You can’t say that!

[hoosboot]

Again, the point is about the END of slavery, it is a modifier saying "ok, we are at reconstruction, thank God for us Whites, we provided Blacks the skills they needed to get by".

Somewhere you said you do not know why it is there, it is there to get White Southern votes. That is the only reason. If that is why it is there, and if you think it is wrong tell me the specific reason that makes more sense, if that is why it is there my explanation fits perfectly.

But let's do this for everything, do we tell people Pearl Harbor sank our obsolete battleships so Pearl made us stronger by guaranteeing a modern navy?

FDR had polio, the bright spot is Eleanor said it made him stronger and braver. Polio helped make the US a stronger nation.

If we are going to, as Tim Scott said, put a silver lining on slavery, let us do it for everything.

It is there to win votes. He isn't trying to win votes of people who hate what the CSA stood for, nor of Blacks.

Can you find a single other state that requires a "skills to compete" requirement?

Why is this an important aspect to teach in the complex and detailed history of slavery. It's the question I've been trying to ask and Crazy offered the best route for including it. Should we highlight the exercise benefits of The Trail of Tears? The thriftiness that the Great Depression provoked?

Maybe in higher level high school courses where the nuances of things can be discussed in more complex ways, but aren't these K-12 guidelines?

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

Again, the point is about the END of slavery, it is a modifier saying "ok, we are at reconstruction, thank God for us Whites, we provided Blacks the skills they needed to get by".

I don't think this description in the standards fits your wording of it. But I don't know:

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.

 

[IUCrazy2]

Interesting thoughts. As Brad noted, one has to ask why something is an important element to teach in the limited time available and how that element is going to be woven into the larger instruction. Particularly in lower grades, it's a difficult challenge. Absent the context of the economic threat that many southern whites felt that newly freed slaves presented, I'm not sure I see a compelling case to include it in a limited instruction period over other elements of a complex history.

Yeah it is all a choice. I haven't looked through all the Florida standards to see what they do with it (and I don't plan to because it really doesn't impact me at all and just not that invested) just saying that it doesn't necessarily have to be some nefarious plot to white wash slavery.

You can tell the story that some percentage of white people just didn't like black people and therefore Jim Crow and that isn't false, but I think there is more complexity involved than just that. And to your point in another post, I wouldn't introduce this to 5th graders.

 

[hoosboot]

Yeah it is all a choice. I haven't looked through all the Florida standards to see what they do with it (and I don't plan to because it really doesn't impact me at all and just not that invested) just saying that it doesn't necessarily have to be some nefarious plot to white wash slavery.

You can tell the story that some percentage of white people just didn't like black people and therefore Jim Crow and that isn't false, but I think there is more complexity involved than just that. And to your point in another post, I wouldn't introduce this to 5th graders.

Yeah, I don't think this is some nefarious plot to whitewash slavery. It's bad language that wasn't thought through all the way. That's why you need to do drafts of these things for comment.

 

[larsIU]

Yeah, I don't think this is some nefarious plot to whitewash slavery. It's bad language that wasn't thought through all the way. That's why you need to do drafts of these things for comment.

ChatGPT never would have used the word "benefit".

 

[CO. Hoosier]

"... how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit." That sounds to me as if slavery allowed them to learn the skills. If I were in a job interview and I said "though my current job I was able to learn 'X'", would that not be crediting my job with at least assisting?

The Germans pressed many captured people into factory work for them. I wonder if Ukrainians, Poles, French think of their time in German factories as developing "skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit"? I don't see what other purpose could be there but to soften everything else said about slavery. Especially because it probably is the last thing discussed, I think people tend to remember the opening and closing. So the last thing they hear on slavery is some slaves were able to develop skills that would help them.

Skills they could have developed as free men and women. Some slaves had food, water, and clothes too. Should that be mentioned.

My idea on slavery. 1) explain chattel slavery vs Roman or Greek. 2) discuss trade, and the northern participation 3) describe what "typical" life was like. It is fair to mention some slaves had it much better and some much worse. 4) Discuss Fugitive Slave Act, underground railroad, and Dred Scott.

