What's wrong with Texas?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Does anyone know without having to do a lot of research what percentage of southerners were slave owners?

~33%

http://www.civilwarcauses.org/stat.htm

Everybody who could afford them, probably. Slaves weren't cheap.

[byu71]

Does anyone know without having to do a lot of research what percentage of southerners were slave owners?

[Jeff Lebowski]

LOL a fight breaks out between JL, DDD and SU (the clique) vs Cowboy and Tex. I am too old to fight, but I know who my money is on.

Ha. Neither cowboy nor Tex have even posted in this thread, you dummy. DDD was making a joke about another thread.

[Jeff Lebowski]

FINALLY! You find something that is worth reading. Why didn't your original shit for an article you posted just simply reference this?

From the above document...

Yes, the textbooks don't deny that slavery existed. They just incorrectly present the root cause for the Civil War. From the next two paragraphs:

However, the requirement in the curriculum standards that compels coverage of “sectionalism, states’ rights, and slavery” (in that order) as causes of the war leads publishers to these sort of misleading – and even inaccurate – passages.

They are inaccurate for a simple reason: the concept of “states’ rights” in an abstract sense as a defense of secession did not appear until after the conclusion of the Civil War. Contemporaneous documents and statements by southerners make it plain that slavery was the underlying reason for their action. In their secession ordinances, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi and Texas all stated their understanding that slavery had been placed in danger by Lincoln’s election and made that their major theme. Moreover, high officials, such as Confederate President Jefferson Davis and Vice President Alexander H. Stephens, made plain the absolute centrality of protecting slavery as the reason for secession. That point is important for two reasons. One is that both Davis and Stephens revised their positions after the war was over to argue that slavery had not been the issue at all, maintaining instead that it had been about abstract constitutionalism. The other is that these passages, which appear designed to fit the TEKS requirement of considering “states’ rights” as a separate issue, does dovetail with current neo-Confederate ideology, which is deeply false to the historical record.

Swish.

[byu71]

LOL a fight breaks out between JL, DDD and SU (the clique) vs Cowboy and Tex. I am too old to fight, but I know who my money is on.

[TripletDaddy]

I actually think Lebowski is the only one not in on the joke here...

lol @ uncle Ted, cowboy, and jeff lebowski!

[Uncle Ted]

You will notice more material on Moses (among other problems). If you want a more detailed analysis, check out the executive summary of the Texas Freedom Network that had a panel of college profs review the textbooks:

http://www.tfn.org/site/DocServer/FI...pdf?docID=4625

Various Moses references discussed on pages 9-11.

FINALLY! You find something that is worth reading. Why didn't your original shit for an article you posted just simply reference this?

From the above document...

First, a clarification: all three of these publishers provide thorough and accurate coverage of slavery in their products. There is no attempt to hide the issue in the run up to the Civil War.

As for the moses material it looks like the review has, as you like to put it, a lot of nitpicking over words.

For example:

Further, stating that “Moses handed down God’s Ten Commandments” is very close to endorsing a religious claim. Stating, for instance, that “Jews and Christians believe that Moses handed down God’s Ten Commandments” would have been more acceptable. Without this qualification, the text seems to endorse the truth of these biblical claims.

Well, ok. The authors should have said "Jews and Christians believe that". Of course, I am sure there is a lot of things in history books that should have this qualification showing opinion. That article you posted could have used a lot of this.

[Moliere]

lol @ Uncle Ted and cowboy!

I actually think Lebowski is the only one not in on the joke here...

[Jeff Lebowski]

It is just like seeing all the human rights violations that we see happening all over the world today but there are no wars started because of them. However, if a country threatens our oil supply (i.e. our economics) then a war is started. Of course, folks will point to the human rights violations or some other bullshit as the cause. Yes, slavery was absolutely wrong and is still absolutely wrong. One would think we are past that dark history but I don't see any wars being started over all the slavery (aka. "human trafficking") that is happening today. Where are the wars? We are too busy fighting wars for primarily economic reasons to notice I guess.

What on earth is your point with that? Yes, slavery was clearly an economic issue for the south. Nobody on either side ever denied that.

Back to my original point and the article you posted making the following assertions:

I already called this bullshit and found what the textbook actually said about Moses. It doesn't say Moses inspired anything. The shit for an article doesn't provide anything to back this assertion other than opinion. If you have a better quote from the actual textbook that backs the above assertion then please post it.

Of course, the author didn't provide any actual quotes from the textbook other than this little snippet:

So in all these state declarations slavery is carefully ordered and listed first, right?

