Zone1 Why Is American Afraid of Black History?

[Libby von H]

Recently there has been a trend on college campuses to create courses that discuss the concept of whiteness. Once that began, the usual suspects crawled out from under the rocks and started whining about racism against whites. Never mind that black studies departments exist; the American right must whine. Hence the current right-wing movement to cleanse our history books of everything they believe makes European descendants look bad.

In the 21st century, we must move beyond memes created by mostly far-right loudmouths. These types have some whites believing we all chose to come over here on the Mayflower. Some believe it is unfair how whites get portrayed in modern teachings. Unfair is revising history to leave out the factual record. Teaching our children the mistakes we made should not mean we are teaching them to dislike whites or being white. I and generations of other blacks endured the annual K-12 section of history about black slavery, and it did not make me hate being black. In recent years we have seen a consistent well-funded, politically supported movement by the right-wing to enforce gaslighting as a way of educating today’s students. In this movement, anything that negatively shows whites must be censored.

WHY IS AMERICA AFRAID OF BLACK HISTORY?​

No one should fear a history that asks a country to live up to its highest ideals.
By Lonnie G. Bunch III

One can tell a great deal about a country by what it chooses to remember: by what graces the walls of its museums, by what monuments are venerated, and by what parts of its history are embraced. One can tell even more by what a nation chooses to forget: what memories are erased and what aspects of its past are feared. This unwillingness to understand, accept, and embrace an accurate history, shaped by scholarship, reflects an unease with ambiguity and nuance—and with truth. One frequent casualty of such discomfort is any real appreciation of the importance of African American history and culture for all Americans.

Why should anyone fear a history that asks a country to live up to its highest ideals—to “make good to us the promises in your Constitution,” as Frederick Douglass put it? But too often, we are indeed fearful. State legislatures have passed laws restricting the teaching of critical race theory, preventing educators from discussing a history that “might make our children feel guilty” about the actions and attitudes of their ancestors. Librarians around the nation feel the chilling effects of book bans. Some individuals who seek to occupy the highest office in the land fear the effects of an Advanced Placement class that explores African American history—a history that, as education officials in Florida have maintained, “lacks educational value”; a history that does not deserve to be remembered.

Rather than running from this history, we should find in it sustenance, understanding, and hope. In the end, we can’t escape the past anyway. What Joe Louis said of an opponent applies to the legacy of history: You can run, but you can’t hide.

Why Is America Afraid of Black History?

No one should fear a history that asks a country to live up to its highest ideals.

www.theatlantic.com

You are hiding right now in the style of Nikole Hannah-Jones, you want all race to start when a foot comes down in 1619 in Jamestown. But that is racist

"The historians John Thornton and Linda Heywood of Boston University estimate that 90 percent of those shipped to the New World were enslaved by Africans and then sold to European traders. The sad truth is that without complex business partnerships between African elites and European traders and commercial agents, the slave trade to the New World would have been impossible, at least on the scale it occurred...."

Don't start calling HEnry Louis Gates a honkie , I know you want to ...or an Uncle Tom. He's right, you are wrong.

 

[IM2]

You are hiding right now in the style of Nikole Hannah-Jones, you want all race to start when a foot comes down in 1619 in Jamestown. But that is racist

"The historians John Thornton and Linda Heywood of Boston University estimate that 90 percent of those shipped to the New World were enslaved by Africans and then sold to European traders. The sad truth is that without complex business partnerships between African elites and European traders and commercial agents, the slave trade to the New World would have been impossible, at least on the scale it occurred...."

Don't start calling HEnry Louis Gates a honkie , I know you want to ...or an Uncle Tom. He's right, you are wrong.

You can quit repeating what you cherrypicked.

Before the white man came to Africa, tribal wars were mostly fought with swords, spears, bows and arrows. Although these weapons were lethal they were nowhere near as quick and fatal as the gun. The problem here was that, only the white strangers had guns and decided which tribal group to support in times of battle. Any tribal group the white strangers supported with their powerful cannons, guns and ammunitions, easily conquered their enemies. This also created another major problem. The white strangers did not support any tribal group for free. In fact, the white strangers started demanding taxes (which included pieces of gold and prisoners of war) and total submission after victory. Any tribal group or community which failed to submit to the Europeans and pay taxes were wiped out. Sometimes the leaders of those communities were executed publicly as a form of warning to neighboring communities. Most communities in Africa were turned into concentration camps with European authorities in place.

Africans did not sell their own people into slavery

www.africaw.com

​

Futhermore,

“In fact, most American slaves were not kidnapped on another continent. Though over 12.7 million Africans were forced onto ships to the Western hemisphere, estimates only have 400,000-500,000 landing in present-day America. How then to account for the four million black slaves who were tilling fields in 1860? “The South,” the Sublettes write, “did not only produce tobacco, rice, sugar, and cotton as commodities for sale; it produced people.” Slavers called slave-breeding “natural increase,” but there was nothing natural about producing slaves; it took scientific management. Thomas Jefferson bragged to George Washington that the birth of black children was increasing Virginia’s capital stock by four percent annually.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016, pp.1

To be blunt, America had slave breeding “factories” where enslaved people were forced to breed.

“According to database-backed estimates by David Eltis and David Richardson, only about 389,000 kidnapped Africans were disembarked in the ports of the present-day United States, the majority of them before independence.”

“By 1860, those few hundred thousand Africans had given way to four million African Americans.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016, pp.11-12

According to the Sublette's, 389,000 slaves landed on the shores of what is now America. By 1860 there were 4 million slaves living here. The importation of slaves was made illegal in 1808. So from 1808 until 1860, the number of slaves increased by at least 1,000 percent. If we allow for the Africans selling each other, Africans would be responsible for approximately 389 thousand slaves. What about the 3.1-4 million additional slaves? Africans did not create them. This was done by forced slave breeding for business, pleasure, and entertainment.

If I buy drugs from a drug dealer, it is not the drug dealer's fault I became an addict. I chose to purchase the drugs. In the same way, Europeans decided to invade Africa and purchase African war captives. I have not been able to find research whereby Africans loaded up slave vessels that landed in Europe to sell slaves. I see no record of any west African shipping company that sailed the Atlantic, dropping off slaves in South America, the Caribbean, and then America. As I wrote earlier, things are not as simple as “Africans sold other Africans into slavery.” It is not as simple as blacks invented slavery and that we should be forever grateful to whites for being so kind as to end it. I was told as a child that half the truth equals a lie. Half the truth is what the tale of Africans selling other Africans is. You cannot make a sale if no one buys. Africans did not own the shipping companies that carried the slaves to America, nor did they swim across the Atlantic to get here. Finally, Africans did not make U.S. laws.

You have come with that sad, sorry white racist argument. It is the claim of Africans selling each other. History is recorded, but we have only received one side of it about the slave trade. Yes, some people were citizens in one African tribe who sold members of other African nations to Europeans. Europeans were not forced to buy Africans, but Africans were forced to sell other Africans in many cases. Nearly 400,000 Africans ended up on these shores and turned into 4 million by atrocities that rank with the worst in human history. Africans did not do that.

After slavery ended, southern whites went on a campaign of what can only be called ethnic cleansing. The federal government turned tail and ran by establishing a legal principle whereby the federal government did not have to enforce the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments by using states’ rights. Apartheid became the law of the land due to the Plessy decision. Blacks tried to escape the oppressive conditions in the south by coming north, but they found just how united the states were relative to white supremacy. Africans did not do that. At every turn, whenever blacks tried reaching for what this country claims to promise, we have run into a brick wall, or more accurately, a white mob. Africans did not do that.

So you can stop repeating the only information you could fiind to try justifying your racism.

 

[AZrailwhale]

You can quit repeating what you cherrypicked.

Before the white man came to Africa, tribal wars were mostly fought with swords, spears, bows and arrows. Although these weapons were lethal they were nowhere near as quick and fatal as the gun. The problem here was that, only the white strangers had guns and decided which tribal group to support in times of battle. Any tribal group the white strangers supported with their powerful cannons, guns and ammunitions, easily conquered their enemies. This also created another major problem. The white strangers did not support any tribal group for free. In fact, the white strangers started demanding taxes (which included pieces of gold and prisoners of war) and total submission after victory. Any tribal group or community which failed to submit to the Europeans and pay taxes were wiped out. Sometimes the leaders of those communities were executed publicly as a form of warning to neighboring communities. Most communities in Africa were turned into concentration camps with European authorities in place.