Yes, they may have learned to grow watermelon (as an example mentioned). That sort of thing can be mentioned in the daily life. "Many times slaves grew their own food". That is more part of daily life than slavery.

But as written, it seems likely this will be the conclusion on slavery. "Slaves are emancipated and in some cases the skills learned provided personal benefit post-war" is softening.

When most people think of slaves, they think of plantations, cotton, tobacco and meager agrarian existence. In fact slaves also worked the factories, docks, railroads and in the building trades. Some, upon emancipation, had marketable skills. I think your attempt to take this reality into seeing slavery as a benefit is hogwash. You are drawing a conclusion and then imputing that conclusion to Florida. Just teach reality.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

CoH, completely agree, each one of us should be recognized as individuals because we are.

Unfortunately we too often see all "colored" folks as being part of a group (which our social contract labels as a Black race). This then obscures treating each of them as an individual (one of a kind). On top of that, we bring crime statistics and other stigmas into play regarding their "race".

Thus when seeing a person of color on the street it is easy to think about those crime statistics and stigmas while forgetting you are seeing a fellow human being.

For so many of us, the tendency for strict adherence to political dogma and ideology is overwhelming. I think we are seeing much if that in this thread.

I mentioned in the OP that discussions about slavery is really not about slavery, but instead is now about oppressed blacks and oppressing whites. Some freely admit that discussions about slavery should and does make whites uncomfortable. Think about that. No whites alive owned slaves. No blacks alive were slaves.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Again, the point is about the END of slavery, it is a modifier saying "ok, we are at reconstruction, thank God for us Whites, we provided Blacks the skills they needed to get by".

Somewhere you said you do not know why it is there, it is there to get White Southern votes. That is the only reason. If that is why it is there, and if you think it is wrong tell me the specific reason that makes more sense, if that is why it is there my explanation fits perfectly.

But let's do this for everything, do we tell people Pearl Harbor sank our obsolete battleships so Pearl made us stronger by guaranteeing a modern navy?

FDR had polio, the bright spot is Eleanor said it made him stronger and braver. Polio helped make the US a stronger nation.

If we are going to, as Tim Scott said, put a silver lining on slavery, let us do it for everything.

It is there to win votes. He isn't trying to win votes of people who hate what the CSA stood for, nor of Blacks.

Can you find a single other state that requires a "skills to compete" requirement?

We brought all those battleships back into service except the Arizona.

 

[Bloom.]

The liberal freak out over the Florida high school history curriculum is a clear window into the racist soul of the left.

In summary . . .

The curriculum noted that upon emancipation, some slaves who learned a trade while a slave were able to use those skills as a free person for their benefit.

The left, led by Kamala Harris, immediately pounced and said that the Florida education officials were saying that slavery benefited some slaves. That notion is strictly forbidden. The Harris/Liberal freak out is by no means a mild disagreement. It is full-throated senseless shouting and screaming.

Some slaves learning skills in the trades while enslaved is objectively true. Using those skills after emancipation for personal benefit is also objectively true.

Yet, that can’t be said. Why?

The answer has been part of history since 1619. Black people are oppressed. They don‘t have skills. Thus liberals tell us that Tim Scott is an exception to the norm, that Clarence Thomas isn’t really black, that blacks can’t manage photo ID’s that blacks can’t do math, and that blacks can only achieve with AA or DEI.

During this curriculum debate I heard a black dude say that just because slavery makes white people uncomfortable is no reason to change teaching. . That was revealing. We must understand that slavery is not about slaves and slave owners. They both have been gone for well over 150 years. Teaching about slavery is really teaching about whites and blacks. That is current affairs. Blacks need to be taught that they are still victims of whites and whites must understand they are still part of a long-gone despised institution.

Skin color is indeed destiny.

