FL schools to teach that "Blacks benefited from slavery" and "massacres had reasons"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither slavery nor the Holocaust had any redemptive value. None.

Redemptive value? No. But people lived it. And just waving a hand and saying it was bad doesn't teach anything or honor their experience.

Of course not. You should teach the details of its evilness and the effects it had on Black families for generations to come. People should know that those movies with happy Black folks singing songs down on the plantation are propaganda and not realistic. They should know about babies being taken from their mother's arms and couples being slip up and the daily violence that occurred and the way that slavery suppressed the building of any kind of generational wealth. They should learn how slaves built things, built the U.S. economy, left their marks on every aspect of American life. No waving a hand necessary.

You still don't get it. Your single minded teaching is not going to help Black or white students. Or others, who are approaching a majority of the population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither slavery nor the Holocaust had any redemptive value. None.

Redemptive value? No. But people lived it. And just waving a hand and saying it was bad doesn't teach anything or honor their experience.

Of course not. You should teach the details of its evilness and the effects it had on Black families for generations to come. People should know that those movies with happy Black folks singing songs down on the plantation are propaganda and not realistic. They should know about babies being taken from their mother's arms and couples being slip up and the daily violence that occurred and the way that slavery suppressed the building of any kind of generational wealth. They should learn how slaves built things, built the U.S. economy, left their marks on every aspect of American life. No waving a hand necessary.

You still don't get it. Your single minded teaching is not going to help Black or white students. Or others, who are approaching a majority of the population.

Why do you want to keep students from knowing the details of slavery? What's the down side to learning as much as you can about the past? How is it "singled minded" to teach so many facts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither slavery nor the Holocaust had any redemptive value. None.

Redemptive value? No. But people lived it. And just waving a hand and saying it was bad doesn't teach anything or honor their experience.

Of course not. You should teach the details of its evilness and the effects it had on Black families for generations to come. People should know that those movies with happy Black folks singing songs down on the plantation are propaganda and not realistic. They should know about babies being taken from their mother's arms and couples being slip up and the daily violence that occurred and the way that slavery suppressed the building of any kind of generational wealth. They should learn how slaves built things, built the U.S. economy, left their marks on every aspect of American life. No waving a hand necessary.

You still don't get it. Your single minded teaching is not going to help Black or white students. Or others, who are approaching a majority of the population.

Sounds like the best way to help Florida's black and white and " others who are approaching a majority of the population" students is to send them out of state to get an education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see this as a compete negative. It means they were learning for themselves even while in slavery disputing the myth that they weren't capable of learning and just followed their masters' rules. I guess it depends on how it's worded along with how much brutality is also taught, but the idea that culture and skill was acquired even while enduring trauma is positive.

They were RIPPED from their own homes, lands with rich culture/langauge/arts/craft ... there is no positive unless you are in deep dark denial. They did not CHOOSE. This country is supposed to be about freedom. Yet, FL wants to whitewash our greatest injustice agaist freedom as a nation.

[Anonymous]

There is a difference between the perpetrator and the victim here. All I'm saying is that even when black people were victims of slavery they did the best they could with their situation. It's actually a sign of strength to not be defeated.

[Anonymous]

Americans are such wusses. do you see Germans complaining when people call Nazi's evil? They take criticism of even their own fathers like real men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither slavery nor the Holocaust had any redemptive value. None.

Redemptive value? No. But people lived it. And just waving a hand and saying it was bad doesn't teach anything or honor their experience.

Didn’t Victor Frankel’s book “Man’s Search for Meaning” touch on these very points? So did Solzhenitsyn I might add.

People should read more and sputter less, it would make for more interesting conversations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither slavery nor the Holocaust had any redemptive value. None.

Redemptive value? No. But people lived it. And just waving a hand and saying it was bad doesn't teach anything or honor their experience.

Didn’t Victor Frankel’s book “Man’s Search for Meaning” touch on these very points? So did Solzhenitsyn I might add.

People should read more and sputter less, it would make for more interesting conversations.

I think all students should be required to read both slave memoirs and holocaust memoirs. People need to know and remember the realities and horrors of these traumatic itmes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where’s the Florida Board of Education link, OP?

Do you know Google: https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/20653/urlt/6-4.pdf

You haven’t read the 200 pages, have you? Lol!

Are you familiar with how to search a pdf?

pages 6, 71: "Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit."

pages 17, 133: "Clarification 2: Instruction includes acts of violence perpetrated against and by African Americans but
is not limited to 1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 1919 Washington, D.C. Race Riot, 1920 Ocoee Massacre, 1921
Tulsa Massacre and the 1923 Rosewood Massacre." (these are all riots/massacres which were started by white people - violence by black people was in self-defense)

What is historically incorrect in the bolded statement?

