A little history lesson no longer taught in schools

[bersaguy]

I was watching the movie Lincoln the other night  after reading the book a month ago and it took me back the my high school days and my studying in U.S.History class. It reminded me that while Lincoln was a Republican, he was dealing with a Democratic controlled Congress during the Civil War. He had already sign the Proclamation two years prior and in 1865 was fighting a volatile Congress about the 13th Amendment to the Constitution that would once and for all remove slavery and never allow it to be where one man could own another. The Democratic Congress fought him tooth and nail to keep the 13th Amendment from passing because they wanted to keep the black man under total control. It took Abraham Lincoln every bit of courage he and his Republican associates could mustard to finally swing enough Democrats to get the vote and pass the 13th Amendment. Now I don’t know how long all of this has quit being taught in our schools but I know it is no longer in our history books. I wonder, if our true history was still being taught in our schools just how many black people today would really be Democrats had they known the real truth about who wanted to keep them enslaved. It appears those same type of Democrats are still around today in the form of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. I don’t even know if Obama even knows about the Democratic Party wanting to keep the Black people in chains but sometime back I think Joe Biden mentioned something about chains and people. Just thought that some of you younger folks that didn’t learn about this in history class would like to do some research on it. You will find it interesting I think.

[Jonnin]

but that was pre party flipflop.  Back then the democrats were the southerners and nothing at all like the post WWI  party that we all know and "love".   Socialism had not even been invented yet as far as the usa was concerned, most of that came in the depression era.   If it were 1880, harry, nancy, obama, and frankentstein would all be "republicans" I would bet on it.

Edited October 3, 2013 by Jonnin

[bersaguy]

but that was pre party flipflop.  Back then the democrats were the southerners and nothing at all like the post WWI  party that we all know and "love".   Socialism had not even been invented yet as far as the usa was concerned, most of that came in the depression era.   If it were 1880, harry, nancy, obama, and frankentstein would all be "republicans" I would bet on it.

Maybe so but it just struck me as odd that there have been so many swings at so many different things in the Federal Government during the writing of our Constitution to be written so effectively and to have this President pretend that the most important document written in this country does not even exist and just does what he wants when he wants and to hell with what the people think..........jmho

[Jonnin]

I do not disagree, just wanted to clarifiy that the party names remain but the platforms all but did a total flip flop.   So it was still the southern conservatives that were largely pro slavery --- who at that time were "democrats" --- and Abe was a product of the northern big city vote.

[bersaguy]

I do not disagree, just wanted to clarifiy that the party names remain but the platforms all but did a total flip flop.   So it was still the southern conservatives that were largely pro slavery --- who at that time were "democrats" --- and Abe was a product of the northern big city vote.

 

I do not disagree, just wanted to clarifiy that the party names remain but the platforms all but did a total flip flop.   So it was still the southern conservatives that were largely pro slavery --- who at that time were "democrats" --- and Abe was a product of the northern big city vote.

Well truth be known I really don't have much use for either but I am proud that a few Republicans are making the voice of the people heard and believe it or not the Democrats I am seeing right now are acting more like the Democrats of Lincolns time than present day ones are.......jmho

[UncleJak]

Does anyone know why Lincoln wanted to pass that amendment?? I do.

[Jonnin]

Not really?  Best I can recall is he was not all that excited about it one way or the other.

[JAB]

Does anyone know why Lincoln wanted to pass that amendment?? I do.

 

So he could ship every, single black person out of the country and use them to start colonies in South America that would be under U.S. rule.  He was an Imperialist and a tyrant.  He also didn't want blacks and whites interbreeding which was another reason he wanted blacks out of the U.S. and away from the white population.  If he hadn't been assassinated, he likely would have at least made an attempt to go forward with his plan.

 

In one of the debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, Lincoln made the following statement:

 

 

"I will say then that I am not nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races: that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters of free negroes, or jurors, or qualifying them to hold office or having them to marry with white people.  I will say in addition that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I suppose will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of social and political equality, and inasmuch as they cannot so live that while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, that I as much as any other man am in favor of the superior position being assigned to the white man."

 

This can be found on page 283 of a book entitled The Lincoln-Douglas Debates The First Complete, Unexpurgated Text, edited and with an introduction by Harold Holzer.

 

Do not forget that Lincoln also signed off on one of the largest (if not the largest) mass execution using the largest mass-gallows in United States history.  The people being executed were Native Americans who were accused of crimes resulting from an uprising.  Thing is, the uprising came about because the Mr. Lincoln's Federal Government was not honoring treaties which promised supplies to those Native Americans.  They and their families were literally being starved and some of them decided to do something about it.  According to some sources, some of the Native Americans hanged weren't even present or involved in the 'uprising'.  Further, Lincoln sent that wonderful humanitarian William T. Sherman to deal with the "Indian problem" after the Civil War had ended.

