Teacher asks 8th-grade students to list positives of slavery...

[there4eyeM]

(from post 199 "Did the good points of slavery boil down to money? If so the students the students should know that interesting little thing about people. They might also see some other bad practices we have is also the result of money, "
An early post related to this point. It could be said no 'good' points existed at all in the slavery system. Some people benefited from it in various ways. They may have thought that good. The slaves did not benefit. Comparing what their conditions were like under slavery with a hypothetical about how they might have been somewhere else on earth hardly establishes an argument for slavery.
The students should have been guided into evaluations based on other than knee-jerk sentimentalism while at the same time remaining firm that slavery cannot be justified today. By our reasoning, today, it is something that is fundamentally, eternally wrong, and was even before emancipation. Children need to learn that in other times, people thought and reasoned differently. We need to remember that, also. Calling slave owners 'evil' is misusing a religious term to describe a repugnant social practice, one that is discussed without being condemned in the Bible. It was a common practice throughout history until very recent times, and continues in forms, in some areas, even now.

 

[Aba Incieni]

(from post 199 "Did the good points of slavery boil down to money? If so the students the students should know that interesting little thing about people. They might also see some other bad practices we have is also the result of money, "
An early post related to this point. It could be said no 'good' points existed at all in the slavery system. Some people benefited from it in various ways. They may have thought that good. The slaves did not benefit. Comparing what their conditions were like under slavery with a hypothetical about how they might have been somewhere else on earth hardly establishes an argument for slavery.
The students should have been guided into evaluations based on other than knee-jerk sentimentalism while at the same time remaining firm that slavery cannot be justified today. By our reasoning, today, it is something that is fundamentally, eternally wrong, and was even before emancipation. Children need to learn that in other times, people thought and reasoned differently. We need to remember that, also. Calling slave owners 'evil' is misusing a religious term to describe a repugnant social practice, one that is discussed without being condemned in the Bible. It was a common practice throughout history until very recent times, and continues in forms, in some areas, even now.

They came from a slave society. They would be slaves here or there. They were already slaves when they changed masters. So the question becomes, "Would you rather be a slave in Africa, or America?"

 

[bgrouse]

That's because whites didn't let them do that, being the smarter race.

You mean more bloodthirsty.

To find out who is more bloodthirsty, take a look at modern Africa (where slavery still exists) or black inner cities.

It’s amazing how many rabid racists

populate these discussions. Fake

history, and fake news are the norms

in these exercises,


and along with the ever present heavy

doses of denial and deflection, a

totally frustrating and useless exercise.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Deflection? You mean like what you just did here by not address what I said?

 

[Bush92]

What does that have to do with anything? Hint: I hold no one responsible for the actions of over a century ago. The only one's responsible for an action are those committing the action.

Sounds like a No.

They are all long gone. Let it go, and if you must decry something, try to make it about something relevant.

Again...what's your point?

I'm saying don't white wash history and pretend there were good points for slavery. There were none for the slaves and we should not teach that there were. That's relevent and today.

You don't see my obvious point? An entire race is being held accountable for the actions of less than 2%. That's my point.

Racism in America is not solely due to slavery although it can be said that's where it got it's start. It's the institutional racism that is the problem today. Laws that were passed and court cases that ruled that whites were not just superior to blacks but also that people of African descent natural station in life was to be in servitude to the white race. This is documented in many places throughout history and then based on this belief ensured that society was shaped in accordance to this belief via Black Codes and other Jim Crow laws.

Today you have government (read: systemic) racism in the form of the CBC, affirmative action, racial hiring quotas, etc.

All brought to you by the same party who has always been race-driven.

The Democrats..yes.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You don't see my obvious point? An entire race is being held accountable for the actions of less than 2%. That's my point.

Another Lost Causer. ^

It's not a "point" when you skew the numbers to include the enormous population numbers of the North, which inluded a minuscule number of slaves.

Nearly 30% of Southern families owned slaves.

There were only 1 million free southern families in the South in 1860.

Nearly four million slaves.

Really?

So the 1860 US Census was wrong?

According to the census, only 8% owned slaves.

Learn to Google!

1860 Census Results

Damn. You're dumber that I thought.

Not only do you not know who started the war, you can't even read the post you're quoting.

You can't dispute my facts, so you go personal. Typical! Dumbass!

You QUOTED me, idiot -- which explained how the stat was skewed - then posted a link to the census which confirmed my statement, you were just too ignorant to understand it - or maybe as I said, you didn't even read it.

