A thread. The "activist parents" fighting the bogeyman they have named "critical race theory" object to the teaching of history that paints anyone white in a negative light. They demand a version of U.S. history that uplifts white historical figures as both innocent and heroic.
They claim that they must have this because it's the only way to salvage the self-esteem of white children, whose spirits would be utterly broken were they to discover that there were mean white people in America's history. This isn't much of a vote of confidence in their kids...
So how do these supposedly grassroots "activists," allegedly completely unsullied by astroturf political organizations posing as intellectual outfits like the Claremont Institute, propose to teach slavery or the civil war, presuming they want them taught in public schools at all?
For example, what were the causes of the confederate states' secession from the U.S.? I know, southern "heritage" people insist that it was some other murky thing besides slavery. Except the actual seceders beg to differ. They even wrote their reasoning down and made it clear.
Why did South Carolina secede on December 20, 1860 after Abe Lincoln's election but before he was even sworn in the following March? After a long wind up, they tell you: slavery; specifically, the hostility of northern states to the institution of slavery. avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/c… 
They even did a version of the January 6 insurrection reasoning, owing their departure to the election of a president who as a Republican (once a grand old party to to be sure) was an enemy SPECIFICALLY of slavery; while asserting that Black people could not possibly be citizens.
The second state to go, Mississippi (January 9, 1861) didn't even bother with the wind-up. They just got right to it: they were seceding to preserve and protect the institution of slavery.
The leaders of Florida, which was the third to join the seditious, human breeding coalition on January 10, 1861 also made it clear that their desire was to defend what they viewed as their God-given right to traffic in flesh as property... nps.gov/articles/flori…
Enter Alabama, which quit the union the day after the future sunshine state. Their leaders too, stated that their aim was to "join the slaveholding states" in forming a new, human trafficking-based republic... ehistory.osu.edu/exhibitions/Re…
What about Georgia (Jan 19)? Here's sentence TWO of their declaration: "For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery." avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/c…
And while the other states: Louisiana (January 26, 1861), Arkansas (May 6, 1861), North Carolina (May 20, 1861) and Tennessee (June 8, 1861) issued more perfunctory articles of secession, it was clear that their case too, was to join a slaver republic.
So how would the anti-history activists prefer that the civil war was discussed in American history classes? Is it possible to exclude the confederates' own words and declarations as to the cause of secession from the narrative and still be teaching "history?"
And how do these modern-day Daughters of the Confederacy propose to maintain their feel-good narrative that slavery "wasn't so bad." I mean, the "why would they abuse their money-makers" argument has never worked with pimps or Robert E. Lee... theatlantic.com/politics/archi…
And their narrative cannot survive the fact that so many Black people demonstrated their utter hatred for slavery by constantly escaping and mounting rebellions, leading to the creation of "fugitive slave laws" to try and force them to come back. history.com/topics/black-h…
Indeed there were far more rebellions than you probably know about, since we're not taught that narrative in school, since it clearly made the DAR types who have dominated what's in our textbooks uncomfortable.
It doesn't take much imagination to understand that enslaved people hated slavery, desperately wanted freedom, and very likely hated the abusers and false Christians they were forced to call "master" and "mistress." Wouldn't you? nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/maai/ensla…
The further evidence of how enslaved people actually felt is that some 180,000 of them took the opportunity of the Civil War to emancipate themselves and join the Union Army; altering the course of the war by literally raising arms against their enslavers. history.com/topics/america…
Meanwhile it's clear that the seceding slaver states loved slavery more than they loved the United States. The evidence? Fellow slaver states like Maryland and West Virginia didn't secede, because they loved the Union more. And highly doubtful there was greater ecumenism there.
And how should we about the riots that broke out in New York in 1863 over conscription that exempted the rich and drew scores of working class white men into the war against their will. They took out their rage on Black children, burning down an orphanage. history.com/topics/america…
And that's just one part of American history. There's so much more, including the complete erasure of the history of America's indigenous tribes, who were wiped out by disease and guns in the European colonizers' zeal to enslave THEM and take their land. history.com/news/native-am…
And the wars they fought to beat back the colonizers... seminolenationmuseum.org/history/semino…
It's a deeply intersectional story, if we're willing to tell it and allow American kids to learn it... glc.yale.edu/sites/default/…
Do we teach about the Caribbean, Central and South America, which were also giant slave colonies, and the impact that had on the history of the Western Hemisphere, including the Louisiana Purchase and the punishment of Haiti for overthrowing French slavery?blackpast.org/global-african…
In the end, what, in the minds of this new DAR, CAN teachers teach?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
