnant?

 

[thewap]

Apple censorship - Dixie flag - Tibet- Dalai lama... getting mixed messages here...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...-latest-concession-to-Chinese-government.html

http://www.macworld.com/article/1145350/apple_china.html

 

[SarcasticJoe]

The Confederate Battle flag in question already had an image as a symbol of hate and oppression. It was a carefully crafted image, formed over decades by people who knew they were using it for oppression.

If Dylann Roof had shot up a church while waving a Rainbow flag, the reaction would have been confusion. It would have tarnished the image of the Rainbow flag, but that image could recover.

The Confederate flag that Roof posed with was already 49% tarnished before last week, and hardly anyone was working to restore it to something that most could be proud of. Roof's act of terrorism just pushed it to 51% tarnished, and started a chain reaction, as people who previously supported it either changed their minds, or decided it wasn't a good idea to be associated with the flag of civil rights oppression and a particular mass murderer.

Yes, it may have been used by quite a lot of people with very questionable opinions over the years. However this is something it was never intended to represent the same way as the Swastika (which specially in India has a VERY different meaning).

The American flag has since 9/11 been associated with all manner of war crimes and other nasty things here outside of the U.S, but we're not looking to ban that ether. The British Union Jack is also associated with all manner of atrocities over a period of centuries and like the American flag, those acts were committed by the people to whom the flag was made to represent.

Banning a flag is completely stupid when it's origins are like those of the confederate war flag. If you're going to ban it because of some idiot like Roof you might as well ban the American and British flags as well. To say that it was originally a symbol of oppression is the same kind of incorrect recanting of history as claiming that when Germany invaded Poland in WW2 the Polish tried attacking German tanks with men on horses (i.e a half-truth at best).

 

[darngooddesign]

The Southern Cross flag was used by Virginia and Tennessee. It changed, not to be better at oppressing people, but because the first version, which is the actual confederate flag looked too much like the Union Jack on the battlefield, and the second version looks like a surrender flag when the wind wasn't blowing.

 

[Badagri]

Banning a flag is completely stupid when it's origins are like those of the confederate war flag. If you're going to ban it because of some idiot like Roof you might as well ban the American and British flags as well. To say that it was originally a symbol of oppression is the same kind of incorrect recanting of history as claiming that when Germany invaded Poland in WW2 the Polish tried attacking German tanks with men on horses (i.e a half-truth at best).

Knee jerk reaction.

 

[AxoNeuron]

No, if they used the SAME logic (helpfully spelled out in the article above), they would only remove books that "use the Confederate flag in offensive or mean-spirited ways, which is in violation of our guidelines."

Much as it may disappoint you, the logic they're applying would not apply to books "that display the Confederate flag for educational or historical uses.

But they didn't just remove apps that use it in a mean spirited way. They removed apps that used it purely to represent the South in a civil war video game, for example, and that wasn't meant in a mean spirited way at all. Apple is now walking back on its actions and is reinstating these apps, fortunately. But they weren't applying their rationale to their actual actions.

 

[AlecZ]

Was never a symbol of slavery. Was and is at symbol of segregation and racism 100-150 years after the civil war.

I've heard/read arguments from people who fly the Confederate flag as nothing more than a symbol of the South, emphasizing separation from the North. It's their heritage. Those people can't really be wrong about the reason they're flying their own flags. Others use it as a hate symbol... better not to let them win.

During the war, it was simply the flag of the seceded states. And what they always taught us in history class was that the war was not fought only over slavery or racism but over various factors surrounding conflicts of Northern and Southern interests. There's a joke about this on the Simpsons, if anyone knows what I'm referring to.

 

[AlecZ]

Hi folks.

I'm from Australia, so I'm have a bit of difficulty understanding this issue. Why was it deemed racist or offensive?

I would've thought that if it's a historical thing and in the games that it's used in context with this, then why is it suddenly a problem?

And it surprises me that Apple, being a very powerful and influentical corporation would take this action. Still, that's politics, I suppose and something that I clearly don't understand. Hope you folks can get a satisfactory resolution to all of this, as it's not going to go away. History never really does, does it? We're often condemned to repeat it.

It was the symbol of the rebellious states in the South (that is, the American South) during the American Civil War. They supported slavery, in contrast with the North. After the war, it was still a symbol of the South, and the South still did not treat black Americans equally. Still today, the stereotype is that all the anti-black racists are still in the South. So some have associated the flag with racism or slavery while others call it part of their Southern identity or heritage. Some people also think that "Southern heritage" implies racism. Maybe I'm alone, but I just don't like the flag because it's rebellious.

Understandably, the flag is controversial. Amazon and others have been banning sales of the flag. Apple doesn't sell any flags, so they decided to ban games that have the flag in them. It IS completely ridiculous whether you consider the Dixie Cross a symbol of Southern identity or hatred or rebellion, but Apple wants to make a political statement.

 

[kalsta]

Yes, it is. That's why we are citizens, and you are a subject of a queen.

With 12 times* the firearm-related death rate in the US compared to Australia, most of us are quite happy to live without the so-called freedom of owning a gun.

*Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

PS. Not that it has anything to do with this topic whatsoever, but Australia (of which I am a citizen) is an independent parliamentary democracy, with a largely ceremonial head of state. We have our own constitution, and we make our own laws.