It confirmed your statement?

I was a math teacher and even a if I was not, a dumbass like you should know that 30% does not equal 8% which is the accurate figure.

The 30% came out of your ass with room to spare!

 

[koshergrl]

Teacher asks 8th-grade students to list positives of slavery

SAN ANTONIO -- A San Antonio charter school has apologized after a teacher asked students in an eighth grade American history class to list the positive and negative aspects of slavery. The teacher at Great Hearts Monte Vista who distributed a worksheet titled "The Life of Slaves: A Balanced View" has been placed on leave.

Aaron Kindel, the superintendent of Great Hearts Texas, said in a statement the school would audit the textbook associated with the lesson.

"To be clear, there is no debate about slavery. It is immoral and a crime against humanity," Kindel said in a statement posted Thursday on the Great Hearts Facebook page. He said the school's headmaster plans to explain the mistake to the history class.

Scott Overland, a spokesman for Pearson, which published the textbook, said the company didn't create and doesn't endorse the worksheet assigned to the students, CBS affiliate KENS-TV reports.

"We do not support the point of view represented in the worksheet and strongly condemn the implication that there was any positive aspect to slavery," Overland said.

A parent of one of the students in the class posted the worksheet Wednesday on Facebook. Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, drew attention to the issue on Thursday when the Democrat tweeted that the worksheet was "absolutely unacceptable."

Let's see...

1. Free labor.

2. The cotton industry was booming.

3. As the great Cliven Bundy once said, it "gave them something to do".

4. 12 Years A Slave, which was a great movie, never would have been made.

Can you think of any more?

The cotton industry was booming..which is why an overreaching government and criminal politicians decided (suddenly) that they could scream RACISM and use it to steal people's land and assets for themselves.

The Civil War wasn't about slavery. It was about cotton, and the desire of progressives to cash in.

 

[paperview]

Another Lost Causer. ^

It's not a "point" when you skew the numbers to include the enormous population numbers of the North, which inluded a minuscule number of slaves.

Nearly 30% of Southern families owned slaves.

There were only 1 million free southern families in the South in 1860.

Nearly four million slaves.

Really?

So the 1860 US Census was wrong?

According to the census, only 8% owned slaves.

Learn to Google!

1860 Census Results

Damn. You're dumber that I thought.

Not only do you not know who started the war, you can't even read the post you're quoting.

You can't dispute my facts, so you go personal. Typical! Dumbass!

You QUOTED me, idiot -- which explained how the stat was skewed - then posted a link to the census which confirmed my statement, you were just too ignorant to understand it - or maybe as I said, you didn't even read it.

It confirmed your statement?

I was a math teacher and even a if I was not, a dumbass like you should know that 30% does not equal 8% which is the accurate figure.

The 30% came out of your ass with room to spare!

WTF is wrong with you?

No one can be this intentionally obtuse - after all this, I can only assume you have some type of mental deficiency.

I said (PAY CLOSE ATTENTION):

"Nearly 30% of Southern families owned slaves."

Are those few words really that difficult for you?

Jesus.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Really?

So the 1860 US Census was wrong?

According to the census, only 8% owned slaves.

Learn to Google!

1860 Census Results

Damn. You're dumber that I thought.

Not only do you not know who started the war, you can't even read the post you're quoting.

You can't dispute my facts, so you go personal. Typical! Dumbass!

You QUOTED me, idiot -- which explained how the stat was skewed - then posted a link to the census which confirmed my statement, you were just too ignorant to understand it - or maybe as I said, you didn't even read it.

It confirmed your statement?

I was a math teacher and even a if I was not, a dumbass like you should know that 30% does not equal 8% which is the accurate figure.

The 30% came out of your ass with room to spare!

WTF is wrong with you?

No one can be this intentionally obtuse - I can only assume you have some type of mental deficiency.

I said (PAY CLOSE ATTENTION):

"Nearly 30% of Southern families owned slaves."

Are those few words really that difficult for you?

Jesus.

...and you are still WRONG!

Get an education before you hurt yourself or someone else!

I have a degree in history. I studied under some of the top history professors in this country at a major university in ALABAMA!

Dumbass!

 

[paperview]

Bustagut-worthy. ^^^

 

[paperview]

Selected Statistics on Slavery in the United States

(unless otherwise noted, all data is as of the 1860 census)

Total number of slaves in the Lower South : 2,312,352 (47% of total population).

Total number of slaves in the Upper South: 1,208758 (29% of total population).

Total number of slaves in the Border States: 432,586 (13% of total population).


