The failure of American public schools to teach children the truth regarding our history

[Jimmy Higgins]

No but plenty African slaves were captured and sold by their fellow Africans to European slave traders. Don’t forget to include that.

In American history? Last time I checked, the US had a small footprint in Africa called Liberia... and that is about it.

It seems ... odd to add a "but" to slavery. Slavery was wrong, we've learned, we supposedly moved on. But people like you won't drop the buts.

Spouting a bunch of nonsense spoonfed by the right wing media machine is not "correcting historical misrepresentations". No one has represented Africa or Africans as not having been involved in the African slave trade. We just lack the knee-jerk reaction of trying to defend European slave trading with a dumbass "but they did it too" argument, that doesn't actually mean anything.

It's not OK just because people from different tribes who looked kind of like the slaves helped out. That makes it even worse, that the white folks dealt with folks who would sell their own siblings to slavery. It's even worse if they were tricked into it believing that slavery wasn't going to be all bad.

Nobody here is denying that slavery was wrong; nobody is trying to defend it; nobody is claiming anything about it is OK. You guys are libeling your political opponents in pursuit of political advantage.

This constant effort to paint as a villain whoever points out historical facts that don't help spread the left's preferred selective picture of the past is the mirror image of red states' rules against their employees pointing out historical facts that don't help spread the right's preferred selective picture of the past. The common goal is to get people not to talk about the parts of the past that might make the public less susceptible to the ideology. The left portrays Christendom as uniquely most guilty of slavery so people will think it's evil at the core and buy into whatever the left wants to replace it with; the right portrays Christendom as uniquely most deserving of credit for ending slavery so people will think it's good at the core and work to preserve it. Neither ideology has anything to gain from the public knowing the complicated reality.

If public schools were mainly staffed by conservatives then it would be blue states passing laws telling them which parts of history not to teach.

I completely agree, but...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Apparently libeling your political opponents in pursuit of advantage spans the ideological spectrum.

It certainly does; but I take it you're insinuating I was doing it. If you think what I wrote is false, what's your theory for why the people I quoted misrepresented their political opponents?

I think the following s an examples of libeling your political opponents.

"If public schools were mainly staffed by conservatives then it would be blue states passing laws telling them which parts of history not to teach. "

As a general rule, misrepresentations arise out from purpose or mistake.

I find it amazing that alt-right liberals (the contemporary version of the Southern Democrat) have completely adopted the right-wing 80's version of a meme of the liberal agenda in schools. I have no idea what the politics of almost all of my teachers were in school in the 80s and 90s.

 

[Politesse]

I have no idea what the politics of almost all of my teachers were in school in the 80s and 90s

Couldn't you tell, by whether or not they taught about slavery or not?

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

It sounds like you want to replace one false history with another.

 

[Oleg]

Apparently libeling your political opponents in pursuit of advantage spans the ideological spectrum.

It certainly does; but I take it you're insinuating I was doing it. If you think what I wrote is false, what's your theory for why the people I quoted misrepresented their political opponents?

I think the following s an examples of libeling your political opponents.

"If public schools were mainly staffed by conservatives then it would be blue states passing laws telling them which parts of history not to teach. "

As a general rule, misrepresentations arise out from purpose or mistake.

I find it amazing that alt-right liberals (the contemporary version of the Southern Democrat) have completely adopted the right-wing 80's version of a meme of the liberal agenda in schools. I have no idea what the politics of almost all of my teachers were in school in the 80s and 90s.

Sure. Used to be that way. It should be that way. But . . .

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

​

Sure. Used to be that way. It should be that way. But . . .

In bygone days, the art of indoctrination was practiced with a subtle hand. In those times, in the halls of learning, the masses were indoctrinated with a deftness that was most effective, for it generally went undetected even by the most astute schoolboys.

They believed they were being taught the truth of history, when in reality they were being fed a diet of falsehoods and deceit.

But now, the veil has been lifted, and the methods of indoctrination are no longer subtle. The average intellect may recognise the propaganda for what it is, but in times past, even very intelligent schoolboys were taken in by the guise of education.†

It is a cautionary tale, reminding us to be vigilant in our quest for knowledge and to question all that is presented to us as truth.
​

*   *   *   *   *​

† But I was never taken in by the insidious schemes of propaganda. My posting history, dating back to the year 2002, when I was but 12 years of age, bears testament to my vigilance and scepticism. I was never one to be swayed by the whispers of deceit, and I have ever remained steadfast in my quest for truth.
​

 

[laughing dog]

Apparently libeling your political opponents in pursuit of advantage spans the ideological spectrum.

