It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump says Department of Education will investigate use of 1619 Project in schools

page: 3
44
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2020 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




does not specifically reference blacks or slaves. Instead it is held to be understood that we are referring to persons, all persons, not free. In those times, that could refer to indentured servants as well as slaves and Indians (Native Americans) who were not considered American citizens but were not slaves either being part of their tribes.


Your own quote:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.


So, indentured servants are counted as whole people and Indians are counted not at all. All others not free people are either slaves or outcasts.



So it was both a question of political power and one of taxation. If the slaves were not going to be allowed representation because the status of slavery would prevent it, then it was also not fair to tax them.


Slaves weren't taxed, their owners were.



The other thing to understand is that counting the people who were not free as full citizens


Only white men "of good character", who owned land were allowed citizenship. Their wives gained citizenship through marriage, but still couldn't vote. In 1790 an Act was passed that allowed for the naturalization of white males, of good character....

There was a two year residency requirement in the United States and one year in the state of residence before an alien would apply for citizenship, by filing a Petition for Naturalization with "any common law court of record" having jurisdiction over his residence. Once convinced of the applicant's “good character”, the court would administer an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution of the United States. The applicant’s children to age of 21 would also be naturalized. The clerk of the court was to make a record of these proceedings, and "thereupon such person shall be considered as a citizen of the United States."

The Act also provided that children born abroad when both parents are U.S. citizens "shall be considered as natural born citizens," but specified that the right of citizenship did "not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States."
.........
Though the Act did not specifically preclude women from citizenship, the common law practice of coverture had been absorbed into the legal system of the United States.[6] Under this practice the physical body of married woman, thus any rights to her person or property, was controlled by her husband. A woman's loyalty to her husband was considered above her obligation to the state.
en.wikipedia.org...



So it was both a question of political power and one of taxation.


No. Slaves didn't pay taxes. This was about representation. They had no representation. They didn't want slave owners to have a vote for every slave they owned.


Should slaves be counted as people or as property when taxing slave-owners? If slaves were considered property, those who owned large plantations (primarily Southerners) would be taxed more than anyone else. Southern delegates to Congress argued that taxes should only apply to free men, meaning that northern cities, which were more populated, would be paying an unfair amount of the federal taxes.

However, it also meant that there would be more representation in congress for that number of tax-paying citizens. Anything put to a vote would fall in the northern states’ favor. The southern delegates argued that if they were to be taxed for their slaves, they should have equal representation in Congress and demanded one vote for each slave they owned.

Since “taxation without representation” had started the Revolutionary War, most people felt this was unfair to the slaves, especially since they would have no say in where their vote was cast.

www.revolutionary-war.net...


edit on 6-9-2020 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 6 2020 @ 08:53 PM
link   
dbl post
edit on 6-9-2020 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2020 @ 08:57 PM
link   
If by the end of his second term Donald Trump is able to weed out the regressive identity politics bullcrap from the United States' institutions, it may be his greatest achievement.

This cancer is harming not only America but the entire western world. Identity Politics is a subversive cult. It literally stems from early 20th century ideals such as Eugenics and was a key part of National Socialism & similar ideologies. Different words & conclusions, but the same root ideas.



posted on Sep, 6 2020 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

wow! what an interesting video!
what they fail to consider is the number of armed americans who will take up arms and defend themselves, defend their families, defend their home, and defend their town.

their plan is not well thought out.



posted on Sep, 6 2020 @ 09:07 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Huh? It's part of the 1619 project. I look things up on my own instead of just flat out believing the OP. On any subject.



posted on Sep, 6 2020 @ 11:32 PM
link   
The only people who benefitted by slavery in the USA are people who were around here when owning slavery was popular. Many farmers who owned slaves did not do worse after they could not have slaves anymore, prices did not go up that much after slavery was made illegal. In fact, all workers on farms before and after slavery was made illegal got paid very little, but the farm did provide cheap food or included food for the workers and often provided some housing for workers....but very little pay.

I grew up on a farm, none of the workers got rich and neither do the farmers workers nowadays, that is because people want cheap food so they can waste their money on great cell phones and packages these days. Maybe we should force the phone companies to give free phones and cheaper monthly charges so people will have more money to spend on food so farm workers can get better wages.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 04:25 AM
link   
I'm glad trump is doing this. It's about time to rid the schools of racist communist doctrine. Anyone who calls it otherwise is just sticking their head in the sand or is retarded AF.

That is the true deviceivness, the "1619" project ha! What an epic fail that bs program is.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 04:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: infolurker




The American Revolution was launched "in order to ensure slavery would continue".


And it did continue well past the time that England and European countries outlawed slavery. As a matter of fact, it took a war to end slavery in the USA 100 years later.

The Declaration of Independence claims that "All men are created equal", but the US constitution designated some people as 3/5th equal. They had no problem denying life, liberty ad pursuit of happiness to some people. Why? I wonder!




In July 2020, Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas proposed the "Saving American History Act of 2020", prohibiting K-12 schools from using federal funds to teach curriculum related to the 1619 project, and make schools that did ineligible for federal professional-development grants.


Ah yes! Republican cancel culture and censorship, soon to be followed by a good 'ole book burning!



Wow do you actually believe this crap? Tell me, do you like to think for yourself? Or do your commie friends also tell you that is racist as well?

Because obviously anything other then your narrative is racist. I'm a trump supporter, am I a racist?

Please please at least look into this crap before you believe in it! Have you looked into the money that funds any of this propaganda?
Let me guess, that would be thinking for yourself and that's wrong for the mob you idolize.

Leftist commies always and I mean always want and need someone to tell them what to do and what is right. Its pathetic



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 04:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: Sookiechacha

You lost the argument at "all his white supremacist supporters". You are one of those guys who think that not allowing the nation to become a communist $hithole means you are a white supremacist?


Trump has white supremacist supporters. If you're not one, there's no need to be offended.


That's OK then. Biden has white supremacist supporters too.



Biden is a well known white supremacist. One only needs to look at his own words to know that is a fact that cannot be argued with.



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha


No. It was about economic and religious freedom for the colonies. I


One out of two ain't bad. The only religion persecuted in the UK at the time was Catholicism.

On a wider point, both the British and the US were slave holding and trading nations at the time of the Revolution. The British, however, did not want the colonies to expand. That, and the treatment of Indian allies in the Seven Years War, was a big factor too.


edit on 7-9-2020 by Whodathunkdatcheese because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2020 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: BerkshireEntity

I'm glad to see so many people upholding the ATS tradition of discussing Marxism and Communism without a blind idea of what either term means.

edit on 7-9-2020 by Whodathunkdatcheese because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 08:05 AM
link   
Only good ol democrat book burning censorship and cancel culture for you!

a reply to: Sookiechacha



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Yes, and Antifa and BLM are the new Nazis, if you're not one ,there is no need to be offended.



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 10:53 AM
link   
I think Hannah-Jones missed the mark. With some work and some polishing, her piece might have made a fine alternate history novel. If she had written it well enough ... well, they're looking for diverse authors to put on bookshelves in school libraries and to teach texts from all over the country.

It would have been far more appropriate there as a thought exercise. Fiction, after all, is the place for exploring those ideas and also the place for narratives.



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: game over man




Some US history that I learned later in life was the Eddie Aikau documentary on ESPN


Seriously an espn puff piece, a company owned by Disney that is pushing identity politics in every way shape and form is your proof of "true" history.



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: subfab

Right up there with “Look a hornet’s nest! Let’s poke it with small dead twigs found on the ground.”



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 11:38 AM
link   
The 1619 Project is alternative history. A new timeline of events. So that white people can feel guilty? F that.

It and the Lincoln Project should be banned.

Once all the statues are gone. Everything is renamed. History is rewritten. Education is indoctrination. When done all that is accepted is what has been told to you, not learned.

That is the plan.



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 11:40 AM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Let it be an alternate history novel. I have no issue with that. I have a duology where the Islamic conquest of Europe was never stopped and the Moors colonized the US and brought their European slaves with them.



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Hey, I am all for fiction. I love those kinds of books or movies. Man in the HIgh Castle was a good one recently and i have read other alt timelines.

For kids to learn as the history of their nation. Nope. Teach the truth.



posted on Sep, 8 2020 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

This is more great news. The 1619 Project is a load of hogwash that has already contaminated too many minds with its propaganda.

I'll take one exception with your description, though... by any standards used in my lifetime, Abraham Lincoln was a White Supremacist. So was about every other white person at that time, including those fighting actively against slavery (Lincoln was not fighting slavery by his own words; he cared only about maintaining the Union). Even the abolitionists considered the black man as "inherently inferior" to whites, and that is the definition of a "white supremacist."

Ironically, those who are advancing this 1619 Project are projecting the exact definition of white supremacist I gave above... how many times do we hear that black people aren't capable of getting an ID, require special assistance from the government just to survive alongside any other race, or other such poppycock? I got news for everyone: I'm no slouch at academia, but there are some black folk who I have personally met who can run circles around me academically like I was some kind of brain-dead lobotomy failure. Academia can be eye-opening at times.

We need more accurate history taught; I will agree with that. The 1619 Project, though, is a giant leap in the wrong direction.

TheRedneck




top topics



 
44
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join