299

Go read it.

300

Asking a state isn’t personal…but I will accept that you know your state had slaves (all territories had people in them bringing their slaves with them)…all 50 of them.

301

Prove it

302

My OP, what assumptions were made?

303

You really don’t know as much as you think you do. My state had no slaves period. So I will accept that you did not learn the real history of the United States in school.

304

The state you live in is not PII. However it is definitely your choice as to whether you want to disclose that or not.

305

The 1619 Project is an ongoing project developed by The New York Times Magazine in 2019 which "aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of [the United States’] national narrative.

The project has sparked criticism and debate among prominent historians and political commentators.[5][6] In a letter published in The New York Times in December 2019, historians Gordon S. Wood, James M. McPherson, Sean Wilentz, Victoria Bynum and James Oakes expressed “strong reservations” about the project and requested factual corrections, accusing the project of putting ideology before historical understanding. In response, Jake Silverstein, the editor of The New York Times Magazine , defended the accuracy of the 1619 Project and declined to issue corrections.[7] In March 2020, historian Leslie M. Harris, who served as a fact-checker for the 1619 Project, wrote that the authors had ignored her corrections, but that the project was a needed corrective to prevailing historical narratives.[8]

The plan was to challenge the notion that the history of the United States began in 1776. The initiative quickly grew into a larger project.[14] The project encompasses multiple issues of the magazine, with related materials in multiple other publications of the Times as well as a project curriculum developed in collaboration with the Pulitzer Center, for use in schools.[14] The project employed a panel of historians and had support from the Smithsonian, for fact-checking, research and development.[17] The project was envisioned with the condition that almost all of the contributions would be from African-American contributors, deeming the perspective of black writers an essential element of the story to be told.[18]

306

OK the straight answer is my mind is made up. Based on past performance even if President Trump actually wants a 1776 commission he is unwilling to do the work to accomplish it. He gets board with actual work. To me this looks like a cynical ploy to shore up the support of the tiki-torch wing of the party who feel like they are getting replaced by minorities.

1 Like
308

I agree that TDS is the primary mindset behind the left’s opposition to this.

1 Like
309

I know exactly what the 1619 project is. I asked you how it was reframing history inaccurately?

310

Pretty much it.

311

My question is, Does “pro-American” history include or exclude slavery? What about the civil war? Is that considered pro-American?

[quote=“PurpnGold, post:1, topic:235440”]

Just do a search before asking the questions. I’d think an OP would require at least some level of research :woman_shrugging:

[quote=“PurpnGold, post:1, topic:235440”]
Trump is trying to position the 1776 commission against the 1619 project.

He is literally saying that slavery isn’t a part of our history.

Assumption

Assumption

312

Indeed, my friend.

313

I’m not opposed to it. It’s irrelevant to the issues I care about like jobs, race-relations, and healthcare/covid.

314

You should have read your 1776 curriculum link.

None of what I said in the OP was an assumption.

From YOUR link

Does “black excellence” (which by the way is what black history month is for) include being slaves?

315

I did. And I posted it.

Yes, it was.

I don’t know. Do you and why is it relevant when you yourself pointed out that we have black history month.

You seem to have an issue with teaching something that inspires and stomps out the victim mentality propaganda from education.

2 Likes
316

Would anyone consider slaves to be victims?

317

No it wasn’t. Your 1776 commission link confirmed everything I questioned.

But I thought your link covered the curriculum? You can’t find it in the link you read?

Also does anyone find it tone deaf that a commission called “the 1776 commission” (Slavery was still a major thing in 1776) has this statement

What between 1776-1865 is going to be taught to “reject” victimhood? What black excellence? Harriet Tubman? She’s already taught. And I don’t think a commission called “1776 commission” should really be celebrating black people who escaped the very conditions that the constitution enshrined.

318

Yup, sometime in the late’50’s as an 8 y/o being called “wop, dago, guinea, greaser” was an enlightening experience. After asking my father what those words meant, he started teaching my brothers and I to box. Good thing, we got into a our share of fights for being “those Italian boys”.
I actually had a teacher in high school literally say to another pisani “ you Italians are all alike”?
We all looked at each other and bust out laughing!
Ha

1 Like
319

So then you did make assumptions in your OP. :woman_shrugging: Thank you

I’m not surprised you’d find it tone deaf.

Inspiring stories built on national character.

So you are saying no one who was black between the time frame of 1776 or 1865 gave anyone reason for inspiration.