It's quite clear DeSantis didn't know what was in the curriculum to begin with, but the issue isn't noting that slaves did possibly learn skills, it's that it's being described as some sort of apprenticeship that is most appalling, as if they should've been thankful they got something out of it.

This forced labor was in lieu of any opportunity to be educated. It was in lieu of the freedom to make choices. The any skill they would've learned and later used as free men/women just meant they could possibly survive being on their own in a land that still mostly hated them merely for being black.

 

[Bloom.]

For so many of us, the tendency for strict adherence to political dogma and ideology is overwhelming. I think we are seeing much if that in this thread.

I mentioned in the OP that discussions about slavery is really not about slavery, but instead is now about oppressed blacks and oppressing whites. Some freely admit that discussions about slavery should and does make whites uncomfortable. Think about that. No whites alive owned slaves. No blacks alive were slaves.

We still have a segment of society that feels skin color determines the value of a person, and they are becoming ever more vocal and emboldened about it. They want to soften the blow of what this country and the people before its formation did to the people and cultures from another part of the world.

The reality is most successful civilizations thrived on the backs of slaves or at the very least forced labor. It doesn't make it any less terrible in looking back from a modern society.


The good news is when the aliens we're hearing about come down and start taking over, enslaving us all, you'll get to learn some new skills.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

When most people think of slaves, they think of plantations, cotton, tobacco and meager agrarian existence. In fact slaves also worked the factories, docks, railroads and in the building trades. Some, upon emancipation, had marketable skills. I think your attempt to take this reality into seeing slavery as a benefit is hogwash. You are drawing a conclusion and then imputing that conclusion to Florida. Just teach reality.

WHY MENTION IT AT ALL! Sans slavery, Blacks would have all those opportunities. Slavery had precisely zero impact on learning skills. None. Free Blacks did all the things you listed. Why mention skills with slavery when slavery in no way expanded skill acquisition.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

WHY MENTION IT AT ALL! Sans slavery, Blacks would have all those opportunities. Slavery had precisely zero impact on learning skills. None. Free Blacks did all the things you listed. Why mention skills with slavery when slavery in no way expanded skill acquisition.

Because it might help explain why certain black people did better while enslaved vis a vis other slaves or after being emancipated?

 

[Stuffshot]

You're reading a lot into a clarification of a standard that I don't believe is warranted. If I'm on the political side attacking this, your proposed teaching that some slaves had it better than others, means I would say "Oh, you're saying slavery was good for some of them? White washer!" As for your job comp, what you would say is "I have developed this skill. Aren't I great? And I did that in overwhelmingly bad conditions! Look at me! I'm awesome!" Why are we assuming the teachers won't focus on that and instead will teach kids that slavery was actually a good thing for some?

Re slavery comps, why just those? Why wouldn't you compare it to the world at the time of US Slavery? Compare it to what was going on in Brazil, the Caribbean, Africa, etc. during the same time.

I think every single thing you mention you would teach is in the Florida standards. So can we dispense with the canard that Florida has eliminated black history from its curriculum?

I don't think teachers can read that standard and know what they are permitted to teach or what they are permitted to say.

And, when a teacher is inevitably accused by a parent or anonymous video of violating this new, vague and unusual standard, I don't think the principals and school boards who will be in charge of disciplining teachers will be able to make a fair decision. In the current environment, the principals and school boards will be pressured by public opinion to issue an unfavorable decision against the accused teacher just to save their own ass.

 

[GiggityGoo]

I don't think teachers can read that standard and know what they are permitted to teach or what they are permitted to say.

And, when a teacher is inevitably accused by a parent or anonymous video of violating this new, vague and unusual standard, I don't think the principals and school boards who will be in charge of disciplining teachers will be able to make a fair decision. In the current environment, the principals and school boards will be pressured by public opinion to issue an unfavorable decision against the accused teacher just to save their own ass.

There should be no profession that has to look over their shoulder as much as K-12 teachers. They are entrusted with the nations most precious resource, developing minds.

If you can’t handle that responsibility. Doors right over there.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

I don't think teachers can read that standard and know what they are permitted to teach or what they are permitted to say.

