How Should We Teach History?

[jpn]

Depends what facts you present in the classes. I can present accurate historical facts depicting the Democratic party as evil incarnate and students would come to the conclusion that one would have to be insane to be a Democrat and be associated with that history.

Sure, and vice versa. Meanwhile, should we leave out all facts regarding how Blacks have been systematically discriminated against throughout our history? That seems to be the position of many conservatives, although they don't come out and actually say that in so many words. Instead they bleat about how students are being taught that "their success or failure is entirely dependent on the actions of others," and other nonsense.

 

[ecofarm]

I understand whitey is very concerned whitey will continue to be victimized by the system and then relegated to second class citizen.



*snicker*

 

[notquiteright]

What should students be taught about slavery and racism in the US?

Of course what we teach 7-year-olds is different from 16-year-olds, so let's make the question about High School. How should the nation's history be characterized in their history classes, in general?

Here's a number line in order to provide a rough means of placing your opinion. I'm going with 7. I believe kids today receive a version closer to 3, and that's here in blue Seattle. Kids in Texas or Mississippi probably get something closer to 0 or 1. Or am I wrong?
View attachment 67337572

Let's try honestly- it would be a refreshing change...

 

[justabubba]

Let's try honestly- it would be a refreshing change...

then honestly tell us what was dishonest about that post

 

[Rawley]

Sure, and vice versa. Meanwhile, should we leave out all facts regarding how Blacks have been systematically discriminated against throughout our history? That seems to be the position of many conservatives,

Name one. Seriously. Name one prominent conservative that has advocated that we don't teach slavery, that we don't teach about racism, that we don't teach about civil rights. Name one school district in the entire United States that has this curriculum. Just one.

 

[justabubba]

Name one. Seriously. Name one prominent conservative that has advocated that we don't teach slavery, that we don't teach about racism, that we don't teach about civil rights. Name one school district in the entire United States that has this curriculum. Just one.

really? the reich wing media is displaying substantial angst about the teaching of the 1619 project and critical race theory and you would want us to believe that conservatives are OK with teaching factually about this country's racist history!

 

[code1211]

would you please identify the idiots who persist in teaching that slavery is still with us
... or were you pretending that is actually being said?

your fatalism/predestination argument is a straw man. no one is making such a stupid assertion that one's fate is predetermined. but if i am wrong, you are more than welcome to identify where such stupidity is being trafficked in our schools

similarly, i am not seeing anything about teaching that one's "success or failure is entirely dependent on the actions of others"
so, i am calling 'bullshit' on that argument. if calling your statement 'bullshit' is found to be inappropriate by you, then point out where students are being taught "that their success or failure is entirely dependent on the actions of others"

and your poetry sucks about as bad as the remainder of your post

Your debilitating ignorance is noted.

 

[notquiteright]

then honestly tell us what was dishonest about that post

Not referring to the post, referring to what many do now. We don't teach calculus to 1st graders so an incremental approach sounds good. But the problem is racism and hate are taught at home without any attempt at phasing it in. Quite often very young children are taught who to hate and take that to school. Incidents at school tend to reinforce such prejudice as hate meets hate....

There is an advantage to school realistic history, where Thanksgiving is taught but so is the reasons why there was no second one. Teaching how the West was Won should include the multiple times Whites violated and changed treaties, how corrupt many Indian Agencies were, genocide to tame the plains tribes as well as the Great Uprisings.

I'm an Okie by birth and never knew about the Tulsa Race Massacre until now... that needs to be fixed. Sundown Towns need more exposure. Colored Way Stations need historical status and restoration. Here we have historical status for 'first homestead in ___________ county'. We can do the same for Black historical sites and have class trips to them....

Stuff like that...

 

[jpn]

When a well read person tells you what they have read, you need to listen. When that person is far more versed in the histography of American history than you, you need to doubly listen. And when you can't offer any evidence to the contrary to that person, and refuse to look up any of these writers on Wiki to verify what he is telling you is true you don't need to listen - you need to stop sharing your ignorance as if it is a form of knowledge.

One thing about conservatives...they sure tend to be arrogant.

