Lawyers come in four primary colors; defense attorneys, ambulance chasers, will/deed writers and prosecution (otherwise known as the dark side to the rest.) Dichotomies abound for such folks but are seldom embraced. I suppose it makes it easier to sleep that way. I dunno.
So oversimplification is like an operating system for you then...curious. There are all sorts of lawyers. You could split them into civil and criminal, but that would only give you a general sense of application. The civil end has specialties like Social Security work, contracts of all sorts, tax law, family law, and so on.
Prosecutors aren't actually looked on, in the general scheme of things, as anything other than a part of the same system. I've worked with and battled with prosecutors and had a beer afterward. We tend to separate the job from the person. I understood that every sleezy deadbeat dad I went after needed to be represented and should be. I never thought less of the lawyer doing his job. No reasonable attorney would absent some ethically challenged and objectionable conduct.
Lawyers who engaged in living at the edge of that envelope eventually find themselves facing an angry judge and a course correction and/or run into a thousand paper cuts from the larger body of counsel once their habits become understood by it. So a fellow who almost has to be court ordered to release discovery and treats opposing counsel with a consistent contempt will find his practice hampered over time and his reputation sullied. If he strays too far he'll find worse.
My whole point in that now defunct thread was that our wouldbe societal manipulators ascribe different meanings to these symbols over time for their own purposes. They become strawmen to be burnt on the altar of public opinion for the purpose of manipulating said opinion.
Where my point was that symbols of evil intention and practice don't merit respect, no matter how they're repackaged. And flying a flag of a fallen, disgraced foe over a seat of government is as daft a notion as flying a Nazi flag in Berlin.
Most folks who rail against the ten commandments couldn't tell you what they say.
I don't think that's true, but I don't think it matters either. I've made my argument in support of those monuments.
In like manner most folks who rail against the stars and bars couldn't tell you what the many issues of the day were just, "Lincoln freed the slaves"
Immaterial if there's a credible argument from those who do. And there is, rather easily.
At least Neal Young was man enough to later be chagrined at his own gross oversimplifications of the south but I won't be holding my breath waiting for TH to do likewise.
Neil Young offered overly broad declarative condemnation and it was simple. That's mostly what you're doing here with your hand wave and declaration that others are simplifying, which is a little funny.
My arguments and documentation were specific in support of a fairly straight forward truth about my ancestors and land and I've always noted that the people who drove the war used a number of different motives to move the people they needed to fight it, but that at its heart was an immoral desire for the advancement of a right to human chattel and the racist mindset that allowed, justified and profited by it.
Playing the man card is a bit desperate. But so was that flag you admire...or want to have seen in a different light so that you can wave it in support of your cause, which isn't really about that flag at all.