Israel and West Bank Settlements

[Typical Lax Dad]

Yes, those accurate, factual assertions are inconvenient to your agenda.
Don't give any credit to former slaves who made their way when freed or to Holocaust survivors.

This is one of the stupidest assertions I've seen in recent history.

"Being a slave taught me to survive after I was a slave." Missing the point of the argument entirely. It's just plain stupid. Like, really, really, really stupid.

How many millions of resourceful, successful, capable people died in slavery and in the holocaust? Such an incredible, insane insult to all the victims.

I agree. The whole discussion is stupid. Former slaves & Holocaust victims were talented, resourceful human beings. To deny that is stupid.

One way to help migrants develop skills that we can all benefit from is through forced labor camps.

My experience is that migrants bring skills with them, in addition to their work ethic....but you be you.

So Jews and Blacks lacked the capacity to develop skills outside of concentration camps and plantations and were lazy? It was only a matter of time for you to be you. Unskilled and lazy…..I remember when “Mexicans” were stereotyped as lazy too.

[MDlaxfan76]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

[Typical Lax Dad]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

[MDlaxfan76]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

In most instances, I give folks a pass for not being sure or unaware of what the implications of their words are….but in Old Saltwater’s case, he has lost that courtesy. He has a track record for choosing such a path. Not a simple innocent misunderstanding which can happen with decent humans. I have found that most people are decent human beings. This is the guy that ran into some black folks at the dog park a few years ago and seemed surprised that they were nice people. So nice he decided to comment on it.

[old salt]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

[MDlaxfan76]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

In most instances, I give folks a pass for not being sure or unaware of what the implications of their words are….but in Old Saltwater’s case, he has lost that courtesy. He has a track record for choosing such a path. Not a simple innocent misunderstanding which can happen with decent humans. I have found that most people are decent human beings. This is the guy that ran into some black folks at the dog park a few years ago and seemed surprised that they were nice people. So nice he decided to comment on it.

Understood...I'm just keeping the "invitation" open.
While unusual, people can learn and actually change over time.
But it's not easy when your social and media bubble pushes the other direction.

Participation in a forum like this, however, provides at least an opportunity to learn...

[MDlaxfan76]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

That's not accurate, though I won't call it a lie as you may have simply missed the acknowledgment that the curriculum contains lots of material that I'd consider to be appropriate. Indeed, the great majority...almost all. Others have similarly acknowledged.

However, I also noted what the curriculum removed from earlier efforts, intentionally removing invitations to read and discuss views of systemic, structural continuations of racism, both legal and government endorsed and de facto...systemic racism. that were at the root of justifications of slavery and persist today.

And, what is at issue with this particular language is not solely that it's offensive, it's that it's defended as if nothing at all to be offended about...first there should have been someone involved in the creation of this curriculum with sufficient awareness that this language wouldn't have appeared, instead would have been modified (as we've made clear would be easy, if the intent was positive), second that no one on the committee understood that this claim of "skills" benefiting former slaves is part of Lost Cause ideology...and third, that once this was brought to the fore, that the reaction is to double down rather than simply say, "oops, that's not what was meant, let's change it"...

That's the problem, the "where woke goes to die" narrative and the selection of people to devise a curriculum that "doesn't make white children feel guilty" results in Lost Cause apologist ideology getting into the curriculum and then defended blindly.

Salty, I continue to keep the door open to you...but it's hard...

[old salt]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

That's not accurate, though I won't call it a lie as you may have simply missed the acknowledgment that the curriculum contains lots of material that I'd consider to be appropriate. Indeed, the great majority...almost all. Others have similarly acknowledged.

However, I also noted what the curriculum removed from earlier efforts, intentionally removing invitations to read and discuss views of systemic, structural continuations of racism, both legal and government endorsed and de facto...systemic racism. that were at the root of justifications of slavery and persist today.

And, what is at issue with this particular language is not solely that it's offensive, it's that it's defended as if nothing at all to be offended about...first there should have been someone involved in the creation of this curriculum with sufficient awareness that this language wouldn't have appeared, instead would have been modified (as we've made clear would be easy, if the intent was positive), second that no one on the committee understood that this claim of "skills" benefiting former slaves is part of Lost Cause ideology...and third, that once this was brought to the fore, that the reaction is to double down rather than simply say, "oops, that's not what was meant, let's change it"...

