Turns out, slavery is good ... for the slaves

[BowlBrother85]

Do you mean teaching history with balance instead of only a certain narrative?

I love how the right is so infatuated with the word "narrative." Just by typing that word alone ... you think you've proven bias, don't you? You can always tell who the Fox News viewers are ... and yes, I realize you will just say that you don't watch that network. Way ahead of you.

The curriculum should be the fact-based reality ... not sterilized to appease anyone's sensitivities.

 

[GroverCleveland]

Intent is usually inferred. And here it's pretty obvious. It's an appeal to the MAGA resentment class.

This is pure nonsense.

 

[GroverCleveland]

So American slavery was good and beneficial. Interesting approach.

Did not say that.

 

[BowlBrother85]

So, in Louisiana to achieve a fair and balanced education it should be taught that slave owners provided pensions for their slaves before pensions were even a thing. The slaves there were paid and taught valuable life skills.

.... and the terrorist attacks of 9/11 shouldn't be taught unless you are also fair and balanced to al Qaeda.

 

[GroverCleveland]

What you doing is attempting to minimize American slavery, by saying it was better than slavery elsewhere. You can see why this might rustle some jimmies when discussing slavery. It is a feeble attempt at justification.

No he is not trying to minimize American slavery. Did not compare American slavery to slavery everywhere else. The statement postulated that American slavery might have been better conditions that slavery in Africa. That is not a justification of slavery. Quit twisting peoples' words trying to justify a completely erroneous take on the curriculum issue.

 

[GroverCleveland]

Do we not already do this? Have you never heard of the Underground Railroad, Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglass and instead need a “personal benefits” unit as your one example of Black survival?

This is being framed as some type of compliment to Black people, but if people are unable to fathom Black perseverance without teaching the personal benefits of slavery, I would say it’s closer to the opposite

No one is teaching or advocating the personal benefits of slavery.

 

[NashVol11]

History should be taught as what happened, why it happened and what was the result of what happened all without a narrative. The best history professor I had took a historical event and brought the ramifications of that even into present day. With all the good, the bad and the ugly.

When people do this with slavery it makes everyone mad haha

 

[GroverCleveland]

Still trying to minimize the evil that was american slavery.

Your entire argument is predicated on the argument that American slaves had it better than African slaves. Slavery is evil. Arguing degrees of evil is a fools errand and a transparent attempt to deflect responsibility.

So, should all of the slaves have been shipped back to Africa

History should be taught as what happened, why it happened and what was the result of what happened all without a narrative. The best history professor I had took a historical event and brought the ramifications of that even into present day. With all the good, the bad and the ugly.

I would add that critical thinking skills should be developed and encouraged as well. Strangely enough, heard plenty from professors who had agendas, one in particular who did not take being challenged in her beliefs very well and failed me in English Comp 101. Was literally told not to come back to class after four weeks. Was too full of piss and vinegar to dispute that with her, so I said goodbye and passed with "A" when I took it next time from a professor who was headed to law school.

 

[hog88]

When people do this with slavery it makes everyone mad haha

No, only those with limited knowledge or unwavering political ideas.

 

[DinkinFlicka]

History should be taught as what happened, why it happened and what was the result of what happened all without a narrative. The best history professor I had took a historical event and brought the ramifications of that even into present day. With all the good, the bad and the ugly.

Which, in my opinion, is the actual value in learning about history.

 

[hog88]

So, should all of the slaves have been shipped back to Africa

I would add that critical thinking skills should be developed and encouraged as well. Strangely enough, heard plenty from professors who had agendas, one in particular who did not take being challenged in her beliefs very well and failed me in English Comp 101. Was literally told not to come back to class after four weeks. Was too full of piss and vinegar to dispute that with her, so I said goodbye and passed with "A" when I took it next time from a professor who was headed to law school.

Sounds like the same professor I had. I had to drop her class because I wouldn't amend my assessment of a character.

 

[GroverCleveland]

Sounds like the same professor I had. I had to drop her class because I wouldn't amend my assessment of a character.

Our first blows were traded over capital punishment. She makes us read a number of anti- essays (one or two of which were quite good) and when we moved on, I asked why did not we not read essay X which was supportive of it. Pissed her off royally.

The comment to not come back to class was over right-to-work. She refused to follow a dress code that was in place when she was hired at a newspaper. Got fired. Lectured us all one class about how that violated her rights. At the end of the tirade I responded along these lines (with her responses)

1) You were hired and accepted the position knowing what the requirements were? (yes)
2) You had no problem cashing their checks as payment? (No)
3) Did they ever not pay you as they agreed to? (No)
4) When they insisted that you follow the dress code, you refused? (Yes. It was a violation of my rights)
5) (this is what got me) I would have fired you too.

 

[McDad]

No, I was commenting on my education in southern schools.

I see that now. Thanks for being merciful in your reply.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

No he is not trying to minimize American slavery. Did not compare American slavery to slavery everywhere else. The statement postulated that American slavery might have been better conditions that slavery in Africa. That is not a justification of slavery. Quit twisting peoples' words trying to justify a completely erroneous take on the curriculum issue.

The only reason to compare the conditions between American slavery and slavery elsewhere is to minimize the effects of American slavery. Quit being obtuse.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

I see that now. Thanks for being merciful in your reply.

I am scared to be a smart a$$ with you. You might really snap one day.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

So, should all of the slaves have been shipped back to Africa

I would add that critical thinking skills should be developed and encouraged as well. Strangely enough, heard plenty from professors who had agendas, one in particular who did not take being challenged in her beliefs very well and failed me in English Comp 101. Was literally told not to come back to class after four weeks. Was too full of piss and vinegar to dispute that with her, so I said goodbye and passed with "A" when I took it next time from a professor who was headed to law school.

There was quite a movement for just that position in the time following the civil war.

 

[GroverCleveland]

The only reason to compare the conditions between American slavery and slavery elsewhere is to minimize the effects of American slavery.

No it is not. Another reason is to compare the relative conditions of slavery period, which is what I took it as. No where was there a statement to minimize the effects of American slavery. It was a comparison of the conditions, not some comparison of merit, a very substantial difference.

Your inability to discern that does not make your conclusion the "only reason" as you unequivocally stated. Might want to review the definition of obtuse and consider how it applies to you.

 

[GroverCleveland]

There was quite a movement for just that position in the time following the civil war.

Yes there was. Liberia was a American colony formed for that express purpose, although I offer a minor correction: it was formed well before the War Between the States. If my recollection is correct, Abraham Lincoln was a supporter of said efforts. Not to castigate Mr. Lincoln, he was not alone in those sentiments by any means.

 

[Sandman 423]

No it is not. Another reason is to compare the relative conditions of slavery period, which is what I took it as. No where was there a statement to minimize the effects of American slavery. It was a comparison of the conditions, not some comparison of merit, a very substantial difference.

Your inability to discern that does not make your conclusion the "only reason" as you unequivocally stated. Might want to review the definition of obtuse and consider how it applies to you.

ehhhhhahhhahheh...... This feels kinda like arguing that America was a Coke head and not a Crack head.

 

[McDad]

Intent is usually inferred. And here it's pretty obvious. It's an appeal to the MAGA resentment class.

You may be right. You may also be notorious for bad predictions.

 

[whodeycin85]

ehhhhhahhhahheh...... This feels kinda like arguing that America was a Coke head and not a Crack head.

More a comparison of prisons...some prisoners prefer certain prison because they are treated differently....but they are still in prison and it sucks

 

[Sandman 423]

More a comparison of prisons...some prisoners prefer certain prison because they are treated differently....

Doesn't seem worth arguing to me. Slavery is wrong, the amount or wrong is inconsequential.

 

[GroverCleveland]

ehhhhhahhhahheh...... This feels kinda like arguing that America was a Coke head and not a Crack head.

Not the same thing at all. Are you arguing being addicted to one drug is better than another or that addiction is in and of itself bad.

We can both agree that addiction is bad. We may not agree that a regular cocaine habit is better than a crack habit. See the difference?

 

[McDad]

I want to add one more idea into the fray.

As a small government ideologue, I am naturally wired to see where big government overreach drives wedges between Americans. Those of you who want state and federal influence, get it. Sometimes you like the outcome....ie when the IRS was targeting R-leaning entities. Sometimes you don't like it...ie when the R-leaning state rewrites history for textbooks. The power you applaud when in your favor is the same power which makes you cry, "Lahd, Lahd", when against your interests. And since the elected leaders are fluid and ever changing, you are hoist with your own petard when a leader is elected who is antithetical to your values.
The solution, it seems to me, is to excise the bureaucratic cancer from our local politics. Which means neither side may get what they want but both sides will be protected from each other.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

More a comparison of prisons...some prisoners prefer certain prison because they are treated differently....but they are still in prison and it sucks

No, more like comparing Auschwitz to Bergen Belson.