THE AMERICA ONE NEWS
Oct 3, 2024  |  
0
 | Remer,MN
Sponsor:  QWIKET.COM 
Sponsor:  QWIKET.COM 
Sponsor:  QWIKET.COM Sports News Monitor and AI Chat.
Sponsor:  QWIKET.COM Sports News Monitor and AI Chat.
back  
topic
American Thinker
American Thinker
29 Jul 2023
Robert Arvay


NextImg:Truth, lies, and slavery

When I was an elementary school student in the 1950s, in the Deep South (Florida), I recall that our history book had two mentions of slavery.  One of them was that “overseers” were merciless men with whips, and oftentimes themselves were slaves.  The other was the ludicrous mention of the plantation-owner’s wife, “tending to a sick slave.” 

Obviously, the truth was being white-washed (play on words intended).  I remember no mention of small children being sold away from their mothers, an unimaginable cruelty.  Nor do I recall mention that it was illegal to teach a slave to read and write. 

Today, that book would be rightly denounced.  The only reason to preserve it would be as a museum piece, an example of state indoctrination of youth. 

Times change—or do they?  

Republican presidential candidate Tim Scott, who is black, rebuked Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis for defending Florida’s curriculum regarding slavery.  That curriculum contains a line which offends those who have not read it in context. 

Quoting from an online article at Newsmax

The news outlet [Politico] noted the Florida standards are backed by DeSantis. They require instructors to teach middle schoolers that "slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit." 

"There is no silver lining in slavery," Scott said. "Slavery was really about separating families, about mutilating humans, and even raping their wives. It was just devastating." 

Of course, the radical left seized upon the “skills” line which, if taken out of context, is comparable to the myth of the plantation-owner’s wife’s compassion for a sick slave. 

While the Florida curriculum, written by black scholars, is emphatically anti-slavery (of course!), there are two things that must be said about the offending line:  First, it is definitely not presented as a “silver lining.”  

Second, and most importantly, it is a fact. 

In rare cases, some slaves did indeed learn trades that became of value to them, once they were freed.  No justification of slavery can be, or was, inferred by noting that fact.  No one would wish to be a slave no matter what they could learn while in bondage.  The curriculum, according to those who have actually read it, and spoken of it, does not pretend otherwise. 

That second part (about facts) is something that is utterly irrelevant, at best, to the Left.  Factual information to them can be just as offensive as a false slur is to the rest of us.  Tim Scott, himself the target of scurrilous attacks from the left, should have immediately recognized that. 

The real reason that the left opposes this, or many other curricula, is that it does not whole-heartedly propagandize what the left teaches—that America is inherently bad, and must be diminished or destroyed. 

The Left wishes not only to censor and cancel opinions, it seeks to censor the truth.  They are just as guilty of indoctrination as were those who wrote my elementary text book.  They are no more compassionate than were the plantation-owners who sold children. 

That fact, above all others, is the one that the Left most desperately seeks to hide.

Image: Library of Congress, via Picryl // no known restrictions