That's the problem, the "where woke goes to die" narrative and the selection of people to devise a curriculum that "doesn't make white children feel guilty" results in Lost Cause apologist ideology getting into the curriculum and then defended blindly.

Salty, I continue to keep the door open to you...but it's hard...

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

That's not accurate, though I won't call it a lie as you may have simply missed the acknowledgment that the curriculum contains lots of material that I'd consider to be appropriate. Indeed, the great majority...almost all. Others have similarly acknowledged.

However, I also noted what the curriculum removed from earlier efforts, intentionally removing invitations to read and discuss views of systemic, structural continuations of racism, both legal and government endorsed and de facto...systemic racism. that were at the root of justifications of slavery and persist today.

And, what is at issue with this particular language is not solely that it's offensive, it's that it's defended as if nothing at all to be offended about...first there should have been someone involved in the creation of this curriculum with sufficient awareness that this language wouldn't have appeared, instead would have been modified (as we've made clear would be easy, if the intent was positive), second that no one on the committee understood that this claim of "skills" benefiting former slaves is part of Lost Cause ideology...and third, that once this was brought to the fore, that the reaction is to double down rather than simply say, "oops, that's not what was meant, let's change it"...

That's the problem, the "where woke goes to die" narrative and the selection of people to devise a curriculum that "doesn't make white children feel guilty" results in Lost Cause apologist ideology getting into the curriculum and then defended blindly.

Salty, I continue to keep the door open to you...but it's hard...

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

folks survived the holocaust because they had more utility than others and slavery had the unintended benefit of developing work ethic and developing skills for people who were otherwise unable to work hard and develop skills outside of slavery…. Being “whipped into shape” had its origins somewhere and like they say there is some truth in lots of stereotypes.

[MDlaxfan76]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

That's not accurate, though I won't call it a lie as you may have simply missed the acknowledgment that the curriculum contains lots of material that I'd consider to be appropriate. Indeed, the great majority...almost all. Others have similarly acknowledged.

However, I also noted what the curriculum removed from earlier efforts, intentionally removing invitations to read and discuss views of systemic, structural continuations of racism, both legal and government endorsed and de facto...systemic racism. that were at the root of justifications of slavery and persist today.

And, what is at issue with this particular language is not solely that it's offensive, it's that it's defended as if nothing at all to be offended about...first there should have been someone involved in the creation of this curriculum with sufficient awareness that this language wouldn't have appeared, instead would have been modified (as we've made clear would be easy, if the intent was positive), second that no one on the committee understood that this claim of "skills" benefiting former slaves is part of Lost Cause ideology...and third, that once this was brought to the fore, that the reaction is to double down rather than simply say, "oops, that's not what was meant, let's change it"...

That's the problem, the "where woke goes to die" narrative and the selection of people to devise a curriculum that "doesn't make white children feel guilty" results in Lost Cause apologist ideology getting into the curriculum and then defended blindly.

Salty, I continue to keep the door open to you...but it's hard...

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

come on, Salty, the scholars chosen were specifically chosen for their right wing views on race. They know better, but have chosen academic career paths based on being an alternative view to those who believe systemic racism and the legacy effects of racism continue today.

No, the Lost Cause ideology wasn't that no slaves had possible "skills", the ideology was that some did, whereas others needed to be whipped; submission was the point... "house slaves" for instance were "loved and cared for" by their owners, not degraded, exploited. Submission, no "uppity" Negroes allowed. The ideology minimizes the degradation, the abuse, the horror of slavery and sanitizes it in a gauzy white wash of "hey' they learned to be blacksmiths' and "benefited from" their time in slavery. Gone with the Wind...Birth of a Nation was more explicitly negative about slaves...they deserved their suppression, they deserved to be lynched like the animals they are...

That you don't know this, or deny this, is because you have bought into the white wash version of that ideology whether unconsciously or not (it was undoubtedly prevalent in your own educational curriculum)...but please do know that it was very concerted effort during Jim Crow to white wash the actions of slave owners and to minimize the horrors committed. Celebrate the "heroes" of the Confederacy with monuments that said to the black residents, "we are in power, shut up and go back to the field or the kitchen".

