Ron DeSantis and Bridget Ziegler reshaping Florida's public schools.

[Super Chief]

Yeah, no. This post is demonstrating no awareness of the fields of history.

The reason why there are subject matter specific survey courses (in this case, demographic-specific survey level courses) is because while references to them may be found here or there in the vanilla survey courses, they are nevertheless not able to provide a concrete narrative on that subject. American history survey courses may have African American narratives scattered in it, but the primary focus is on something different: namely, the narrative of how the United States sees itself as a nation state. But that narrative is also by default about the white male experience, with *pockets* of other people scattered throughout the literature, often unevenly.

So in other words they are created to make one demographic feel good.

When you’re able to take a course on African American history, you may be treated to the history of the United States as a nation state, but it would be through the prism of the Black populations that inhabited the colonies and the country. And given the unique historical context of African Americans, the central focus will be on what it is like to be them, to be an oppressed minority who had few to no rights at any point in time prior to the mid-1960s.

Are you suggesting that White Americans are incapable of being empathetic to the horrors of slavery experienced by Black Americans? Or that White Americans are unable to see the injustice of forced relocation of American Indians in a manner which destroyed their culture and their security?

These historical transgression occurred. I am not responsible for them, you are not responsible for them, and none of us today are victims of those crimes. All we are required to do is study them, acknowledge them, and never repeat them, regardless of the color of our individual skins. It is ridiculous to teach history and then inject today some false narrative that students of color need to see themselves as continual victims of past history. Which is what some here refuse to acknowledge as part of what happens in these course when CRT is injected into them.

Black folks today are not slaves. White kids are not members of the KKK. Black kids are not Eyptian pharohs, White kids are not Roman generals. The PAST is the PAST, study it, but we are NOT it, not as long as we don't repeat it.

And that’s also when you are going to get that very unique look at how, given that, how do Black Americans interact with American citizenship and patriotism. And those debates can share similarities with white Americans, but even those who said “yes, I am an American, I love my country, etc etc.” will say so with a different rationale than you normally hear from other peoples.

I don't care about the past. I care about right now.

On the contrary, African American history or studies courses have led to a revisionism toward reminding people that Black people were not mere passive recipients, but were active participants in history. That’s why there is a conscious effort to look at slave revolts, the internal debates in the Black community about how to pursue freedom, how to act politically, what sort of education should they aspire to having, why many of them continued to actively serve in the military, etc. As a result of that focus, defenders of more traditional narratives can be found debating African American-centric scholars on the extent to which Black people were able to shape their own destinies without being just victims of oppression.

All of that can be taught in any history course, it is not limited to a race specific course.

We are supposed to all be color blind. That is what the civil rights movement was all about. CRT and 1619 teaching is going backwards, we are supposed to be beyond that by now.

 

[Fiddytree]

So in other words they are created to make one demographic feel good.


Are you suggesting that White Americans are incapable of being empathetic to the horrors of slavery experienced by Black Americans? Or that White Americans are unable to see the injustice of forced relocation of American Indians in a manner which destroyed their culture and their security?

These historical transgression occurred. I am not responsible for them, you are not responsible for them, and none of us today are victims of those crimes. All we are required to do is study them, acknowledge them, and never repeat them, regardless of the color of our individual skins. It is ridiculous to teach history and then inject today some false narrative that students of color need to see themselves as continual victims of past history. Which is what some here refuse to acknowledge as part of what happens in these course when CRT is injected into them.

Black folks today are not slaves. White kids are not members of the KKK. Black kids are not Eyptian pharohs, White kids are not Roman generals. The PAST is the PAST, study it, but we are NOT it, not as long as we don't repeat it.





I don't care about the past. I care about right now.


All of that can be taught in any history course, it is not limited to a race specific course.

We are supposed to all be color blind. That is what the civil rights movement was all about. CRT and 1619 teaching is going backwards, we are supposed to be beyond that by now.

