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

When people show you who they are, believe them

 

I don’t think it’s ever a valid claim to say “no one” or “everyone” about either side of the aisle.

 

Fair point. I will go back a search the thread for the scathing critiques by those on the right.

 

What astounds me is the lengths and depths of the few who have decided that this new curriculum is a hill they wish to stand and defend.

To me, the entire concept of teaching students that slavery was “beneficially” to those enslaved is, well, irredeemable. And it appears those on here conceptually agree that the idea is repugnant, yet nevertheless fight viciously to defend this hill.

Why? What is it about DeSantisism that leads you to defend his actions no matter how offensive they may be, even to you?

 

Next step in the Florida curriculum in World History:

The Inquisition actually benefitted the Jews, as it taught them the enrichment of world travel.

 

and the holocaust showed Jews the joy of "sacrifice" and "sharing" their wealth with others.

 

The way to diffusing this kind of moral argumentation is to uphold a moral standard of human conduct and point out that it has been violated. "Prejudice" literally means before judgment. It is a premature judgment made about another person. You can tell a lot about the distribution of power in a culture by which kinds of prejudice are tolerated and accepted and which kinds of prejudice are not tolerated and accepted.

 

How about we stop legislating laws and policies that are directed to silencing and censoring a specific group of people? Is that such a controversial point that causes vocal outrage?

 

That is a red herring to the point I was making. It is completely unrelated.

 

silly pt, at best. premature?!?! Who defines that? Does a light bulb go off when people are allowed to process information? I watch my dog insta-size up other dogs from a good distance. Not using avail info is idiotic & unnatural.

Bayesian inference - Wikipedia

 

Unless dear leader is talking about slaves from 1855-65, who then became free men, he can stick this claim where the sun doesn't shine.

 

Here's exactly how the conversation started.

I said this:

PITBOSS said this directly in response to the above.

Then you responded like this:

Here's how that looks to me: Discussing any competency that Blacks had during reconstruction which they developed during slavery is akin to saying that "slavery wasn't so bad."

Here's the issue with that line of thinking: "Where do we draw the line?"

Most of us agree that institutional racism lasted at least until 1964. I would agree that remnants of it lasted even longer than that in the form of redlining, and obviously there are some racists today, but it's not really a "systemic" issue anymore.

My post was mocking the notion that merely pointing out competencies that Blacks have had throughout history, including during slavery, is suggesting "slavery isn't so bad." So, I took it a big step further and parodied the current SJWs on the left who think that America remains systemically racist due to inequity... so therefore, any highlighting of Black competencies is trivializing systems of oppression because those competencies were developed under such systems.

 

Hilarious from Kruse

 

When you meet an African-American for the first time do you employ Bayesian Inference as a tool to do analysis and make predictions about the person you have just met?

 

of course. As do you. In fact, in your question, why did you judge than as an AA. I’ll bet it’s due to the color of their skin

 

When you see a black person walking on the other side of the street or shopping in the same store as you what kind of beyesian inferences do you make about them?

 

to call a person Black is to process information

 

NM

 

Anything else? There is a lot of data about African Americans out there. Do you use it to draw inferences about African Americans before you meet them?

 

You spelled Baseball wrong.