[old salt]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

That's not accurate, though I won't call it a lie as you may have simply missed the acknowledgment that the curriculum contains lots of material that I'd consider to be appropriate. Indeed, the great majority...almost all. Others have similarly acknowledged.

However, I also noted what the curriculum removed from earlier efforts, intentionally removing invitations to read and discuss views of systemic, structural continuations of racism, both legal and government endorsed and de facto...systemic racism. that were at the root of justifications of slavery and persist today.

And, what is at issue with this particular language is not solely that it's offensive, it's that it's defended as if nothing at all to be offended about...first there should have been someone involved in the creation of this curriculum with sufficient awareness that this language wouldn't have appeared, instead would have been modified (as we've made clear would be easy, if the intent was positive), second that no one on the committee understood that this claim of "skills" benefiting former slaves is part of Lost Cause ideology...and third, that once this was brought to the fore, that the reaction is to double down rather than simply say, "oops, that's not what was meant, let's change it"...

That's the problem, the "where woke goes to die" narrative and the selection of people to devise a curriculum that "doesn't make white children feel guilty" results in Lost Cause apologist ideology getting into the curriculum and then defended blindly.

Salty, I continue to keep the door open to you...but it's hard...

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

come on, Salty, the scholars chosen were specifically chosen for their right wing views on race. They know better, but have chosen academic career paths based on being an alternative view to those who believe systemic racism and the legacy effects of racism continue today.

No, the Lost Cause ideology wasn't that no slaves had possible "skills", the ideology was that some did, whereas others needed to be whipped; submission was the point... "house slaves" for instance were "loved and cared for" by their owners, not degraded, exploited. Submission, no "uppity" Negroes allowed. The ideology minimizes the degradation, the abuse, the horror of slavery and sanitizes it in a gauzy white wash of "hey' they learned to be blacksmiths' and "benefited from" their time in slavery. Gone with the Wind...Birth of a Nation was more explicitly negative about slaves...they deserved their suppression, they deserved to be lynched like the animals they are...

That you don't know this, or deny this, is because you have bought into the white wash version of that ideology whether unconsciously or not (it was undoubtedly prevalent in your own educational curriculum)...but please do know that it was very concerted effort during Jim Crow to white wash the actions of slave owners and to minimize the horrors committed. Celebrate the "heroes" of the Confederacy with monuments that said to the black residents, "we are in power, shut up and go back to the field or the kitchen".

All the stuff you are saying can & will be taught within the curriculum. I read the list in my original post.
Stop telling me what I know. I was among the initial cadre of instructors in the Navy's race relations courses in the late 1970's.
...& it made a difference.

[MDlaxfan76]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

That's not accurate, though I won't call it a lie as you may have simply missed the acknowledgment that the curriculum contains lots of material that I'd consider to be appropriate. Indeed, the great majority...almost all. Others have similarly acknowledged.

However, I also noted what the curriculum removed from earlier efforts, intentionally removing invitations to read and discuss views of systemic, structural continuations of racism, both legal and government endorsed and de facto...systemic racism. that were at the root of justifications of slavery and persist today.

And, what is at issue with this particular language is not solely that it's offensive, it's that it's defended as if nothing at all to be offended about...first there should have been someone involved in the creation of this curriculum with sufficient awareness that this language wouldn't have appeared, instead would have been modified (as we've made clear would be easy, if the intent was positive), second that no one on the committee understood that this claim of "skills" benefiting former slaves is part of Lost Cause ideology...and third, that once this was brought to the fore, that the reaction is to double down rather than simply say, "oops, that's not what was meant, let's change it"...

That's the problem, the "where woke goes to die" narrative and the selection of people to devise a curriculum that "doesn't make white children feel guilty" results in Lost Cause apologist ideology getting into the curriculum and then defended blindly.

Salty, I continue to keep the door open to you...but it's hard...

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

come on, Salty, the scholars chosen were specifically chosen for their right wing views on race. They know better, but have chosen academic career paths based on being an alternative view to those who believe systemic racism and the legacy effects of racism continue today.

No, the Lost Cause ideology wasn't that no slaves had possible "skills", the ideology was that some did, whereas others needed to be whipped; submission was the point... "house slaves" for instance were "loved and cared for" by their owners, not degraded, exploited. Submission, no "uppity" Negroes allowed. The ideology minimizes the degradation, the abuse, the horror of slavery and sanitizes it in a gauzy white wash of "hey' they learned to be blacksmiths' and "benefited from" their time in slavery. Gone with the Wind...Birth of a Nation was more explicitly negative about slaves...they deserved their suppression, they deserved to be lynched like the animals they are...

That you don't know this, or deny this, is because you have bought into the white wash version of that ideology whether unconsciously or not (it was undoubtedly prevalent in your own educational curriculum)...but please do know that it was very concerted effort during Jim Crow to white wash the actions of slave owners and to minimize the horrors committed. Celebrate the "heroes" of the Confederacy with monuments that said to the black residents, "we are in power, shut up and go back to the field or the kitchen".

All the stuff you are saying can & will be taught within the curriculum. I read the list in my original post.
Stop telling me what I know. I was among the initial cadre of instructors in the Navy's race relations courses in the late 1970's.
...& it made a difference.

Hey, I know only what you say on here.
And you're darn consistent.

ok, I said.."you don't know this , OR deny this"...ok, denial.
Frankly, that's worse.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

That's not accurate, though I won't call it a lie as you may have simply missed the acknowledgment that the curriculum contains lots of material that I'd consider to be appropriate. Indeed, the great majority...almost all. Others have similarly acknowledged.

However, I also noted what the curriculum removed from earlier efforts, intentionally removing invitations to read and discuss views of systemic, structural continuations of racism, both legal and government endorsed and de facto...systemic racism. that were at the root of justifications of slavery and persist today.

And, what is at issue with this particular language is not solely that it's offensive, it's that it's defended as if nothing at all to be offended about...first there should have been someone involved in the creation of this curriculum with sufficient awareness that this language wouldn't have appeared, instead would have been modified (as we've made clear would be easy, if the intent was positive), second that no one on the committee understood that this claim of "skills" benefiting former slaves is part of Lost Cause ideology...and third, that once this was brought to the fore, that the reaction is to double down rather than simply say, "oops, that's not what was meant, let's change it"...

That's the problem, the "where woke goes to die" narrative and the selection of people to devise a curriculum that "doesn't make white children feel guilty" results in Lost Cause apologist ideology getting into the curriculum and then defended blindly.

Salty, I continue to keep the door open to you...but it's hard...

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

come on, Salty, the scholars chosen were specifically chosen for their right wing views on race. They know better, but have chosen academic career paths based on being an alternative view to those who believe systemic racism and the legacy effects of racism continue today.

No, the Lost Cause ideology wasn't that no slaves had possible "skills", the ideology was that some did, whereas others needed to be whipped; submission was the point... "house slaves" for instance were "loved and cared for" by their owners, not degraded, exploited. Submission, no "uppity" Negroes allowed. The ideology minimizes the degradation, the abuse, the horror of slavery and sanitizes it in a gauzy white wash of "hey' they learned to be blacksmiths' and "benefited from" their time in slavery. Gone with the Wind...Birth of a Nation was more explicitly negative about slaves...they deserved their suppression, they deserved to be lynched like the animals they are...

That you don't know this, or deny this, is because you have bought into the white wash version of that ideology whether unconsciously or not (it was undoubtedly prevalent in your own educational curriculum)...but please do know that it was very concerted effort during Jim Crow to white wash the actions of slave owners and to minimize the horrors committed. Celebrate the "heroes" of the Confederacy with monuments that said to the black residents, "we are in power, shut up and go back to the field or the kitchen".

All the stuff you are saying can & will be taught within the curriculum. I read the list in my original post.
Stop telling me what I know. I was among the initial cadre of instructors in the Navy's race relations courses in the late 1970's.
...& it made a difference.

You damn right it did….. Lord have mercy!!! That might be the funniest $h!t I have read on this board. “Hands up don’t shoot” and “woke” are punchlines for you…. I want my money back.

[PizzaSnake]

Don't forget rapists...that's always been a theme...they're coming for your women...