It certainly does; but I take it you're insinuating I was doing it. If you think what I wrote is false, what's your theory for why the people I quoted misrepresented their political opponents?

I think the following s an examples of libeling your political opponents.

"If public schools were mainly staffed by conservatives then it would be blue states passing laws telling them which parts of history not to teach. "

As a general rule, misrepresentations arise out from purpose or mistake.

I find it amazing that alt-right liberals (the contemporary version of the Southern Democrat) have completely adopted the right-wing 80's version of a meme of the liberal agenda in schools. I have no idea what the politics of almost all of my teachers were in school in the 80s and 90s.

Sure. Used to be that way. It should be that way. But . . .

The idea that protecting any child (transgender or not) is progressive or ultra liberal is truly revealing. One would hope every teacher would subscribe to the notion of protecting children.

I recall a furor that a poster in my son’s HS caused among the “Christians”. The poster asked students to not assault classmates they thought was gay. Those bigoted morons thought it was promoting the gay lifestyle and rejected the idea that those children deserved protection from physical harm because they were sinning against Gawd.

 

[Oleg]

Apparently libeling your political opponents in pursuit of advantage spans the ideological spectrum.

It certainly does; but I take it you're insinuating I was doing it. If you think what I wrote is false, what's your theory for why the people I quoted misrepresented their political opponents?

I think the following s an examples of libeling your political opponents.

"If public schools were mainly staffed by conservatives then it would be blue states passing laws telling them which parts of history not to teach. "

As a general rule, misrepresentations arise out from purpose or mistake.

I find it amazing that alt-right liberals (the contemporary version of the Southern Democrat) have completely adopted the right-wing 80's version of a meme of the liberal agenda in schools. I have no idea what the politics of almost all of my teachers were in school in the 80s and 90s.

Sure. Used to be that way. It should be that way. But . . .

The idea that protecting any child (transgender or not) is progressive or ultra liberal is truly revealing. One would hope every teacher would subscribe to the notion of protecting children.

I recall a furor that a poster in my son’s HS caused among the “Christians”. The poster asked students to not assault classmates they thought was gay. Those bigoted morons thought it was promoting the gay lifestyle and rejected the idea that those children deserved protection from physical harm because they were sinning against Gawd.

You don’t object to this because it pushes a ideology/religion you support - on other peoples’ children. There’s no reason for this to be in the classroom. A teacher should not express interest in a child’s sexually or indoctrinate children on sexual or political agendas. The groomer label fits.

 

[laughing dog]

You don’t object to this because it pushes a ideology/religion you support - on other peoples’ children. There’s no reason for this to be in the classroom. A teacher should not express interest in a child’s sexually or indoctrinate children on sexual or political agendas. The groomer label fits.

You are right . It supports the ideology that children should be protected from assault, both physical and emotions- especially at school. One would think any adult who is not a monster would subscribe to that ideology. I realize it is a nuanced view that one does not have agree or like a child in order to protect them from harm. To conflate that with a sexual or political agenda is ridiculous.

Honestly, I hope any teacher who did not think children should be protected at school is relieved of their duties.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Apparently libeling your political opponents in pursuit of advantage spans the ideological spectrum.

It certainly does; but I take it you're insinuating I was doing it. If you think what I wrote is false, what's your theory for why the people I quoted misrepresented their political opponents?

I think the following s an examples of libeling your political opponents.

"If public schools were mainly staffed by conservatives then it would be blue states passing laws telling them which parts of history not to teach. "

As a general rule, misrepresentations arise out from purpose or mistake.

I find it amazing that alt-right liberals (the contemporary version of the Southern Democrat) have completely adopted the right-wing 80's version of a meme of the liberal agenda in schools. I have no idea what the politics of almost all of my teachers were in school in the 80s and 90s.

Sure. Used to be that way. It should be that way. But . . .

So protecting children is a leftist thing now?

 

[Politesse]

One would think any adult who is not a monster would subscribe to that ideology.

Take it from me, they believe that child abuse is the only way to raise "correct" children. I grew up in Republican country, where easily one family in four was hiding the violently abusive habits of the head of house, but any teacher who tried to intervene in said abuse could expect to be dismissed for "causing trouble" and upsetting the parents. If you suggested that what people were doing was wrong, all the adults in the room would angrily insist that they "got whoopings" when they were little and they "turned out just fine".

They are monsters, but the monsters aren't rare. They think liquidpixie75 is a threat to society that needs to be coerced out of her position for wearing a t-shirt, but if they knew one of her students was being savagely beaten by their caretaker, they'd just look the other way, pretend not to see the bruises.

