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

Institutional racism still exists in this country- some info below:

Black women are 2 to 3 times more likely to die in childbirth than white women
Black children are 2 to 3 times more likely to die in childbirth than white children
There are racial biases built into algorithms to test for kidney disease (using false assumptions blacks have more muscle mass than white people) and for pulmonary tests (using false assumptions that blacks have 10-15% less lung capacity than white people)
These assumptions date back to the slave days and result in inferior treatment for these diseases.
DOJ has reached agreement with State of Alabama to mitigate for discrimination in against generations of black residents over deficiencies in sewer systems.
Just tip of iceberg - welcome constructive feedback.

 

I think I’ve figured it out. The DeSantis-Rufo policy ideas are designed to revive the Lost Cause fallacy and slowly indoctrinate our youth with this evil lie. It’s the only explanation I can think of as to why anyone could even conceive of glorifying the “golden period” of slavery.

 

so this refutes your pt about prejudging & makes my pt that people constantly process info. You PREjudge a black person as an AA despite their skin color telling you nothing about their nationality. However. Assuming you see this person in America, it’s pretty good info processing. If they spoke with a British accent, you’d insta update & put probability on other nationalities. This is how our minds work. There’s nothing wrong with using incomplete, imperfect & scant info. Now, if you aren’t willing to update as new info comes in, there’s a prob

 

You're still at this? Bless your heart.

 

Why do you care?

 

Why do you think it is repugnant? Is it because it is false, or is it because you find it morally and politically reprehensible in the current cultural moment?

 

I find it morally and politically reprehensible to rewrite history, and to mandate our children be taught that slavery has a “good side” to it. Why are the supporters of this mission to whitewash history so insecure and thin-skinned that they feel the need to whitewash?

I’ve asked before, but why is this the hill you choose to defend?

The last time the South went through this re-write, the Daughters of the Confederacy created the Lost Cause. Amongst other things, the Lost Cause propagated a false narrative that slavery wasn’t so terrible. They did so to provide background for popular support to fight against the civil rights movement in the 60s.

Read up on the Lost Cause. You’ll see the same bogus revisionism that DeSantites are doing today.

 

Here’s an excerpt from Wikipedia that I just looked up:


Beyond forced unpaid labor and denial of freedom to leave the slaveholder, the treatment of slaves in the United States often included sexual abuse and rape, the denial of education, and punishments like whippings. Families were often split up by the sale of one or more members, usually never to see or hear of each other again.[11] By turning a blind eye to these realities, Lost Cause proponents re-imagine slavery as a positive good and deny that alleviation of the conditions of slavery was the central cause of the American Civil War, contrary to statements made by Confederate leaders, such as in the Cornerstone Speech.[12] Instead, they frame the war as a defense of states' rights, and as necessary to protect their agrarian economy against supposed Northern aggression.[13][14][15] The Union victory is thus explained as the result of its greater size and industrial wealth, while the Confederate side is portrayed as having greater morality and military skill.[12] Modern historians overwhelmingly disagree with these characterizations, noting that the central cause of the war was slavery.[16][17][18]

There were two intense periods of Lost Cause activity: the first was around the turn of the 20th century, when efforts were made to preserve the memories of dying Confederate veterans, and the second was during the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, in reaction to growing public support for racial equality. Through actions such as building prominent Confederate monuments and writing history textbooks, Lost Cause organizations (including the United Daughters of the Confederacy and Sons of Confederate Veterans) sought to ensure Southern whites would know what they called the "true" narrative of the Civil War, and therefore continue to support white supremacistpolicies such as Jim Crow laws.[9][19] In that regard, white supremacy is a central feature of the Lost Cause narrative.[19]

Lost Cause of the Confederacy - Wikipedia

 

I think I've made it clear that common sense says that some slaves were freed with skills that would have been at least useful and possibly marketable. As I've also said, why would the state demand that be taught other than to say there was some good that happened in slavery?
Somehow you took that all the way to:

obviously I said absolutely nothing about blacks being as poor today as they were 160 years ago and you obviously couldn't point anyone else who did. and no one certainly accused you of hating all black people.
it's funny. you take such outrage and insist on insulting anyone who you think misrepresents your opinion and then try to pretend I and others have said anything close to as ridiculous as you've claimed.
i will not take your route to insults, simply say that your claim is fiction.

