• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Texas is whitewashing its racist history

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
28,389
14,289
136
This new law just reeks of jealousy...
Last week, the Republican governor of Texas signed a law creating “The 1836 Project,”
Gov Abbot says this is his goal for the new 1836 project.
Together, we’ll keep our rich history alive.” The project will promote “the principles that make Texas Texas,” especially the state’s “legacy of economic prosperity.”
Want to bet Texas won't be teaching this part of Texas's constitution they are so interested in preserving.
Section 9 of the original Texas Constitution:
“All persons of color who were slaves for life previous to their emigration to Texas, and who are now held in bondage, shall remain in the like state of servitude. (The Texas) Congress shall pass no laws to prohibit emigrants from bringing their slaves into the republic with them, and holding them by the same tenure by which such slaves were held in the United States; nor shall Congress have the power to emancipate slaves; nor shall any slaveholder have the power to emancipate his or her slave without the consent of Congress…”
After featuring that provision in The 1836 Congress, I trust that the current citizens of Texas will also be told why Section 9 was enacted in the first place: Because Mexico, which ruled the territory at the time, had recently enacted a law abolishing slavery. The Anglo settlers in Texas wouldn’t stand for that (John Durst, a prominent white landowner, wrote: “We are ruined forever”).
Defending slavery was a major impetus for the decision to break away from Mexico and establish an independent republic. It worked beautifully – between 1840 and 1850, the Texas slave population increased 500 percent, propping up the state’s most precious commodity, on which roughly 95 percent of the economy was based: Cotton.
Also remember that "purity of the ballot box" phrase also in their Constitution? Let's have that discussion in class.

Texas is whitewashing its racist history | Dick Polman | Pennsylvania Capital-Star (penncapital-star.com)
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
62,977
16,441
136
The whole point of slavers stealing Texas from Mexico was to expand slavery into new territory. That was literally the whole point of the existence of Texas. Slavery was also the whole point of Texas waging a war against the United States only fifteen years after statehood. The Texas slavers fought two back to back wars to preserve and expand slavery.
 

maluckey1

Senior member
Mar 15, 2018
296
128
86
Meh...I've read far more informed views on Wikipedia

The author cherry picked one of about a dozen reasons that Texas declared independence. Slavery was one of them, and it's true that the Texans weren't champing at the bit to abolish it, but it's certainly not the main reason. FWIW, Mexico didn't abolish slavery out of the kindness of their hearts (look up atrocities committed by Spain and Mexico in the new world). Mexico wanted to slow down non-Mexican expansion in the territory. California passed laws stripping all voting, representation and most all civil rights from the former slaves and non-whites in the same time period......and they were a "free" state. I don't hear anyone screaming about that......

It's far from a single-sided issue, and some of the major reasons for the Texan's unrest were that they were controlled without any true hope of representation, no response in a timely manner (distance), lack of education, taxation and law enforcement that was considered unfair etc.

These reasons would be very familiar to the 13 colonies, since they were the same reasons cited for their independence not long before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ElFenix

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
21,335
13,633
136
The whole point of slavers stealing Texas from Mexico was to expand slavery into new territory. That was literally the whole point of the existence of Texas. Slavery was also the whole point of Texas waging a war against the United States only fifteen years after statehood. The Texas slavers fought two back to back wars to preserve and expand slavery.
But the brown man was mean to them and wanted to take away their property. They weren't fighting for slavery but to protect property rights and the wealth they had built in Texas. Just ignore that their "property" were actual human beings that's totally immaterial to the story of how Texas was founded.
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
8,525
5,713
136
Meh...I've read far more informed views on Wikipedia

The author cherry picked one of about a dozen reasons that Texas declared independence. Slavery was one of them, and it's true that the Texans weren't champing at the bit to abolish it, but it's certainly not the main reason. FWIW, Mexico didn't abolish slavery out of the kindness of their hearts (look up atrocities committed by Spain and Mexico in the new world). Mexico wanted to slow down non-Mexican expansion in the territory. California passed laws stripping all voting, representation and most all civil rights from the former slaves and non-whites in the same time period......and they were a "free" state. I don't hear anyone screaming about that......

