The State's actions should be defended?

[Malachi151]

My view is that the American State should be studied by children as if it were a foreign country.

There is no reason to teach loyalty to the State in any way at all. Respect for the country yes, respect for our history ys, "respect" for the State, yes, loyalty, NO.

Disloyalty should not be taught, but the idea that teh State has meaning in and of itself is wrong. The State is to be a tool of the people, nothing more. The policies of the State and its history should be taught in all schools objectively with the purpose in teaching children how to govern themselves, not in teaching children to be loyal to a government.

We as human being must be loyal, first and formost, to humanity, nothing should be above that.

 

[ssibal]

We as human being must be loyal, first and formost, to humanity, nothing should be above that.

Sorry, I'll take myself, my family, my friends, and my country over humanity.

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Note: Slavery was not an "action of the state".

 

[Malachi151]

bump

 

[shanek]

For me it was a tie between #4 and #6. I ended up picking #6, but only as the result of eenie-meenie-miney-moe.

 

[shanek]

Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

Note: Slavery was not an "action of the state".

Yes, it was. Slavery was codified into almost every aspect of law when this country was founded, so much so that Washington and Jefferson found it very difficult to free their slaves, no matter hwo hard they tried.

 

[Nasarius]

Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

Note: Slavery was not an "action of the state".

No, but allowing it was.

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Re: Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

No, but allowing it was.

Rather the non-action of the state with respect to a pre-existing instution.

Abolishing slavery was an action of the state.

 

[shanek]

Re: Re: Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

Rather the non-action of the state with respect to a pre-existing instution.

Abolishing slavery was an action of the state.

Then why did Washington and Jefferson run into legal problems when they tried to set their slaves free?

 

[RCNelson]

shanek:
Then why did Washington and Jefferson run into legal problems when they tried to set their slaves free?

What legal problems did they run into?

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

Then why did Washington and Jefferson run into legal problems when they tried to set their slaves free?

What are you talking about? They both freed their slaves at their deaths according to their wills.

Washington and Washington alone could have freed everyones' slaves by saying it should be done. He didn't, and that's not to his credit. Only Washington had enough influence to do that.

He could have been King. It is to his credit that he refused that.

What legal problems are you talking about?
Anti-emancipation laws were from the 1840s.

Evidence?

 

[Malachi151]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

What are you talking about? They both freed their slaves at their deaths according to their wills.

Washington and Washington alone could have freed everyones' slaves by saying it should be done. He didn't, and that's not to his credit. Only Washington had enough influence to do that.

He could have been King. It is to his credit that he refused that.

What legal problems are you talking about?
Anti-emancipation laws were from the 1840s.

Evidence?

Jefferson only freed 5 of his more than 100 salves upon his death.

 

[shanek]

What legal problems did they run into?

I mentioned them in another thread. Basically, any slave freed that was still in Virginia 13 months later could be captured and resold; you couldn't free your slaves if others who could hold a legal claim to your estate wanted them; others. Washington freed his slaves in his will upon his death; that was really the only avenue left. By the time Jefferson had died, even that avenue had been closed off.

 

[shanek]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

What are you talking about? They both freed their slaves at their deaths according to their wills.

Jefferson didn't; by the time he had died his ability to do so had been closed off. He tried, but was ultimately unsiccessful.

Washington and Washington alone could have freed everyones' slaves by saying it should be done. He didn't,

Where are you getting this from? Washington spoke out in favor of the emancipation of slaves almost his entire political life!

 

[shanek]

Here's my post in the other thread on the matter:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870143066#post1870143066

 

[Tmy]

The State may not have invented slavery but they enforced it, through property lawsn voting laws, citizen ship laws, and law enforcement in general. Theres your state action.



In school I dont recall loyalty being that much of a focus. We said the pledge and all and the US was always in a favored light in the history books but it wasnt that intense.

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

Jefferson only freed 5 of his more than 100 salves upon his death.

OK what of it? What does this have to do with "actions of the state"?

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

Where are you getting this from? Washington spoke out in favor of the emancipation of slaves almost his entire political life!

Indeed he did. But he didn't free his own hundreds of slaves.

If he had, it might have inspired imitation.

I do admire Washington, but he could have been better, and had the opportunity to be so. I'm not just judging him by modern standards.

 

[Tmy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The State's actions should be defended?

OK what of it? What does this have to do with "actions of the state"?

Slavery couldnt exist wh/o state action. If I was a slave and I decided to leave what happens. get dragged back by the sheriff maybe. Even if my master physically caught me theres the states selective inaction. By not enforceing impriosnment and assualt laws they allow the slavemaster to drag me back to the plantation.

 

[Schizobunny]

I said I think it should be studied as objectively as if it were a foreign country, because students need to be able to make their own decisions and not be blinded by patriotism or hate.