Almost one-third of all Southern families owned slaves. In Mississippi and South Carolina it approached one half. The total number of slave owners was 385,000 (including, in Louisiana, some free Negroes).

As for the number of slaves owned by each master, 88% held fewer than twenty, and nearly 50% held fewer than five. (A complete table on slave-owning percentages is given at the bottom of this page.)

For comparison's sake, let it be noted that in the 1950's, only 2% of American families owned corporation stocks equal in value to the 1860 value of a single slave. Thus, slave ownership was much more widespread in the South than corporate investment was in 1950's America.

On a typical plantation (more than 20 slaves) the capital value of the slaves was greater than the capital value of the land and implements.

Slavery was profitable, although a large part of the profit was in the increased value of the slaves themselves. With only 30% of the nation's (free) population, the South had 60% of the "wealthiest men." The 1860 per capita wealth in the South was $3,978; in the North it was $2,040.

Selected Bibliography

1. Battle Cry of Freedom, by James McPherson
2. Ordeal by Fire, by James McPherson
3. The Confederate Nation, by Emory Thomas
4. Civil War Day by Day, by E.B. Long
5. Ordeal of the Union (8 vols.) by Allan Nevins
6. Reader's Companion to American History, by Eric Foner and John Garrity

Census data can be appealed to in order to determine the extent of slave ownership in each of the states that allowed it in 1860. The figures given here are the percentage of slave-owning families as a fraction of total free households in the state. The data was taken from a now-inactive census archive site at the University of Virginia, but equivalent data may be found here.

Mississippi: 49%
South Carolina: 46%
Georgia: 37%
Alabama: 35%
Florida: 34%
Louisiana: 29%
Texas: 28%
North Carolina: 28%
Virginia: 26%
Tennessee: 25%
Kentucky: 23%
Arkansas: 20%
Missouri: 13%
Maryland: 12%
Delaware: 3%
In the Lower South (SC, GA, AL, MS, LA, TX, FL -- those states that seceded first), about 36.7% of the white families owned slaves. In the Middle South (VA, NC, TN, AR -- those states that seceded only after Fort Sumter was fired on) the percentage is around 25.3%, and the total for the two combined regions -- which is what most folks think of as the Confederacy -- is 30.8%. In the Border States (DE, MD, KY, MO -- those slave states that did not secede) the percentage of slave-ownership was 15.9%, and the total throughout the slave states was almost exactly 26%.

An interesting discussion about how many Confederate soldiers might have owned slaves, along with pointers to other sources, can be found here. Another good source is this book.

Selected Statistics

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Teacher asks 8th-grade students to list positives of slavery

SAN ANTONIO -- A San Antonio charter school has apologized after a teacher asked students in an eighth grade American history class to list the positive and negative aspects of slavery. The teacher at Great Hearts Monte Vista who distributed a worksheet titled "The Life of Slaves: A Balanced View" has been placed on leave.

Aaron Kindel, the superintendent of Great Hearts Texas, said in a statement the school would audit the textbook associated with the lesson.

"To be clear, there is no debate about slavery. It is immoral and a crime against humanity," Kindel said in a statement posted Thursday on the Great Hearts Facebook page. He said the school's headmaster plans to explain the mistake to the history class.

Scott Overland, a spokesman for Pearson, which published the textbook, said the company didn't create and doesn't endorse the worksheet assigned to the students, CBS affiliate KENS-TV reports.

"We do not support the point of view represented in the worksheet and strongly condemn the implication that there was any positive aspect to slavery," Overland said.

A parent of one of the students in the class posted the worksheet Wednesday on Facebook. Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, drew attention to the issue on Thursday when the Democrat tweeted that the worksheet was "absolutely unacceptable."

Let's see...

1. Free labor.

2. The cotton industry was booming.

3. As the great Cliven Bundy once said, it "gave them something to do".

4. 12 Years A Slave, which was a great movie, never would have been made.

Can you think of any more?

The school is just one more PC Idiocracy. EVERYTHING has a + and a - side to it, even slavery, that is the nature of the universe, otherwise there never would have been slaves! It was a lesson in critical thinking, thinking outside the box, not justification of slavery, but now thanks to fear of PC, these kids will lose a valuable lesson in looking at something very bad and seeing that even such things have their positive aspects. The Chinese call it yin and yang, but in the Dumbed Down States of America, our poor kids are not allowed to think and learn freely, being told by their "school" that you are only allowed to believe that things like slavery, war, old age, illness and even death are all bad with nothing good or positive to ever be gleaned, taken or learned from them.

Only a white person in delusional denial thinks that there was anything positive about slavery. Especially in a nation whose credo reads “All men are created equal”, such conclusions would invite the enslavement of those privileged and in power presently. Maybe your opinion would be different if your ancestors and their progeny had been slaves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The big thing is they learned trades, which came in handy after slavery ended, so of. The received pay for doing what the did on the Plantations but the "good old boys" figure out that they could get the job done with Share Cropping. Almost the same thing. The the New Slavery came into view. Many Blacks moved North and worked in Factory Jobs that paid a little more.

 

[paperview]

Viral post gets it wrong about extent of slavery in 1860

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The natural state of most of mankind is slavery. Slavery is the ultimate safety. The slave never needs to worry about where his food will come from, clothing is given, shelter is provided. The master must care for the sick slave to protect his investment. Therefore there is free medical care. The slave is relieved of all the cares of living. Slavery is a leftist dream. The slave only wants a just, generous and indulgent master.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Southern Rebels fired the first shots -- and did so months before Sumter.

The South had been banging the drums of war for years before.

Lost Cause enthusiasts are such lost causes.

...
Just think about it using your own brain, dude. Why would the civilians of the Southern Confederacy let the Union keep forts that could blockade Southern ports at any time?

You think we would p[ut up with that crap today?

No, we would negotiate some kind of deal to get the forts under our control..

That is what the Southern civilians tried to do but were 'repulsed' (i.e. fired upon) in doing so.

But by all means, find me a case of Southern Confederate troops firing on Union civilians or military prior to January 8, 1861 and then you would have proven your case.

But you cant because it did not happen. You have been lied to about the Civil War your entire life, man. That is what victors do.

Lost Causers....a lost cause.

Florida had not even seceded, and no, no one was fired up then.

==========
Museum of Florida History - Crisis at Pensacola, 1861 »
==========
O.R.-- SERIES I--VOLUME 1 [S# 1] CHAPTER IV.
OPERATIONS IN FLORIDA.
No. 3. -- Reports of Lieut. Adam J. Slemmer, First U.S. Artillery, of the transfer of his command from Barrancas Barracks to Port Pickens, and subsequent events (to February 5, 1861) in Pensacola Harbor.

FORT PICKENS, FLA., February 5, 1861.
SIR: Having heard rumors that the forts and other public property in Pensacola Harbor were to be seized by troops under the orders of the governor of Florida, and having been advised of the seizure of the forts in Mobile Bay, I deemed it proper, having received no instructions from Washington, to endeavor to prevent, by all the means in my power, a like seizure here.

On the morning of the 7th ultimo, accompanied by Lieutenant Gilman, I called upon the commander of the navy-yard, Commodore Armstrong, to consult with him in reference to some plan to be adopted to insure the safety of the public property. We had a similar consultation on the evening of the same day and on the morning of the 8th. The commodore, in the absence of any orders, deemed it inexpedient to cooperate with us.

On the morning of the 8th I removed all the powder from the magazine in the Spanish battery of Fort Barrancas to the inner magazines, because, from its exposed position, it was liable to seizure at any moment. I also caused all the batteries to be put in working order, and at night placed a sergeant's guard in the fort with the drawbridge raised. That night a body of men (about twenty in number) came to the fort with the evident intention of taking possession. The corporal of the guard caused the alarm to be given, upon which the assailants retreated precipitately. The guard was immediately strengthened by half the company, but nothing further occurred that night.
============
On 9 October 1861 the commander of Confederate forces in Pensacola, General Braxton Bragg, ordered an assault on Fort Pickens that was ultimately unsuccessful. Colonel Harvey Brown, the commander of Union forces, felt this attack required an answer and planned an attack of his own. Fort McRee, the closest fortification to Fort Pickens and a road block to any attempted assault on Pensacola, was to be the primary target.
============

The Star of the West was fired upon by southern rebel yahoos on the 9th of January:

January 9, 1861. On this day, Senators Judah P. Benjamin and John Slidell of Louisiana telegraphed Gov. Moore of that state (which had not yet seceded from the Union), that Federal gunboats were secretly bringing supplies to the forts at the mouth of the Mississippi River. Both men had yet to resign from the Senate. Gov. Moore ordered Braxton Bragg and 500 troops to seize the forts and the United States arsenal at Baton Rouge.