 

History has spun Lincoln's choice to use slavery as a politically expedient means of justifying his war against sovereign states as some desire to establish racial equality.  His own statements show that he wasn't all that concerned with racial equality and that he, in fact, did not believe that the races were equal in any way.  Other statements - including a letter he wrote to a newpaper in response to an editorial - indicate that he really didn't care whether slavery ended or not, saying that what he did regarding slavery he did to preserve the Union and that if he could preserve the Union by not freeing a single slave then that is what he would do, if he could preserve the Union by freeing all the slaves then that is what he would do and that if he could preserve the union by freeing some slaves and not others then that is what he would do.

 

The Emancipation Proclamation only 'freed' slaves in states or portions of states that were currently in rebellion.  States or portions of states where slavery was legal and that had either not rebelled or had be re-taken by Union forces were not included in the Proclamation.  As the states that were still in rebellion were under the authority of the CSA and not the USA, Lincoln really had no power in those states.  Therefore, the Emancipation Proclamation in actuality did not free any slaves.  Again, it was a political move.

 

Many people likely also do not know that one of the first moves that the Confederate government made was to make it illegal to bring any new slaves into Confederate states.  The slaves who were already there were not freed but no new slaves were to be introduced.  I guess we will never know how things would have proceeded from there - if slavery would have eventually died out or not.  Some accounts claim that slavery was being rendered economically unsound by inventions such as the cotton gin, etc. in that it would soon become less of an investment to simply hire a few workers than to own a slave workforce.  Some even claim that slavery on a mass scale would have more or less died out on its own by the mid 1870s, anyhow.  As I said, I don't know if that would have been the case and we will likely never know.

 

Just a little more history that is not commonly taught in schools.

Edited October 3, 2013 by JAB

[UncleJak]

I wasn't gonna go into that much detail....but thanks.
It was politically based and nothing to do with freedom or equality.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4

[BigK]

Good stuff, JAB. That mirrors what I read for a class at MTSU back in the day.

 

Good professors/teachers hate textbooks, because they are written to be PC and clean and bland. 

[broylz]

so what has changed? they may not want people being owned by others anymore but when you feed and shelter the poor for free, the government can own them without calling them slaves. they still do what the government wishes so they can continue the lifestyle. and that too goes beyond race.

[JAB]

so what has changed? they may not want people being owned by others anymore but when you feed and shelter the poor for free, the government can own them without calling them slaves. they still do what the government wishes so they can continue the lifestyle. and that too goes beyond race.

 

I would argue that as soon as sovereign states had their sovereignity over-ridden and became subjugated by force to the Federal government and a tyrannical POTUS was not only willing to but actually did jail people and strip them of property without habeus corpus that freedom in this country - as the Founders intended it to be - became a mere shadow of its former self, anyhow.

Edited October 4, 2013 by JAB

[Guest 6.8 AR]

As provided by the respondents of this thread, there was very little education inside the little schoolhouse that

included many of these facts. Sometimes the little yellow school bus takes a few turns before it takes our kids to

real education. More often than not.

[UncleJak]

so what has changed? they may not want people being owned by others anymore but when you feed and shelter the poor for free, the government can own them without calling them slaves. they still do what the government wishes so they can continue the lifestyle. and that too goes beyond race.

Malcolm X warned about it and it got him killed...

Sent barefoot from the hills of Tennessee

[bersaguy]

Oh ! Don't get me wrong. I was not a Lincoln fan at all. It just struck me as odd that back in those days it was the Democrats that wanted to keep the blacks enslaved to control them and today about 80 to 85 % of all blacks are Democrats and vote democratically. I often wonder how many would have done that had they been taught what we were in school back in our day verses what they are taught today........broylz has a good point also....

[bersaguy]

Malcolm X warned about it and it got him killed...

Sent barefoot from the hills of Tennessee

 

Malcolm X warned about it and it got him killed...

Sent barefoot from the hills of Tennessee

Malcom X spoke against the control once to often. your 100% correct and yea it got him killed.

[JAB]

Malcom X spoke against the control once to often. your 100% correct and yea it got him killed.

 

There are many indicators that what Malcolm X really did wrong was that he began abandoning his earlier radical/extremist views and hatred of white people and began adopting a less radical ideology that didn't necessarily consider white people to be 'devils' - an opinion which he had previously held.

 

Of course, there are also many indicators that what Malcolm X really REALLY did wrong was that he began to be too popular.  He was beginning to overshadow Farrakhan and the other Nation of Islam nutjobs in popularity and in the number of people willing to follow him.  He also revealed some scandalous information about the then leader of the Nation of Islam, Elijah Mohammed.  Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam couldn't have that so they stirred up their followers to murder Malcolm X.

 

I found a link to a story that says Farrakhan actually admitted to Malcolm X's daughter on an episode of 60 Minutes that he now believes his words 'may' have contributed to the murder of Malcolm X.  For a slimy piece of filth like Farrakhan to admit even that much is just about the equivalent of someone else making a full confession, IMO.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-194051.html

Edited October 4, 2013 by JAB

[UncleJak]

There are many indicators that what Malcolm X really did wrong was that he began abandoning his earlier radical/extremist views and hatred of white people and began adopting a less radical ideology that didn't necessarily consider white people to be 'devils' - an opinion which he had previously held.

Of course, there are also many indicators that what Malcolm X really REALLY did wrong was that he began to be too popular. He was beginning to overshadow Farrakhan and the other Nation of Islam nutjobs in popularity and in the number of people willing to follow him. He also revealed some scandalous information about the then leader of the Nation of Islam, Elijah Mohammed. Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam couldn't have that so they stirred up their followers to murder Malcolm X.

I found a link to a story that says Farrakhan actually admitted to Malcolm X's daughter on an episode of 60 Minutes that he now believes his words 'may' have contributed to the murder of Malcolm X. For a slimy piece of filth like Farrakhan to admit even that much is just about the equivalent of someone else making a full confession, IMO.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-194051.html

I agree with almost everything you said. Except I don't think Islam killed X. All the rest is very accurate, including Farrakhan's remarks.

Sent barefoot from the hills of Tennessee

[Guest rmse9]

bersaguy,

 

You can be assured that todays youth and many folks in their 20's, 30's and 40' depending on where they live have not been taught history as it happened, but as it was revised by the liberal progressives. Todays history books leave out so much of what has happened in world history and American history. Especially if it is not politically correct.  I do not think civics or anything about out government is taught any longer. Our young people have no idea of our true history or our government and how is supposed to work. We are having a liberal dumbing down of our youth so they will be more submissive to the master. That is one of the ways Obama was able to get elected. Young voters as a rule do not have the knowledge or desire for a government that is truly set up like our Republic. We are headed for a great tragedy down the road if we do not see that our children receive proper educations and stop the lowering of standards for graduation. Most schools now are only intent on making good on required test scores and not providing a true education. We are graduating too many students that cannot read, write or think.

[Guest ThePunisher]

bersaguy,
 
You can be assured that todays youth and many folks in their 20's, 30's and 40' depending on where they live have not been taught history as it happened, but as it was revised by the liberal progressives. Todays history books leave out so much of what has happened in world history and American history. Especially if it is not politically correct.  I do not think civics or anything about out government is taught any longer. Our young people have no idea of our true history or our government and how is supposed to work. We are having a liberal dumbing down of our youth so they will be more submissive to the master. That is one of the ways Obama was able to get elected. Young voters as a rule do not have the knowledge or desire for a government that is truly set up like our Republic. We are headed for a great tragedy down the road if we do not see that our children receive proper educations and stop the lowering of standards for graduation. Most schools now are only intent on making good on required test scores and not providing a true education. We are graduating too many students that cannot read, write or think.

I cannot put all the blame on all the younger indoctrinated people b/c I know too many dumba## older folks and parents that have drank the liberal kool-aid way too long in their life. Just too many people of all ages that are eat up with the dumba##.

[Spiffy]

I do not disagree, just wanted to clarifiy that the party names remain but the platforms all but did a total flip flop.   So it was still the southern conservatives that were largely pro slavery --- who at that time were "democrats" --- and Abe was a product of the northern big city vote.

 

And nothing has really changed. The "Big City" still tries to run the lives of everyone and we are all slaves to the government......think your not just dont pay any taxes at all and see how quick your freedom disappears.

[bersaguy]

I know for a fact that my Boys didn't get to learn real history in high school back in the 80's. I looked at one of their history books and there was no mention anywhere about slavery, the civil war and many other issues from that era in our country. The Black organizations got all of that removed as teaching racism and racist. Now I don't agree with slavery and never have. I don't think any man should be allowed to own another man body and soul. But I do believe that even though Yes is was a dark time in our country's history it is still a part of our country's heritage and needs to be taught to all children or all races in our schools...........jmho

[Guest rmse9]

I cannot put all the blame on all the younger indoctrinated people b/c I know too many dumba## older folks and parents that have drank the liberal kool-aid way too long in their life. Just too many people of all ages that are eat up with the dumba##.

I agree there are many older ones that are outside the mainstream, but it is by their choice whereas most of our youth are being indoctrinated and do not even realize it and many have no choice because of the curriculum being taught.

[Guest rmse9]

I know for a fact that my Boys didn't get to learn real history in high school back in the 80's. I looked at one of their history books and there was no mention anywhere about slavery, the civil war and many other issues from that era in our country. The Black organizations got all of that removed as teaching racism and racist. Now I don't agree with slavery and never have. I don't think any man should be allowed to own another man body and soul. But I do believe that even though Yes is was a dark time in our country's history it is still a part of our country's heritage and needs to be taught to all children or all races in our schools...........jmho

The real issue is history not taught and remembered will occur again somewhere in the future.