Nothing will develop “work ethic” like a whip. Some have it naturally, others need to be whipped into shape, according to Old Salt.

well...I think you're trolling him there, as I'd like to think that Salty simply hasn't recognized the implications of what these folks are communicating, and he's defending, but I get it that piercing the apologia bubble is important sometimes.

Let me just say that the invitation is open to anyone on here to realize that it's quite simple to say 'oops, I didn't understand that, didn't see that perspective, sorry, let's change the wording to better reflect our best intentions".

But now that it's more clear (hopefully), the refusal by some to take that simple path speaks volumes about actual intentions.

And that's the issue for public figures like DeSantis and Gutfeld. They double and triple down.

You're both trolling me. The more offensive analogies that you both make, the more you demonstrate it.
The more baseless negative stereotypes you pull out of your asses, the more you soil the discussion.

You are both willfully misconstruing a flyspeck in a lengthy well meaning document.
You offer no opinion on the rest of the lengthy document.

That's not accurate, though I won't call it a lie as you may have simply missed the acknowledgment that the curriculum contains lots of material that I'd consider to be appropriate. Indeed, the great majority...almost all. Others have similarly acknowledged.

However, I also noted what the curriculum removed from earlier efforts, intentionally removing invitations to read and discuss views of systemic, structural continuations of racism, both legal and government endorsed and de facto...systemic racism. that were at the root of justifications of slavery and persist today.

And, what is at issue with this particular language is not solely that it's offensive, it's that it's defended as if nothing at all to be offended about...first there should have been someone involved in the creation of this curriculum with sufficient awareness that this language wouldn't have appeared, instead would have been modified (as we've made clear would be easy, if the intent was positive), second that no one on the committee understood that this claim of "skills" benefiting former slaves is part of Lost Cause ideology...and third, that once this was brought to the fore, that the reaction is to double down rather than simply say, "oops, that's not what was meant, let's change it"...

That's the problem, the "where woke goes to die" narrative and the selection of people to devise a curriculum that "doesn't make white children feel guilty" results in Lost Cause apologist ideology getting into the curriculum and then defended blindly.

Salty, I continue to keep the door open to you...but it's hard...

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

come on, Salty, the scholars chosen were specifically chosen for their right wing views on race. They know better, but have chosen academic career paths based on being an alternative view to those who believe systemic racism and the legacy effects of racism continue today.

No, the Lost Cause ideology wasn't that no slaves had possible "skills", the ideology was that some did, whereas others needed to be whipped; submission was the point... "house slaves" for instance were "loved and cared for" by their owners, not degraded, exploited. Submission, no "uppity" Negroes allowed. The ideology minimizes the degradation, the abuse, the horror of slavery and sanitizes it in a gauzy white wash of "hey' they learned to be blacksmiths' and "benefited from" their time in slavery. Gone with the Wind...Birth of a Nation was more explicitly negative about slaves...they deserved their suppression, they deserved to be lynched like the animals they are...

That you don't know this, or deny this, is because you have bought into the white wash version of that ideology whether unconsciously or not (it was undoubtedly prevalent in your own educational curriculum)...but please do know that it was very concerted effort during Jim Crow to white wash the actions of slave owners and to minimize the horrors committed. Celebrate the "heroes" of the Confederacy with monuments that said to the black residents, "we are in power, shut up and go back to the field or the kitchen".

For an interesting, fact-based perspective on the reality of slavery in the South, go visit any of several former rice plantations in the Low Country of coastal SC and imagine working in those conditions—for free…

This both-siderism currently employed is a fcuking joke and those who traffic in it are probably due our pity for the horrible wrong done to them in their upbringing that renders them unable to recognize or correct the errors in their conception of reality.

[OCanada]

Educators are leaving FL and TX. Maybe DeSantis can hold a presser on what he has learned from his closest black friends. The curriculum was rewritten to serve a political end and that is how it will be taught. It has an objective.

There is no silver lining in any of it. But bigots gotta bigot. The skills thing would be hysterical if it were not so tragic for anyone to buy into that narrative.