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

For the left it is sexual abuse, for the right it is physical and verbal abuse.

Right-wingers like to get off on beating up children, left-wingers prefer molesting them, in my observation.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

For the left it is sexual abuse, for the right it is physical and verbal abuse.

Right-wingers like to get off on beating up children, left-wingers prefer molesting them, in my observation.

That is an incredibly baseless observation. I can't imagine abuse has any particular partisan spin.

 

[Toni]

One would think any adult who is not a monster would subscribe to that ideology.

Take it from me, they believe that child abuse is the only way to raise "correct" children. I grew up in Republican country, where easily one family in four was hiding the violently abusive habits of the head of house, but any teacher who tried to intervene in said abuse could expect to be dismissed for "causing trouble" and upsetting the parents. If you suggested that what people were doing was wrong, all the adults in the room would angrily insist that they "got whoopings" when they were little and they "turned out just fine".

They are monsters, but the monsters aren't rare. They think liquidpixie75 is a threat to society that needs to be coerced out of her position for wearing a t-shirt, but if they knew one of her students was being savagely beaten by their caretaker, they'd just look the other way, pretend not to see the bruises.

This is far more true than most of us are comfortable with.

 

[Politesse]

For the left it is sexual abuse, for the right it is physical and verbal abuse.

Right-wingers like to get off on beating up children, left-wingers prefer molesting them, in my observation.

That is an incredibly baseless observation. I can't imagine abuse has any particular partisan spin.

I have definitely known victims of abuse wherever I have gone in this world, regardless of ruling party.

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

For the left it is sexual abuse, for the right it is physical and verbal abuse.

Right-wingers like to get off on beating up children, left-wingers prefer molesting them, in my observation.​

That is an incredibly baseless observation. I can't imagine abuse has any particular partisan spin.​

When one says something is 'based on one's observation,' it can hardly be said to be baseless, now can it? I say, one's own observations & experiences can be a valuable source of information, & to dismiss them outright would be a grave error. After all, my dear chap, we must rely upon our own perceptions & insights to navigate the world, mustn't we? One's personal observations & experiences can be an invaluable wellspring of knowledge. Let us not dismiss the value of individual experience, I implore you.​

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

For the left it is sexual abuse, for the right it is physical and verbal abuse.

Right-wingers like to get off on beating up children, left-wingers prefer molesting them, in my observation.​

That is an incredibly baseless observation. I can't imagine abuse has any particular partisan spin.​

When one says something is 'based on one's observation,' it can hardly be said to be baseless, now can it?​

Just because someone says something is "based on one's observation" doesn't imply any level of legitimacy of being based on anything worth considering. That is unless you are a social worker and have a large collection of evidence at your disposal which made you come to this conclusion.

I say, one's own observations & experiences can be a valuable source of information, & to dismiss them outright would be a grave error.
After all, my dear chap, we must rely upon our own perceptions & insights to navigate the world, mustn't we? One's personal observations & experiences can be an invaluable wellspring of knowledge. Let us not dismiss the value of individual experience, I implore you.​

Those are a lot of words that aren't actually doing much but attempting to defend a baseless assertion. After all, the Catholic Church (so many churches) are known for not being liberal... and the sex abuse was systemic. A lot of sexual abuse comes from people that know the victim well... not by conservatives or liberals.

And this is tailing well off of topic.

 

[TomC]

That is unless you are a social worker and have a large collection of evidence at your disposal which made you come to this conclusion.

That is not a proper way to address his lordship.
Tom

 

[Trebaxian Vir]

have a large collection of evidence at your disposal

Yes.

]attempting to defend a baseless assertion.

Incorrect. Allow me to quote, so as to clarify my position:

"Right-wingers like to get off on beating up children, left-wingers prefer molesting them, [based on] my observation."​

I hope that this will put any misunderstandings to rest.

 

[Jarhyn]

have a large collection of evidence at your disposal

Yes.

]attempting to defend a baseless assertion.

Incorrect. Allow me to quote, so as to clarify my position:

"Right-wingers like to get off on beating up children, left-wingers prefer molesting them, [based on] my observation."​

I hope that this will put any misunderstandings to rest.

Mere claims of observation do not provide strong basis, particularly for those whose claims are often suspect, or whose veracity cannot be ascertained.

Unless you are a left winger that molests children or have studies on the molestation of children, your observations do not establish an observation of trend.

It's just an asspull to claim trend on case study.