Should teachers be allowed to say "Slavery was bad and it should not happen again"?

It is! Which is why we need to talk about it in schools to help students understand what modern slavery looks like.

 

What people, who people are advocating not teaching slavery was bad and we should not institute it again. WHO are you talking about??? And we have forever taught slavery was bad and we should not institute since long before CRT, are you asserting it is REQUIRED to have CRT in order to teach slavery was bad and we should never institute it again? That would be nonsense. The thought we MUST teach CRT to INSURE slavery is taught as something bad and should never be instituted again more utter nonsense.

 

We have one here in this thread. Now explain why banning CRT wouldn't motivate someone like him from taking legal action against a school who taught "slavery is wrong".

 

Definitely yes to the opening question.
History taught in grade school differs from history taught in high school and even that taught in college.
Grade school scratches the surface of history. High School deals a lot more as to what happened and in college courses get into why things happened. Anyway that is how it was for my years of schooling.

A good example is the Treaty of Guadalupe Del Hidalgo.
In fact I got deeper into that to be a Real Estate broker than I had previously in classes taught publicly.

 

No we don't.

I believe schools should sort themselves out and teach proper stuff instead of government's agendas.

 

That's not really how to look at teaching. They're teaching different things yes but you lay the foundation for higher concepts. So yes you will be taught certain ways of thinking about historical events before you actually go into details on them. For example, by making sure students think things like "slavery was bad and it should never happen again" so you can build off that when you talk about why the system of slavery was wrong according to Tocqueville.

 

I'm assuming this thread would be focusing on public schools or at the very least curriculum funded in part by the government. The government will be involved either way. I don't see the meaningful distinction here.

 

I can't disagree with any of the above but somehow when it comes to teaching about war none of that is taken into account. It's as if there's some kind of difference between war and human rights atrocities. So I'll ask you again, do you believe teaching about war should be postponed until junior high school?

 

'Slavery is bad' isn't just a moral issue. Certainly enslaving people is immoral in the opinion of most people, but its also illegal, unlawful and contrary to the ideals of a free society, and those are the pertinent points in a primary education setting. The primary 'scholarly' contributors to CRT write that institutional racism is largely caused by white people's lack of a valuation of a racial identity which results in a lack of their valuation of racial minorities' own perception of a valuable racial identity. Which is really just a complicated way of saying that white people cause racism because they aren't as racist as everyone else... I'm not opposed to CRT being taught, but it should be an elective in higher education, not a part of primary education curriculum. Whatever else CRT is, its still just a philosophy, and a very specialized one at that.

 

One anonomous guy here is the best you got? I'm talking about across country, in the body politic where is this demand we not teach about slavery?

 

"Little Jimmie, stop hitting little Eddie with that steel pipe. Braining people with clubs is wrong"

"Shut the **** up teach, that's a moral judgment"

 

CRT blames being white right now, on perceived evils from well over 156 years in the past.

 

Any support for equality is from a position of greed and is limited to only what you can personally gain from it.

 

Bluesguy, people think talking about racism, and how it looks in a modern day setting is CRT. It's not CRT. We're seeing this play out in school board meetings across the country where people don't understand anti-racist education isn't the same as CRT. One anonymous poster here is indicative of what other people think in the country.

Right, I understand that point and it's absolutely correct. Slavery is morally repugnant. CRT should be taught at higher levels. No questions about that. What I'm concerned however is people will use the language of banning CRT not to ban CRT, but to ban anti-racist education. How will someone like you who says we shouldn't teach CRT in schools, make sure we still have that basic anti-racist education?

 

And? Where are you going with that?

 

Other than in our military, where can you see slavery being acceptable again?

 

This is the epitome of straw man. No teacher anywhere is prevented from doing this.

 

because then it is us vs them - it's harder when it's us vs us

but you still have to tame it down for young kids

even the bible is tamed down to a children's bible when teaching it to little children

 

"
In Oklahoma City, teacher Telannia Norfar said she and her colleagues at Northwest Classen High School had planned to discuss a schoolwide approach to help students understand current events – including the murder of George Floyd, family separation at the Mexico border and the use of racist terms such as the "China virus.We need to do it, because our students desire it," she said. "But how do we do that without opening Oklahoma City public schools up to a lawsuit?"

..."While the new law does not ban its (Tulsa Race Massacre) teaching, Lewis said it is likely to limit how much teachers feel they can dive into conversations about topics such as structural racism and white supremacy before and since the massacre."
https://www.npr.org/2021/05/28/1000...al-race-theory-are-leading-to-self-censorship

I'm asking you to consider a teacher's perspective on the issue. How do you reassure a teacher that teaching concepts around race won't be labeled as CRT?

 

If one wants to examine slavery, as a course, to relate it to today, simply use our military as examples.
I have personal experience with being drafted, which is the involuntary imposition of service on citizens and not with the all volunteer service. So perhaps best is to use when we drafted as examples.

 

You could definitely do something like that.You could even go further back and talk about this during the Vietnam war. But the question then becomes how do you include concepts around race in this? Especially considering things like with what happened at the Air Force Academy (I can't remember the name of the place) a couple of years.

 

What good is discussing modern slavery when we havent even resolved the historic slavery issue? Its like running before you can walk, not gonna happen.

 

What do you mean? I’m not sure exactly what you mean here.

 

No they don't, the look specifically a the CRT materials and ideas that are being taught, racist and bigoted and historically inaccurate CRT. THAT is what they want out of the schools where it has entered and to prevent it everywhere else. That does NOT preclude and accurate teaching of American history and slavery and civil rights.

Let me try again can you show me anyone of any consequence or any group of any significance or any politician pushing to ban teaching slavery was bad and should never be instituted in the country again. Can you point me to any school board meetings were parents were demanding slavery be taught as something good and we should institute again.

You OP is clearly a strawman.

It should not be taught anywhere. It divides us as a people, it is bigoted in it's assertions about other races. I make sure the same way I have for my 68 years on this planet 66 before CRT even existed, why do I have to do something different now? Why does it suddenly occur that with CRT slavery will be taught as something good and should be reinstated. That is SHEER NONSENSE.

 

You said we need to discuss modern slavery. There is no point since historic slavery discussion hasnt been resolved yet.