Africans did not sell their own people into slavery

www.africaw.com

​

Futhermore,

“In fact, most American slaves were not kidnapped on another continent. Though over 12.7 million Africans were forced onto ships to the Western hemisphere, estimates only have 400,000-500,000 landing in present-day America. How then to account for the four million black slaves who were tilling fields in 1860? “The South,” the Sublettes write, “did not only produce tobacco, rice, sugar, and cotton as commodities for sale; it produced people.” Slavers called slave-breeding “natural increase,” but there was nothing natural about producing slaves; it took scientific management. Thomas Jefferson bragged to George Washington that the birth of black children was increasing Virginia’s capital stock by four percent annually.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016, pp.1

To be blunt, America had slave breeding “factories” where enslaved people were forced to breed.

“According to database-backed estimates by David Eltis and David Richardson, only about 389,000 kidnapped Africans were disembarked in the ports of the present-day United States, the majority of them before independence.”

“By 1860, those few hundred thousand Africans had given way to four million African Americans.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016, pp.11-12

According to the Sublette's, 389,000 slaves landed on the shores of what is now America. By 1860 there were 4 million slaves living here. The importation of slaves was made illegal in 1808. So from 1808 until 1860, the number of slaves increased by at least 1,000 percent. If we allow for the Africans selling each other, Africans would be responsible for approximately 389 thousand slaves. What about the 3.1-4 million additional slaves? Africans did not create them. This was done by forced slave breeding for business, pleasure, and entertainment.

If I buy drugs from a drug dealer, it is not the drug dealer's fault I became an addict. I chose to purchase the drugs. In the same way, Europeans decided to invade Africa and purchase African war captives. I have not been able to find research whereby Africans loaded up slave vessels that landed in Europe to sell slaves. I see no record of any west African shipping company that sailed the Atlantic, dropping off slaves in South America, the Caribbean, and then America. As I wrote earlier, things are not as simple as “Africans sold other Africans into slavery.” It is not as simple as blacks invented slavery and that we should be forever grateful to whites for being so kind as to end it. I was told as a child that half the truth equals a lie. Half the truth is what the tale of Africans selling other Africans is. You cannot make a sale if no one buys. Africans did not own the shipping companies that carried the slaves to America, nor did they swim across the Atlantic to get here. Finally, Africans did not make U.S. laws.

You have come with that sad, sorry white racist argument. It is the claim of Africans selling each other. History is recorded, but we have only received one side of it about the slave trade. Yes, some people were citizens in one African tribe who sold members of other African nations to Europeans. Europeans were not forced to buy Africans, but Africans were forced to sell other Africans in many cases. Nearly 400,000 Africans ended up on these shores and turned into 4 million by atrocities that rank with the worst in human history. Africans did not do that.

After slavery ended, southern whites went on a campaign of what can only be called ethnic cleansing. The federal government turned tail and ran by establishing a legal principle whereby the federal government did not have to enforce the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments by using states’ rights. Apartheid became the law of the land due to the Plessy decision. Blacks tried to escape the oppressive conditions in the south by coming north, but they found just how united the states were relative to white supremacy. Africans did not do that. At every turn, whenever blacks tried reaching for what this country claims to promise, we have run into a brick wall, or more accurately, a white mob. Africans did not do that.

So you can stop repeating the only information you could fiind to try justifying your racism.

Actually swords, spears and other edged weapons are far more lethal than flintlock smoothbore muskets. They have a much higher rate of fire and don't expose the location of the operator with a large cloud of grey-white smoke. The only advantage a flintlock has over a bow is that you can teach someone to use a musket well in a day or two and it takes years to train an archer.

