Quote: @Vanguard83 said:
To settle the "Why the Civil War was fought" debate..If I may:The question itself is oversimplified and just "multiple choice" history.
First understand the difference between: "Preconditions" and "Precipitants"Nothing happens in a vacuum, there were a combination of these preconditions and precipitants that led southern states to succeed, and ultimately war.
ONE precondition goes back as far as the Constitution; as slaves, (also indentured servants and women) were not specifically addressed other than in terms of representation in the legislative branch (3/5ths Compromise). Article V specifies the means by which the Constitution of the United
States can be amended. It ends by forbidding amendments that would
repeal the language in Article I, Section 9, which prohibits a ban on
the importation of slaves prior to 1808. The Constitution contrasts with the Declaration of Independence that
"All Men are created equal" (At the time, land owning Caucasians). The issue was effectively "tabled" and would go unresolved until admission of new territories / states (Missouri Compromise). Meanwhile, the INTERNAL slave trade continues to flourish. Another precondition is the polarization between the economies of the North (Industrialized) and South (Agrarian), also the issue of states' rights versus Federal power, which was ALREADY decided with the end of the Whiskey Rebellion.
Precipitants include Compromise of 1850, where CA. admitted as a free state, but required Northerners to assist in the capture / return of fugitive slaves. Another precipitant is Northern / Southern reaction to the book "Uncle Tom's Cabin". The assault on Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks in Congress, Kansas-Nebraska Act, Frequent slave rebellions / John Brown, The Dred Scott decision that a slave was "property", and the election of Lincoln. Finally, the idea of a Confederation of autonomous states, Independent of the United States, gains leverage after South Carolina succeeds.
As more states succeed, Lincoln states that Federal forts in these areas are still considered UNION property, soldiers, munitions, etc. When Fort Sumter is attacked - Game on.
A few important side considerations: When the war begins Congress is not in session, Lincoln conducts the war for effectively three months. He also suspends Habeus Corpus, thousands are arrested and held without trial. Lincoln admits that several of his actions were probably unconstitutional, but cited executive power. Lincoln also was more concerned with "saving the Union" than ending slavery. After Antietam, the Emancipation proclamation was a stroke of genius for a couple reasons. First it showed that Lincoln didn't consider succession legal, nor recognize the Confederate States as a separate entity....Second (and much more brilliant) when word of emancipation spreads to southern plantations...slave escapes and rebellions would become more probable, in turn usurping Confederate troops from the front lines to put down any such actions.
by all means.....keep going.... a refresher is never a bad thing.... if only there was something for adults to be able to get a history refresher anytime we wanted.... if only there was a way to get information about something you were interested in when you wanted it... if only. =)
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
its like if we pretend that something didnt happen hard enough, and teach it that way long enough, and remove traces of its existence in print.... that we can some how make it like it never happened, or that it will somehow make that thought, action, or way of life disappear from modern life.
what ever happened to use these black eyes of history as teaching moments?
Wish I could "LIKE THIS" about a dozen times.
New history teachers are handed the keys to their classroom, textbooks and a "pacing guide" and thrown into a class of 36 kids every hour for six hours a day. The textbooks are sterile, and void of any conflict or argument. They actually OMIT events and use terms like "despite some setbacks, our nation recovered and prospered" WHAT WERE THOSE SETBACKS? How can we learn from our past mistakes, if those mistakes / differing voices are never studied?
It's infuriating. Thank God I'm close to retiring, each year as a student of history myself, I find myself using the textbook less and less. Last school year I used the textbook....NOT ONCE, and I'm the teacher that OTHER teachers send their own kids to.
Example:
I do an activity in my class using four sources on the Attack on the USS Mattox (Tonkin Gulf Resolution)1. The SENTENCE from the textbook about it.2. Paul Johnson "A Patriots History" (Right)3. William Manchester "The Glory and the Dream" (Middle)4. Howard Zinn "People's History of US" (Left)
All quality explanations...EXCEPT the textbook.
