• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

TTea Party Group Wants To 'Soften' Slavery In Textbooks

Solitaire

Neoclinus blanchardi
Solitaire
Joined
Jul 25, 2001
Messages
3,096
Location
Tennessee
Tea Party Group Wants To 'Soften' Slavery In Textbooks

What do you remember about American History class? Chances are you took away the basics; the birth of a democracy and a roller-coaster of ups-and-downs. But some Tea Party members say those basics are flawed when it comes to textbooks. "My biggest concern is that important information is being omitted, which creates a negative light on our Founding Fathers," said Tea Party activist Brian Rieck.

Many members of the group are asking Tennessee lawmakers to tweak textbooks so that doesn't happen. Notably, they're hoping to make changes in how slavery and encroachment on Native Americans are portrayed to students. "Slavery is of course portrayed in the textbooks nowadays I'm sure as a totally negative thing. Had there not been slavery in the South, the economy would've fallen," Rieck said. Rieck told News 5 without offering that balance, the Founding Fathers, many of whom were slave owners, could be slighted for their contributions in the eyes of students.
Click to expand...


Which produced a very interesting reaction in the local paper. Here's a snippet.

Tea Bagging History by Averie Greene

A little over a year ago, the Texas Board of Education voted to edit history books so that slavery could be shown in a less negative light ... Yeah, I thought the same thing. I'm pretty sure that no matter how many times you sugarcoat slavery, it's still going to be evil and despicable. If this "edit" of history weren't bad enough, the Tennessee Tea Party now wants to edit our state's books as well, not just by making slavery seem a little less mean, but by getting rid of any reference to slavery completely — as well as any reference about our country's founding fathers owning slaves.

Their reasoning? It makes people have less than warm and fuzzy feelings about our Founding Fathers and therefore makes America look bad. Isn't that a great idea? Whenever you don't like something from history, just change it! Lincoln wasn't assassinated; Narnia was behind his balcony curtain. The Trail of Tears was actually the Trail of Lollipops, and Jimmy Hoffa just got his Hogwarts Letter. See how easy that was? So what's the problem? It's not real and it's offensive. These are history books, not fiction.

Regardless of what kind of awful things our founding fathers did, it is unethical to lie about who they were and what they did. If this makes America look bad, I say too bad. There's a reason it makes us look bad. It's because what America did was bad. Taking slavery out of history books isn't going to change it or make it any better. It's just going to give kids the idea that slavery was inconsequential; that it was so unimportant to the history of the U.S. that it doesn't even bear a mention between chapters on the Revolutionary War and Little Big Horn. Oh, are we going to take out the Native Americans, too? I guess they're not important either, even though they were here first.
Click to expand...

But when I went on their web site, all I could find was some Black Robe Regiment and not much more. :wackyhuh:
 
I never understand the sort of people who want to deify the "Founding Fathers". Or anybody else, for that matter.
 
What is strange about that?

People have been rewriting "history" on a regular basis since writing has been invented.....what makes you think that they actually have ever stopped?

Knowledge of history in the USA is anorexic already.... what's one more induced vomit of facts?:boggled:
 
Last edited:
TragicMonkey said:
I never understand the sort of people who want to deify the "Founding Fathers". Or anybody else, for that matter.
Click to expand...

They also act like the "Founding Fathers" were one monolithic entity who agreed on everything. There was a lot of animosity between them, never mind wildly varying opinions on everything. For every Founding Father's opinion on just about anything, you can find another Founding Father with the opposite opionion.
 
Heh, sounds like the TT group has something in common with the reparations crowd:

"Slavery is of course portrayed in the textbooks nowadays I'm sure as a totally negative thing. Had there not been slavery in the South, the economy would've fallen," Rieck said.
Click to expand...