 

[Unkotare]

Actually swords, spears and other edged weapons are far more lethal than flintlock smoothbore muskets. They have a much higher rate of fire and don't expose the location of the operator with a large cloud of grey-white smoke. The only advantage a flintlock has over a bow is that you can teach someone to use a musket well in a day or two and it takes years to train an archer.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Took me a few seconds to figure it out.

 

[Libby von H]

Since white godlessness did not end with slavery, you might want to look at the white races detachment from God instead of lecturing me about blacks. The history yu talk about belongs to whtes.

I am sure from my extensive study of race and history and the Civil War that Frederick Douglass would DESPISE you

 

[Dagosa]

Everything they touch turns to shit. Look at the African nations, look at the Caribbean black nations. Look at inner city America.

Facts.

A- hole. Look at Hitler, look at Putin and look at Trump and his followers. They are shit.

 

[excalibur]

A- hole. Look at Hitler, look at Putin and look at Trump and his followers. They are shit.

You poor thing.

 

[IM2]

I am sure from my extensive study of race and history and the Civil War that Frederick Douglass would DESPISE you

View attachment 928135

I doubt it. You don't get to whitewash Frederick Douglass.

 

[IM2]

A- hole. Look at Hitler, look at Putin and look at Trump and his followers. They are shit.

The problem with this idiot is that he ignores white colonization in his racist rant.

 

[IM2]

Teaching children about mistakes of the past. That will include teaching the Gen Z's that working for a living is a proud thing not just a white thing; Teaching them that Lyndon Johnson was the death of the modern black family and that Martin Luther King was a plagiarist and a womanize.
Wait! Who is afraid of history again?

We worked for free for 200 years. I don't think whites have anything to tell us about work. LBJ did not destroy the back family and King was not a plagarist. Whites such as yourself are scared of history.

 

[JGalt]

A- hole. Look at Hitler, look at Putin and look at Trump and his followers. They are shit.

Isn't that what Biden's uncle Bozey turned into?

 

[Libby von H]

Recently there has been a trend on college campuses to create courses that discuss the concept of whiteness. Once that began, the usual suspects crawled out from under the rocks and started whining about racism against whites. Never mind that black studies departments exist; the American right must whine. Hence the current right-wing movement to cleanse our history books of everything they believe makes European descendants look bad.

In the 21st century, we must move beyond memes created by mostly far-right loudmouths. These types have some whites believing we all chose to come over here on the Mayflower. Some believe it is unfair how whites get portrayed in modern teachings. Unfair is revising history to leave out the factual record. Teaching our children the mistakes we made should not mean we are teaching them to dislike whites or being white. I and generations of other blacks endured the annual K-12 section of history about black slavery, and it did not make me hate being black. In recent years we have seen a consistent well-funded, politically supported movement by the right-wing to enforce gaslighting as a way of educating today’s students. In this movement, anything that negatively shows whites must be censored.

WHY IS AMERICA AFRAID OF BLACK HISTORY?​

No one should fear a history that asks a country to live up to its highest ideals.
By Lonnie G. Bunch III

One can tell a great deal about a country by what it chooses to remember: by what graces the walls of its museums, by what monuments are venerated, and by what parts of its history are embraced. One can tell even more by what a nation chooses to forget: what memories are erased and what aspects of its past are feared. This unwillingness to understand, accept, and embrace an accurate history, shaped by scholarship, reflects an unease with ambiguity and nuance—and with truth. One frequent casualty of such discomfort is any real appreciation of the importance of African American history and culture for all Americans.

Why should anyone fear a history that asks a country to live up to its highest ideals—to “make good to us the promises in your Constitution,” as Frederick Douglass put it? But too often, we are indeed fearful. State legislatures have passed laws restricting the teaching of critical race theory, preventing educators from discussing a history that “might make our children feel guilty” about the actions and attitudes of their ancestors. Librarians around the nation feel the chilling effects of book bans. Some individuals who seek to occupy the highest office in the land fear the effects of an Advanced Placement class that explores African American history—a history that, as education officials in Florida have maintained, “lacks educational value”; a history that does not deserve to be remembered.

Rather than running from this history, we should find in it sustenance, understanding, and hope. In the end, we can’t escape the past anyway. What Joe Louis said of an opponent applies to the legacy of history: You can run, but you can’t hide.

