Aside from Douglass's several speeches discussing the Constitution, which he did refer to as a "glorious liberty document," even as he recognized the flaws of those who had been interpreting it, I also recommend his long, nuanced and complex oration on Lincoln at the unveiling of the Freedman's Monument in 1876. Douglass went from powerfully criticizing Lincoln to deeply admiring him, and all sides of his views come through in that oration. Plus, his powerful sense of love for what America was becoming and for its potential, even while seeing clearly its failings and backsliding. His anger and his love of country were perfectly fused. Something utterly lacking in the sour, ungrateful, cheap anti-Americanism inspiring today's woke warriors.
Perhaps it is you who should please stop. I note in your response to Elizabeth above here, you basically confirm the point about Douglass and the Constitution made by the Prager U video while continuing to trash it. You also confirm my points about Douglass and Lincoln by listing the books you refer to, while stilll continuing a posture of outraged indignation. About what is getting a bit harder to see.
Laughable. I point out the numerous flaws in the Prager U video. You fly right past that. The “set fires”opening, followed by the kids noting we have people like that now is obviously a reference to BLM. Garrison pointed out the good things Lincoln accomplished. Your attempt at distraction only works on Conservative sites or among Conservative circles. Taken outside of Conservative circles, people smell the stench of the Prager U Frederick Douglass crap. Prager U Candace Owens skit about white people not inventing slavery evokes laughter when discussing chattel slavery in the United States.
I changed my mind, please don’t stop, please take the Prager U nonsense out to the general public. I expect to see the Prager U bias challenged in court by teachers and parents. If Prager is acceptable, so is the 1619 Project.
The issue isn't the Prager U video, Robert, it is why you have decided to harp endlessly about it. It is not any part of the Florida standards, after all. I earlier said it was simplistic, though basically correct about Douglass and the Constitution. Which you actually acknowledge. But simplistic is not what bothers you about it actually. It;s just not rage filled enough, I guess. Your own analyses here are laced with a tone of absolute certainty and moral preening far in excess of what the Prager U video exhibits. I probably should not have bothered to engage as much as I have, so this will be it for me. Have at it if you need to.
No rage. No preening. The Construction had to be amended to achieve Douglass’ goal. I am absolutely certain the without amendment, the door was left open to slavery in the Constitution.
Edit to add:
Although the Constitution did not refer directly to slaves, it did not ignore them entirely. Article one, section two of the Constitution of the United States declared that any person who was not free would be counted as three-fifths of a free individual for the purposes of determining congressional representation. The "Three-Fifths Clause" thus increased the political power of slaveholding states. It did not, however, make any attempt to ensure that the interests of slaves would be represented in the government.
On the 200th anniversary of the ratification of the US Constitution, Thurgood Marshall, the first African American to sit on the Supreme Court, said that the Constitution was "defective from the start." He pointed out that the framers had left out a majority of Americans when they wrote the phrase, "We the People." While some members of the Constitutional Convention voiced "eloquent objections" to slavery, Marshall said they "consented to a document which laid a foundation for the tragic events which were to follow."
The Prager U video, which I somehow thought was connected to Hillsdale also. In any case, the video is obviously somewhat simplistic, but in fact Douglass did disagree with Garrison about compromise and did view the Constitution, properly interpreted, as a "glorious liberty document." As I said, nuanced. Love and anger, both. I will take the Prager U simplification over the much worse and angry simplification of the 1619 Project, which hardly even mentions Douglass.
I would strongly object to children being exposed to the biased Prager U video. It strengthens my point about the Florida curriculum will be worthless. Hopefully parents and teachers will take DeSantis to court.
I think you are mistaken in saying "1619 is NOT being taught." According to the Wikipedia page on the 1619 Project, the Project included a school curriculum that apparently came out in 2019. The Columbia Journalism Review described this part of the overall project as "including lesson plans, guides and activities to help teachers bring this (1619 Project) material into their classrooms." I have seen various reports that in some jurisdictions such as Illinois and California, the 1619 Project or very similar materials are already or soon will be used in most or all public schools. Moreover, I think it very likely that the 1619 Project is already being used by individual teachers in some public and private schools in many states.
Aside from Douglass's several speeches discussing the Constitution, which he did refer to as a "glorious liberty document," even as he recognized the flaws of those who had been interpreting it, I also recommend his long, nuanced and complex oration on Lincoln at the unveiling of the Freedman's Monument in 1876. Douglass went from powerfully criticizing Lincoln to deeply admiring him, and all sides of his views come through in that oration. Plus, his powerful sense of love for what America was becoming and for its potential, even while seeing clearly its failings and backsliding. His anger and his love of country were perfectly fused. Something utterly lacking in the sour, ungrateful, cheap anti-Americanism inspiring today's woke warriors.