 

[JustThinkin']

He's not contradicting himself whatsoever. The specific "states right" they noted was to decide if slavery should be legal or illegal, in direct response to the law passed that all new states admitted to the Union would be non-slave by law. Not a single state made a secession document stating they were seceding for states rights... they actually opposed states rights by and large, specifically, the right of Northern states to not return fugitive slaves.

Mississippi's Declaration reads:

And it continues, justifying its position on slavery and its relation to commerce.

Georgia:
South Carolina:

We can continue this through each state... or you could read them yourself, and note for yourself that it was over slavery.

http://www.civilwar.org/education/h...fcauses.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/

The issue of slavery is also why the Emancipation Proclamation only applied to rebelling states, not Union states... who had Kentucky in their ranks... where slavery was legal throughout the war.

Thanks (although I was still hoping for a direct answer from maelstromr). That was interesting and informative. I am well aware of this organization. I visited the Gettysburg reenactment a few years ago, and I got to speak to people who still support the South's position (as well as those who support the North, of course), which was very interesting. They're all involved in the event and work together in making it successful, despite their differing opinions.


From these documents it appears clear that slavery was the key issue as far as these Southern states were concerned - just as I was first taught in school. But one side doesn't unilaterally determine all the reasons for war. I think the North had other considerations as well - such as keeping the Union together, and maintaining control. I wanted to keep my summary concise - I still think it was pretty accurate. In fact I was rather pleased with it, considering how verbose I can get!

 

[Happybunny]

Just to place my 2 cents.

As to war-games and the question of flags, I've got an original Avalon Hill Gettysburg game from 1964, not a flag to be seen, so it can and has been done before.

 

[AlecZ]

With 12 times* the firearm-related death rate in the US compared to Australia, most of us are quite happy to live without the so-called freedom of owning a gun.

*Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

The gun-related homicide rate is the important statistic since that doesn't include suicides. The U.S. has an even worse record in that respect.

I'm not a fan of the right to bear arms either (act, but one reason people might consider it worthwhile is that you have the power to protect yourself and your property instead of being mostly defenseless should someone find a gun illegally and decide to rob you. Anyway, I think it's too late to remove that right, even if it were not already in our constitution.

Also, I can see why people, especially in rural areas, would be angry that they can't own guns just because of shootings that occur somewhere far away. That gun-related homicide rate is the average for the entire country, but it varies wildly and is actually very low in certain states. And it doesn't seem to correlate with gun ownership percentage at all. It seems to be directly proportional to total murders per capita. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state)

Unfortunately, it wouldn't work to ban guns only in certain states.

 

[cdm283813]

Just to place my 2 cents.

As to war-games and the question of flags, I've got an original Avalon Hill Gettysburg game from 1964, not a flag to be seen, so it can and has been done before.

This is why the news sucks in the U.S. People are way to sensitive to handle real world situations. What you hear on the news and what actually happened are 2 different things. Sometimes the act is so hideous you don't even know about it. People in this country want to live in a protective bubble and pretend that stuff don't happen. So we take the bad stuff out and water it down with fluff.

 

[kalsta]

The gun-related homicide rate is the important statistic since that doesn't include suicides. The U.S. has an even worse record in that respect.

Oh my word, you're right… According to the stats, you're 32 times more likely to be a homicide victim by shooting in the US compared to Australia.

BTW, to all those people who would say there are other factors at work here, and it's not as simple as taking guns away, I'm hearing you. The number of guns per capita is about 6 times higher in the US, which couldn't alone account for such a huge difference. So what are the other contributing factors? Do most Americans recognise there's a real problem here? Could national legislation of any kind lower the death rate?

I'm not a fan of the right to bear arms either (act, but one reason people might consider it worthwhile is that you have the power to protect yourself and your property instead of being mostly defenseless should someone find a gun illegally and decide to rob you. Anyway, I think it's too late to remove that right, even if it were not already in our constitution.

Also, I can see why people, especially in rural areas, would be angry that they can't own guns just because of shootings that occur somewhere far away. That gun-related homicide rate is the average for the entire country, but it varies wildly and is actually very low in certain states. And it doesn't seem to correlate with gun ownership percentage at all. It seems to be directly proportional to total murders per capita. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state)

Appreciate your thoughts. In Australia, guns are not banned, but you require a licence to own one and there are strict eligibility rules. Like you say, rural land owners can argue a genuine need.

Unfortunately, it wouldn't work to ban guns only in certain states.

Agreed. In Australia, the states had to fall in line with federal legislation. Not sure how feasible that would be in the US.

 

[a0me]

In Germany if they jumped off a bridge into a raging river would it be good if everyone else did it also?

Did I say anything about us having to follow Germany's censorship laws?

 

[SHNXX]

I am against use of confederate flags for political reasons but this kind of censorship on GAMES is not cool.

 

[benthewraith]

The App Store has returned at least one of the games.

 

[AFDoc]

I think people are losing their junk over this and it's crazy. Take it off of car's plates and off of state flags. It shouldn't fly over any state property but not selling anything that may have a flag of the Confederacy is simply lunacy. Typical US over reaction. It's either nothing or full tilt... nothing in between.

 

[lowendlinux]