You made a bald assertion for which you provided zero evidence. When challenged, you rather hilariously appeal to authority--your own! Your assertion that you're better read than I, while knowing nothing about me, is actually rather desperate. Insisting that I listen to you because you're right and I'm wrong and you'd prove it if you could but you can't so just believe me because I'm really smart, makes me wonder how old you are.

You write: "And when you can't offer any evidence to the contrary to that person, and refuse to look up any of these writers on Wiki to verify what he is telling you is true you don't need to listen - you need to stop sharing your ignorance as if it is a form of knowledge." This sentence is gibberish. How do you propose that one provide evidence that a historian never in their long careers and volumes of written documents included facts about the British inciting Blacks? You're asking me to prove a negative.

You should never have asserted that these historians never wrote about British attempts to incite slaves without reference to a systematic review of all their writings. If you were any kind of an academic you'd know that.

 

[Phys251]

View attachment 67337585

Through whose lens? Enslaved Africans? White colonizers? Mexicans? The Natives?

 

[Mika-El]

One thing about conservatives...they sure tend to be arrogant.

Your first statement engages in the very cognitive processes people criticize CRT for or are discussing how to teach history arises from-black and white thinking where the speaker is convinced they are right and everyone else is wrong and they reflect this bias in their presentations.

It is ridiculous to say all conservatives are arrogant as you have suggested. Anyone at anytime shares this quality. It has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with basic manners. In fact your words above show arrogance and a lack of basic manners. Would you want someone to label you the same way you have labelled all of the above? Of course not? Does that need to be taught to you now at this stage of your life?

I am not liberal or conservative. I am a bit of both. I embrace classic conservatism precisely because it emphasizes the need for individuals to understand themselves on an individual level and not overly on their collective identity as much as it cherishes symbols of consistency. I really doubt you have read Edmund Burke or for that matter anything from William F. Buckley let alone Hobbes or Bentham who would be defined as classic Liberals. I think with due respect you are caught up in a notion all conservatives are rich white Republicans. I hope I am wrong.

You do realize Lincoln was a Republican? You do realize Eisenhower was a Republican? Do you want to argue either of them given what they witnesses were "racists" because they were by inherent belief racist. For that matter Martin Luther King was as much an advocate of specific conservative beliefs as he was liberal ones. Many of his beliefs were based on a concept of Christianity that was far from radical.

He walked into my synagogue in Montreal when I was 7 and won everyone over in minutes with his knowledge of Judaism and his ability to express basic fundamental conservative beliefs as to equality. He and William F. Buckley would have made great debating partners.

In fact if yu have a chance play back the debate on between the black liberal writer James Baldwin and William F. Buckley. They are a classic example of how true liberals and conservatives argue in regards to race relations in the US. You will not see one word from either that dehumanizes anyone or insults or assumes.

Look I do not want to belabour the point but the issue as to being open minded and teaching children to see many sides of an argument or possible solutions comes from presenting facts as accurately as is possible not starting off with any preconceived ideas as to right or wrong.

Try it with conservatives because if you can't you just add to the bigotry we are all asking about and seeking ways to avoid on either side of the political spectrum. Thank you.

 

[code1211]

Sure, and vice versa. Meanwhile, should we leave out all facts regarding how Blacks have been systematically discriminated against throughout our history? That seems to be the position of many conservatives, although they don't come out and actually say that in so many words. Instead they bleat about how students are being taught that "their success or failure is entirely dependent on the actions of others," and other nonsense.

You are interpreting the position(s) of "many conservatives" using bias and hate to condemn and dismiss them.

A FAIR study of racism would be based on the long and universal practice of slavery throughout world history.

A PART of that study could include the particular iterations in the US AND the various struggles in the US, political and military and social, that finally ENDED the practice here. The same topics could be addressed in various cultures.

Teaching that people are born UN-equal and that the lives of people, defined by politicians as being either "Black" or "White", are defined by their skin color is racist and filled with hate and deception.

This is the basis of racial segregation as demonstrated in the past and demonstrated in the present.

 

[jpn]

Name one. Seriously. Name one prominent conservative that has advocated that we don't teach slavery, that we don't teach about racism, that we don't teach about civil rights. Name one school district in the entire United States that has this curriculum. Just one.