Quote: @Vanguard83 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
its like if we pretend that something didnt happen hard enough, and teach it that way long enough, and remove traces of its existence in print.... that we can some how make it like it never happened, or that it will somehow make that thought, action, or way of life disappear from modern life.
what ever happened to use these black eyes of history as teaching moments?
Wish I could "LIKE THIS" about a dozen times.
New history teachers are handed the keys to their classroom, textbooks and a "pacing guide" and thrown into a class of 36 kids every hour for six hours a day. The textbooks are sterile, and void of any conflict or argument. They actually OMIT events and use terms like "despite some setbacks, our nation recovered and prospered" WHAT WERE THOSE SETBACKS? How can we learn from our past mistakes, if those mistakes / differing voices are never studied?
It's infuriating. Thank God I'm close to retiring, each year as a student of history myself, I find myself using the textbook less and less. Last school year I used the textbook....NOT ONCE, and I'm the teacher that OTHER teachers send their own kids to.
i have to wonder that since this indoctrination to a new history is taking place at the collegiate level... in a generation will we even have anybody able to teach actual history, not the pc approved revisionist version that the texts are written to claim?
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Vanguard83 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
its like if we pretend that something didnt happen hard enough, and teach it that way long enough, and remove traces of its existence in print.... that we can some how make it like it never happened, or that it will somehow make that thought, action, or way of life disappear from modern life.
what ever happened to use these black eyes of history as teaching moments?
Wish I could "LIKE THIS" about a dozen times.
New history teachers are handed the keys to their classroom, textbooks and a "pacing guide" and thrown into a class of 36 kids every hour for six hours a day. The textbooks are sterile, and void of any conflict or argument. They actually OMIT events and use terms like "despite some setbacks, our nation recovered and prospered" WHAT WERE THOSE SETBACKS? How can we learn from our past mistakes, if those mistakes / differing voices are never studied?
It's infuriating. Thank God I'm close to retiring, each year as a student of history myself, I find myself using the textbook less and less. Last school year I used the textbook....NOT ONCE, and I'm the teacher that OTHER teachers send their own kids to.
i have to wonder that since this indoctrination to a new history is taking place at the collegiate level... in a generation will we even have anybody able to teach history?
I'm not so sure it's happening at college / university level. If anything it's coming from textbook publishers who are afraid of any backlash from anything controversial. Sad, because history needs those "Emotional punch in the stomach" once in a while. As a by-product, teachers are then afraid to take risks for fear of upsetting admin. or parents. I'm old, and can get away with a lot more because of my experience I think, than say a beginning teacher who may be afraid to try something considered controversial. I've had conservative kids tell me I was their favorite teacher (One recently accepted to the Air Force Academy) and kids left of the foul pole say the same thing. I guess they both basically feel safe because I detest all thing political.
The best history teachers are the one's who bring in material OUTSIDE the text, and bring those things into the classroom, but in a world where everyone is upset by everything maybe I've just been lucky.
Quote: @Vanguard83 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Vanguard83 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
its like if we pretend that something didnt happen hard enough, and teach it that way long enough, and remove traces of its existence in print.... that we can some how make it like it never happened, or that it will somehow make that thought, action, or way of life disappear from modern life.
what ever happened to use these black eyes of history as teaching moments?
Wish I could "LIKE THIS" about a dozen times.
New history teachers are handed the keys to their classroom, textbooks and a "pacing guide" and thrown into a class of 36 kids every hour for six hours a day. The textbooks are sterile, and void of any conflict or argument. They actually OMIT events and use terms like "despite some setbacks, our nation recovered and prospered" WHAT WERE THOSE SETBACKS? How can we learn from our past mistakes, if those mistakes / differing voices are never studied?
It's infuriating. Thank God I'm close to retiring, each year as a student of history myself, I find myself using the textbook less and less. Last school year I used the textbook....NOT ONCE, and I'm the teacher that OTHER teachers send their own kids to.
i have to wonder that since this indoctrination to a new history is taking place at the collegiate level... in a generation will we even have anybody able to teach history?