 

I'm not defending this. There is, however, a fundamentalist closeminded tinge to the shaming going on in this thread, which is I am asking the question.

I don't whitewash slavery. I think it was terrible and unjust, and I believe it is a major stain on the history of our country. I think the additions to the curriculum that are being critiqued are weird. I also think they are unimportant and irrelevant in the grand scope of history. I think it would be on par with throwing in that Hitler served at the soup kitchen once and supported some welfare programs or something. I'm sure Hitler did something once that could be considered good by society on some level. Maybe he ate all of his vegetables after dinner once or something, but that is irrelevant in the grand scope of history. And that is how I look at this. I think DeSantis wasted his time and energy here, and he made a mountain out of a mole hill.

What is being advocated in the curriculum could be true. It could be false. I critique DeSantis here on the relevance and the importance of some of the standards in the curriculum. I don't defend it.

I also look at the debate in this thread kind of like a debate over whether Hitler ate all of his vegetables after dinner or something. It literally has zero impact on the overall picture because the other stuff Hitler did is all that matters. There is 0 reason to draw lines and be fundamentalist about it one way or the other.

 

Apparently, fresh out of college school teacher Mr. DeSantis was constantly at odds with his students for his stunning lack of knowledge about amongst other things, the causes of the civil war.

He's always been totally clueless.

 

He may know exactly what he’s doing and just be a bad person. I think that is a more logical explanation.

And unlike the vast majority of us, he hasn’t grown or gained perspective since he was in his early 20s. There seems to a twisted darkness inside him that life experiences and interactions with fellow humans cannot illuminate

 

False dilemma. It is false and I find it morally and politically repugnant in this cultural moment. If I thought there was a group of stupid people just trying to protect their children from anything bad I would pity their ignorance I would not elect them to any office.

 

You mean she made up s*** ?

CNN Panelist Unloads on Kamala Harris, She 'Completely Made-up' Allegations About Florida's Curriculum

 

I am pointing out the faulty logic through parody and mockery, as I already explained to you.

Also let's not pretend like you don't know what you're doing when you say: "why would the state demand that be taught other than to say there was some good that happened in slavery?" in response to PITBOSS who responded to me. That's not what I said, and that's akin to saying that any sort of universally accepted evil "wasn't all that bad" like the Holocaust or 9/11. That's an ugly form of dismissiveness that you pretend is not insulting, when everybody knows damn well that is incredibly insulting because everybody knows that's wrong. That's why I began the thread in the manner in which I did, I really wanted to be clear, but no attempt is ever good enough unless you completely agree with the hive mind here.

So here are my questions for you:
1. Why would you continue to act like I was trying to suggest "slavery wasn't all bad" despite me repeatedly explaining myself, unless you want to demonize me as a slavery sympathizer?
2. At what point can we start talking about Black competencies without trivializing systems of oppression or systemic racism? Post-Civil War? Post Civil Rights Act? Post Barack Obama?

 

Sounds like we are basically in full agreement. There is no educational value in educating our children that slavery was good for both sides. None. And so the real question, then, is why try and implement it? And when we look at who is now the de facto educational czar, Chris Rufo, the answer becomes clearer and clearer. He is trying to whitewash history, he is trying to reinvent the fallacy of the Lost Cause.

 

So I looked through the Florida curriculum on teaching about slavery and there are 191 items for teachers to focus on when teaching. The one in question I agree is wrong to put in there. But to say it's a full whitewash is typical partisanship. When the issue at hand is 0.5% of the curriculum then I wouldn't agree it's a whitewash at all. Simple solution is to remove that part or don't teach that particular talking point.

 

I’ve seen a committed pattern to whitewash. The attack on CRT, the attacks on AP courses, and now this. And of course we aren’t even discussing the fact that Rufo won’t allow any mention of gayness in schools, including editing out such basic things as math problems that might lead to ami Ference that the subject lives in a gay household.

And more to your point, I don’t think anyone is suggesting we strip the entire curriculum. I think the point is focused on the effort by Rufo to sneak this into the curriculum and hoe it goes unnoticed. Don’t you have a problem with that?

 

Who is Rufo? Is he on the Fl school board that makes these decisions? CRT is a problem for a lot of people, myself included, so that is a separate discussion.

 

Unskilled Florida Man Regrets Missing Out on Being Enslaved