This is the benchmark that clarifies: "Examine the various duties and trades performed by slaves (e.g., agricultural
work, painting, carpentry, tailoring, domestic service, blacksmithing,
transportation)"

Why is it necessary to point out that while they learned these skills in order to serve their masters, enslaved people would also be able to darn their own socks?

Some skilled slaves could also work for others, not their masters, for pay. Just like any other skilled worker. Maybe you would learn something if you go to school in Florida.

This is common knowledge.

But what you’re gliding right over is that the enslaved could only do so with the permission of the person who owned them, so no, not just like any other skilled worker.

And most of the time it wasn’t for their own personal pay. I went on multiple historic home tours and to the Slave Market Museum in Charleston and this was very clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see this as a compete negative. It means they were learning for themselves even while in slavery disputing the myth that they weren't capable of learning and just followed their masters' rules. I guess it depends on how it's worded along with how much brutality is also taught, but the idea that culture and skill was acquired even while enduring trauma is positive.

Who are you to justify the Blacks enslavement had a silver lining? Do you also think the holocaust had some silver lining? Do you have no shame?

I think a lot of holocaust survivors talk about their experience and how they got by if they survived and then what that experience gave them to move forward into the world. I don't remember glossing over any aspect of that experience.

You think? I doubt it!

JFC, your explanation is that some holocaust survivors moved forward in spite of the horrendous time they experienced and not because of it explains why FL should teach the benefit of slavery to middle school students! Deepsh*t, for normal human being it is not so hard to say slavery was an abomination and there is no sane justification for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see this as a compete negative. It means they were learning for themselves even while in slavery disputing the myth that they weren't capable of learning and just followed their masters' rules. I guess it depends on how it's worded along with how much brutality is also taught, but the idea that culture and skill was acquired even while enduring trauma is positive.

Who are you to justify the Blacks enslavement had a silver lining? Do you also think the holocaust had some silver lining? Do you have no shame?

I think a lot of holocaust survivors talk about their experience and how they got by if they survived and then what that experience gave them to move forward into the world. I don't remember glossing over any aspect of that experience.

None of them said that being forced to dig ditches to bury their friends’ bodies gave them valuable skills once they were liberated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where’s the Florida Board of Education link, OP?

Do you know Google: https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/20653/urlt/6-4.pdf

You haven’t read the 200 pages, have you? Lol!

Are you familiar with how to search a pdf?

pages 6, 71: "Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit."

pages 17, 133: "Clarification 2: Instruction includes acts of violence perpetrated against and by African Americans but
is not limited to 1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 1919 Washington, D.C. Race Riot, 1920 Ocoee Massacre, 1921
Tulsa Massacre and the 1923 Rosewood Massacre." (these are all riots/massacres which were started by white people - violence by black people was in self-defense)

Ok. What exactly to you dispute?

NP. Are you for real? The “and by” implies that Black people are at fault for the massacres that were perpetrated against them. That’s what sane, non-KKK members dispute.

It does not imply that.

Yes it does. There is no need for the "and by" unless you are accusing Black people of violence. And I bet you're a supporter of "stand your ground."

When will Florida begin teaching about the violence perpetrated by George Zimmerman?

accusing black people of violence is not the same as implying black people are at fault for the massacres that were perpetrated against them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where’s the Florida Board of Education link, OP?

Do you know Google: https://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/20653/urlt/6-4.pdf

You haven’t read the 200 pages, have you? Lol!

Are you familiar with how to search a pdf?

pages 6, 71: "Benchmark Clarifications:
Clarification 1: Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit."

pages 17, 133: "Clarification 2: Instruction includes acts of violence perpetrated against and by African Americans but
is not limited to 1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 1919 Washington, D.C. Race Riot, 1920 Ocoee Massacre, 1921
Tulsa Massacre and the 1923 Rosewood Massacre." (these are all riots/massacres which were started by white people - violence by black people was in self-defense)

Ok. What exactly to you dispute?

NP. Are you for real? The “and by” implies that Black people are at fault for the massacres that were perpetrated against them. That’s what sane, non-KKK members dispute.

It does not imply that.

Yes it does. There is no need for the "and by" unless you are accusing Black people of violence. And I bet you're a supporter of "stand your ground."

When will Florida begin teaching about the violence perpetrated by George Zimmerman?

accusing black people of violence is not the same as implying black people are at fault for the massacres that were perpetrated against them.

In this context? That is absolutely what they’re hoping students infer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:



Yes PP, please explain why this thread is misleading. Let us know what we are missing.

.Do the standards say "Blacks benefited from slavery" and "massacres had reasons"?

[Anonymous]

It is absolutely a return to the "reconstruction" and Jim Crow era of distortion and misinformation, and it is totally wilful.