Tweet

Tera Hunter

19 Jun, 5 tweets, 1 min read

Let's discuss the significance of #Juneteenth, which was amplified during last summer's protests and the escalating take-downs of Confederate monuments. Juneteenth served as a counter-narrative, especially starting in the late 19th century when the the Lost Cause ideology

was fabricated. The erection of Confederate monuments was part of a deliberate and successful effort by the United Daughters of the Confederacy to bolster white supremacy; to rewrite history to deny the significance of slavery in the Civil War and its violent role in American

history. Celebrations of Juneteenth stood in stark contrast. The Emancipation Proclamation was. They discussed citizenship rights. They amplified the individual and collective achievements of AfAms. They refused to let actual U.S. history be completely excised, debased,

or forgotten. They provided provided a powerful critique of the propaganda that was being called "history" that has had such an enduring influence that it has reached well beyond the South, as shown by the proliferation of Confederate monuments from coast to coast.

Neo Confederates were quite effective in passing off their version of history so much so that it became nationalized. We're seeing this again with the right's complete desecration of CRT, which bears absolutely no relationship to what's being taught in k-12 schools.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @TeraWHunter

Tera Hunter

@TeraWHunter

25 Jul 20

Lawrence Mead is exhibit “A “to dispute David Brooks & others who claim there are no conservatives in academia. Not true. They are often the most influential scholars. Mead has played a key role in national welfare reform. His latest polemic “Poverty and Culture” in Society” /1

is a summary of a book he published a year ago and a rehashing of arguments he has been making for decades. It is listed as “commentary” that appears online, but not in the print journal. Thus, it was not peer reviewed, I’m assuming. /2

He uses geography to stand in for race, while making sweeping racist claims, especially about “blacks and Hispanics.” He uses the West vs. Non-West divide to make the case that non-European descended people are ill equipped to handle the demands of modern America because they /3

Read 10 tweets

Tera Hunter

@TeraWHunter

21 Jun 20

I want to talk about emancipation, for anyone who is interested. As Juneteenth is being discussed there is a lot of misunderstandings about the Emancipation Proclamation, how slavery came to an end, and what made Texas different.

The Emancipation Proclamation did not free most enslaved people. The short version is that it applied mainly to the Confederate states. They obviously were not going to obey a dictum from a government whose authority they had rejected.

Slavery was not destroyed by one event or one person. It did not happen all at once. It was a protracted process that took place over the course of the Civil War. African Americans seized the moment from the onset of the war, to make it about abolition, even though the federal

Read 12 tweets

Tera Hunter

@TeraWHunter

7 Mar 19

Thread. This is a response to a conversation on @nhannahjone ‘s timeline a couple of days ago about slavery. She argued that for most of U.S. history, “black people were set completely *outside* of the class structure.”
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1102545… …

That slaves, “As non-people, as property, as a tradable commodity, they were classless. Their race meant they had NO class.” Most people on her TL agreed with her. A few were puzzled and skeptical. In another tweet in response to a critic she said:

“Can a table or a mule be part of a class. If so, then, yes, AMerican slaves were part of a class.” The idea that enslaved people were regarded as property is a contradiction on its face, as many scholars have argued. Slaves were commodified for the purpose of exploiting their

Read 13 tweets

Tera Hunter

@TeraWHunter

24 Dec 18

https://twitter.com/johnedwinmason/status/1077031611185676288

These were “work or fight” laws originally issued during World War I to require able bodied men to either serve in the military or find civilian jobs. In the South, there was already a long tradition of coercing black labor through vagrancy laws. Black men were disproportionately

https://twitter.com/johnedwinmason/status/1077031611185676288

arrested under “work or fight”. But the white South originated something wholly unintended in the law by targeting black WOMEN. A military conscription was used as a pretext to force them to work as domestics in white homes, at precisely the time other jobs were opening up

for them in the war industry. Maintaining white domesticity was considered too important to sacrifice and thus was treated like a war aim. White women were not expected to perform their own cleaning, cooking, washing because that was consigned to black women.

Read 5 tweets

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!