You quoted me, but conveniently edited out a key portion. I wrote:

"Sure, and vice versa. Meanwhile, should we leave out all facts regarding how Blacks have been systematically discriminated against throughout our history? That seems to be the position of many conservatives, although they don't come out and actually say that in so many words. Instead they bleat about how students are being taught that "their success or failure is entirely dependent on the actions of others," and other nonsense."​

The bold italicized portion was in the original; you found it inconvenient so you edited it out. Let me guess, you watch a lot of rightwing "news," right? Selective editing just becomes a habit, a way of life, right?

I was actually quoting a conservative poster here, Code1211, post #112 in this thread.

 

[jpn]

You do realize Lincoln was a Republican? You do realize Eisenhower was a Republican? Do you want to argue either of them given what they witnesses were "racists" because they were by inherent belief racist. For that matter Martin Luther King was as much an advocate of specific conservative beliefs as he was liberal ones. Many of his beliefs were based on a concept of Christianity that was far from radical.

OMG. Do you think the Republican Party of 1860 is in any way comparable to its 2021 version? Why did the South transform itself from a Democratic bastion to a Republican stronghold after the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s? Ever hear of the Republican Party's Southern Strategy?

And oh by the way. Many people consider Christ's message to be quite radical indeed. Just ask the money changers in the Temple (substitute Wall Street for today). Of course if you listen to "Christian" Evangelicals, you'd think Jesus was a crotchety old white guy terrified that those swarthy-skinned folks are going to take away all his much-deserved privileges. Today's Democratic Party is far more faithful to Jesus's radical message of compassion and tolerance than the Republican's agenda of slashing taxes for the rich while slashing programs to help the less fortunate. Is coming within one vote of taking health care away from 30 million American a "Christian" act? Really?

Oh Lord, give me strength...

 

[jpn]

In fact if yu have a chance play back the debate on between the black liberal writer James Baldwin and William F. Buckley. They are a classic example of how true liberals and conservatives argue in regards to race relations in the US. You will not see one word from either that dehumanizes anyone or insults or assumes.

The history of Buckley's support for racism is well documented. In his own words, in fact.

Later on he overcame this racism, so kudos. But to write that he never insulted Blacks is factually incorrect, as documented in my links.

 

[jpn]

Teaching that people are born UN-equal and that the lives of people, defined by politicians as being either "Black" or "White", are defined by their skin color is racist and filled with hate and deception.
This is the basis of racial segregation as demonstrated in the past and demonstrated in the present

People are born equal. Pretending that they are treated equally in America today is being belligerently ignorant.

If you want to actually do the work of an enlightened, responsible American citizen, Google "examples of racial inequality today." Look at the results. Examine the sources. All liberal propaganda? Or is there some real substance there?

Let us know what you find.

 

[Mika-El]

The history of Buckley's support for racism is well documented. In his own words, in fact.

Later on he overcame this racism, so kudos. But to write that he never insulted Blacks is factually incorrect, as documented in my links.

I concur he started off engaging in ideology that would be considered racist today. Yes. My comments were limited only to that debate as a model for debating the issue not his entire career. I must defer to the point you made though, fair is fair.

 

[Mika-El]

OMG. Do you think the Republican Party of 1860 is in any way comparable to its 2021 version? Why did the South transform itself from a Democratic bastion to a Republican stronghold after the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s? Ever hear of the Republican Party's Southern Strategy?

And oh by the way. Many people consider Christ's message to be quite radical indeed. Just ask the money changers in the Temple (substitute Wall Street for today). Of course if you listen to "Christian" Evangelicals, you'd think Jesus was a crotchety old white guy terrified that those swarthy-skinned folks are going to take away all his much-deserved privileges. Today's Democratic Party is far more faithful to Jesus's radical message of compassion and tolerance than the Republican's agenda of slashing taxes for the rich while slashing programs to help the less fortunate. Is coming within one vote of taking health care away from 30 million American a "Christian" act? Really?

Oh Lord, give me strength...

Oh mhy God....Oh Lord give me strength....hmmm are you that religious or are you a tad melodramatic? Lol. Trust me God does not need to help you.

