New Florida curriculum says slavery had “personal benefits” for slaves

Then start your own thread. I’ll be sure to come right over and comment…

 

Why do you think it “looks bad optically?”

 

Just out of curiosity what percentage of enslaved persons do you think were able to market their skills during the 246 years (from 1619 to 1865) in which chattel slavery was legal in the United States? If my understanding of American history is accurate the percentage is extremely small and those who opted to exercise the option of marketing their skills against the wishes of their owners in states in which slavery was not legal could be subject to capture, forcible return to their masters and frequently torture for exercising that option.

 

Maybe because it wasn't true.
Irish slaves myth
A number of the Irish came to the US as indentured servants for a fixed period of time after which they became free persons. Obviously not remotely similar to chattel slavery in which enslaved persons were held in involuntary servitude for life with the condition extending to their decedents in perpetuity.

 

I know. But the Florida curriculum includes sections on indentured servitude. Everybody knows why.

 

Well since you were actually the first one to bring up the AP curriculum in this thread, I'm gonna talk about it here instead.

 

That has nothing to do with the conversation. Try to stay on topic.

 

Sure, just keep it to what I brought up, which is that you were originally for something that you now perceive as racist.

 

Because it sounds like it was a supporting it. They should get rid of it. Said it on page one. But everyone piling on is 100% politics.

 

No, I'm going to talk about the entirety of both documents, since you're the one who first compared them in this thread. You don't even know what's in the AP course. You should educate yourself before you post about stuff that you know nothing about.

 

Ok so your post that I quoted and asked you about specifically said “do I think it was racist? No”

Your first post in this thread (page 2) says: “Extremely insensitive/racist thing to put in the curriculum.”

lol. Backtrack much?

 

You keep talking about the entirety of both, you are racist for wanting the AP course with it’s obvious racist message.

 

Yes, I’ve changed my view slightly. Not racist but insensitive. You can call it backtracking but after I saw the AP course had it as well as Encyclopedias also having it I changed my view. With new facts it would be unwise to not be open to changing your view. It’s why so many maskers look foolish for blindly still thinking masks work only because they don’t want to admit they were wrong in their thinking for a few years.

 

The AP version is a lot less racist than the DeSantis version. I know that because I've read both of them. You haven't so you should follow your own advice and not comment on things you know nothing about.

 

Ah, so you did the same thing you're accusing me of doing. At least I've read both documents so I know what I'm talking about. You cherry picked one sentence out of each.

 

Lol, “less racist”? Holy crap that shit is funny. You are only a little racist I guess…

 

Nope. I never commented on the AP course before. Good try.

 

The AP course had what exactly? How is this you NOT commenting on the AP course by equating it with the new curriculum? Lol. Might be time to call it a night, champ.

 

Well one of the reasons DeSantis banned it from Florida is because he thought it was racist against white people. Like it didn't include stuff about how white people were slaves too. But you have no idea what's in the AP course. So you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

I posted what the AP course has, go back and read it. Sounds like you need to lay off the sauce sport.