You seem to be confused. One minute you’re saying that they are victimhood studies, which I am assuming doesn’t feel good if you’re the purported victim, and now you’re saying they were created to make people feel good.

These are history courses. They are not meant to be wholly focused on the present or future.

“We are supposed to all be color blind. That is what the civil rights movement was all about.”

No, that’s not what the civil rights movement was all about. It was more multi-faceted than that and was about the place of the Black American in society, and the extent to which equality under law was all that was needed or something more.

 

[Bucky]

I wouldn't exactly give either of these two a ringing endorsement.

Why?

 

[j brown's body]

So in other words they are created to make one demographic feel good.


Are you suggesting that White Americans are incapable of being empathetic to the horrors of slavery experienced by Black Americans? Or that White Americans are unable to see the injustice of forced relocation of American Indians in a manner which destroyed their culture and their security?

These historical transgression occurred. I am not responsible for them, you are not responsible for them, and none of us today are victims of those crimes. All we are required to do is study them, acknowledge them, and never repeat them, regardless of the color of our individual skins. It is ridiculous to teach history and then inject today some false narrative that students of color need to see themselves as continual victims of past history. Which is what some here refuse to acknowledge as part of what happens in these course when CRT is injected into them.

Black folks today are not slaves. White kids are not members of the KKK. Black kids are not Eyptian pharohs, White kids are not Roman generals. The PAST is the PAST, study it, but we are NOT it, not as long as we don't repeat it.





I don't care about the past. I care about right now.


All of that can be taught in any history course, it is not limited to a race specific course.

We are supposed to all be color blind. That is what the civil rights movement was all about. CRT and 1619 teaching is going backwards, we are supposed to be beyond that by now.

You would benefit from this course, and s.from ome time with the 1619 Project.

 

[BirdinHand]

You seem to be confused. One minute you’re saying that they are victimhood studies, which I am assuming doesn’t feel good if you’re the purported victim, and now you’re saying they were created to make people feel good.

These are history courses. They are not meant to be wholly focused on the present or future.

“We are supposed to all be color blind. That is what the civil rights movement was all about.”

No, that’s not what the civil rights movement was all about. It was more multi-faceted than that and was about the place of the Black American in society, and the extent to which equality under law was all that was needed or something more.

You’d have a better chance at teaching a monkey algebra than getting that one to even begin to grasp the nuances of your very well written explanations.

 

[John3945]

So in other words they are created to make one demographic feel good.


Are you suggesting that White Americans are incapable of being empathetic to the horrors of slavery experienced by Black Americans? Or that White Americans are unable to see the injustice of forced relocation of American Indians in a manner which destroyed their culture and their security?

These historical transgression occurred. I am not responsible for them, you are not responsible for them, and none of us today are victims of those crimes. All we are required to do is study them, acknowledge them, and never repeat them, regardless of the color of our individual skins. It is ridiculous to teach history and then inject today some false narrative that students of color need to see themselves as continual victims of past history. Which is what some here refuse to acknowledge as part of what happens in these course when CRT is injected into them.

Black folks today are not slaves. White kids are not members of the KKK. Black kids are not Eyptian pharohs, White kids are not Roman generals. The PAST is the PAST, study it, but we are NOT it, not as long as we don't repeat it.





I don't care about the past. I care about right now.


All of that can be taught in any history course, it is not limited to a race specific course.

We are supposed to all be color blind. That is what the civil rights movement was all about. CRT and 1619 teaching is going backwards, we are supposed to be beyond that by now.

I was a grade school and high school student in the 70's. We were taught quite a bit about slavery. All of the teaching was from the appropriate point of view that slavery
was an awful, reprehensibe thing. There seemed to be no attemt to whitewash or gloss over anything. So when you say " All we are required to do is study them, acknowledge them, and never repeat them", I feel like this is already being taught. I read so many posts saying that teaching ignores slavery and we need CRT to fix this.