That's funny that you keep going back to that and also funny that you are sure there is only one comment about Moses because that is all you found in your google search. You have proven a negative without actually seeing the book! Congrats.

Actually, here is a more detailed run-down of the issues in the new textbooks.

http://wonkette.com/560133/new-texas...ry-segregation

I especially like that wacky cartoon and interactive worksheet where the space aliens get affirmative action benefits.



You will notice more material on Moses (among other problems). If you want a more detailed analysis, check out the executive summary of the Texas Freedom Network that had a panel of college profs review the textbooks:

http://www.tfn.org/site/DocServer/FI...pdf?docID=4625

Various Moses references discussed on pages 9-11.

[ERCougar]

It's a lot easier to become morally outraged about something when money is involved.

States' rights as a justification for discrimination. Where have I seen that before?

[Uncle Ted]

BTW, here are the declaration of causes for seceding states for South Carolina, Mississippi, and Georgia (in addition to Texas).

http://www.civilwarcauses.org/reasons.htm

Fascinating reading. Slavery is clearly the main issue in every case, but each state specifically references Northern states refusing to enforce the fugitive slave laws (exercising states' rights!) as a specific cause. One example:



Ha. States' rights, my arse.

The main cause was economics...

How the Cotton Gin Started the Civil War
[...]
Before the cotton gin, slavery had been on its way out—farmers realized it was more expensive to maintain slaves, compared to the value of what they could produce. Cotton was a troublesome crop anyway; its fiber could only be separated from the sticky, embedded seeds by hand, a grueling and exhausting process.


This changed dramatically, of course, with the advent of the cotton gin. Suddenly cotton became a lucrative crop and a major export for the South. However, because of this increased demand, many more slaves were needed to grow cotton and harvest the fields. Slave ownership became a fiery national issue and eventually led to the Civil War.
[...]

https://www.asme.org/engineering-top...-the-civil-war

It is just like seeing all the human rights violations that we see happening all over the world today but there are no wars started because of them. However, if a country threatens our oil supply (i.e. our economics) then a war is started. Of course, folks will point to the human rights violations or some other bullshit as the cause. Yes, slavery was absolutely wrong and is still absolutely wrong. One would think we are past that dark history but I don't see any wars being started over all the slavery (aka. "human trafficking") that is happening today. Where are the wars? We are too busy fighting wars for primarily economic reasons to notice I guess.

Back to my original point and the article you posted making the following assertions:

This Fall, Texas schools will teach students that Moses played a bigger role in inspiring the Constitution than slavery did in starting the Civil War.

I already called this bullshit and found what the textbook actually said about Moses. It doesn't say Moses inspired anything. The shit for an article doesn't provide anything to back this assertion other than opinion. If you have a better quote from the actual textbook that backs the above assertion then please post it.

It is alarming that 150 years after the Civil War's end children are learning that slavery was, as one Texas board of education member put it in 2010, "a side issue."

Of course, the author didn't provide any actual quotes from the textbook other than this little snippet:

They teach that "sectionalism, states' rights and slavery" — carefully ordered to stress the first two and shrug off the last — caused the conflict.

So in all these state declarations slavery is carefully ordered and listed first, right?

[TripletDaddy]

lol @ Uncle Ted and cowboy!

[Jeff Lebowski]

It was about slavery. Did you read the article in the WA Post about all the mythology about the Confederacy that still persists? I agree with the author that we need to rename all the streets and highways named after racist traitors like Lee and Davis. There shouldn't be any federal money to maintain Confederate monuments.

Yes, I already posted it here somewhere. This is the article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...ong/?tid=sm_fb

[Jeff Lebowski]

BTW, here are the declaration of causes for seceding states for South Carolina, Mississippi, and Georgia (in addition to Texas).

http://www.civilwarcauses.org/reasons.htm

Fascinating reading. Slavery is clearly the main issue in every case, but each state specifically references Northern states refusing to enforce the fugitive slave laws (exercising states' rights!) as a specific cause. One example:

In the present case, that fact is established with certainty. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.

The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: "No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."

Ha. States' rights, my arse.

[SeattleUte]

I heard this story today, and this made me howl with laughter: "'This is Texas,' Walt says. 'This is a good Republican red state. They don't violate people's rights here. Take that to Chicago, New York, not here.'"

http://www.npr.org/2015/07/07/420824...y-are-innocent

There is more evil in Texas than any other state, including Utah.