Why Is America Afraid of Black History?

No one should fear a history that asks a country to live up to its highest ideals.

www.theatlantic.com

You yourself don't know Black History, you talk about whites from Jamestown as if slavery started with the landing of that ship

"The historians John Thornton and Linda Heywood of Boston University estimate that 90 percent of those shipped to the New World were enslaved by Africans and then sold to European traders. The sad truth is that without complex business partnerships between African elites and European traders and commercial agents, the slave trade to the New World would have been impossible,"

YOU ARE A RACIST AND IT IS UNDENIABLE

 

[Libby von H]

We worked for free for 200 years. I don't think whites have anything to tell us about work. LBJ did not destroy the back family and King was not a plagarist. Whites such as yourself are scared of history.

Even raging liberal Democrats affirm LBJ destroyed Black Society

Even the recent history of the Great Society says Black housing was a DISASTER

" public housing projects, which expanded under Johnson. She tells a compelling if familiar story of the infuriating arrogance of government planners, who repeatedly destroyed poor communities in the belief that they could build better places. Shlaes, who has a good eye for quotes, picks a beauty from a court decision allowing the destruction of a neighborhood in Washington, D.C. “If those who govern the District of Columbia decide that the nation’s capital shall be beautiful as well as sanitary, there is nothing in the Fifth Amendment that stands in the way,” the court wrote. Public housing in the United States, sadly, has rarely been beautiful or sanitary. Shlaes catalogs some of the low points: the efforts of government social workers to ensure that fathers did not visit their children; the decision to increase rents with income, eliminating any incentive to work; the insistence that even the owners of modest homes would be better off in government apartments. “To be housed, it turned out, was not what people wanted,” she writes. “They wanted to house themselves.”"

 

[Libby von H]

We worked for free for 200 years. I don't think whites have anything to tell us about work. LBJ did not destroy the back family and King was not a plagarist. Whites such as yourself are scared of history.

""The Government lost the War on Poverty. "In fact what the War on Poverty and the new flood "of benefits did do was the opposite of prevent poverty. "They established a new kind of poverty, "a permanent sense of downtroddenness. "The gap between black and white unemployment widened. "Welfare programs funded by Johnson "and Nixon expanded rolls to an appalling extent. "Appalling because welfare fostered a new sense "of hopelessness and disenfranchisement "among those who received it.""

 

[Libby von H]

Observers like Harrington and Moynihan had misgivings. Formerly, black and white unemployment rose and fell in tandem. Now, however, blacks stayed unemployed while white employment rose. Could it be that many young blacks had so few basic life skills that they had given up and were unemployable? Were they a “new lost generation?” Harrington wondered.

Yes, Moynihan replied in his famous 1965 report to the president, which argued that the black family was fracturing, increasingly unable to provide children with the nurture required to develop the focus needed to get an education or hold a job. That, he suggested, was the core problem government had to solve.

 

[Libby von H]

Still, of all the “experts,” Moynihan proved the most insightful. At least he read the welfare statistics critically enough to see that the Great Society’s programs were not reversing but hastening the disintegration of black families. The conclusion to his famous study, “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action” (1965) is as compelling today as it was 55 years ago, and not just with respect to black families but to all families trapped by welfare dependency:

In a word, a national effort towards the problems of Negro Americans must be directed towards the question of family structure. The object should be to strengthen the Negro family so as to enable it to raise and support its members as do other families. After that, how this group of Americans chooses to run its affairs, take advantage of its opportunities, or fail to do so, is none of the nation’s business.

 

[the watcher]

It's not so much black history, it's black economics, black math, and black accountability that generates confusion.

 

[Dagosa]

We worked for free for 200 years. I don't think whites have anything to tell us about work. LBJ did not destroy the back family and King was not a plagarist. Whites such as yourself are scared of history.

White racism comes in many forms. This time it comes in the form of a white racist who colors himself in order to sell himself to black voters.

 

[IM2]

White racism comes in many forms. This time it comes in the form of a white racist who colors himself in order to sell himself to black voters.

Yep.