---> On this same day, the Star of the West attempted to resupply Fort Sumter but was fired on by a masked battery from Morris Island and then by guns from Fort Moultrie. In spite of the fact the ship was flying two United States flags, the ship was repeatedly fired on. The ship turned and steamed away.


Why Is There Controversy Over Confederate Monuments?

West Point teaches the first unofficial shots were fired by the South, on Star of the West.

Learn your history, racist rebel Bowie.

History is my life's profession, over three decades -- not from Southern Lost Causers still pissed by they lost the war, and certainly not like you try to pluck a Wiki single citation and pretend you know all history from that.

Lol, 'giving the alarm' was firing at the civilians, you nit wit.

roflmao

 

[JimBowie1958]

No. The market doesn't support working at your wage. So you have the choice of either shutting down, raising wages to attract people, hiring illegal aliens, or back in the day, just buying some slaves. Not so stupid business model. The South went to WAR trying to preserve it.

It was an immoral business model, condemned by every major church in Christendom.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Viral post gets it wrong about extent of slavery in 1860

Horse kahkah

Using Census data to research his book, Glatthaar calculated that 4.9 percent of people in the slaveholding states owned slaves, that 19.9 percent of family units in those states owned slaves, and that 24.9 percent of households owned slaves. (Households are a broader category than families.)​

So according to this ass hat even people up North were in slaveholding households if the had cousins in the South that owned slaves.

utter horse kahkah

 

[rightwinger]

Lot of positives for the slave owner

Free labor
Free sex
Breeding stock

 

[Aba Incieni]

Lot of positives for the slave owner

Free labor
Free sex
Breeding stock

Mulattoes were worth more, too. Owners tried to keep the girls pupped.

 

[GHook93]

Teacher asks 8th-grade students to list positives of slavery

SAN ANTONIO -- A San Antonio charter school has apologized after a teacher asked students in an eighth grade American history class to list the positive and negative aspects of slavery. The teacher at Great Hearts Monte Vista who distributed a worksheet titled "The Life of Slaves: A Balanced View" has been placed on leave.

Aaron Kindel, the superintendent of Great Hearts Texas, said in a statement the school would audit the textbook associated with the lesson.

"To be clear, there is no debate about slavery. It is immoral and a crime against humanity," Kindel said in a statement posted Thursday on the Great Hearts Facebook page. He said the school's headmaster plans to explain the mistake to the history class.

Scott Overland, a spokesman for Pearson, which published the textbook, said the company didn't create and doesn't endorse the worksheet assigned to the students, CBS affiliate KENS-TV reports.

"We do not support the point of view represented in the worksheet and strongly condemn the implication that there was any positive aspect to slavery," Overland said.

A parent of one of the students in the class posted the worksheet Wednesday on Facebook. Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, drew attention to the issue on Thursday when the Democrat tweeted that the worksheet was "absolutely unacceptable."

Let's see...

1. Free labor.

2. The cotton industry was booming.

3. As the great Cliven Bundy once said, it "gave them something to do".

4. 12 Years A Slave, which was a great movie, never would have been made.

Can you think of any more?

Produced a lot of mixed race babies! Eventually let to America dominating the summer olympics because of all the trained beasts


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Slimdugger99]

Viral post gets it wrong about extent of slavery in 1860

Horse kahkah

Using Census data to research his book, Glatthaar calculated that 4.9 percent of people in the slaveholding states owned slaves, that 19.9 percent of family units in those states owned slaves, and that 24.9 percent of households owned slaves. (Households are a broader category than families.)​

So according to this ass hat even people up North were in slaveholding households if the had cousins in the South that owned slaves.

utter horse kahkah

This discussion, and I use the term loosely, shows the total ignorance of the majority of white peoples in America on the subjects of U.S. slavery, and race. One posted 1860 slave census puts the average slave percentage as 8%, the last post puts it at 4.9%. Even the 8% figure is looked on as a hugely conservative estimate. No systematic, accurate records were kept by the government, either North or South. Scholars are left to their own devices when attempting an accurate portrayal of the institution free from the various contemporaneous influences and prejudices of the time and the more modern and virulent contamination’s of today’s racism and denial. The slave narrative of life and death, of slavery’s drudgery, it’s horrors of living under the heels of sadistic taskmasters. This narrative if written by slaves, was ridiculed and dismissed to be replaced in our culture by the happy, grinning, subservient Uncle Tom. Serious scholarship on the subject, when found, is recent and devoid of the human testimony that makes history compelling and alive. The denial and racism that still exists in our society makes the exhumation of this history difficult but also mandatory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk