Is this CRT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many crazies.

Hey, move to Haiti and Liberia, and please report back on black utopia!

Feel free to give up your US passports before you leave, to show how brave you are.

You are racist and you don't understand anything. Why do you think Haiti has problems?

Exactly.

Oppress people for centuries and then act like it's their fault they are struggling? PP is an ignorant racist.

Do elementary schools start with how the African tribes like the Bono State, Ashanti, and Yoruba, etc. were involved in slave-trading. Serving as intermediaries, waging war on African states to capture Africans for export as slaves, getting them to the Atlantic Ocean and the Mideast for gold and silver. They’d even do the castrations themselves before selling to the Arabs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many crazies.

Hey, move to Haiti and Liberia, and please report back on black utopia!

Feel free to give up your US passports before you leave, to show how brave you are.

You are racist and you don't understand anything. Why do you think Haiti has problems?

Exactly.

Oppress people for centuries and then act like it's their fault they are struggling? PP is an ignorant racist.

Do elementary schools start with how the African tribes like the Bono State, Ashanti, and Yoruba, etc. were involved in slave-trading. Serving as intermediaries, waging war on African states to capture Africans for export as slaves, getting them to the Atlantic Ocean and the Mideast for gold and silver. They’d even do the castrations themselves before selling to the Arabs.

High school, and yes- World History.
Elementary schools do discuss slavery in the US.
Middle and High School - Civil War , Jim Crow, Civil Rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically no, but it’s what people are referring to when they talk about CRT in k-12 education.

A lot of parents don’t think public schools should teach students to be “agents of social change”. They expect their kids to be taught skills like math and reading, and facts like science and social studies. Creating social change agents seems outside of that mission.

This is where it gets hairy. A lot of what's being taught in social studies is not facts but someone's interpretation of facts, especially in k-12.

+1

Parents want social studies to be as uncontroversial as possible until maybe high school. Facts like George Washington was our first president isn’t very controversial. Explaining how the three branches of government work isn’t very controversial.

A lot of people feel heavier topics like race discussions should wait until high school. People don’t want to see it in elementary school. Elementary schools shouldn’t be a battleground.

Our entire US history is about race. Race and class. And no it is not an interpretation. The only battleground has to do with those who can't understand that.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It kind of starts there, right?
*Men
*All men liberty
*Rights
*Life

That is absolutely an interpretation. One I would venture most Americans disagree with (that our county’s ENTIRE history is about race).

Ok, Let's go over it again:
Men- not all men. And no women
All men liberty- Some men did not have liberty. In fact, black men and women did not have liberty. Indigenous people had no liberty, or land.
Rights- White land owning men. Not black men, not Indigenous men, not women. Were there religious rights? No.
Life-What about black men? Were they guaranteed their lives? No.

In your own answer you talk about sex, religion, & wealth. While maintaining that the “entire” history is about race.

Let's go over it again. Listen up.

Men- the gender of only man, not women, who are given rights, by God, not black men or black women, not women, not indigenous men or women. That's the white male interpretation of religion. It's not[i] about sex, it's not about religion, and it's about who white Christian men decide who has rights and wealth.
because they have decided what God wants.
Because you don't understand this is why this needs to be taught in schools.

DP. Are you still arguing about this? You were shown to be wrong.

You are also showing us why this conversation is so difficult - some people think that everything can be and should be about race, whether it actually is or not.

Yep, all home-brewed semantics out of context and verbiage of the times. Harping over and over. Never listening or processing or responding to the question. Just her canned response. Maybe if she says it enough times and louder and louder people will fall for it?

How do you know it is a she? And news flash, no one has to "fall for it. " It's history. Facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically no, but it’s what people are referring to when they talk about CRT in k-12 education.

A lot of parents don’t think public schools should teach students to be “agents of social change”. They expect their kids to be taught skills like math and reading, and facts like science and social studies. Creating social change agents seems outside of that mission.

This is where it gets hairy. A lot of what's being taught in social studies is not facts but someone's interpretation of facts, especially in k-12.

+1

Parents want social studies to be as uncontroversial as possible until maybe high school. Facts like George Washington was our first president isn’t very controversial. Explaining how the three branches of government work isn’t very controversial.

A lot of people feel heavier topics like race discussions should wait until high school. People don’t want to see it in elementary school. Elementary schools shouldn’t be a battleground.

Our entire US history is about race. Race and class. And no it is not an interpretation. The only battleground has to do with those who can't understand that.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It kind of starts there, right?
*Men
*All men liberty
*Rights
*Life

That is absolutely an interpretation. One I would venture most Americans disagree with (that our county’s ENTIRE history is about race).

Ok, Let's go over it again:
Men- not all men. And no women
All men liberty- Some men did not have liberty. In fact, black men and women did not have liberty. Indigenous people had no liberty, or land.
Rights- White land owning men. Not black men, not Indigenous men, not women. Were there religious rights? No.
Life-What about black men? Were they guaranteed their lives? No.

In your own answer you talk about sex, religion, & wealth. While maintaining that the “entire” history is about race.

Let's go over it again. Listen up.

Men- the gender of only man, not women, who are given rights, by God, not black men or black women, not women, not indigenous men or women. That's the white male interpretation of religion. It's not[i] about sex, it's not about religion, and it's about who white Christian men decide who has rights and wealth.
because they have decided what God wants.
Because you don't understand this is why this needs to be taught in schools.

You may be right, but in standard grammar, the male includes the female, so your explanation doesn't work.

No, in fact, that is the point. When this was written it did not include "she." Women did not have rights, not property rights, not voting rights, not business rights, not employment rights, not inheritance rights. That is what is taught. And why.

I mean, you really are the dumbest of dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically no, but it’s what people are referring to when they talk about CRT in k-12 education.

A lot of parents don’t think public schools should teach students to be “agents of social change”. They expect their kids to be taught skills like math and reading, and facts like science and social studies. Creating social change agents seems outside of that mission.

This is where it gets hairy. A lot of what's being taught in social studies is not facts but someone's interpretation of facts, especially in k-12.

+1

Parents want social studies to be as uncontroversial as possible until maybe high school. Facts like George Washington was our first president isn’t very controversial. Explaining how the three branches of government work isn’t very controversial.

A lot of people feel heavier topics like race discussions should wait until high school. People don’t want to see it in elementary school. Elementary schools shouldn’t be a battleground.

Our entire US history is about race. Race and class. And no it is not an interpretation. The only battleground has to do with those who can't understand that.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It kind of starts there, right?
*Men
*All men liberty
*Rights
*Life

That is absolutely an interpretation. One I would venture most Americans disagree with (that our county’s ENTIRE history is about race).

Ok, Let's go over it again:
Men- not all men. And no women
All men liberty- Some men did not have liberty. In fact, black men and women did not have liberty. Indigenous people had no liberty, or land.
Rights- White land owning men. Not black men, not Indigenous men, not women. Were there religious rights? No.
Life-What about black men? Were they guaranteed their lives? No.

In your own answer you talk about sex, religion, & wealth. While maintaining that the “entire” history is about race.

Let's go over it again. Listen up.

Men- the gender of only man, not women, who are given rights, by God, not black men or black women, not women, not indigenous men or women. That's the white male interpretation of religion. It's not[i] about sex, it's not about religion, and it's about who white Christian men decide who has rights and wealth.
because they have decided what God wants.
Because you don't understand this is why this needs to be taught in schools.

DP. Are you still arguing about this? You were shown to be wrong.

You are also showing us why this conversation is so difficult - some people think that everything can be and should be about race, whether it actually is or not.

I am not wrong. At all. Your problem is
that you don't think race enters into our history, but our history has race issues weaved within the entire scope and sequence. One cannot teach history without teaching how we got here. What do you think history is about? I can't imagine

This is about as stupid as someone saying the single only most important fact of our history is the Mexican War, or the Louisiana Purchase, or the Gold Rush, or the Indian Wars, or the anti-Chinese Acts.

Hint: Enough with race and racism.

This country wouldn't even exist without colonialism, without slave labor, without the annilhation of cultures . If you think that doesn't belong in a classroom, what does according to you?

