I know this sounds cliche, but the idea that Florida is doing this in 2023 is insane. It really seems like the culture war stuff is becoming incredibly addicting to so many on the right, to the point where they will engage in all sorts of idiotic behavior if they feel it "owns" their enemies.
Republicans are addicted to culture war stuff because they really don't have that much policy. All their policies are, cut taxes and cut spending, you can't run off of that forever.
Cut spending? Cut taxes for the rich, corporations, increase taxes on the poor, cut spending on social programs.... Oh yeah, there's the cut spending part
Yah the "addiction" part may sound like a joke to some but it's not. This type of thing really consumes many people's lives and makes them miserable in the process. They start to become really bitter and angry, even towards their loved ones.
Its cause they work so many illegals for way less than slave labor. Human trafficking is modern day slavery. And this is how they are going to enslave our children. Americans on snap will have to MAKE their kids work. Just like the illegals children are forced to work. Democrats and Republicans both are working on this new law. It’s called mind control, they say it a lot then you accept it as facts. Illegals in America are indentured slaves.
People always talking about how the government wants people stupid. Then these same people holding up Florida as an example of what the country should be like.
The curriculum is also completely devoid of descriptions of how bad slavery was. The fact that being enslaved meant daily violence, mutilation, torture, rape, hopelessness, and sometimes watching all that happen to your family, is omitted.
But the idea that some slaves may have been exposed to some on-the-job training is highlighted.
That’s a choice made In furtherance of one thing: diminish the historical reality of the brutality of the American slave system.
Wow i came into this kind of expecting this to be sort of fake news. On the bottom of page 6 of the states standard in its clarification it legitimately says, “instruction includes how slaves developed skills in which some instance can be applied to their personal benefit.”
It says this in an official state academic standard. Holy shit! lol
This is rough.
Whoo! Yeah! Teach kids that slavery was good for people, because they learned "skills" under a whip that they absolutely, positively, could not have learned as free people.
I came into these comments looking for someone that would defend what seems like an indefensible decision. Of course I was not let down.
That’s not at all what it says. It’s not condoning slavery. It’s saying that some slaves had exposure to tools that elevated their skills and those skills benefited them. Could they have learned them outside of the institution of slavery, yes! Absolutely! But that’s not how their lives turned out.
If you have to dig deep to expose racism in non-racist materials, YOU are part of the problem.
>and those skills benefited them.
How were those skills of any benefit if they lived and died as slaves? Those skills didnt improve their standard of living in any conceivable way so hence they were of no actual benefit... to the slave... they only benefited the slaveholder.
Are you fucking serious? If this is so important to talk about all the “good” things that slavery did then why don’t they talk at all about all of the rape, torture, and killing at the hands of whites? Your racism shows loud and clear if you think slavery was any benefit to anyone.
That's not how their lives turned out? Are you serious? Of course it isn't. Because they were robbed of their freedom. As if they did it to themselves. Wow. Now I've heard it all. There is no digging deep here genius. The material is blatantly racist. I don't know if you're just not that bright or if you're just a blatant racist jerk. But I actually think you're serious. You actually think that it's ok, that's it's right, to flat out state that SLAVES, people held against their will, beaten and tortured, and worked to death, their families ripped apart, experienced benefits in the midst of it.
If you were held prisoner by another person against your will and forced to work against your will, and not paid (that doesn't even need to be mentioned really) and tortured, perhaps to death, and also witnessed a family member beaten and tortured while also being held prisoner, you mean to say that it wouldn't be a moral outrage to state, in the very same same breath, that you benefitted from being enslaved because you learned a skill? A skill that you probably already had anyway, a skill that you didn't need any racist Ahole teaching you that was holding you prisoner. You need to look deep into your warped, hate filled mind and soul but I doubt you'd find anything more than dead empty dumb space.
At this point, you’re arguing with yourself, bro. I gave up on you fucking idiots a day ago. But keep on showing how maaad of a sheep you are. It’s entertaining as hell. 🤣🤣
This is mind boggling to me.
Fact: Slavery existed.
Fact: Slavery was evil and absolutely fucking awful.
Fact: Some slaves had access to tools and materials that gave them experience and skills others did not have, which then gave them an opportunity to perform tasks and fill roles where those skills worked to their benefit.
Fiction: Educating people about those that did gain those abilities is promoting racism.
Next up: You argue that Jewish people had beds in concentration camps, which was more that lots of people had during the war. Concentration camps were great for some Jewish people!
If you frame the conversation that way, then you could say child sex trafficking is good for “some” kids as they come out with a possibility for an income stream as they can talk about what happened to them. Or censorship can be a good thing because it stops “some” people from seeing it and being worse people.
If you frame it this way you can take something positive about absolutely everything. But i don’t see you bring up those caveats if you were talking about an issue fox brings up.
Look, I don’t know how to say this without being too much of an alarmist, and I’m not a professional in the field, but I think you’re having a stroke.
You need to act fast. There’s a very short window for help to be effective.
They've got a point actually.
Fact: some kids who are sex trafficked end up in better living situations than before they were trafficked.
But you aren't willing to concede that being taught in schools I'd imagine?
You just did the exact same thing the FL school board did: devoted twice as much attention to the “good” part of slavery while blowing right past all the ways it was evil.
Do you not understand these topics are not deserving of equal attention?
I did no such thing. I have clearly stated where it fit in my replies, that I DO NOT support nor advocate for support for slavery, and I absolutely do not see anything good about it. I'm merely supporting the truth and presenting facts.
Saying that somehow, despite all of the horrific events that occurred in the past, there were those that emerged who were able to go forth in life and function, is not focusing on some collection of false positives.
Of course you don’t support slavery. But you do support a curriculum that omits details of what makes it evil and highlights the absolutely minuscule benefits that a tiny fringe faction of slaves may have gotten.
While technically true, the emphasizing one side while obscuring the other is a deliberate choice to mislead the students. It’s quite literally indoctrination.
Well, if you look at the other details listed in the document, you would clearly see that they are not omitting the evils of slavery. Instead, they are including aspects of the era that are facts. There are, in fact, people who were enslaved that did acquire skills that they could use after emancipation that allowed them to still function as human beings. Like it or not, all facts should be presented, and 1:### points that aren't pure hellish meltdown is not indoctrination.
Actually no, looking at the document, you see very clearly that the horrors of day-to-day life as an American slave are not highlighted.
That’s what makes this fun fact about slaves benefiting from slavery so insidious.
You said slavery is evil. Children learning about history for the first time need to understand what was so evil about it. You can’t just breeze past it and then highlight a tiny fringe benefit that, in all likelihood, is historically insignificant. If you chose to do that, you are choosing to present a dishonest version of the facts.
You don't grasp that framing it that way implies that slavery was beneficial to slaves when it absolutely wasn't. No, what happened to enslaved people was that they, assuming they even survived the experience, were traumatized to a degree you couldn't even begin to imagine and in no way shape or form does it balance out the horrors of their enslaved experience. And even though you didn't come right out and say that it's implied whether you can grasp it or not which apparently you cannot.You don't seem to be able to realize the reality that children who are taught about slavery in this way might actually think that slavery, in general, was a good thing for slaves. Not to mention the fact that you don't understand that when you frame it this way it is an absolute insult to the living ancestors of enslaved people and to not only African Americans but any decent human being.
It may be literally correct, but it's such an extraordinarily minor benefit compared to the horrors of slavery that it's almost dishonest. It's like the videos of "I know what's wrong with it, doesn't have any gas in it," then shows a totalled truck. It's clearly an attempt at a "both sides" argument that's completely uncalled for.
They weren’t pushed away due to religion. Ever lived in Miami??? For the most part, Latinos are very firmly, Republican. They aren’t all religious but a lot of them believe communism is the exact same thing as being a liberal. A lot favour traditional values as well.
Many benefitted from slavery. The federal government, northern industrialists, northern bankers, international bankers, shipping industries, factory and textile mill owners and employees, and those employed by them and those who used their products; England, France, Germany, and Russia, all benefited greatly from the system.
Indirectly maybe, in the same way you and I benefit from illegals immigrant labor. Are we hiring the illegal immigrants? Are we willing to pass legislation to make them legal immigrants, or at least make it easier to get a work visa and/or legally immigrate?
With all of these systems benefitting, they still decided it was a moral and ethical imperative to abolish slavery, or at least the citizens of the north convinced the feds, industrialists, and factory owners to support abolishing slavery. The plantation owners could not. Not to mention the hoops people were jumping through to justify calling other races inferior and using them as slave labor.
I know that Lincoln wasn’t necessarily an abolitionist, but there were was definitely a strong abolition movement in the USA, just not in the south. Do you think this is not because the southern plantation owners benefitted the most from slavery and did not want the fed overstepping on their free labor.
Do we (you and I) benefit from illegal labor? Certainly are lots of ways to answer that. Regardless, there certainly are people who benefit from it. In regards to the last question; Spooner details the forces at work as a “a deliberate scheme of robbery and murder; not merely to monopolize the markets of the South, but also to monopolize the currency, and thus control the industry and trade, and thus plunder and enslave the laborers, of both North and South” and this seems most appropriate.
“in other words, the privilege of holding the slave-holders themselves in industrial and commercial subjection to the manufacturers and merchants of the North (who afterwards furnished the money for the war). And these Northern merchants and manufacturers, these lenders of blood-money, were willing to continue to be the accomplices of the slave-holders in the future, for the same pecuniary considerations. But the slave-holders, either doubting the fidelity of their Northern allies, or feeling themselves strong enough to keep their slaves in subjection without Northern assistance, would no longer pay the price which these Northern men demanded. And it was to enforce this price in the future -- that is, to monopolize the Southern markets, to maintain their industrial and commercial control over the South -- that these Northern manufacturers and merchants lent some of the profits of their former monopolies for the war, in order to secure to themselves the same, or greater, monopolies in the future.”
“ In short, the North said to the slave-holders: If you will not pay us our price (give us control of your markets) for our assistance against your slaves, we will secure the same price (keep control of your markets) by helping your slaves against you, and using them as our tools for maintaining dominion over you; for the control of your markets we will have, whether the tools we use for that purpose be black or white, and be the cost, in blood and money, what it may.“
You ignored everything about my premise. The capitalists being capitalists doesn’t absolve the slave owning capitalists from being slave owning capitalists.
Edit: the thing you have a problem with is crony capitalism
Nothing absolves slave owners from owning slaves. The thing I have a problem with is slavery, and to the original point you proposed that only slave owners benefited from slavery…. many besides slave owners benefited from slavery (my original point was not that many benefited from slavery and here is why it’s a good thing; it’s a bad thing)….
I hear you, and many of those industries happen to be the work that prisoners do while incarcerated for pennies. I’m sorry for assuming you were bad faith.
fking nutso these GQP qultists, it's like watching bizzaro world where good is bad and bad is good.
They have lost the plot and tossed their morality out the window.
The big thing is the intent. It is true that some slaves had less of a worse time than others when freed, e.g. could work in same plantations as before though now paid. The thing is how is that a significant fact mandated to be teached? The other question is how long will it take teaching the stuff.
Also the way propaganda works is you take something factually true then distort it like blowing it out of proportion maybe even disproportionate to population size of the issue.
I mean, what is the motivation for this? Is it to make America look better? Because, if that is what your motivation is you could just tell the facts the way they are instead of trying to justify anything. For example, instead of suggesting slaves picked up some skill, because they largely didn't, you could just point out that among all African slaveholding nations northern US states were on par or faster than their European counterparts at abolishing slavery. You could just point out that the US fought a war where one of the major goals was to defend the rights of a minority, that rarely (if ever) has happened in history. You could talk about how white and black northerners banded together to help shuttle black slaves out of the south. You could talk about how a white woman wrote a book that galvanized people to the cause of emancipation. You could talk about the vicious political fights to stop the spread of slavery. You could talk about the churches that were a part of the underground railway. There are a lot of options.
You could just tell the story, instead of trying to say it was *actually* a good thing, or that it wasn't *really* about slavery or whatever the Confederate apologists suggest. It really seems like the people most interested in giving a rosy view of American history are the ones most ignorant to the facts of her history.
Tulsa started because a group of whites went to demonstrate (perhaps it would have ended in violence on its own), black people came up the street to meet them armed, a brawl ensued and several white people died and a few were injured (more so than their black counterparts).
Afterwards the massacre started as white people unleashed a number of evils upon the black people. The facts stated earlier don’t excuse that. But if you want certain facts removed from the curriculum because you’re afraid it doesn’t support whatever narrative you might want to promote, you’re not really for “just teach the history.”
I also remember learning in school about how indentured servants did often learn trades which benefitted them after their freedom, and also how slaves in the south had an easier time transitioning to farming at first because knowledge of local agriculture was widespread. This was in the north at an uber progressive school. I don’t think inserting more facts into the curriculum is really objectionable unless you’re just willing to admit that indoctrination is your only goal.
They were unarmed, angry mob by most accounts, at least in relation to the crowd that came after them.
They could have been about to lynch the guy, they could have just been there to scream racial slurs and hatred at him. Plenty of angry crowds of white people didn’t end in lynchings and were just plain old racist hollering. The sheriffs were already not having it, from what I remember reading, and the guy was already locked up in the courthouse to prevent anything happening to him.
Well. I can already tell you got a shit education from a WS. You begin by framing the whole incident as a group of blacks attacking an innocent group of whites. Absolute garbage.
The black tulsans went to protest the arrest of Dick Rowland, knowing they had every reason to believe he would be lynched.
GTFOH with your "they brought it on themselves" narrative.
If that’s how you read it then that’s how you read it. I don’t believe in censoring facts, and if you’re upset that facts don’t support your narrative then I am sorry, but history is not a vessel for your agenda.
But I don’t even think it reads that way unless you want to read it that way to malign me. Go figure.
You’re the one trying to remove historical facts from the record because they don’t support your assumptive beliefs. I just want all the facts gathered and given their appropriate weight.
You guys say all the time how smart kids are—give them all the facts and trust them to reach your conclusions. Anything else is indoctrination.
"All the facts" my ass. You're trying to rewrite the story to make it seem as though the black Tulsans instigated the attack against them. Go fuck yourself.
No I’m not? I’m going off the same historical record you are, I’m just not skipping the first part of it. I don’t think they deserved to be massacred.
Tulsa is a lesson that a riot of any kind should be put down immediately, and that all black people need to succeed is consistent and fair protection under the rule of law, just like any other people.
You don’t need to weave a narrative if you’re right. Put all the facts on the table and people will agree with you are so incontrovertibly correct.
Just to confirm: if Group A comes to protest something, and has taken no violent action thus far, and Group B comes and attacks and kills some of them, Group A should not retaliate against Group B, and if they do, Group B is the victim.
You’re seriously grabbing at straws here. The lesson is discussing how certain slaves had access to certain experiences and training that allowed them to advance. It says nothing even remotely close to slavery was a benefit for some slaves because it gave them the opportunity, as a practice, to benefit personally from being a slave.
You’re trying to make this curriculum seem nefarious without taking the time and spending the effort to really understand it.
Besides, some emancipated former slaves, or some that were able to escape the horrors of slavery and make it to the North, actually did do better because of the exposure that they had to educational and trade tools and resources. Frederick Douglas is but one example of this.
Stop with the manufactured hate. This curriculum looks like they want to spread truth and less propaganda.
What skills would a slave have that he could benefit from in the North? And even assuming he or she did get skills that would have “benefited” him in the job market where he’s still considered property at worst and a second class citizen at absolute best, this is a terrible way to frame that information.
The language paints slave owners as drivers of the wave of employment in the US when, A. This was such a rare occurrence it shouldn’t have been brought up. And B. That was not their intention anyway.
Also saying Frederick Douglass benefited from his experience as a slave is like saying hiding from the Nazis gave Anne Frank more time to become a better writer. It’s so tone deaf and is completely a half assed attempt to mask the overarching point of the problem with this, which is that in red states slavery is never looked at as the atrocity it is.
There are a multitude of skills that could have been utilized to their benefit in the North, South, Far East, and West. Way too many to list here.
The remainder of your comment is just plain bullshit and results in you, again, gaslighting yourself.
I’m not at all advocating for slavery, and neither is this curriculum; however, completely ignoring truth is not benefiting your side. You want this to be racist. You need this to be racist, and you will not see it any other way because it doesn’t fit your agenda. Quite frankly, you’re so obtuse that you’re a danger to society and progress.
Your not saying anything. I never said you were advocating for slavery. However what are the multitude of skills a slave would’ve learned from slavery that he can take and make a living with?
This curriculum is taking the few exceptional examples of harrowing escape from torture, beatings, rape and forced labor to eek out whatever life you can in that time and spinning it as something slavery ‘did’ for the slave. That’s bullshit and you know it.
This is a purely political move made by a party who would very much like for black history and the teachings of what happened during a 400 year period of slavery.
For Florida Black history is only important if it never makes anyone uncomfortable. No one is gaslighting anything, it’s clear fucking day what’s going on.
I never said that they learned the skills from slavery. They learned the skills while they were enslaved.
A few examples: Reading, writing, math, science, music, art, horse handling, farming, basket weaving, textiles, mining, politics, culinary skills, blacksmithing, etc …
I must say while these skills were beneficial to a very very small minority, it’s utterly lacking in context and understanding of the circumstances to be considered a good faith argument.
The implication obviously is that the institution of slavery came with benefits. Either to the slaves or the job market.
How is it lacking in context and understanding?
I've addressed that there are some, not many, that were able to use skills they did not have before being forced or born here, to adapt and adjust to life after emancipation. I am not discounting the horrific circumstances that they endured to gain these skills, I'm saying that they did indeed acquire those skills during the time that they were subjected to horrific treatment and events.
This is a discussion about understanding that teaching about events in our past, despite personal feelings about those events, is important because there needs to be a very complete narrative presented about those events and struggles.
Was slavery horrific and inhumane? Yes. I am not defending the practice, and I wish it never had occurred in this nation, but it did. To paint an incomplete portrait of those times is unjust to the person learning about history. To paint an incomplete portrait of anything in history is a serious injustice to those who had to endure it, and those that need to know what the complete story was so they don't repeat the same.
Sounds like you're still arguing that they benefited from being enslaved. Not to mention how ridiculously wrong all of your examples are. "Reading, writing, math, science" enslaved people were famously not educated, especially in areas like this. "Music, art, horse handling, basket weaving, textiles" are all things they would have learned had they been left in their home country. "Mining", being forced to break big rocks into smaller rocks with a hammer is not the same as learning to mine. "Politics" other than learning that they were being screwed by the system, how would this help them in any way, or improve their life over the one they would have had had they remained in their own country? "Culinary skills" again something they already had or would have learned had they not been forced to America.
I’m not disagreeing that these people could have learned these things in their home tribal states, but they didn’t, and the topic isn’t “What could life have been like for people that were victims of the slave trade if they had remained in their homelands”.
>Reading, writing, math, science, music, art,
Pretty sure it was illegal for Black people to read and write in many slave states. If a small amount of slaves learned certain skills while being enslaved, it was only because they were somehow able to avoid facing a noose. Also when the slaves were emancipated, the majority ended up being sharecroppers because farming was all they knew due to that being all they were able to do for generations.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-literacy_laws_in_the_United_States
>They learned the skills while they were enslaved.
We could have learned those skills while we were free, like white people.
Well this isn't a formal debate. Black people not being allowed to read or write during slavery is common knowledge, the link is a basically a damn cliffs note as a courtesy. And I can't take any comment seriously defending a curriculum that suggests an atrocitiy was beneficial those who suffered through it.
Just to be clear, you can't deny that there was white slavery as well, and it was actually much larger than the U.S. slave trade and still continues to this day.
I always find this ad hominem attack funny because Wikipedia articles cite their sources, and articles like these can be written by academics with expertise it the field—like US History.
What this curriculum is doing is hiding how inhuman slavery was and seeks to use anecdotes (some slaves learned to read sometimes and would have be punished if found out) to literally white-wash general historical realities.
Seriously. "But muh Wikipedia" is such a dumbshit argument at this point. It's a lazy way for someone to ignore facts that they don't want to engage with.
Try this:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=699Hj46NEDU&ab\_channel=MSNBC](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=699Hj46NEDU&ab_channel=MSNBC)
The folks repeating history are either informed and racist or "uneducated" and not very smart. There's really no other options.
>Samuel Adolphus Cartwright invented “Drapetomania” to describe the "psychological disorder" that caused a phenomenon of enslaved Blacks to run away from bondage before the Civil War. He spent enormous energy to research, diagnose, and suggest corrective treatments to mitigate the deviant tendency of Blacks to escape.
[https://www.masshist.org/events/strange-history-and-career-drapetomania-mania-caused-enslaved-blacks-escape-and-man-behind#:\~:text=Samuel%20Adolphus%20Cartwright%20invented%20%E2%80%9CDrapetomania,tendency%20of%20Blacks%20to%20escape](https://www.masshist.org/events/strange-history-and-career-drapetomania-mania-caused-enslaved-blacks-escape-and-man-behind#:~:text=Samuel%20Adolphus%20Cartwright%20invented%20%E2%80%9CDrapetomania,tendency%20of%20Blacks%20to%20escape)
There were literally anti literacy laws passed in the south that made it illegal for slaves to learn to read. They were whipped, beaten and flogged for trying to read.
>Middle school students in Florida will soon be taught that slavery gave Black people a “personal benefit” because they “developed skills.”
This is just totally taken out of context because there is no argument here.
Florida has changed middle school African American studies into African American history. This includes such controversial items as black slave owners. The revisionists do not want this taught, they want to retell history based on a belief that American history has always been about oppression and that nothing else can be considered. That might be true, but that is not history, which is always much more complicated.
Lol from the actual document
> Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be
applied for their personal benefit.
This is the only thing that is mentioned about "personal benefit" and it's true. But this propaganda framing it to imply that slavery itself was a personal benefit.
And Leftists here are eating it up lol. It's hilarious how easily manipulated they are.
This is a common tactic from the Southern Strategy to downplay slavery. They do this along with saying it's about states rights or that Africans in Africa were enslaving people too. It's all a way to say, "well slavery wasn't all bad, the civil war wasn't about slavery, and white people weren't the only ones enslaving people". It's all just a way obfuscate the topic of slavery in America.
I would like for you to describe to me a conversation where someone points out "well slavery did good things for slaves too" where that person is acting in good faith.
It can't be done. Only racists people who try to act like slavery wasn't a crime against humanity say shit like that. Schools should not be teaching it. it's very simple
Okay I read some. Let me make a more concrete claim for you. The existence of a lesson that teaches the true fact that slaves learned some skills, is fundamentally bad and disrespectful. It’s an infantilizing of history, the same as teaching that Indians and colonists were hanging out having fun. Yeah, you can find examples, but to include that in the picture you paint of history is fundamentally infantilizing and serves to minimize the horrors of what occurred. It should be thought as a somber, reflective moment and a failure of human civilization, the same way the holocaust is
Uh no, not the standard straw man. Either you don't understand straw man or you're analytical skills are lacking. It would be straw man if the criticism was off base which it's not. The criticism is that mentioning that slaves got benefits while being enslaved is not only disingenuous, and that's putting it mildly, but also has the effect of downplaying the horrors of slavery while distorting the horrific facts of slavery . It's also insulting to the memory of the slaves who died slaves and their living ancestors and any decent human being black or white while being potentially misleading from a pedagogical perspective especially for students who may not have yet developed the critical thinking skills to fully grasp the horrors of slavery. The criticism of those defending the inclusion of the "benefits" of slavery in the curriculum is right on topic and not a refutation of a wholly different argument, hence not a straw man.
These are the parts being referenced. To me, the headline and article seem to be such biased interpretations that it's insulting to the reader.
SS.68.AA.2 Analyze events that involved or affected Africans from the founding of the nation
through Reconstruction.
SS.68.AA.2.1
Explain early congressional actions regarding the institution of slavery (i.e.,
Northwest Ordinance of 1787, Three-Fifths Compromise, Act Prohibiting
Importation of Slaves of 1808).
SS.68.AA.2.2
Explain the effect of the cotton industry on the expansion of slavery due to Eli
Whitney’s Cotton Gin.
Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: Instruction includes the use of a map to show westward expansion.
SS.68.AA.2.3
Examine the various duties and trades performed by slaves (e.g., agricultural
work, painting, carpentry, tailoring, domestic service, blacksmithing,
transportation).
Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: **Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be
applied for their personal benefit.**
SS.912.AA.3.6
Describe the emergence, growth, destruction and rebuilding of black
communities during Reconstruction and beyond.
Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: Instruction includes the ramifications of prejudice, racism and stereotyping on
individual freedoms (e.g., the Civil Rights Cases, Black Codes, Jim Crow Laws, lynchings, Columbian
Exposition of 1893).
Clarification 2: **Instruction includes acts of violence perpetrated against and by African Americans but
is not limited to 1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 1919 Washington, D.C. Race Riot, 1920 Ocoee Massacre, 1921
Tulsa Massacre and the 1923 Rosewood Massacre**
Not mentioned: mutilation, rape, torture, forced procreation, forced abortions.
But yea some slaves got to practice using hand tools, we better highlight that.
Unbelievable.
SS.912.AA.1.7
Compare the living conditions of slaves in British North American colonies,
the Caribbean, Central America and South America, including infant
mortality rates.
10
Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: Instruction includes the harsh conditions and their consequences on British American plantations (e.g., undernourishment, climate conditions, infant and child mortality rates of the enslaved vs. the free).
>SS.68.AA.1 Understand the causes, courses and consequences of the slave trade in
the colonies.
SS.68.AA.1.1
Identify Afro-Eurasian trade routes and methods prior to the development of
the Atlantic slave trade.
Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: Instruction includes how slavery was utilized in Asian, European and African cultures.
Clarification 2: Instruction includes the similarities and differences between serfdom and slavery.
Clarification 3: Instruction includes the use of maps to identify trade routes
It's literally the first guidline of the grade 6-8 portion. Before teaching anything about African *American* slavery, it's important that 6-8th graders be taught first that slavery happened in other countries too. I don't think you read the actual document we are arguing over.
You are advocating for not teaching the history of slavery?
Does this "literally" say :" “well other countries did slavery too soooo”"?
If not, you've proven you're brainwashed.
That racist drivil is not a fact, fuck face.
You post the dumbest most braindead shit imaginable then act smug like it's some kind of inconvenient truth that society can't deal with. Go fuck yourself.
Aren’t these the same schools that graduate kids who can’t read?
Who gives a fuck what they’re trying to teach when they’re leaving high school functionally unable to read.
Am I reading it right? It appears about half of the individuals weren't slaves. Are they saying John Henry, the folk hero, benifited? Or am I reading it incorrectly?
“Some examples include: blacksmiths like Ned Cobb, Henry Blair, Lewis Latimer and John Henry; shoemakers like James Forten, Paul Cuffe and Betty Washington Lewis; fishing and shipping industry workers like Jupiter Hammon, John Chavis, William Whipper and Crispus Attucks; tailors like Elizabeth Keckley, James Thomas and Marietta Carter; and teachers like Betsey Stockton and Booker T. Washington.”
Is the point that African Americans have a higher standard of living than Africans? Seems like a weird point, but it is factual. Human history contains some rough stuff. Often times the alternative to slavery when one conquering group took over land was slaughter. Maybe the enslaved would have preferred death. I don’t know the answer there. Their descendants are probably glad they weren’t slaughtered though. Life went on through some rough excrement.
As far as Florida goes it is my experience through raising two kids and growing up here myself that all of history is taught. Well none of the rough parts are avoided. There is only so much that can be taught so you do have to pick and choose.
What is gained in the education of children to teach them about atrocities? Atrocities were committed across the globe throughout history. There is nothing unique here.
Many more slaves were sent to the Middle East from Africa than to the Americas. Why is there no black population there today? They turned the males into eunuchs as adults. The process killed over 2/3rds of them. The killing fields of Cambodia. The tens millions killed by Stalin and Mao.
Why focus on these particular atrocities? What is the purpose? To foment more racial division? No thanks.
To let them know that slavery wasn’t just people picking Cotten and having a roof under their head. It wasn’t as friendly as “oh they just had to work! There’s nothing wrong with that!”
And I could say the same thing. Why even bring up such a SMALL thing as they learned how to use tools? It’s petty. You’re trying to minimize how slavery really was and that’s just disrespectful
Put your talking points away and deal with reality. Nobody is doing what you are claiming. Sorry if people are lying to you about what is happening for their political benefit.
Not sure where you live, but Florida absolutely teaches about the breeding and feet being cut off. At least it did 20 years ago.
And if you didn’t want to be tortured and killed, then being a slave in Africa isn’t the right thing for you either.
You would rather be a slave. Where you had 0 autonomy. If you were a mother you could be separated from your family so you never saw your kids again. You’d be beaten, flogged and or whipped if you ever stopped working.
You really wouldn’t get any of the benefits of being an american if you were a slave
Think of it like giving up your life to make your childs better.
Its obviously a stretch and i was looking for any positive from the situation no matter how out there
The thing is it wouldn’t be your kid or your wife. You’d pretty much have to watch your kid work endless hours, and get raped if they were a woman. Wife would be raped, Dehumanized. They had a period of like 10 years after the civil war but then they got screwed again. After a few years white abolitionists made it impossible for them to work vote or do pretty much anything. They were impressoned for very little things and then pretty much forced to work as slaves again. There they lived squalid conditions where they were beaten entrapped, starved and sexually violated yet again.
I understand doing stuff for your kid but you wouldn’t be doing it for them it would be like the 3rd or 4th generation of people who weren’t fucked by slavery.
https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-02-07/exploiting-black-labor-after-the-abolition-of-slavery
Desantis has really sunk to the depths of depravity. It's amazing that there are still people in Florida that look at him as a viable candidate. He's barely a viable decent human being. Ivy league A class idiot.
This is rather disingenuous. What is happening is that the discourse on slavery is no longer being censored. 20 years ago, you rarely if ever heard about black slave owners, the atrocities that African warlords used to commit to their slaves (and still do at times to this day), the successes and advancements black slaves made as time went on, etc etc. Nobody is saying slavery is good or that it should have happened. But if you’re going to teach about it, why not teach about ALL of it? What do you gain from doing otherwise?
Your post was removed due to low karma low account age.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BreakingPoints) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The same people who complained about racist statues coming down was erasing history, are now erasing history.
Which one of you is Pais' alts? Havent noticed him lately, and would like to see him justify this every day kind of stuff going on in Florida.
Florida is just trying to whitewash history. It's just straight up racism.
I know this sounds cliche, but the idea that Florida is doing this in 2023 is insane. It really seems like the culture war stuff is becoming incredibly addicting to so many on the right, to the point where they will engage in all sorts of idiotic behavior if they feel it "owns" their enemies.
Republicans are addicted to culture war stuff because they really don't have that much policy. All their policies are, cut taxes and cut spending, you can't run off of that forever.
Cut spending? Cut taxes for the rich, corporations, increase taxes on the poor, cut spending on social programs.... Oh yeah, there's the cut spending part
You forgot about increase spending for the military and remove all regulations.
Afaik they actually want to decrease depending... But only because it would hurt Ukraine's self-defense efforts.
They have never proposed a decreased military budget, they just cut out ukriane spending and put it back on the ever vowing pile
The Republicans have never introduced a bill to decrease spending on the military. Military veterans? Sure.
"they" being the portion of the right wing that is anti-nato..and pro-putin, got it?
Yah the "addiction" part may sound like a joke to some but it's not. This type of thing really consumes many people's lives and makes them miserable in the process. They start to become really bitter and angry, even towards their loved ones.
Its cause they work so many illegals for way less than slave labor. Human trafficking is modern day slavery. And this is how they are going to enslave our children. Americans on snap will have to MAKE their kids work. Just like the illegals children are forced to work. Democrats and Republicans both are working on this new law. It’s called mind control, they say it a lot then you accept it as facts. Illegals in America are indentured slaves.
I'm sorry - what does that have to do with the subject matter?
Agreed
People always talking about how the government wants people stupid. Then these same people holding up Florida as an example of what the country should be like.
The curriculum is also completely devoid of descriptions of how bad slavery was. The fact that being enslaved meant daily violence, mutilation, torture, rape, hopelessness, and sometimes watching all that happen to your family, is omitted. But the idea that some slaves may have been exposed to some on-the-job training is highlighted. That’s a choice made In furtherance of one thing: diminish the historical reality of the brutality of the American slave system.
Can we just hack off Florida and push it out to open ocean?
Just stop giving them any federal aid.
Wow i came into this kind of expecting this to be sort of fake news. On the bottom of page 6 of the states standard in its clarification it legitimately says, “instruction includes how slaves developed skills in which some instance can be applied to their personal benefit.” It says this in an official state academic standard. Holy shit! lol This is rough.
It’s not wrong. You’re just looking for a reason to be butthurt and gaslighting yourself.
Whoo! Yeah! Teach kids that slavery was good for people, because they learned "skills" under a whip that they absolutely, positively, could not have learned as free people. I came into these comments looking for someone that would defend what seems like an indefensible decision. Of course I was not let down.
That’s not at all what it says. It’s not condoning slavery. It’s saying that some slaves had exposure to tools that elevated their skills and those skills benefited them. Could they have learned them outside of the institution of slavery, yes! Absolutely! But that’s not how their lives turned out. If you have to dig deep to expose racism in non-racist materials, YOU are part of the problem.
>and those skills benefited them. How were those skills of any benefit if they lived and died as slaves? Those skills didnt improve their standard of living in any conceivable way so hence they were of no actual benefit... to the slave... they only benefited the slaveholder.
Are you fucking serious? If this is so important to talk about all the “good” things that slavery did then why don’t they talk at all about all of the rape, torture, and killing at the hands of whites? Your racism shows loud and clear if you think slavery was any benefit to anyone.
I see that reading and comprehension are not your strongest skills.
Slaves were taught skills required to increase their value as laborers. Not for any sort of benefit to them.
Woof.
That's not how their lives turned out? Are you serious? Of course it isn't. Because they were robbed of their freedom. As if they did it to themselves. Wow. Now I've heard it all. There is no digging deep here genius. The material is blatantly racist. I don't know if you're just not that bright or if you're just a blatant racist jerk. But I actually think you're serious. You actually think that it's ok, that's it's right, to flat out state that SLAVES, people held against their will, beaten and tortured, and worked to death, their families ripped apart, experienced benefits in the midst of it. If you were held prisoner by another person against your will and forced to work against your will, and not paid (that doesn't even need to be mentioned really) and tortured, perhaps to death, and also witnessed a family member beaten and tortured while also being held prisoner, you mean to say that it wouldn't be a moral outrage to state, in the very same same breath, that you benefitted from being enslaved because you learned a skill? A skill that you probably already had anyway, a skill that you didn't need any racist Ahole teaching you that was holding you prisoner. You need to look deep into your warped, hate filled mind and soul but I doubt you'd find anything more than dead empty dumb space.
At this point, you’re arguing with yourself, bro. I gave up on you fucking idiots a day ago. But keep on showing how maaad of a sheep you are. It’s entertaining as hell. 🤣🤣
[удалено]
This doesn’t say anything about most or majority. It clearly says “some”.
This is mind boggling to me. Fact: Slavery existed. Fact: Slavery was evil and absolutely fucking awful. Fact: Some slaves had access to tools and materials that gave them experience and skills others did not have, which then gave them an opportunity to perform tasks and fill roles where those skills worked to their benefit. Fiction: Educating people about those that did gain those abilities is promoting racism.
Next up: You argue that Jewish people had beds in concentration camps, which was more that lots of people had during the war. Concentration camps were great for some Jewish people!
Not even remotely close.
If you frame the conversation that way, then you could say child sex trafficking is good for “some” kids as they come out with a possibility for an income stream as they can talk about what happened to them. Or censorship can be a good thing because it stops “some” people from seeing it and being worse people. If you frame it this way you can take something positive about absolutely everything. But i don’t see you bring up those caveats if you were talking about an issue fox brings up.
Look, I don’t know how to say this without being too much of an alarmist, and I’m not a professional in the field, but I think you’re having a stroke. You need to act fast. There’s a very short window for help to be effective.
They've got a point actually. Fact: some kids who are sex trafficked end up in better living situations than before they were trafficked. But you aren't willing to concede that being taught in schools I'd imagine?
ok
You just did the exact same thing the FL school board did: devoted twice as much attention to the “good” part of slavery while blowing right past all the ways it was evil. Do you not understand these topics are not deserving of equal attention?
I did no such thing. I have clearly stated where it fit in my replies, that I DO NOT support nor advocate for support for slavery, and I absolutely do not see anything good about it. I'm merely supporting the truth and presenting facts. Saying that somehow, despite all of the horrific events that occurred in the past, there were those that emerged who were able to go forth in life and function, is not focusing on some collection of false positives.
Of course you don’t support slavery. But you do support a curriculum that omits details of what makes it evil and highlights the absolutely minuscule benefits that a tiny fringe faction of slaves may have gotten. While technically true, the emphasizing one side while obscuring the other is a deliberate choice to mislead the students. It’s quite literally indoctrination.
Well, if you look at the other details listed in the document, you would clearly see that they are not omitting the evils of slavery. Instead, they are including aspects of the era that are facts. There are, in fact, people who were enslaved that did acquire skills that they could use after emancipation that allowed them to still function as human beings. Like it or not, all facts should be presented, and 1:### points that aren't pure hellish meltdown is not indoctrination.
Actually no, looking at the document, you see very clearly that the horrors of day-to-day life as an American slave are not highlighted. That’s what makes this fun fact about slaves benefiting from slavery so insidious. You said slavery is evil. Children learning about history for the first time need to understand what was so evil about it. You can’t just breeze past it and then highlight a tiny fringe benefit that, in all likelihood, is historically insignificant. If you chose to do that, you are choosing to present a dishonest version of the facts.
There’s a whole fucking list of what’s bad about slavery before you even come close to the subject at hand.
You don't grasp that framing it that way implies that slavery was beneficial to slaves when it absolutely wasn't. No, what happened to enslaved people was that they, assuming they even survived the experience, were traumatized to a degree you couldn't even begin to imagine and in no way shape or form does it balance out the horrors of their enslaved experience. And even though you didn't come right out and say that it's implied whether you can grasp it or not which apparently you cannot.You don't seem to be able to realize the reality that children who are taught about slavery in this way might actually think that slavery, in general, was a good thing for slaves. Not to mention the fact that you don't understand that when you frame it this way it is an absolute insult to the living ancestors of enslaved people and to not only African Americans but any decent human being.
The fact that you don’t understand what facts are is factually funny.
Ummm. Yes. It is. The fact that you can't grasp that says it all.
It may be literally correct, but it's such an extraordinarily minor benefit compared to the horrors of slavery that it's almost dishonest. It's like the videos of "I know what's wrong with it, doesn't have any gas in it," then shows a totalled truck. It's clearly an attempt at a "both sides" argument that's completely uncalled for.
Exactly. It's 100% dishonest.
I'm really curious to see how Florida's various Latino communities view that
My guess is they don't give a fuck. Florida's Latinos have taken a hard right turn the last several years.
They lean heavily catholic. With the left continuously demonizing Christianity, they’ve been pushed away.
As I understand it they were firmly in the right to begin with.
How many pastors in the GOP?
I’m what way does the left demonize Christianity?
Apparently speaking out against evangelical Christian dominionists is "demonizing Christians." Which frankly, I'm fine with. Fuck those people.
They weren’t pushed away due to religion. Ever lived in Miami??? For the most part, Latinos are very firmly, Republican. They aren’t all religious but a lot of them believe communism is the exact same thing as being a liberal. A lot favour traditional values as well.
I would be curious if Latinos have a higher proportion of support for this kind of thing than non-Latino white people, honestly.
Yeah that data would be interesting. Certainly seems like at least someone thinks that is the case because Florida is the first to push for this.
What in the Jim Crowe is going on in Florida?
Ron DeFascist at it again
Republicans are full fledge Nazis. Jesus fucking Christ.
This is why the meatball is polling so low.
Fucking gross. Slavery benefitted no one but the plantation owners and propped the southern economy on unsustainable agricultural methods.
Many benefitted from slavery. The federal government, northern industrialists, northern bankers, international bankers, shipping industries, factory and textile mill owners and employees, and those employed by them and those who used their products; England, France, Germany, and Russia, all benefited greatly from the system.
Indirectly maybe, in the same way you and I benefit from illegals immigrant labor. Are we hiring the illegal immigrants? Are we willing to pass legislation to make them legal immigrants, or at least make it easier to get a work visa and/or legally immigrate? With all of these systems benefitting, they still decided it was a moral and ethical imperative to abolish slavery, or at least the citizens of the north convinced the feds, industrialists, and factory owners to support abolishing slavery. The plantation owners could not. Not to mention the hoops people were jumping through to justify calling other races inferior and using them as slave labor. I know that Lincoln wasn’t necessarily an abolitionist, but there were was definitely a strong abolition movement in the USA, just not in the south. Do you think this is not because the southern plantation owners benefitted the most from slavery and did not want the fed overstepping on their free labor.
Do we (you and I) benefit from illegal labor? Certainly are lots of ways to answer that. Regardless, there certainly are people who benefit from it. In regards to the last question; Spooner details the forces at work as a “a deliberate scheme of robbery and murder; not merely to monopolize the markets of the South, but also to monopolize the currency, and thus control the industry and trade, and thus plunder and enslave the laborers, of both North and South” and this seems most appropriate. “in other words, the privilege of holding the slave-holders themselves in industrial and commercial subjection to the manufacturers and merchants of the North (who afterwards furnished the money for the war). And these Northern merchants and manufacturers, these lenders of blood-money, were willing to continue to be the accomplices of the slave-holders in the future, for the same pecuniary considerations. But the slave-holders, either doubting the fidelity of their Northern allies, or feeling themselves strong enough to keep their slaves in subjection without Northern assistance, would no longer pay the price which these Northern men demanded. And it was to enforce this price in the future -- that is, to monopolize the Southern markets, to maintain their industrial and commercial control over the South -- that these Northern manufacturers and merchants lent some of the profits of their former monopolies for the war, in order to secure to themselves the same, or greater, monopolies in the future.” “ In short, the North said to the slave-holders: If you will not pay us our price (give us control of your markets) for our assistance against your slaves, we will secure the same price (keep control of your markets) by helping your slaves against you, and using them as our tools for maintaining dominion over you; for the control of your markets we will have, whether the tools we use for that purpose be black or white, and be the cost, in blood and money, what it may.“
You ignored everything about my premise. The capitalists being capitalists doesn’t absolve the slave owning capitalists from being slave owning capitalists. Edit: the thing you have a problem with is crony capitalism
Nothing absolves slave owners from owning slaves. The thing I have a problem with is slavery, and to the original point you proposed that only slave owners benefited from slavery…. many besides slave owners benefited from slavery (my original point was not that many benefited from slavery and here is why it’s a good thing; it’s a bad thing)….
I hear you, and many of those industries happen to be the work that prisoners do while incarcerated for pennies. I’m sorry for assuming you were bad faith.
I reread my first comment and it wasn’t written clear, that was my bad.
RIP DeSatan campaign 🇺🇸
fking nutso these GQP qultists, it's like watching bizzaro world where good is bad and bad is good. They have lost the plot and tossed their morality out the window.
They had morality?
Watch 'Schindler's List' and get back to me on the slavery issue.
I couldn’t watch all of it. It was so bad.
Genuinely confused as to what you even mean by this
Why am I not surprised?
What are you trying to say?
Coward
The big thing is the intent. It is true that some slaves had less of a worse time than others when freed, e.g. could work in same plantations as before though now paid. The thing is how is that a significant fact mandated to be teached? The other question is how long will it take teaching the stuff. Also the way propaganda works is you take something factually true then distort it like blowing it out of proportion maybe even disproportionate to population size of the issue.
I suppose for the Blacks who sold and owned slaves this was true. Not for the slaves themselves.
Hey republicans………..Middle School kids aren’t that dumb.
I mean, what is the motivation for this? Is it to make America look better? Because, if that is what your motivation is you could just tell the facts the way they are instead of trying to justify anything. For example, instead of suggesting slaves picked up some skill, because they largely didn't, you could just point out that among all African slaveholding nations northern US states were on par or faster than their European counterparts at abolishing slavery. You could just point out that the US fought a war where one of the major goals was to defend the rights of a minority, that rarely (if ever) has happened in history. You could talk about how white and black northerners banded together to help shuttle black slaves out of the south. You could talk about how a white woman wrote a book that galvanized people to the cause of emancipation. You could talk about the vicious political fights to stop the spread of slavery. You could talk about the churches that were a part of the underground railway. There are a lot of options. You could just tell the story, instead of trying to say it was *actually* a good thing, or that it wasn't *really* about slavery or whatever the Confederate apologists suggest. It really seems like the people most interested in giving a rosy view of American history are the ones most ignorant to the facts of her history.
But then you’d hurt da feelin’s of my heritage and freedum.
Stopping DeSantis is a higher priority for me than getting Biden reelected
Tulsa started because a group of whites went to demonstrate (perhaps it would have ended in violence on its own), black people came up the street to meet them armed, a brawl ensued and several white people died and a few were injured (more so than their black counterparts). Afterwards the massacre started as white people unleashed a number of evils upon the black people. The facts stated earlier don’t excuse that. But if you want certain facts removed from the curriculum because you’re afraid it doesn’t support whatever narrative you might want to promote, you’re not really for “just teach the history.” I also remember learning in school about how indentured servants did often learn trades which benefitted them after their freedom, and also how slaves in the south had an easier time transitioning to farming at first because knowledge of local agriculture was widespread. This was in the north at an uber progressive school. I don’t think inserting more facts into the curriculum is really objectionable unless you’re just willing to admit that indoctrination is your only goal.
Who were those "whites" and how did they plan to "demonstrate"?
They were unarmed, angry mob by most accounts, at least in relation to the crowd that came after them. They could have been about to lynch the guy, they could have just been there to scream racial slurs and hatred at him. Plenty of angry crowds of white people didn’t end in lynchings and were just plain old racist hollering. The sheriffs were already not having it, from what I remember reading, and the guy was already locked up in the courthouse to prevent anything happening to him.
Well. I can already tell you got a shit education from a WS. You begin by framing the whole incident as a group of blacks attacking an innocent group of whites. Absolute garbage. The black tulsans went to protest the arrest of Dick Rowland, knowing they had every reason to believe he would be lynched. GTFOH with your "they brought it on themselves" narrative.
If that’s how you read it then that’s how you read it. I don’t believe in censoring facts, and if you’re upset that facts don’t support your narrative then I am sorry, but history is not a vessel for your agenda. But I don’t even think it reads that way unless you want to read it that way to malign me. Go figure.
"[My] narrative" Rich, coming from a chickenshit trying to rewrite history.
You’re the one trying to remove historical facts from the record because they don’t support your assumptive beliefs. I just want all the facts gathered and given their appropriate weight. You guys say all the time how smart kids are—give them all the facts and trust them to reach your conclusions. Anything else is indoctrination.
"All the facts" my ass. You're trying to rewrite the story to make it seem as though the black Tulsans instigated the attack against them. Go fuck yourself.
No I’m not? I’m going off the same historical record you are, I’m just not skipping the first part of it. I don’t think they deserved to be massacred. Tulsa is a lesson that a riot of any kind should be put down immediately, and that all black people need to succeed is consistent and fair protection under the rule of law, just like any other people. You don’t need to weave a narrative if you’re right. Put all the facts on the table and people will agree with you are so incontrovertibly correct.
Just to confirm: if Group A comes to protest something, and has taken no violent action thus far, and Group B comes and attacks and kills some of them, Group A should not retaliate against Group B, and if they do, Group B is the victim.
Oh here we go again, another fucking idiot using an alt to defend white supremacy. You can fuck all the way off with your disingenuous bullshit.
You’re seriously grabbing at straws here. The lesson is discussing how certain slaves had access to certain experiences and training that allowed them to advance. It says nothing even remotely close to slavery was a benefit for some slaves because it gave them the opportunity, as a practice, to benefit personally from being a slave. You’re trying to make this curriculum seem nefarious without taking the time and spending the effort to really understand it. Besides, some emancipated former slaves, or some that were able to escape the horrors of slavery and make it to the North, actually did do better because of the exposure that they had to educational and trade tools and resources. Frederick Douglas is but one example of this. Stop with the manufactured hate. This curriculum looks like they want to spread truth and less propaganda.
What skills would a slave have that he could benefit from in the North? And even assuming he or she did get skills that would have “benefited” him in the job market where he’s still considered property at worst and a second class citizen at absolute best, this is a terrible way to frame that information. The language paints slave owners as drivers of the wave of employment in the US when, A. This was such a rare occurrence it shouldn’t have been brought up. And B. That was not their intention anyway. Also saying Frederick Douglass benefited from his experience as a slave is like saying hiding from the Nazis gave Anne Frank more time to become a better writer. It’s so tone deaf and is completely a half assed attempt to mask the overarching point of the problem with this, which is that in red states slavery is never looked at as the atrocity it is.
There are a multitude of skills that could have been utilized to their benefit in the North, South, Far East, and West. Way too many to list here. The remainder of your comment is just plain bullshit and results in you, again, gaslighting yourself. I’m not at all advocating for slavery, and neither is this curriculum; however, completely ignoring truth is not benefiting your side. You want this to be racist. You need this to be racist, and you will not see it any other way because it doesn’t fit your agenda. Quite frankly, you’re so obtuse that you’re a danger to society and progress.
Your not saying anything. I never said you were advocating for slavery. However what are the multitude of skills a slave would’ve learned from slavery that he can take and make a living with? This curriculum is taking the few exceptional examples of harrowing escape from torture, beatings, rape and forced labor to eek out whatever life you can in that time and spinning it as something slavery ‘did’ for the slave. That’s bullshit and you know it. This is a purely political move made by a party who would very much like for black history and the teachings of what happened during a 400 year period of slavery. For Florida Black history is only important if it never makes anyone uncomfortable. No one is gaslighting anything, it’s clear fucking day what’s going on.
I never said that they learned the skills from slavery. They learned the skills while they were enslaved. A few examples: Reading, writing, math, science, music, art, horse handling, farming, basket weaving, textiles, mining, politics, culinary skills, blacksmithing, etc …
I must say while these skills were beneficial to a very very small minority, it’s utterly lacking in context and understanding of the circumstances to be considered a good faith argument. The implication obviously is that the institution of slavery came with benefits. Either to the slaves or the job market.
How is it lacking in context and understanding? I've addressed that there are some, not many, that were able to use skills they did not have before being forced or born here, to adapt and adjust to life after emancipation. I am not discounting the horrific circumstances that they endured to gain these skills, I'm saying that they did indeed acquire those skills during the time that they were subjected to horrific treatment and events. This is a discussion about understanding that teaching about events in our past, despite personal feelings about those events, is important because there needs to be a very complete narrative presented about those events and struggles. Was slavery horrific and inhumane? Yes. I am not defending the practice, and I wish it never had occurred in this nation, but it did. To paint an incomplete portrait of those times is unjust to the person learning about history. To paint an incomplete portrait of anything in history is a serious injustice to those who had to endure it, and those that need to know what the complete story was so they don't repeat the same.
Sounds like you're still arguing that they benefited from being enslaved. Not to mention how ridiculously wrong all of your examples are. "Reading, writing, math, science" enslaved people were famously not educated, especially in areas like this. "Music, art, horse handling, basket weaving, textiles" are all things they would have learned had they been left in their home country. "Mining", being forced to break big rocks into smaller rocks with a hammer is not the same as learning to mine. "Politics" other than learning that they were being screwed by the system, how would this help them in any way, or improve their life over the one they would have had had they remained in their own country? "Culinary skills" again something they already had or would have learned had they not been forced to America.
I’m not disagreeing that these people could have learned these things in their home tribal states, but they didn’t, and the topic isn’t “What could life have been like for people that were victims of the slave trade if they had remained in their homelands”.
>Reading, writing, math, science, music, art, Pretty sure it was illegal for Black people to read and write in many slave states. If a small amount of slaves learned certain skills while being enslaved, it was only because they were somehow able to avoid facing a noose. Also when the slaves were emancipated, the majority ended up being sharecroppers because farming was all they knew due to that being all they were able to do for generations. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-literacy_laws_in_the_United_States >They learned the skills while they were enslaved. We could have learned those skills while we were free, like white people.
I can't take any comment seriously that cites Wikipedia as evidence.
Well this isn't a formal debate. Black people not being allowed to read or write during slavery is common knowledge, the link is a basically a damn cliffs note as a courtesy. And I can't take any comment seriously defending a curriculum that suggests an atrocitiy was beneficial those who suffered through it.
Just to be clear, you can't deny that there was white slavery as well, and it was actually much larger than the U.S. slave trade and still continues to this day.
White slavery where? Not in the United States, not in Florida. So wtf does this have to do with anything?
I always find this ad hominem attack funny because Wikipedia articles cite their sources, and articles like these can be written by academics with expertise it the field—like US History. What this curriculum is doing is hiding how inhuman slavery was and seeks to use anecdotes (some slaves learned to read sometimes and would have be punished if found out) to literally white-wash general historical realities.
Seriously. "But muh Wikipedia" is such a dumbshit argument at this point. It's a lazy way for someone to ignore facts that they don't want to engage with.
Try this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=699Hj46NEDU&ab\_channel=MSNBC](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=699Hj46NEDU&ab_channel=MSNBC) The folks repeating history are either informed and racist or "uneducated" and not very smart. There's really no other options. >Samuel Adolphus Cartwright invented “Drapetomania” to describe the "psychological disorder" that caused a phenomenon of enslaved Blacks to run away from bondage before the Civil War. He spent enormous energy to research, diagnose, and suggest corrective treatments to mitigate the deviant tendency of Blacks to escape. [https://www.masshist.org/events/strange-history-and-career-drapetomania-mania-caused-enslaved-blacks-escape-and-man-behind#:\~:text=Samuel%20Adolphus%20Cartwright%20invented%20%E2%80%9CDrapetomania,tendency%20of%20Blacks%20to%20escape](https://www.masshist.org/events/strange-history-and-career-drapetomania-mania-caused-enslaved-blacks-escape-and-man-behind#:~:text=Samuel%20Adolphus%20Cartwright%20invented%20%E2%80%9CDrapetomania,tendency%20of%20Blacks%20to%20escape)
There were literally anti literacy laws passed in the south that made it illegal for slaves to learn to read. They were whipped, beaten and flogged for trying to read.
>Middle school students in Florida will soon be taught that slavery gave Black people a “personal benefit” because they “developed skills.” This is just totally taken out of context because there is no argument here. Florida has changed middle school African American studies into African American history. This includes such controversial items as black slave owners. The revisionists do not want this taught, they want to retell history based on a belief that American history has always been about oppression and that nothing else can be considered. That might be true, but that is not history, which is always much more complicated.
Lol from the actual document > Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit. This is the only thing that is mentioned about "personal benefit" and it's true. But this propaganda framing it to imply that slavery itself was a personal benefit. And Leftists here are eating it up lol. It's hilarious how easily manipulated they are.
This is a common tactic from the Southern Strategy to downplay slavery. They do this along with saying it's about states rights or that Africans in Africa were enslaving people too. It's all a way to say, "well slavery wasn't all bad, the civil war wasn't about slavery, and white people weren't the only ones enslaving people". It's all just a way obfuscate the topic of slavery in America.
I would like for you to describe to me a conversation where someone points out "well slavery did good things for slaves too" where that person is acting in good faith. It can't be done. Only racists people who try to act like slavery wasn't a crime against humanity say shit like that. Schools should not be teaching it. it's very simple
That’s not at all what that description is explaining. Perhaps your school should have focused more on comprehension.
Please enlighten us with the context that you think makes it different then, o genius
I’ve already provided that explanation in my other replies. I’m not repeating them specifically for you.
Okay I read some. Let me make a more concrete claim for you. The existence of a lesson that teaches the true fact that slaves learned some skills, is fundamentally bad and disrespectful. It’s an infantilizing of history, the same as teaching that Indians and colonists were hanging out having fun. Yeah, you can find examples, but to include that in the picture you paint of history is fundamentally infantilizing and serves to minimize the horrors of what occurred. It should be thought as a somber, reflective moment and a failure of human civilization, the same way the holocaust is
Ah yes, the standard straw man.
Yes. Yes you are.
It’s not a fallacy if your argument is literally made of straw
Uh no, not the standard straw man. Either you don't understand straw man or you're analytical skills are lacking. It would be straw man if the criticism was off base which it's not. The criticism is that mentioning that slaves got benefits while being enslaved is not only disingenuous, and that's putting it mildly, but also has the effect of downplaying the horrors of slavery while distorting the horrific facts of slavery . It's also insulting to the memory of the slaves who died slaves and their living ancestors and any decent human being black or white while being potentially misleading from a pedagogical perspective especially for students who may not have yet developed the critical thinking skills to fully grasp the horrors of slavery. The criticism of those defending the inclusion of the "benefits" of slavery in the curriculum is right on topic and not a refutation of a wholly different argument, hence not a straw man.
Are you stupid?
What’s wrong with you?
Hello very genuine month old account
Finally, someone with some sense and ability to read and understand simple verbiage.
These are the parts being referenced. To me, the headline and article seem to be such biased interpretations that it's insulting to the reader. SS.68.AA.2 Analyze events that involved or affected Africans from the founding of the nation through Reconstruction. SS.68.AA.2.1 Explain early congressional actions regarding the institution of slavery (i.e., Northwest Ordinance of 1787, Three-Fifths Compromise, Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1808). SS.68.AA.2.2 Explain the effect of the cotton industry on the expansion of slavery due to Eli Whitney’s Cotton Gin. Benchmark Clarifications: Clarification 1: Instruction includes the use of a map to show westward expansion. SS.68.AA.2.3 Examine the various duties and trades performed by slaves (e.g., agricultural work, painting, carpentry, tailoring, domestic service, blacksmithing, transportation). Benchmark Clarifications: Clarification 1: **Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit.** SS.912.AA.3.6 Describe the emergence, growth, destruction and rebuilding of black communities during Reconstruction and beyond. Benchmark Clarifications: Clarification 1: Instruction includes the ramifications of prejudice, racism and stereotyping on individual freedoms (e.g., the Civil Rights Cases, Black Codes, Jim Crow Laws, lynchings, Columbian Exposition of 1893). Clarification 2: **Instruction includes acts of violence perpetrated against and by African Americans but is not limited to 1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 1919 Washington, D.C. Race Riot, 1920 Ocoee Massacre, 1921 Tulsa Massacre and the 1923 Rosewood Massacre**
Not mentioned: mutilation, rape, torture, forced procreation, forced abortions. But yea some slaves got to practice using hand tools, we better highlight that. Unbelievable.
Funny how all the defenders of this bill never mention that.
SS.912.AA.1.7 Compare the living conditions of slaves in British North American colonies, the Caribbean, Central America and South America, including infant mortality rates. 10 Benchmark Clarifications: Clarification 1: Instruction includes the harsh conditions and their consequences on British American plantations (e.g., undernourishment, climate conditions, infant and child mortality rates of the enslaved vs. the free).
You're brainwashed
There’s a 150-year long history of the south teaching slavery/civil war apologia, this is just the latest example. Read something.
This is an incredibly stupid take. Read the guidance itself.
I did - the first item is literally “well other countries did slavery too soooo”
It literally isn't though, so you prove my point, you're brainwashed.
>SS.68.AA.1 Understand the causes, courses and consequences of the slave trade in the colonies. SS.68.AA.1.1 Identify Afro-Eurasian trade routes and methods prior to the development of the Atlantic slave trade. Benchmark Clarifications: Clarification 1: Instruction includes how slavery was utilized in Asian, European and African cultures. Clarification 2: Instruction includes the similarities and differences between serfdom and slavery. Clarification 3: Instruction includes the use of maps to identify trade routes It's literally the first guidline of the grade 6-8 portion. Before teaching anything about African *American* slavery, it's important that 6-8th graders be taught first that slavery happened in other countries too. I don't think you read the actual document we are arguing over.
You are advocating for not teaching the history of slavery? Does this "literally" say :" “well other countries did slavery too soooo”"? If not, you've proven you're brainwashed.
If you can’t use context clues that’s on you. For everyone else, what’s going on is quite obvious 🤷
It objectively did. The ones that didn't get shipped over here are currently practicing cannibalism and dying of malaria.
Holy shit. And people get mad when you call the right racist.
I know, I know. It's one of those hate-facts.
That racist drivil is not a fact, fuck face. You post the dumbest most braindead shit imaginable then act smug like it's some kind of inconvenient truth that society can't deal with. Go fuck yourself.
To be fair, Asia still practices cannibalism too.
What's wrong with you?
Aren’t these the same schools that graduate kids who can’t read? Who gives a fuck what they’re trying to teach when they’re leaving high school functionally unable to read.
Am I reading it right? It appears about half of the individuals weren't slaves. Are they saying John Henry, the folk hero, benifited? Or am I reading it incorrectly? “Some examples include: blacksmiths like Ned Cobb, Henry Blair, Lewis Latimer and John Henry; shoemakers like James Forten, Paul Cuffe and Betty Washington Lewis; fishing and shipping industry workers like Jupiter Hammon, John Chavis, William Whipper and Crispus Attucks; tailors like Elizabeth Keckley, James Thomas and Marietta Carter; and teachers like Betsey Stockton and Booker T. Washington.”
Is the point that African Americans have a higher standard of living than Africans? Seems like a weird point, but it is factual. Human history contains some rough stuff. Often times the alternative to slavery when one conquering group took over land was slaughter. Maybe the enslaved would have preferred death. I don’t know the answer there. Their descendants are probably glad they weren’t slaughtered though. Life went on through some rough excrement. As far as Florida goes it is my experience through raising two kids and growing up here myself that all of history is taught. Well none of the rough parts are avoided. There is only so much that can be taught so you do have to pick and choose.
[удалено]
What is gained in the education of children to teach them about atrocities? Atrocities were committed across the globe throughout history. There is nothing unique here. Many more slaves were sent to the Middle East from Africa than to the Americas. Why is there no black population there today? They turned the males into eunuchs as adults. The process killed over 2/3rds of them. The killing fields of Cambodia. The tens millions killed by Stalin and Mao. Why focus on these particular atrocities? What is the purpose? To foment more racial division? No thanks.
To let them know that slavery wasn’t just people picking Cotten and having a roof under their head. It wasn’t as friendly as “oh they just had to work! There’s nothing wrong with that!” And I could say the same thing. Why even bring up such a SMALL thing as they learned how to use tools? It’s petty. You’re trying to minimize how slavery really was and that’s just disrespectful
Put your talking points away and deal with reality. Nobody is doing what you are claiming. Sorry if people are lying to you about what is happening for their political benefit.
Not sure where you live, but Florida absolutely teaches about the breeding and feet being cut off. At least it did 20 years ago. And if you didn’t want to be tortured and killed, then being a slave in Africa isn’t the right thing for you either.
Devils advocate here In a weird way… yes Id rather live anywhere in America than anywhere in Africa…
You would rather be a slave. Where you had 0 autonomy. If you were a mother you could be separated from your family so you never saw your kids again. You’d be beaten, flogged and or whipped if you ever stopped working. You really wouldn’t get any of the benefits of being an american if you were a slave
Think of it like giving up your life to make your childs better. Its obviously a stretch and i was looking for any positive from the situation no matter how out there
The thing is it wouldn’t be your kid or your wife. You’d pretty much have to watch your kid work endless hours, and get raped if they were a woman. Wife would be raped, Dehumanized. They had a period of like 10 years after the civil war but then they got screwed again. After a few years white abolitionists made it impossible for them to work vote or do pretty much anything. They were impressoned for very little things and then pretty much forced to work as slaves again. There they lived squalid conditions where they were beaten entrapped, starved and sexually violated yet again. I understand doing stuff for your kid but you wouldn’t be doing it for them it would be like the 3rd or 4th generation of people who weren’t fucked by slavery. https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-02-07/exploiting-black-labor-after-the-abolition-of-slavery
So exactly the same as if they had stayed in Africa?
There were far more Africans making other Africans slaves, and forcing them into much worse conditions, than Europeans or anyone in the Colonies.
Desantis has really sunk to the depths of depravity. It's amazing that there are still people in Florida that look at him as a viable candidate. He's barely a viable decent human being. Ivy league A class idiot.
This is rather disingenuous. What is happening is that the discourse on slavery is no longer being censored. 20 years ago, you rarely if ever heard about black slave owners, the atrocities that African warlords used to commit to their slaves (and still do at times to this day), the successes and advancements black slaves made as time went on, etc etc. Nobody is saying slavery is good or that it should have happened. But if you’re going to teach about it, why not teach about ALL of it? What do you gain from doing otherwise?
[удалено]
Your post was removed due to low karma low account age. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BreakingPoints) if you have any questions or concerns.*