And, when a teacher is inevitably accused by a parent or anonymous video of violating this new, vague and unusual standard, I don't think the principals and school boards who will be in charge of disciplining teachers will be able to make a fair decision. In the current environment, the principals and school boards will be pressured by public opinion to issue an unfavorable decision against the accused teacher just to save their own ass.

That’s not how state educational standards work.

 

[Stuffshot]

We brought all those battleships back into service except the Arizona.

And maybe the Oklahoma.

I think they were able to refloat the Oklahoma but never put it back into the war.

 

[Stuffshot]

That’s not how state educational standards work.

That generalization is far too broad to be true. Standards are not self-implementing anyway.

What I described is exactly how.popularly elected school boards act when publicly confronted by emotionally charged parents or activists.

 

[T.M.P.]

Because it might help explain why certain black people did better while enslaved vis a vis other slaves or after being emancipated?

So would the amount of anal rape they had to endure.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

That generalization is far too broad to be true. Standards are not self-implementing anyway.

What I described is exactly how.popularly elected school boards act when publicly confronted by emotionally charged parents or activists.

You don’t understand what state educational standards are.

 

[DANC]

I mean, he gave citations for his claims, but sure, dispute it because of his twitter name.

If that was true, you'd be hearing all about it - non-stop - on MSNBC and CNN.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

Why is this an important aspect to teach in the complex and detailed history of slavery. It's the question I've been trying to ask and Crazy offered the best route for including it. Should we highlight the exercise benefits of The Trail of Tears? The thriftiness that the Great Depression provoked?

Maybe in higher level high school courses where the nuances of things can be discussed in more complex ways, but aren't these K-12 guidelines?

Well, yeah, that helps explain some future attitudes, I think.

Suffering sometimes produces high art and beauty. But I don't think that's what this is about.

It's an interesting question though: why isn't one of the things we teach about that, given all the trauma suffered by a lot of slaves (I don't know if it can be said all, I'm not that familiar with it), many, many of them must have been suffering through pretty severe PTSD during their lives. What does being raised by those so used to trauma for so long do to your upbringing? To your personality and your attitudes to protect yourself? Do they, in turn, inflict that suffering onto their children? When and how does that cycle break?

 

[hoosboot]

Well, yeah, that helps explain some future attitudes, I think.

Suffering sometimes produces high art and beauty. But I don't think that's what this is about.

It's an interesting question though: why isn't one of the things we teach about that, given all the trauma suffered by a lot of slaves (I don't know if it can be said all, I'm not that familiar with it), many, many of them must have been suffering through pretty severe PTSD during their lives. What does being raised by those so used to trauma for so long do to your upbringing? To your personality and your attitudes to protect yourself? Do they, in turn, inflict that suffering onto their children? When and how does that cycle break?

As usual, those are all really interesting questions (although we don't typically focus on the thriftiness of those who came through the Great Depression as a benefit that we should lean into.)

We don't typically look at the high art that suffering produces as the "benefit" of it. I understand the desire to look for positive stories amidst the dark and ugly story of slavery, but I haven't seen a great rationale to make the useful skills that African-Americans who were enslaved left slavery with an important teaching point in middle school. I thought Crazy's take on it was an interesting connecting of the dots and I think aspect you focus on here is likewise really compelling introspection. We're currently not great at that kind of nuanced conversation though in most of our public discourse because there aren't easy, pre-packaged answers to land on (and I don't even know if high school is appropriate for trying to have these kinds of conversations.)

 

[Stuffshot]

You don’t understand what state educational standards are.

Maybe, but I know they are not automatically self-activating.

And you act like you've never been to a school board meeting in your life,

 

[Bloom.]

WHY MENTION IT AT ALL! Sans slavery, Blacks would have all those opportunities. Slavery had precisely zero impact on learning skills. None. Free Blacks did all the things you listed. Why mention skills with slavery when slavery in no way expanded skill acquisition.