The Indian Wars- not about racism?
Mexican Wars? You mean when we took it?
Do you know the history of the Louisiana Purchase? Why it happened? Who lived in that territory?

So, yes, race plays a role in even your examples?
You need to go back to school.

Honey, I might need to go back to school.

But you need to START school. It's quite obvious where you stand -- third grade in a DC school where MLK is presented as Jesus?

Again, you need to be educated before you post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically no, but it’s what people are referring to when they talk about CRT in k-12 education.

A lot of parents don’t think public schools should teach students to be “agents of social change”. They expect their kids to be taught skills like math and reading, and facts like science and social studies. Creating social change agents seems outside of that mission.

This is where it gets hairy. A lot of what's being taught in social studies is not facts but someone's interpretation of facts, especially in k-12.

+1

Parents want social studies to be as uncontroversial as possible until maybe high school. Facts like George Washington was our first president isn’t very controversial. Explaining how the three branches of government work isn’t very controversial.

A lot of people feel heavier topics like race discussions should wait until high school. People don’t want to see it in elementary school. Elementary schools shouldn’t be a battleground.

Our entire US history is about race. Race and class. And no it is not an interpretation. The only battleground has to do with those who can't understand that.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It kind of starts there, right?
*Men
*All men liberty
*Rights
*Life

That is absolutely an interpretation. One I would venture most Americans disagree with (that our county’s ENTIRE history is about race).

Ok, Let's go over it again:
Men- not all men. And no women
All men liberty- Some men did not have liberty. In fact, black men and women did not have liberty. Indigenous people had no liberty, or land.
Rights- White land owning men. Not black men, not Indigenous men, not women. Were there religious rights? No.
Life-What about black men? Were they guaranteed their lives? No.

In your own answer you talk about sex, religion, & wealth. While maintaining that the “entire” history is about race.

Let's go over it again. Listen up.

Men- the gender of only man, not women, who are given rights, by God, not black men or black women, not women, not indigenous men or women. That's the white male interpretation of religion. It's not[i] about sex, it's not about religion, and it's about who white Christian men decide who has rights and wealth.
because they have decided what God wants.
Because you don't understand this is why this needs to be taught in schools.

DP. Are you still arguing about this? You were shown to be wrong.

You are also showing us why this conversation is so difficult - some people think that everything can be and should be about race, whether it actually is or not.

I am not wrong. At all. Your problem is
that you don't think race enters into our history, but our history has race issues weaved within the entire scope and sequence. One cannot teach history without teaching how we got here. What do you think history is about? I can't imagine

This is about as stupid as someone saying the single only most important fact of our history is the Mexican War, or the Louisiana Purchase, or the Gold Rush, or the Indian Wars, or the anti-Chinese Acts.

Hint: Enough with race and racism.

This country wouldn't even exist without colonialism, without slave labor, without the annilhation of cultures . If you think that doesn't belong in a classroom, what does according to you?

The Indian Wars- not about racism?
Mexican Wars? You mean when we took it?
Do you know the history of the Louisiana Purchase? Why it happened? Who lived in that territory?

So, yes, race plays a role in even your examples?
You need to go back to school.

Honey, I might need to go back to school.

But you need to START school. It's quite obvious where you stand -- third grade in a DC school where MLK is presented as Jesus?

Again, you need to be educated before you post.

That PP is right. You view everything through the lens of race. But there is more to the world than that. You're wearing blinkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically no, but it’s what people are referring to when they talk about CRT in k-12 education.

A lot of parents don’t think public schools should teach students to be “agents of social change”. They expect their kids to be taught skills like math and reading, and facts like science and social studies. Creating social change agents seems outside of that mission.

This is where it gets hairy. A lot of what's being taught in social studies is not facts but someone's interpretation of facts, especially in k-12.

+1

Parents want social studies to be as uncontroversial as possible until maybe high school. Facts like George Washington was our first president isn’t very controversial. Explaining how the three branches of government work isn’t very controversial.

A lot of people feel heavier topics like race discussions should wait until high school. People don’t want to see it in elementary school. Elementary schools shouldn’t be a battleground.

