Anything that makes you apply your hand to your face.
Some people will tell you, "Well ackshually it was for states' rights," but those states wanted to use those rights to enforce slavery.
It strikes me as like the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument. Like, wow, you're totally right about the semantics, but at the cost of missing the point entirely.
Also the people kill people thing points to a need for widespread free mental health services which they definitely don't support.
Honestly as a non american I always thought the point of that statement was that its not guns that kill people its the way you hand them out like candy with the barest excuse for any kind of safety evaluation that kills people.
No, it's the idea that people who are murderous will kill no matter what.. missing the point that it's harder for them to do that successfully if they don't have guns.
Exactly. The Confederate States' Constitution explicitly mentions and regulates slavery throughout the document.
It was 100% about slavery.
Anyone who says "states' rights" without mentioning slavery is either an ignorant turd or a racist POS.
States rights to do what? (⌐▀͡ ̯ʖ▀)︻̷┻̿═━一-
People kill people with what? (⌐▀͡ ̯ʖ▀)︻̷┻̿═━一-
I grew up in the country in the bible belt. I bought the states rights argument for a long time. I was never a Confederacy stan, but yknow sure I get it.
Then one day I actually read everyone's secession declarations and basically all of them name slavery out the jump. Welp, fuck them. 🤷♂️
Article 1 of the Confederate Constitution says Slavery is a god given right and makes it illegal for any Confederate state to outlaw slavery.
So it actually reduced States Rights.
This is probably the same person who helped get textbooks updated to show pictures of slaves dancing and having a good time 🤮
Imagine feeling threatened by the notion that enslaving people was cruel and bad.
Congratulations, your kids will be ill prepared for a global world. It's sad that foreign kids will have a better grasp of American history than Americans
Now that is not really difficult. Most Americans learn little about American history for a start (and even less about some key issues where America had its low points), and nearly nothing about international history.
What American kids learn about WWII is the glory that the Americans have won over European fashism and Japanese imperialism, and how they helped people after the war. What they don't learn about is how Germany got into the fashism (which has loads of shocking similarities to what is happening with Trump and the GOP at the moment!), or the atrocities that American soldiers and the government did back then.
Congratulations, your kids will be ill prepared for a global world. It's sad that foreign kids ~~will~~ have a better grasp of American history than Americans.
"It was about States' Rights!"
"Yeah, a State's Right to what, exactly?"
The top chunk missing from Texas shows pretty decisively how important that "right" was to them.
I'm an introvert, probably neurodivergent, and was bullied in school. I always thought public schools were not adapted for neurodivergent people and those that could not "fit in the mold". I thought I didn't receive enough attention. I always had more questions and were afraid to ask. So in a way could understand why some people would want to avoid that for their children, by homeschooling them.
However, people like in this Tweet are the exact reason why homeschooling in my region (Québec/Canada) is generally frowned upon. It's always people against vaccination, the religious and ignorants that pushes for homeschooling, and that's also why it's very difficult to have the right to do that here. Mennonites are actually leaving the province because of that.
As an autistic teacher (as in I am autistic, not that I teach only autistic kids), I am on the lookout for ND kids who have slipped through the cracks. One of them this year took under my wing, and she just flourished.
When J would come into my on-level Algebra 2 class at the very beginning of this past school year, I could well recognize the fear of math lurking behind her glazed-over eyes and panicked microgestures. I suspected she was autistic due to her speech patterns, movements, and other things, so I put that idea on her counselor's radar. Not sure what became of that, but it's not my job to clock the counselors and diagnostician, so I just trusted they were doing their jobs. 😊
I started with building trust with J, by insisting that she just try and then, when she got stuck in frustration, showing her the patience she deserved and guiding her with a smile through filling the gaps in her knowledge. Once she could see that I wasn't going to jump on her wrong answers and make her feel even more stupid than she already felt, she was willing to follow through on just trying as I'd asked her to do every day. "Perfection is a myth, and Rome wasn't built in a day. So just...try! Give yourself permission to be wrong, because that is the only way learning can happen."
And so she did...her grades for the six grading periods of the school year were (approximation) 70, 75, 81, 86, 92, and 98. By the fourth six weeks, she was asking for extra examples to try in class, and she insisted upon being able to understand how to do them before the period ended. I'm not sure if I could say she loved math after my class, certainly not as much as I love it, but she was no longer afraid of it, and she had developed the tenacity and self-efficacy she needed to show any future math class what for and no mistake.
J really did my teacher heart proud!
Two answers to stuff like this:
Edit: sorry about the Battlefields link; it’s the easiest aggregate of several even if it also tries to support the states’ rights argument by talking about laws while excluding it was all about laws regarding slavery.
It wasn't even about states rights, not really. If you read the SC declaration of succession, they talk extensively about the states rights to succeed legally and why in the first 13 paragraphs, then in the 14th they start the explanation of why they are succeeding. It's about the northern states not returning fugitive slaves, as was the law at the time, and the government doing anything to enforce the Constitution. Then in paragraph 22 they discuss the election of Lincoln and his open opposition to slavery and they were worried about losing the right to have slaves.
Basically, if the government isn't strong enough or willingly to enforce its own constitution, then they didn't need to be a part of that government and they had the right to denounce that government the same way they had done with the British government during the revolution.
It's 100% about slavery and there isn't
It was absolutely about states' rights.
... to keep the institution of slavery alive.
People halfway across the world know that the US civil war was about slavery.
yes, but those people haven't been lied to their entire elementary & high school lives on the topic.
It's systemic ignorance.
(You can see the same thing in the Philippines about their current president's history. It's sad how common it is.)
And this is exactly why homeschooling exists. For the most part of course. It's people who want a certain view of History taught and don't want to have to worry about pesky things like facts or history or books. That's why so much homeschooling is deeply Evangelical Christian, and somehow even the weirder branch of Evangelical Christians if that's a thing, also why so much of it has Nazi shit involved. Yeah if you've never looked it up there's a lot of Nazi propaganda in the homeschooling community. It's just great..
Isn't it 'my truth' instead of 'the truth' then? 😇
Bet she never read the Constitution, Confederate or otherwise:
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_csa.asp
"In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States."
well if we're being semantically accurate here. It didn't start because of slavery, slavery on its own very rarely does anything. It was the disagreement between the north and south on slavery itself, that caused the civil war. And of course, the iconic "states rights, to have slavery, but we dont talk about the slavery part because that's inconvenient and makes us look bad"
I mean it gets worse than that. You can really put it down to a southern overreaction. Lincoln was pretty upfront about being against the expansion of slavery and admitted prior to his presidency that he did not believe the president had the authority to outright end it. If the south had not seceded and started the civil war over their unfounded fears of losing slavery then it's very likely that slavery would have existed in this country for a few more decades.
The Lincoln - Horace Greeley correspondence really makes the country look bad on the issue overall, especially when you look to the Congress of Vienna's statements on slavery which occurred roughly 50 years prior to the American Civil War.
Edit: Before someone loses their mind, yes the war was about slavery, just going further in detail.
"Actually, there were numerous causes. Aside from the obvious schism between the abolitionists and the anti-abolitionists, there were economic factors, both domestic and inter-"
"Just say slavery."
"Slavery it is, sir!"