Exactly.

Just because they learned them while being a slave doesn't make it a benefit of slavery. Being the facts that they learned things doesn't make it any less moral or outrageous. It's almost as stupid as someone saying not all slaves were treated poorly. Yeah...yeah they were. They held against their will.

 

[Mas-sa-suta]

Page 6 of Florida 2023 Academic Standards for teaching Social Studies: "Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit."

Students shouldn't be indoctrinated to the idea that fvcking slavery was beneficial. There's no way that language should appear in any Academic Standards for teaching social studies.

Truth = indoctrination
Virtue signalling = virtue
Up=down

Orwell understood totalitarian zeitgeist.

 

[stollcpa]

View embedded media

Here's Dr. William Allen one of the authors of the history standards workgroup.

God democrats hate black people who have the audacity to have opinions that differ from theirs.

He mentioned VP Harris. In about a minute he showed intelligence compared to that idiot Harris.

 

[hoot1]

God democrats hate black people who have the audacity to have opinions that differ from theirs.

He mentioned VP Harris. In about a minute he showed intelligence compared to that idiot Harris.

Stoll, if a teacher taught your children that slaves were fortunate to learn trades which they couldn't have acquired living in Africa, how would you react ?

I'd be curious about what else the teacher had to say about the slaves and slavery. Also be curious about what happened to the descendents of these slaves and how useful the trades learned were by the time of say the industrial revolution.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

if a teacher taught your children that slaves were fortunate to learn trades which they couldn't have acquired living in Africa, how would you react ?

You realize that question is a hypothetical unsupported by the Florida proposal, don’t you?

 

[hoot1]

You realize that question is a hypothetical unsupported by the Florida proposal, don’t you?

CoH, good question.

All the more reason to be curious about what else my hypothetical teacher might be conveying to the children.

 

[twenty02]

Another black GOP congressman coming out against DeSantis

GOP Rep. John James slams DeSantis for curriculum comments on slavery: ‘You’ve gone too far’

Rep. John James (R-Mich.) criticized Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) on Friday for his response to Republican lawmakers who called him out on his state’s new Black history education standards Friday. “@RonDe…

thehill.com

 

[stollcpa]

Stoll, if a teacher taught your children that slaves were fortunate to learn trades which they couldn't have acquired living in Africa, how would you react ?

I'd be curious about what else the teacher had to say about the slaves and slavery. Also be curious about what happened to the descendents of these slaves and how useful the trades learned were by the time of say the industrial revolution.

That’s not what’s being taught. Did you watch the video of the black man who was part of designing the curriculum? In one minute of listening to him it’s no contest on his intelligence compared to VP Harris who lied or misunderstood what’s to be taught.

 

[secondasky]

You realize that question is a hypothetical unsupported by the Florida proposal, don’t you?

CoH, good question.

All the more reason to be curious about what else my hypothetical teacher might be conveying to the children.

Maybe to tell your parents to support teachers' unions ?

 

[Mas-sa-suta]

Cool story, bro.

Dumb with dumber..

 

[i'vegotwinners]

The liberal freak out over the Florida high school history curriculum is a clear window into the racist soul of the left.

In summary . . .

The curriculum noted that upon emancipation, some slaves who learned a trade while a slave were able to use those skills as a free person for their benefit.

The left, led by Kamala Harris, immediately pounced and said that the Florida education officials were saying that slavery benefited some slaves. That notion is strictly forbidden. The Harris/Liberal freak out is by no means a mild disagreement. It is full-throated senseless shouting and screaming.

Some slaves learning skills in the trades while enslaved is objectively true. Using those skills after emancipation for personal benefit is also objectively true.

Yet, that can’t be said. Why?

The answer has been part of history since 1619. Black people are oppressed. They don‘t have skills. Thus liberals tell us that Tim Scott is an exception to the norm, that Clarence Thomas isn’t really black, that blacks can’t manage photo ID’s that blacks can’t do math, and that blacks can only achieve with AA or DEI.