It's far from a single-sided issue, and some of the major reasons for the Texan's unrest were that they were controlled without any true hope of representation, no response in a timely manner (distance), lack of education, taxation and law enforcement that was considered unfair etc.

These reasons would be very familiar to the 13 colonies, since they were the same reasons cited for their independence not long before.
That's true, but keep in mind that it's the intention of the 1836 Project that matters more than what's in the state's constitution: the goal is to silence critics of institutional racism with a "two can play at that game" strategy.

And people aren't screaming about California because that state is willing to acknowledge its dark past and make amends for it. Texas is trying to pretend its dark past doesn't exist.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
62,977
16,441
136
Meh...I've read far more informed views on Wikipedia

The author cherry picked one of about a dozen reasons that Texas declared independence. Slavery was one of them, and it's true that the Texans weren't champing at the bit to abolish it, but it's certainly not the main reason. FWIW, Mexico didn't abolish slavery out of the kindness of their hearts (look up atrocities committed by Spain and Mexico in the new world). Mexico wanted to slow down non-Mexican expansion in the territory.
The main reason Americans were moving into Texas was to grab land to expand cotton farming using slaves. That is simply a fact so teach it. We can also teach about the Mexican response.


California passed laws stripping all voting, representation and most all civil rights from the former slaves and non-whites in the same time period......and they were a "free" state. I don't hear anyone screaming about that......
I'm good with teaching California students about their history.


It's far from a single-sided issue, and some of the major reasons for the Texan's unrest were that they were controlled without any true hope of representation, no response in a timely manner (distance), lack of education, taxation and law enforcement that was considered unfair etc.
They could have just gone back home except that they were making too much money. Texas wasn't their country.

These reasons would be very familiar to the 13 colonies, since they were the same reasons cited for their independence not long before.
 

maluckey1

Senior member
Mar 15, 2018
296
128
86
"They could have just gone back home except that they were making too much money. Texas wasn't their country."

Rather glib, and overly simplistic, but true enough.

Riddle me this then. Name anyone except the First Nations that should be here?.

Land is taken by force. Be it economic or physical, the end result is that one side loses. Denying that is denying history itself. It seems you forget that the land didn't belong to the Spanish / Mexicans either. The spaniards enslaved and slaughtered the aboriginals without much forethought. The land also didn't belong to the Aztecs in Mexico. They took it by force and bloodshed, using slave labor to build temples and cities.

My point is, the entire history of humankind is built on the corpses of our own stupidity. Whether you teach about it or not, the end result is the same...you are where you are because of what happened.
 
Mar 11, 2004
21,594
3,738
126
"They could have just gone back home except that they were making too much money. Texas wasn't their country."

Rather glib, and overly simplistic, but true enough.

Riddle me this then. Name anyone except the First Nations that should be here?.

Land is taken by force. Be it economic or physical, the end result is that one side loses. Denying that is denying history itself. It seems you forget that the land didn't belong to the Spanish / Mexicans either. The spaniards enslaved and slaughtered the aboriginals without much forethought. The land also didn't belong to the Aztecs in Mexico. They took it by force and bloodshed, using slave labor to build temples and cities.

My point is, the entire history of humankind is built on the corpses of our own stupidity. Whether you teach about it or not, the end result is the same...you are where you are because of what happened.
I had written out a post explaining why you're effectively tacitly enabling white supremacy by your glib and indolent and insipid "well don'tcha know history is slavery and genocide all the way down, so the particulars of the state of Texas being founded on it aren't really important, so anyone taking issue with explicit attempt to whitewash it is just being sensitive and ignorant, the Aztecs..........", but frankly I expect you'll just be quibbling until we delve into Glorgnak the Amoeba raping the bacteria that possibly ejaculated onto a comet that eventually plowed into the debris that formed earth to create life here, and I don't have time for that shit.