And:

"When I hear Rahm Emanuel talking about a budget deficit when we're talking about reparations, to me that's offensive," Watkins said. "This country was built on our backs, the backs of our ancestors. They bled, they died, they came in chains and they died in pain. So don't talk to me about budget deficits right now. Not on this subject."
Click to expand...
 
I can't believe this.

It was the Republicans who were against slavery.

It was the Democrats who supported the James Gang as unfairly treated ex-Confederate soldiers.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I never understand the sort of people who want to deify the "Founding Fathers". Or anybody else, for that matter.
Click to expand...

Because they have tiny dicks, and need flawlessly perfect heroes to glorify as a way of compensating for it.


What? It makes more sense than the BS reason they give.
 
Totalitarian societies have been merrily re-writing history for many years. Why shouldn't we?
From the descriptions of slavery I recall from elementary school in the fifties, it was terrific.
Saved from being eaten by wild beasts in Africa and given a nice job and a banjo....
 
Bill Thompson said:
I can't believe this.

It was the Republicans who were against slavery.

It was the Democrats who supported the James Gang as unfairly treated ex-Confederate soldiers.
Click to expand...

Looks like you didn't get the memo. In the 60's and 70's, the entire southern racist political movement shifted from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party. This was a direct result of the Civil Rights Act ('64) and the Voting Rights Act ('65), and it was exploited to the fullest by Nixon. He called it the "southern strategy."

Now, go forth and be ignorant no more.
 
Bikewer said:
Totalitarian societies have been merrily re-writing history for many years. Why shouldn't we?
From the descriptions of slavery I recall from elementary school in the fifties, it was terrific.
Saved from being eaten by wild beasts in Africa and given a nice job and a banjo....
Click to expand...

I don't remember the slaves having a banjo. That was for hillbillies sitting on the porch in West Virginia and Roy Clark.
 
Bikewer said:
Totalitarian societies have been merrily re-writing history for many years. Why shouldn't we?
From the descriptions of slavery I recall from elementary school in the fifties, it was terrific.
Saved from being eaten by wild beasts in Africa and given a nice job and a banjo....
Click to expand...
pgwenthold said:
I don't remember the slaves having a banjo. That was for hillbillies sitting on the porch in West Virginia and Roy Clark.
Click to expand...

Ironically, the banjo was invented in Africa. It came here with the slaves.

Then the hillbillies stole it. ;)
 
Cleon said:
Ironically, the banjo was invented in Africa. It came here with the slaves.

Then the hillbillies stole it. ;)
Click to expand...
See? Slavery wasn't all bad.

;)

Seriously, though, to make attribution of the founding fathers as "evil slaveowners" is a logical error. Primarily because it singles them out for a sort of treatment that isn't done uniformly with the people of that era.

Looks to me like an easy way to attribute "evil" to wealthy people.
 
mhaze said:
See? Slavery wasn't all bad.

;)

Seriously, though, to make attribution of the founding fathers as "evil slaveowners" is a logical error. Primarily because it singles them out for a sort of treatment that isn't done uniformly with the people of that era.

Looks to me like an easy way to attribute "evil" to wealthy people.
Click to expand...

Find me a textbook that calls them "evil slaveowners".

However, slavery was and is evil. At one time it may have been accepted, but it is still evil. Trying to somehow "soften" that is illogical.
 
Bill Thompson said:
I can't believe this.

It was the Republicans who were against slavery.

It was the Democrats who supported the James Gang as unfairly treated ex-Confederate soldiers.
Click to expand...


Yes and back then Republicans were liberal and Democrats were conservative
 
Bill Thompson said:
I can't believe this.

It was the Republicans who were against slavery.

It was the Democrats who supported the James Gang as unfairly treated ex-Confederate soldiers.
Click to expand...

Once upon a time, Christians were actually Jews. Americans were British. Texans were Mexicans.

How can things possibly be different now?

My brain is 'sploding!
 
Parties...must...remain same...as ideology.....party....is equivalent....to ideology.....must not....rock boat....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom