Current Events > GOP pushing for a bill to ban teaching of slavery

(+) Yeah! (+)

Tyranthraxus posted...

What is precisely the agenda though? There's definitely an agenda in teaching it but what do you think it is? Conversely there's an agenda in trying to ban it as well. What do you think the proponents and opponents are trying to accomplish here?

Like one side is trying to _____ and the other side is trying to _____

I feel the worst elements of the two sides (and thus the loudest elements) are trying to:
Side 1: Characterize traditional America as a racist monstrosity forever,
Side 2: Basically do the opposite, characterize America as perfect or just freeze or revert every history textbook as is forever.

The good faith liberals are trying to change the books to make them more accurate to history, and the good faith conservatives are trying to prevent changes that make the books less accurate to history.

I am much much much more concerned if the thing being argued for is the right thing than the character and motives of the people who brought it up.

If a super racist person accidentally advocates for a law that promotes equality, great! We should help them get the law passed, not resist the law because of who brought it.


---

joe40001 posted...

I feel the worst elements of the two sides (and thus the loudest elements) are trying to:
Side 1: Characterize traditional America as a racist monstrosity forever,
Side 2: Basically do the opposite, characterize America as perfect or just freeze or revert every history textbook as is forever.

The good faith liberals are trying to change the books to make them more accurate to history, and the good faith conservatives are trying to prevent changes that make the books less accurate to history.

I am much much much more concerned if the thing being argued for is the right thing than the character and motives of the people who brought it up.

If a super racist person accidentally advocates for a law that promotes equality, great! We should help them get the law passed, not resist the law because of who brought it.

Well so here's the thing. "Traditional America" had race-based slavery. If that's not a racist monstrosity then what is?

That said to me I see the agendas as follows.

One side is trying to teach how the lasting effects of slavery are still being expressed today in modern social institutions and the other side operates those institutions and is threatened by people demanding that their institutions expel their racist influences.

There's a very clear right and wrong here. To maintain the status quo which nearly everyone agrees is awful or to push for something better which is painful at first but will benefit everyone long term.

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Well so here's the thing. "Traditional America" had race-based slavery. If that's not a racist monstrosity then what is?

Race based slavery obviously is a racist monstrosity, that doesn't mean "Traditional America" is because "Traditional America" is made up of more than just race based slavery.

That said to me I see the agendas as follows.

One side is trying to teach how the lasting effects of slavery are still being expressed today in modern social institutions and the other side operates those institutions and is threatened by people demanding that their institutions expel their racist influences.

There's a very clear right and wrong here. To maintain the status quo which nearly everyone agrees is awful or to push for something better which is painful at first but will benefit everyone long term.

The issue is that you are being reductive IMO. Yes most people have problems with the status quo, that doesn't mean all changes to the status quo are for the better, or that every part of the status quo is bad.

The police need reform, but that is different than saying they should be abolished, particularly if we have nothing to put in their place.

It's a similar thing with this, updating history books to be more accurate to history is good. Updating history books to be pages and pages of indoctrination that "America = bad" is bad. When teaching history the primary motive should be truth, not narrative of agenda.

---

joe40001 posted...

Race based slavery obviously is a racist monstrosity, that doesn't mean "Traditional America" is because "Traditional America" is made up of more than just race based slavery.

The free states were super racist as fuck. It's not like just because they didn't have slavery that it was some kind of utopia for black people. So even when examining the parts that had nothing to do with slavery you still have a country founded on the principles that black people weren't allowed to vote, have public education, or own land. And that's just black people. You don't want to go down the rabbit hole of the racist treatment of the aboriginals.

joe40001 posted...

The issue is that you are being reductive IMO. Yes most people have problems with the status quo, that doesn't mean all changes to the status quo are for the better, or that every part of the status quo is bad.

The police need reform, but that is different than saying they should be abolished, particularly if we have nothing to put in their place.

It's a similar thing with this, updating history books to be more accurate to history is good. Updating history books to be pages and pages of indoctrination that "America = bad" is bad. When teaching history the primary motive should be truth, not narrative of agenda.

It's not really reductive at all. That's just the honest assessment.

Changing the status quo does not mean changing each and every aspect of the status quo. The status quo is maintained only when nothing is changed. If even the smallest thing is changed, then the status quo is changed.

We should not teach "police reform" but showing the historical origins of police in America and how racism has shaped their policy through the decades should be taught and let the students come to their own conclusions as to whether or not they still see a problem that needs fixing and their own conclusions on how to fix the problems.

And acknowledging the crimes of your country's history isn't indoctrination no matter how many people claim it is. It's the first step in making amends for those crimes.


---

By 2021 standards, everything in history is a monstrosity.

Also, to be very cynical, a country that wallows in self-loathing will always lose to a country that has the population united by an uplifting mythology.

durask posted...

Also, to be very cynical, a country that wallows in self-loathing will always lose to a country that has the population united by an uplifting mythology.

Lmao what

---

durask posted...

Also, to be very cynical, a country that wallows in self-loathing will always lose to a country that has the population united by an uplifting mythology.

The way Poland lost to Germany.

---

Self loathing is not a winning strategy.

people should learn from mistakes from the past so they dont repeat them.

this is the equivalent of covering your ears and going "la la la this never happened la la la i cant hear you!!"...

durask posted...

Self loathing is not a winning strategy.

Define "winning" in this context. How does "a country" win?

---

durask posted...

Self loathing is not a winning strategy.

5 year account with 60 karma

whos alt
---

CyricZ posted...

Define "winning" in this context. How does "a country" win?

Economic/military/cultural domination.

sktgamer_13dude posted...

5 year account with 60 karma

whos alt

Yours. I am your evil half.

Snowflakes really need to believe america has no historical blemishes worth discussion

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

The free states were super racist as fuck. It's not like just because they didn't have slavery that it was some kind of utopia for black people. So even when examining the parts that had nothing to do with slavery you still have a country founded on the principles that black people weren't allowed to vote, have public education, or own land. And that's just black people. You don't want to go down the rabbit hole of the racist treatment of the aboriginals.

It's not really reductive at all. That's just the honest assessment.

Changing the status quo does not mean changing each and every aspect of the status quo. The status quo is maintained only when nothing is changed. If even the smallest thing is changed, then the status quo is changed.

We should not teach "police reform" but showing the historical origins of police in America and how racism has shaped their policy through the decades should be taught and let the students come to their own conclusions as to whether or not they still see a problem that needs fixing and their own conclusions on how to fix the problems.

And acknowledging the crimes of your country's history isn't indoctrination no matter how many people claim it is. It's the first step in making amends for those crimes.

Stating fact is not indoctrination.

Telling people explicitly to hate the country would be. I'm not saying that is what most would do, just that I hope you agree that such a thing would not be appropriate.

Teaching the most truthful representation of history would be best, I am concerned that you seem to almost imply nothing happened in US history but racism. Because if that was "taught' that would not be teaching history but pushing a narrative for the students.

---

joe40001 posted...

I am concerned that you seem to almost imply nothing happened in US history but racism.

It's true. We also had colonization. Frontier justice. Sterilization of undesirables for a short time. McCarthyism. MK-Ultra. Forever wars, recently.

---

CyricZ posted...

It's true. We also had colonization. Frontier justice. Sterilization of undesirables for a short time. McCarthyism. MK-Ultra. Forever wars, recently.

Nothing good, huh.
Name a "good" country to measure against.

durask posted...

Economic/military/cultural domination.

Civ ain't real life my dude

---

UnholyMudcrab posted...

At this point, I just don't see how the GQP can survive without completely destroying the country's democracy. You can't hold views like this and retain enough support to win fair elections.

Thats why they are gerrymandering and doing all the voter suppression.

---

durask posted...

Nothing good, huh.
Name a "good" country to measure against.

Most countries suck, and those other countries also whitewash their history.

---

CyricZ posted...

It's true. We also had colonization. Frontier justice. Sterilization of undesirables for a short time. McCarthyism. MK-Ultra. Forever wars, recently.

What is something good that took place in the USA?

---

joe40001 posted...

What is something good that took place in the USA?

Jfc, how old are you? Anything over 12 is really quite absurd.

---

But Lincoln was Republican and fought against slavery.

..... so why not teach history about this great republican standing up for black freedom?.... not like there's a party switch that happened that people would learn about, right?....

---

COVxy posted...

Jfc, how old are you? Anything over 12 is really quite absurd.

Is that question too hard?

I mean it says something about a person if they literally can't name 1 good thing that took place in the USA.

That is not the kind of mindset that should be behind rewriting history textbooks.

---

joe40001 posted...

What is something good that took place in the USA?

country fried steak

---

Ryuko_Chan posted...

country fried steak

See, it's really not that hard to name 1 good thing that happened in the USA.

---

joe40001 posted...

What is something good that took place in the USA?

First man on the moon.

What is something bad that happened in the USA?

joe40001 posted...

What is something good that took place in the USA?

That time Lincoln freed the slaves

---