Please stop. Douglass would compare the current authoritarians to the Confederates.
When DeSantis changes, I may develop respect for him.
Perhaps it is you who should please stop. I note in your response to Elizabeth above here, you basically confirm the point about Douglass and the Constitution made by the Prager U video while continuing to trash it. You also confirm my points about Douglass and Lincoln by listing the books you refer to, while stilll continuing a posture of outraged indignation. About what is getting a bit harder to see.
Laughable. I point out the numerous flaws in the Prager U video. You fly right past that. The “set fires”opening, followed by the kids noting we have people like that now is obviously a reference to BLM. Garrison pointed out the good things Lincoln accomplished. Your attempt at distraction only works on Conservative sites or among Conservative circles. Taken outside of Conservative circles, people smell the stench of the Prager U Frederick Douglass crap. Prager U Candace Owens skit about white people not inventing slavery evokes laughter when discussing chattel slavery in the United States.
I changed my mind, please don’t stop, please take the Prager U nonsense out to the general public. I expect to see the Prager U bias challenged in court by teachers and parents. If Prager is acceptable, so is the 1619 Project.
The issue isn't the Prager U video, Robert, it is why you have decided to harp endlessly about it. It is not any part of the Florida standards, after all. I earlier said it was simplistic, though basically correct about Douglass and the Constitution. Which you actually acknowledge. But simplistic is not what bothers you about it actually. It;s just not rage filled enough, I guess. Your own analyses here are laced with a tone of absolute certainty and moral preening far in excess of what the Prager U video exhibits. I probably should not have bothered to engage as much as I have, so this will be it for me. Have at it if you need to.
Yes, my issue is the Prager U animation. Prager U is being allowed to be used in Florida classrooms
https://time.com/6301287/florida-prageru-education-schools/
No rage. No preening. The Construction had to be amended to achieve Douglass’ goal. I am absolutely certain the without amendment, the door was left open to slavery in the Constitution.
Edit to add:
Although the Constitution did not refer directly to slaves, it did not ignore them entirely. Article one, section two of the Constitution of the United States declared that any person who was not free would be counted as three-fifths of a free individual for the purposes of determining congressional representation. The "Three-Fifths Clause" thus increased the political power of slaveholding states. It did not, however, make any attempt to ensure that the interests of slaves would be represented in the government.
https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/slavery/experience/legal/docs2.html#:~:text=Article%20one%2C%20section%20two%20of,purposes%20of%20determining%20congressional%20representation.
On the 200th anniversary of the ratification of the US Constitution, Thurgood Marshall, the first African American to sit on the Supreme Court, said that the Constitution was "defective from the start." He pointed out that the framers had left out a majority of Americans when they wrote the phrase, "We the People." While some members of the Constitutional Convention voiced "eloquent objections" to slavery, Marshall said they "consented to a document which laid a foundation for the tragic events which were to follow."
https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/teaching-resource/historical-context-constitution-and-slavery
I am so impressed with the complexity of your response compared to the Hillsdale video.
Which Hillsdale video?
The Prager U video, which I somehow thought was connected to Hillsdale also. In any case, the video is obviously somewhat simplistic, but in fact Douglass did disagree with Garrison about compromise and did view the Constitution, properly interpreted, as a "glorious liberty document." As I said, nuanced. Love and anger, both. I will take the Prager U simplification over the much worse and angry simplification of the 1619 Project, which hardly even mentions Douglass.
I would strongly object to children being exposed to the biased Prager U video. It strengthens my point about the Florida curriculum will be worthless. Hopefully parents and teachers will take DeSantis to court.
Edit to add:
1619 is NOT being taught. Strawman argument.
I think you are mistaken in saying "1619 is NOT being taught." According to the Wikipedia page on the 1619 Project, the Project included a school curriculum that apparently came out in 2019. The Columbia Journalism Review described this part of the overall project as "including lesson plans, guides and activities to help teachers bring this (1619 Project) material into their classrooms." I have seen various reports that in some jurisdictions such as Illinois and California, the 1619 Project or very similar materials are already or soon will be used in most or all public schools. Moreover, I think it very likely that the 1619 Project is already being used by individual teachers in some public and private schools in many states.