During this curriculum debate I heard a black dude say that just because slavery makes white people uncomfortable is no reason to change teaching. . That was revealing. We must understand that slavery is not about slaves and slave owners. They both have been gone for well over 150 years. Teaching about slavery is really teaching about whites and blacks. That is current affairs. Blacks need to be taught that they are still victims of whites and whites must understand they are still part of a long-gone despised institution.

Skin color is indeed destiny.

is the Florida school system also now mandated to teaching school children that those murdered in mass killings get to go to heaven sooner, never have to work another day or pay another dollar in tax, therefore are beneficiaries of, not victims.

if not, why are Florida school children being deprived of learning the obvious upsides of being a crime victim, and the benefits that criminals bestow on others..

 

[hoot1]

That’s not what’s being taught. Did you watch the video of the black man who was part of designing the curriculum? In one minute of listening to him it’s no contest on his intelligence compared to VP Harris who lied or misunderstood what’s to be taught.

Stoll, my question was about how would you react to a teacher following his or her own interpretation of history.

I'd suggest to my kid to read some other interpretations. If the kid didn't follow up, at least he would understand there are other opinions out there.

 

[stollcpa]

Stoll, my question was about how would you react to a teacher following his or her own interpretation of history.

I'd suggest to my kid to read some other interpretations. If the kid didn't follow up, at least he would understand there are other opinions out there.

If I knew they were doing it, I’d be at the school addressing it. I did it more than once during my son’s school years. Last time was his senior year.

Teacher’s are doing too much of their own interpretation.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

If I knew they were doing it, I’d be at the school addressing it. I did it more than once during my son’s school years. Last time was his senior year.

Teacher’s are doing too much of their own interpretation.

I think every teacher and professor inserts a bit of his or her interpretation into their teaching. I taught military history in college and no doubt what I emphasized depended on my interpretation. It’s only natural.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

This is a great thread.

It shows the demons involved with parsing sound bites out of context and teaching limited history.

One sentence from among hundreds has been taken out of a planning document listing concepts, not specifics, and intentionally misinterpreted and disinterpreted out of its context by vote whores who don’t give a crap about anything but retaining power and scouring their political opponents with anything at hand - “by any means necessary.”

Does anyone doubt that a former slave who had been forced to cultivate crops during slavery might have used that knowledge to his economic benefit after slavery, say if given 40 acres and a mule? Or the same with whatever can be learned from forced work on ships, or in warehouses, or in a livery or as a blacksmith? Was this knowledge or experience forcibly removed from former slaves? Maybe by aliens?

What might have prevented former slaves from becoming economically independent after the Civil War? Is THAT an idea worth exploring? What happened to former slaves in the Secesh South after the War Between The States? Why, even as late as 1913, when the Secesh Democrats were finally able elect themselves a President again, would that President re-segregate federal civil service, even stating that “segregation” was a “benefit” (to select a relevant word he used)?

What if a textbook implementing this carefully selected “standard” said “For example, many former slaves who had worked on plantations growing crops had acquired the skills necessary to farm on their own, but were prevented from doing so by the continuing racism of the Secesh Democrats, who have ruined everything they ever touched with lies and false claims of dogooderism, so that even 40 acres and a mule would not have been not much help to former slaves.”

That’s a lesson I could get behind.

So let it be written - so let it be taught.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

If I knew they were doing it, I’d be at the school addressing it. I did it more than once during my son’s school years. Last time was his senior year.

Teacher’s are doing too much of their own interpretation.

hard to believe teachers didn't check first with the total disaster you are, before saying anything.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

CoH, good question.

All the more reason to be curious about what else my hypothetical teacher might be conveying to the children.

Which is why the educrats promulgate standards.

If it were up to me I’d start students on critical thinking and Socratic questioning about most subjects, including history and slavery. In this example, I’d ask the class things like if they were a slave would they be motivated to learn to read, or learn smithing, things like that. Then ask why or why not. But that’s just me. I love to explore issues with a barrage of questions.