I'm not so sure it's happening at college / university level. If anything it's coming from textbook publishers who are afraid of any backlash from anything controversial. Sad, because history needs those "Emotional punch in the stomach" once in a while. As a by-product, teachers are then afraid to take risks for fear of upsetting admin. or parents. I'm old, and can get away with a lot more because of my experience I think, than say a beginning teacher who may be afraid to try something considered controversial. I've had conservative kids tell me I was their favorite teacher (One recently accepted to the Air Force Academy) and kids left of the foul pole say the same thing. I guess they both basically feel safe because I detest all thing political.
The best history teachers are the one's who bring in material OUTSIDE the text, and bring those things into the classroom, but in a world where everyone is upset by everything maybe I've just been lucky.
anybody can present a text book or approved material, its a special person that is a true teacher.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Vanguard83 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Vanguard83 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
its like if we pretend that something didnt happen hard enough, and teach it that way long enough, and remove traces of its existence in print.... that we can some how make it like it never happened, or that it will somehow make that thought, action, or way of life disappear from modern life.
what ever happened to use these black eyes of history as teaching moments?
Wish I could "LIKE THIS" about a dozen times.
New history teachers are handed the keys to their classroom, textbooks and a "pacing guide" and thrown into a class of 36 kids every hour for six hours a day. The textbooks are sterile, and void of any conflict or argument. They actually OMIT events and use terms like "despite some setbacks, our nation recovered and prospered" WHAT WERE THOSE SETBACKS? How can we learn from our past mistakes, if those mistakes / differing voices are never studied?
It's infuriating. Thank God I'm close to retiring, each year as a student of history myself, I find myself using the textbook less and less. Last school year I used the textbook....NOT ONCE, and I'm the teacher that OTHER teachers send their own kids to.
i have to wonder that since this indoctrination to a new history is taking place at the collegiate level... in a generation will we even have anybody able to teach history?
I'm not so sure it's happening at college / university level. If anything it's coming from textbook publishers who are afraid of any backlash from anything controversial. Sad, because history needs those "Emotional punch in the stomach" once in a while. As a by-product, teachers are then afraid to take risks for fear of upsetting admin. or parents. I'm old, and can get away with a lot more because of my experience I think, than say a beginning teacher who may be afraid to try something considered controversial. I've had conservative kids tell me I was their favorite teacher (One recently accepted to the Air Force Academy) and kids left of the foul pole say the same thing. I guess they both basically feel safe because I detest all thing political.
The best history teachers are the one's who bring in material OUTSIDE the text, and bring those things into the classroom, but in a world where everyone is upset by everything maybe I've just been lucky.
"its a special person that is a true teacher".
I have 2 nieces that are teachers. I love hearing things like this. Teachers get dumped on because the are the 1st line. They often feel the frustration of a system that ties their hands. Teach to a test that was written by people who haven't taught in decades. So people cherry pick bad stories about terrible teachers and swipe the broad stroke. Both nieces spent years in college for the privilege of being insulted by people with half their education. Usually the reason parents attack them is not because of their teaching but the system they are forced to teach. I have also heard the stories about tenured teachers. Maybe in my day. I've met everyone of my grandsons teachers from K on up. Going into 6th this fall. All of them were young ladys with young kids of their own. This is their attraction to teaching...imo. They get summers off with their kids. I don't know where the old teachers go. Maybe Middle and High School will have more. Or after their kids are grown they take their years of education somewhere it will be appreciated.
Teachers have to care about kids first and foremost.
Its tough to find people who care about OTHERS kids as much as their own.
At graduation we are just as excited as the students and parents. Heck, I see other peoples kids more than my own sometimes.
Love my kids and teaching but meetings and Asmin BS I could do without.
Quote: @Vanguard83 said:
Teachers have to care about kids first and foremost.
Its tough to find people who care about OTHERS kids as much as their own.
At graduation we are just as excited as the students and parents. Heck, I see other peoples kids more than my own sometimes.
Love my kids and teaching but meetings and Asmin BS I could do without.
Oh...is that why all my teachers cheered like drunken frat boys when I walked across the stage for my graduation?
|