Slaves had a culture, history and skills before arrival. The southern aristocracy was scared spit less of a rebellion. The owners did their best to expunge culture and language. Skills are harder to erase. I am picturing VA in 1630. A slave decides he has skills that are in demand so he will go to town and start a new business with his new found skills cause his labor has value. Except he cannot own property, cannot be free, cannot marry w/o permission and his kids and wife can be sold. He cannot realize his potential as a human being and he is not free to make his own decisions except in a Frankl kind of way. I am imagining 1630. 200 hundred tears later slaves are still slaves. No labor market for them down there. 200 years later Jim Crow and terror still hold sway. People are lynched for doing nothing really. Civil rights legislation is passed in the 1960s but implementation is slow. Meanwhile some POS decides “skills”…. Every state that withdrew said they were withdrawing because of slavery. The nerve of trying to prevent its spread. The language used by its defenders spoke to the character of its defenders and their beliefs.

Half of my family fought for the South. I doubt many of the right currently gathering attention did. Trump and Desantis don’t have anyone. So many of their supporters showing a flag that is not the Confederate flag of the war to express their white nationalist grievances. Imagine a people after 500 years wanting full citizenhmship and equality of opportunity to reach their full potential.

USNA has had its issues like the rest of society’s institutions. The Catholic Church .. we cannot have black priests bcs no disciples were black. That will be replayed on the issue of women during the Synod. All the disciples were Jews though.

All scholars are not equal nor are all findings and sources. Some are created so others can reference them as opposed to those trying to find fact and make sense of it.

Meanwhile Israel continues to violate Torah and human rights. The public discourse there has changed radically in the last 20-30 years. It is no longer a true democracy and is increasingly separate but not equal nor is it trying to be either

[a fan]

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

And you refuse to acknowledge that these intentions are nowhere to be found in the actual law.

The same hubris you possess keeps them from acknowledging that the laws wording was a sh(tshow, and fixing the actual problem.

They, like you in so many cases, refuse to admit when they are wrong, or are unclear---and instead, lash out at others for their lack of clarity.

A reasonable person would have read what's actually in the law, and realized that those words have NOTHING to do with what they claim they intended.

BTW, no, my first thought wasn't the Holocaust analogy.

My first thought was: tell Florida educators to use this same line of thinking when teaching Sex Education.

As in: tell kids that "getting pregnant at 15 can sometimes lead to all sorts of positive life lessons".

Would you sign on for that? I wouldn't. There's NO NEED to teach that. But it's certainly true, right?

I can list successful people who got pregnant at the age of 15, right?


The logic used by these academics.....is wanting. I'll leave it at that.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The Lost Cause ideology was that slaves were not capable of such things, which that instruction refutes.
It is only offensive to those looking for a reason to be offended. The rest of your response is incomprehensible.
You refuse to acknowledge the credentials & good intentions of the academics who produced the curriculum.

And you refuse to acknowledge that these intentions are nowhere to be found in the actual law.

The same hubris you possess keeps them from acknowledging that the laws wording was a sh(tshow, and fixing the actual problem.

They, like you in so many cases, refuse to admit when they are wrong, or are unclear---and instead, lash out at others for their lack of clarity.

A reasonable person would have read what's actually in the law, and realized that those words have NOTHING to do with what they claim they intended.

BTW, no, my first thought wasn't the Holocaust analogy.

My first thought was: tell Florida educators to use this same line of thinking when teaching Sex Education.

As in: tell kids that "getting pregnant at 15 can sometimes lead to all sorts of positive life lessons".

Would you sign on for that? I wouldn't. There's NO NEED to teach that. But it's certainly true, right?

I can list successful people who got pregnant at the age of 15, right?


The logic used by these academics.....is wanting. I'll leave it at that.

Logic is an under appreciated quality these days. I always try to apply logic and analogy. Two powerful tools when used in concert. What YA calls a “sucker punch”….I call using logical conclusions and analogies…..if one follows a particular train of thought or pursue an argument being made to its logical conclusion …..

[Typical Lax Dad]

Thank God Robert Smalls was a slave….he never would have been able to learn these things. A fine example of how slavery allowed people to develop skills….even maritime. We wasting a lot of money at USNA….obviously a cheaper way to develop sailors.

[old salt]

Thank God Robert Smalls was a slave….he never would have been able to learn these things. A fine example of how slavery allowed people to develop skills….even maritime. We wasting a lot of money at USNA….obviously a cheaper way to develop sailors.

The Navy's done a lot better on affirmative action than your industry has.