Our entire US history is about race. Race and class. And no it is not an interpretation. The only battleground has to do with those who can't understand that.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It kind of starts there, right?
*Men
*All men liberty
*Rights
*Life

That is absolutely an interpretation. One I would venture most Americans disagree with (that our county’s ENTIRE history is about race).

Ok, Let's go over it again:
Men- not all men. And no women
All men liberty- Some men did not have liberty. In fact, black men and women did not have liberty. Indigenous people had no liberty, or land.
Rights- White land owning men. Not black men, not Indigenous men, not women. Were there religious rights? No.
Life-What about black men? Were they guaranteed their lives? No.

In your own answer you talk about sex, religion, & wealth. While maintaining that the “entire” history is about race.

Let's go over it again. Listen up.

Men- the gender of only man, not women, who are given rights, by God, not black men or black women, not women, not indigenous men or women. That's the white male interpretation of religion. It's not[i] about sex, it's not about religion, and it's about who white Christian men decide who has rights and wealth.
because they have decided what God wants.
Because you don't understand this is why this needs to be taught in schools.

DP. Are you still arguing about this? You were shown to be wrong.

You are also showing us why this conversation is so difficult - some people think that everything can be and should be about race, whether it actually is or not.

I am not wrong. At all. Your problem is
that you don't think race enters into our history, but our history has race issues weaved within the entire scope and sequence. One cannot teach history without teaching how we got here. What do you think history is about? I can't imagine

This is about as stupid as someone saying the single only most important fact of our history is the Mexican War, or the Louisiana Purchase, or the Gold Rush, or the Indian Wars, or the anti-Chinese Acts.

Hint: Enough with race and racism.

This country wouldn't even exist without colonialism, without slave labor, without the annilhation of cultures . If you think that doesn't belong in a classroom, what does according to you?

The Indian Wars- not about racism?
Mexican Wars? You mean when we took it?
Do you know the history of the Louisiana Purchase? Why it happened? Who lived in that territory?

So, yes, race plays a role in even your examples?
You need to go back to school.

Honey, I might need to go back to school.

But you need to START school. It's quite obvious where you stand -- third grade in a DC school where MLK is presented as Jesus?

Again, you need to be educated before you post.

That PP is right. You view everything through the lens of race. But there is more to the world than that. You're wearing blinkers.

Do you mean blinders? Lol. Go away sock puppet troll. You are the PP. This is above your cognitive attainment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically no, but it’s what people are referring to when they talk about CRT in k-12 education.

A lot of parents don’t think public schools should teach students to be “agents of social change”. They expect their kids to be taught skills like math and reading, and facts like science and social studies. Creating social change agents seems outside of that mission.

This is where it gets hairy. A lot of what's being taught in social studies is not facts but someone's interpretation of facts, especially in k-12.

+1

Parents want social studies to be as uncontroversial as possible until maybe high school. Facts like George Washington was our first president isn’t very controversial. Explaining how the three branches of government work isn’t very controversial.

A lot of people feel heavier topics like race discussions should wait until high school. People don’t want to see it in elementary school. Elementary schools shouldn’t be a battleground.

Our entire US history is about race. Race and class. And no it is not an interpretation. The only battleground has to do with those who can't understand that.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It kind of starts there, right?
*Men
*All men liberty
*Rights
*Life

That is absolutely an interpretation. One I would venture most Americans disagree with (that our county’s ENTIRE history is about race).

Ok, Let's go over it again:
Men- not all men. And no women
All men liberty- Some men did not have liberty. In fact, black men and women did not have liberty. Indigenous people had no liberty, or land.
Rights- White land owning men. Not black men, not Indigenous men, not women. Were there religious rights? No.
Life-What about black men? Were they guaranteed their lives? No.

In your own answer you talk about sex, religion, & wealth. While maintaining that the “entire” history is about race.

Let's go over it again. Listen up.

Men- the gender of only man, not women, who are given rights, by God, not black men or black women, not women, not indigenous men or women. That's the white male interpretation of religion. It's not[i] about sex, it's not about religion, and it's about who white Christian men decide who has rights and wealth.
because they have decided what God wants.
Because you don't understand this is why this needs to be taught in schools.

DP. Are you still arguing about this? You were shown to be wrong.

You are also showing us why this conversation is so difficult - some people think that everything can be and should be about race, whether it actually is or not.

I am not wrong. At all. Your problem is
that you don't think race enters into our history, but our history has race issues weaved within the entire scope and sequence. One cannot teach history without teaching how we got here. What do you think history is about? I can't imagine

This is about as stupid as someone saying the single only most important fact of our history is the Mexican War, or the Louisiana Purchase, or the Gold Rush, or the Indian Wars, or the anti-Chinese Acts.

Hint: Enough with race and racism.

This country wouldn't even exist without colonialism, without slave labor, without the annilhation of cultures . If you think that doesn't belong in a classroom, what does according to you?

The Indian Wars- not about racism?
Mexican Wars? You mean when we took it?
Do you know the history of the Louisiana Purchase? Why it happened? Who lived in that territory?

So, yes, race plays a role in even your examples?
You need to go back to school.

Honey, I might need to go back to school.

But you need to START school. It's quite obvious where you stand -- third grade in a DC school where MLK is presented as Jesus?

Again, you need to be educated before you post.

That PP is right. You view everything through the lens of race. But there is more to the world than that. You're wearing blinkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically no, but it’s what people are referring to when they talk about CRT in k-12 education.

A lot of parents don’t think public schools should teach students to be “agents of social change”. They expect their kids to be taught skills like math and reading, and facts like science and social studies. Creating social change agents seems outside of that mission.

This is where it gets hairy. A lot of what's being taught in social studies is not facts but someone's interpretation of facts, especially in k-12.

+1

Parents want social studies to be as uncontroversial as possible until maybe high school. Facts like George Washington was our first president isn’t very controversial. Explaining how the three branches of government work isn’t very controversial.

A lot of people feel heavier topics like race discussions should wait until high school. People don’t want to see it in elementary school. Elementary schools shouldn’t be a battleground.

Our entire US history is about race. Race and class. And no it is not an interpretation. The only battleground has to do with those who can't understand that.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It kind of starts there, right?
*Men
*All men liberty
*Rights
*Life

That is absolutely an interpretation. One I would venture most Americans disagree with (that our county’s ENTIRE history is about race).

Ok, Let's go over it again:
Men- not all men. And no women
All men liberty- Some men did not have liberty. In fact, black men and women did not have liberty. Indigenous people had no liberty, or land.
Rights- White land owning men. Not black men, not Indigenous men, not women. Were there religious rights? No.
Life-What about black men? Were they guaranteed their lives? No.

In your own answer you talk about sex, religion, & wealth. While maintaining that the “entire” history is about race.

Let's go over it again. Listen up.

Men- the gender of only man, not women, who are given rights, by God, not black men or black women, not women, not indigenous men or women. That's the white male interpretation of religion. It's not[i] about sex, it's not about religion, and it's about who white Christian men decide who has rights and wealth.
because they have decided what God wants.
Because you don't understand this is why this needs to be taught in schools.

DP. Are you still arguing about this? You were shown to be wrong.

You are also showing us why this conversation is so difficult - some people think that everything can be and should be about race, whether it actually is or not.

I am not wrong. At all. Your problem is
that you don't think race enters into our history, but our history has race issues weaved within the entire scope and sequence. One cannot teach history without teaching how we got here. What do you think history is about? I can't imagine

This is about as stupid as someone saying the single only most important fact of our history is the Mexican War, or the Louisiana Purchase, or the Gold Rush, or the Indian Wars, or the anti-Chinese Acts.

Hint: Enough with race and racism.

This country wouldn't even exist without colonialism, without slave labor, without the annilhation of cultures . If you think that doesn't belong in a classroom, what does according to you?

The Indian Wars- not about racism?
Mexican Wars? You mean when we took it?
Do you know the history of the Louisiana Purchase? Why it happened? Who lived in that territory?

So, yes, race plays a role in even your examples?
You need to go back to school.

Honey, I might need to go back to school.

But you need to START school. It's quite obvious where you stand -- third grade in a DC school where MLK is presented as Jesus?

NP. I guess things have changed. When I was in the third grade, in a racially segregated public school, MLK, Jr was presented as a dynamic and inspiring speaker and Civil Rights leader. Then he was murdered, and we got to talk about that. I remember saying to a teacher when I was in the fourth grade that it didn’t make sense to “pledge allegiance “ because it wasn’t true that we had “Liberty and Justice for all” — so how could we pledge to something that clearly was a lie?

It’s interesting for me to read these comments about preserving the innocence of children. I missed that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Technically no, but it’s what people are referring to when they talk about CRT in k-12 education.

A lot of parents don’t think public schools should teach students to be “agents of social change”. They expect their kids to be taught skills like math and reading, and facts like science and social studies. Creating social change agents seems outside of that mission.

This is where it gets hairy. A lot of what's being taught in social studies is not facts but someone's interpretation of facts, especially in k-12.

+1

Parents want social studies to be as uncontroversial as possible until maybe high school. Facts like George Washington was our first president isn’t very controversial. Explaining how the three branches of government work isn’t very controversial.

A lot of people feel heavier topics like race discussions should wait until high school. People don’t want to see it in elementary school. Elementary schools shouldn’t be a battleground.

Our entire US history is about race. Race and class. And no it is not an interpretation. The only battleground has to do with those who can't understand that.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

It kind of starts there, right?
*Men
*All men liberty
*Rights
*Life

That is absolutely an interpretation. One I would venture most Americans disagree with (that our county’s ENTIRE history is about race).

Ok, Let's go over it again:
Men- not all men. And no women
All men liberty- Some men did not have liberty. In fact, black men and women did not have liberty. Indigenous people had no liberty, or land.
Rights- White land owning men. Not black men, not Indigenous men, not women. Were there religious rights? No.
Life-What about black men? Were they guaranteed their lives? No.

In your own answer you talk about sex, religion, & wealth. While maintaining that the “entire” history is about race.

Let's go over it again. Listen up.

Men- the gender of only man, not women, who are given rights, by God, not black men or black women, not women, not indigenous men or women. That's the white male interpretation of religion. It's not[i] about sex, it's not about religion, and it's about who white Christian men decide who has rights and wealth.
because they have decided what God wants.
Because you don't understand this is why this needs to be taught in schools.

DP. Are you still arguing about this? You were shown to be wrong.

You are also showing us why this conversation is so difficult - some people think that everything can be and should be about race, whether it actually is or not.

I am not wrong. At all. Your problem is
that you don't think race enters into our history, but our history has race issues weaved within the entire scope and sequence. One cannot teach history without teaching how we got here. What do you think history is about? I can't imagine

This is about as stupid as someone saying the single only most important fact of our history is the Mexican War, or the Louisiana Purchase, or the Gold Rush, or the Indian Wars, or the anti-Chinese Acts.

Hint: Enough with race and racism.

This country wouldn't even exist without colonialism, without slave labor, without the annilhation of cultures . If you think that doesn't belong in a classroom, what does according to you?

The Indian Wars- not about racism?
Mexican Wars? You mean when we took it?
Do you know the history of the Louisiana Purchase? Why it happened? Who lived in that territory?

So, yes, race plays a role in even your examples?
You need to go back to school.

Honey, I might need to go back to school.

But you need to START school. It's quite obvious where you stand -- third grade in a DC school where MLK is presented as Jesus?

NP. I guess things have changed. When I was in the third grade, in a racially segregated public school, MLK, Jr was presented as a dynamic and inspiring speaker and Civil Rights leader. Then he was murdered, and we got to talk about that. I remember saying to a teacher when I was in the fourth grade that it didn’t make sense to “pledge allegiance “ because it wasn’t true that we had “Liberty and Justice for all” — so how could we pledge to something that clearly was a lie?

It’s interesting for me to read these comments about preserving the innocence of children. I missed that.

That's a nice anecdote but we're not talking about what we learned in school but what our children are learning in school. When you have kids, then we can talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many crazies.

Hey, move to Haiti and Liberia, and please report back on black utopia!

Feel free to give up your US passports before you leave, to show how brave you are.

You are racist and you don't understand anything. Why do you think Haiti has problems?

Exactly.

Oppress people for centuries and then act like it's their fault they are struggling? PP is an ignorant racist.

Do elementary schools start with how the African tribes like the Bono State, Ashanti, and Yoruba, etc. were involved in slave-trading. Serving as intermediaries, waging war on African states to capture Africans for export as slaves, getting them to the Atlantic Ocean and the Mideast for gold and silver. They’d even do the castrations themselves before selling to the Arabs.

So…you don’t even have kids?

There is very little world history in ES. It’s mostly state and US history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many crazies.

Hey, move to Haiti and Liberia, and please report back on black utopia!

Feel free to give up your US passports before you leave, to show how brave you are.

You are racist and you don't understand anything. Why do you think Haiti has problems?

Exactly.

Oppress people for centuries and then act like it's their fault they are struggling? PP is an ignorant racist.

Do elementary schools start with how the African tribes like the Bono State, Ashanti, and Yoruba, etc. were involved in slave-trading. Serving as intermediaries, waging war on African states to capture Africans for export as slaves, getting them to the Atlantic Ocean and the Mideast for gold and silver. They’d even do the castrations themselves before selling to the Arabs.

Slavery apologist. Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many crazies.

Hey, move to Haiti and Liberia, and please report back on black utopia!

Feel free to give up your US passports before you leave, to show how brave you are.

You are racist and you don't understand anything. Why do you think Haiti has problems?

Exactly.

Oppress people for centuries and then act like it's their fault they are struggling? PP is an ignorant racist.

Do elementary schools start with how the African tribes like the Bono State, Ashanti, and Yoruba, etc. were involved in slave-trading. Serving as intermediaries, waging war on African states to capture Africans for export as slaves, getting them to the Atlantic Ocean and the Mideast for gold and silver. They’d even do the castrations themselves before selling to the Arabs.

Why would a discussion of US history begin there? Since you don't seem familiar with the MCPS curriculum, I'll let you know that those topics are covered in World History, where they belong. However, in elementary school, the focus is on US History, and Maryland state history. So, yes, they talk about how the US was built on a foundation of cruelty, human bondage, genocide, and land theft. As they should. "

If my kids had attended elementary school in Burundi I would expect their national history courses to also include both the good and the bad, alongside the history of colonization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many crazies.

Hey, move to Haiti and Liberia, and please report back on black utopia!

Feel free to give up your US passports before you leave, to show how brave you are.

You are racist and you don't understand anything. Why do you think Haiti has problems?

Exactly.

Oppress people for centuries and then act like it's their fault they are struggling? PP is an ignorant racist.

Do elementary schools start with how the African tribes like the Bono State, Ashanti, and Yoruba, etc. were involved in slave-trading. Serving as intermediaries, waging war on African states to capture Africans for export as slaves, getting them to the Atlantic Ocean and the Mideast for gold and silver. They’d even do the castrations themselves before selling to the Arabs.

Slavery apologist. Disgusting.

Given they took in more slaves than the Americas, why doesn’t the Mideast have a large African contingency today? The Smithsonian AA museum didn’t cover that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many crazies.

Hey, move to Haiti and Liberia, and please report back on black utopia!

Feel free to give up your US passports before you leave, to show how brave you are.

You are racist and you don't understand anything. Why do you think Haiti has problems?

Exactly.

Oppress people for centuries and then act like it's their fault they are struggling? PP is an ignorant racist.

Do elementary schools start with how the African tribes like the Bono State, Ashanti, and Yoruba, etc. were involved in slave-trading. Serving as intermediaries, waging war on African states to capture Africans for export as slaves, getting them to the Atlantic Ocean and the Mideast for gold and silver. They’d even do the castrations themselves before selling to the Arabs.

Why would a discussion of US history begin there? Since you don't seem familiar with the MCPS curriculum, I'll let you know that those topics are covered in World History, where they belong. However, in elementary school, the focus is on US History, and Maryland state history. So, yes, they talk about how the US was built on a foundation of cruelty, human bondage, genocide, and land theft. As they should. "

If my kids had attended elementary school in Burundi I would expect their national history courses to also include both the good and the bad, alongside the history of colonization.

I know! Such a horrible state and country! Why do we even live here?!?