“The majority of the class felt that they would rather be a slave than to be a factory worker. And she was just extremely confused by that, knowing what slaves went through, she couldn’t understand why anyone would choose that,” James said. “The rationale by those students to choose slaves was that they had free housing, they had free food and they had free protection. But the argument that she and I put forth was that those things were not free.”Now, these kids are 8 years old--but I'm thinking that maybe this says something about trends in our society--the values they're growing up with. Right? I mean--that whole Obama bought votes with phones thing is just an oversimplification of the actual promise Democrats make to their constituency of minority voters.
After all, Steve Matthews, the School District Superintendent said the essay was based on a Michigan Content Expectation that 8th graders should be able to explain the differences in the lives of free blacks and those of free whites. As such, the teacher won't be disciplined--although they'll review the question. It maybe wasn't the best way to ask that, was it?
If you nodded at any of the above (save for the fact about the Content Expectation) you're a sucker.
The above? It's bullshit. And I'd take a way closer look at that teacher if I were running that school.
12 Years A Slave
The American Spectator, a respected conservative monthly, recently posted a review of 12 Years A Slave.
Our awareness of Mr. McQueen’s frankly stated political agenda cannot but affect our view of the supposed history that is supposedly repeating itself and may even cast doubt backwards on that history itself. If ever in slavery’s 250-year history in North America there were a kind master or a contented slave, as in the nature of things there must have been, here and there, we may be sure that Mr McQueen does not want us to hear about it.And
They don’t care that such a cartoonishly simple-minded view of the vast and fascinating sweep of the past cuts them off from learning anything from it that they don’t already know — just as it cuts off the movie audience, assumed to harbor similar prejudices themselves, from any acquaintance with historical “reality” not pre-certified as politically correct.I got racist bingo. Let me make this guy's position very clear: writing in a significant conservative print publication this guy, presumably of the Party of Lincoln, is attacking an autobiographical account of slavery because it does not show 'both sides of the story.' That's like saying Schindler's List needed some money-grubbing Jews or something--you know, to show the Nazi side. Or, I don't know, laud some Nazi scientists for their innovations in aerospace technology?
This is literally breathtaking. While The Omnivore presumes that anything published on the web in this day and age is simply click-bait he cannot fathom the editorial malpractice that allowed this to run in a mainstream Republican publication*.
If you are wondering what these things, the American Spectator's review and the school teacher's assignment, have to do with each other, let me give you two more pieces of the puzzle. Most people in the American Spectator's comments sections are rightly appalled by the review--but every once in a while someone steps in to defend the institution of slavery.
* Why it's like the NRO suddenly realizing they'd better get rid of John Derbyshire (the link is to The Blaze ... read the comments)