Listen, you might want to read what I actually said. I did not compare the Republican party of 1860 to today's 2021 version ever. However unlike you I do not define the entire party's members under one lump some stereotype as you do. In my world BOTH the Democrats and Republicans have their share of what you define as "racists". The party they are in does not mean they magically are not racist if they are Democrats but racist if they are Republican. In fact the history of the Democratic party in the South of the US is full of racist haters who used the party as a platform to spread their views.

As for your subjective opinion Democrats are closer to Christ's teachings than the Republicans that is absurd. It reflects your bias and your concept of Christianity. Both parties are primarily influeced by materialist not spiritualist views. They both are equally as corrupt or ideal depending on who each person is in which party and what they put into practice in their daily lives with the abilities they have.

You define people by a collective stereotype label. I take them as individuals and examine what they do in their actions each day of their life. No I do not think I or anyone is righteous and moral simply because we call ourselves by a political label. How absurd.

 

[code1211]

You quoted me, but conveniently edited out a key portion. I wrote:

"Sure, and vice versa. Meanwhile, should we leave out all facts regarding how Blacks have been systematically discriminated against throughout our history? That seems to be the position of many conservatives, although they don't come out and actually say that in so many words. Instead they bleat about how students are being taught that "their success or failure is entirely dependent on the actions of others," and other nonsense."​

The bold italicized portion was in the original; you found it inconvenient so you edited it out. Let me guess, you watch a lot of rightwing "news," right? Selective editing just becomes a habit, a way of life, right?

I was actually quoting a conservative poster here, Code1211, post #112 in this thread.

The highlighted portion of you post would be more accurate if is included a reference to the FACT that the discrimination you reference is all but gone right now and was decreasing in the US from about 1960 forward.

IF America was a racist nation, THEN we would not be seeing minorities used as spokespeople for so many products that need sales from all parts of society.

We SEE successful members of every minority currently living in the US. Our youth is pretty much color blind. Are you going to believe your lying eyes or the lies of the politicians?

Politicians are using propaganda to deceive the weak minded. Race relations is only one more topic area where the attempted deception is attempted.

Only the Weak Minded are buying this line of tripe and they must ignore so much obvious fact to do so. It's amazing!

 

[code1211]

People are born equal. Pretending that they are treated equally in America today is being belligerently ignorant.

If you want to actually do the work of an enlightened, responsible American citizen, Google "examples of racial inequality today." Look at the results. Examine the sources. All liberal propaganda? Or is there some real substance there?

Let us know what you find.

How about I just look at the world around me and see what is true and what is outlandish stupidity and lies?

Watch TV at night and check to see how many ads employ the services of people who do not have really, really pale skin.

Obviously, there is no human being who has ever been "White" or who has ever been "Black". That we use these terms is a product of being lied to by those who wish to divide and promote the divisions they exploit.

I'm old. I was just at a gathering of friends and a very wonderful person new to me, very intelligent and entertaining, and I shared the duties at the grill.

My lineage leads back to Northern Europe. His lineage leads back to what is now Nigeria. There was absolutely no innate hate or envy or pre-existing distrust. In truth, we enjoyed numerous shared beliefs and areas of commonality.

The hate and acrimony you seek to promote is imaginary and political. You are being victimized by the mongers of hate who are issuing propaganda to deceive the weak minded.

Don't help them.

 

[jpn]

How absurd.

Here's another reason why pointing out that "Lincoln was a Republican" has no meaning today: Lincoln led a war against insurrection; he didn't cheerlead one.

 

[jpn]

How about I just look at the world around me and see what is true and what is outlandish stupidity and lies?

So you took a pass on the evidence I presented that might penetrate your ideological blinders. I'm so surprised.

 

[jpn]

As for your subjective opinion Democrats are closer to Christ's teachings than the Republicans that is absurd.

It's so, so important for conservatives/Republicans to pretend that there is no morality behind public policy. We know why.

 

[Mika-El]

Here's another reason why pointing out that "Lincoln was a Republican" has no meaning today: Lincoln led a war against insurrection; he didn't cheerlead one.

It has no meaning to you. You speak for you.

 

[Mika-El]

It's so, so important for conservatives/Republicans to pretend that there is no morality behind public policy. We know why.

You make another bigoted assumption.