There comes a point where a person should learn that arguing for the sake of arguing isn't just counterproductive to themselves but can enable atrocities by downplaying their significance. Which might explain why you're so adamant on making sure you try and tout your historical perspective, because you know, its just not possible that we might already know that and yet are not even discussing that because not only is it not the actual topic of the thread, it completely misses the discussion entirely, but perhaps that is the point of your endeavor? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but if you want to discuss the history of Mexico then I suggest perhaps you make your own thread for that as it doesn't really pertain to modern Texas government attempting to teach how the slavery the state was built on is an economic machine to be celebrated, one that made Texas great still to this day, while they try and claim that their slavery wasn't racist and perpetrated an anti-black mentality that continues to this day.
 

Matt390

Member
Jun 7, 2019
142
62
71
The whole point of slavers stealing Texas from Mexico was to expand slavery into new territory. That was literally the whole point of the existence of Texas. Slavery was also the whole point of Texas waging a war against the United States only fifteen years after statehood. The Texas slavers fought two back to back wars to preserve and expand slavery.
In the same way slavers stole Georgia from Britain.
 

Matt390

Member
Jun 7, 2019
142
62
71
Not really, Britain wasn't banning slavery. But keep trying to divert attention from Texas' sordid history if it pleases you to do so.

The 1619 project told me that the Revolutionary war was all about slavery.

I dont see how that matters. Slavers were the political elite in both Texas and Georgia when they rebelled and gained their independence.
 

Matt390

Member
Jun 7, 2019
142
62
71
It did no such thing.
...

“One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.”


I vigorously disputed the claim. Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution, the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the 13 Colonies went to war.


Bolding was done by me

Conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons some of the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery. By 1776, Britain had grown deeply conflicted over its role in the barbaric institution that had reshaped the Western Hemisphere. In London, there were growing calls to abolish the slave trade. This would have upended the economy of the colonies, in both the North and the South. The wealth and prominence that allowed Jefferson, at just 33, and the other founding fathers to believe they could successfully break off from one of the mightiest empires in the world came from the dizzying profits generated by chattel slavery. In other words, we may never have revolted against Britain if some of the founders had not understood that slavery empowered them to do so; nor if they had not believed that independence was required in order to ensure that slavery would continue. It is not incidental that 10 of this nation’s first 12 presidents were enslavers, and some might argue that this nation was founded not as a democracy but as a slavocracy.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
52,312
4,710
126
...





Bolding was done by me



What I'm getting out of this is that you agree with IronWing.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
12,651
9,480
136
Sorry it just cracks me up that whiny bitch lefties get their panties in a bunch about something that happened almost 200 years ago, but are perfectly fine with the mass trafficking in people that's occurring right now across the border with the aid of the Democratic Party.
Who the fuck is ok with people being unwillingly trafficked you sick fuck? It's about not demonizing and criminalizing people trying to come here of their own accord for a better life or fleeing persecution trying to seek asylum.

It's you sickos that were gleeful about permanently separating children for parents solely for the act of trying to seek asylum here.

It just disgusts me that people like you exist. And tens of millions of you.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
21,335
13,633
136
Who the fuck is ok with people being unwillingly trafficked you sick fuck? It's about not demonizing and criminalizing people trying to come here of their own accord for a better life or fleeing persecution trying to seek asylum.

It's you sickos that were gleeful about permanently separating children for parents solely for the act of trying to seek asylum here.

It just disgusts me that people like you exist. And tens of millions of you.
You all really need to put tajbot on ignore. He is just here to troll.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
12,651
9,480
136
You all really need to put tajbot on ignore. He is just here to troll.
I don't think so. From my experiences on social media, there are many many many people that truly think like this to their core.

They are basically future Nazi's, just waiting for their competent Hitler to show up
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
21,335
13,633
136
I don't think so. From my experiences on social media, there are many many many people that truly think like this to their core.

They are basically future Nazi's, just waiting for their competent Hitler to show up
I don’t doubt that taj believes whatever crap he posts. But he is worthless to engage with in this small forum with limited views. He posts here just to get a reaction. If he didn’t get that reaction he would move on.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY