Ok. So there is no indication that Ms. Hogan’s statements are a reflection of the parent’s complaints, the statement’s were included for sensationalism, and Ms. Hogan is a twit. Are we in agreement?
Quick! Stop all the Germans teaching WW2 history!
Although I don’t agree with the slavery aspect of it, I do agree with how the parents feel about a white person teaching Black history. I would compare it (but only for examples sake) having someone who learned english 5yrs ago as a 2nd language teaching english. Or even a man teaching Woman’s Studies. Some issues in Women’s Studies and Black History are sensitive issues. A person from that background could provide a more personal and more, for lack of a better word, believable.
As a student or parent or any concerned person in a childs life, I would feel much more comfortable with a Black person teaching it.
Who would be better suited to tell my child that in spite of all the racism that they have incurred/will incurr, that they can do anything they want in life, that they are beautiful just the way they are, to be proud of the generations that went before them and to be proud of themselves as Black people.
I would not stop non-Black students from taking the class. Everyone should learn where the other came from. It makes room for better understanding amongst each other.
(slapping Lobsang silly)
I’ll agree to that, Grim.
Inter-tribal wars have been going on in Africa, as they did on other continents, since, oh probably the beginning of time. Are you going to blame internal strife, as well as the fact that places like the African savannah and desert are not suitable for settle-and-farm lifestyles on the fact that white slave traders showed up to buy the slaves that black Africans were selling?
Are you really saying that without the slave trade ever having happened, Africa would’ve found itself with stable governments due to the fact that it became a wonderful agrarian continent in which tribal wars ceased and there was always enough fertile land on which to grow crops? Because I’d have a hard time believing that the generall tribal and nomadic nature of Africa, as well as the geography and climate would’ve changed if there was no slave trade.
vivian: There’s no problem whatsoever with someone who learned English five years ago teaching English provided they’ve acquired the necessary skill. And yes, I actually do now at least one person who has and does.
Why? They started it…
It’s another case of (I only know the British terms for this…) the middle class blacks leeching on to the discrimination that the working class are subjected to in order to safeguard their jobs.
Jobs funded by the taxpayer…
Reminds me of the O J Simpson trial…
Blacks who wouldn’t have a hope in hell of getting a ‘Not Guilty’ with a tenth of the evidence against him celebrating…
Where were they for Edward Earl Johnson
I will not have my kids taught by a WHITE DEVIL[sup]TM[/sup] damn it!!!
No I’m not claiming that Africa would be some sort of Utopia if only they had been left alone. What I’m saying is that no one knows if it would have gotten better or worse without the imposition of other alien cultures and mores. What makes me so angry about comments such as Airman Doors’ is the presumption that Africa was and could only become such a horrid place to live.
Sorry, but I strongly disagree with this. All else being equal, who do you think will produce a more “credible” history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, an Israeli or a Palestinian? Obviously, the answer is neither because both are heavily invested in the history they teach.
The same is true in this case, if only because the two people quoted feel that only someone heavily invested in the subject matter should teach the class. But this is just wrong. Pop-Marxism aside, history isn’t necessarily always politics. If you’re interested in history, it’s just as bad having someone teach the class who’s worked up about being a victim as it is having someone teach the class who’s intent on minimizing the history of racial conflict and oppresion in the U.S.
Speaking for myself, I think the whole concept of “Black History” is an idea whose time, if it ever came at all, is long gone. If it were me, I’d design a curriculum in, say, “Freedom History” that examined both the good and the bad in the recent history of oppression and prejudice in America and the world. Race and religion have been responsible for both the most barbaric and the most magnificent expressions of the human spirit, sometimes at the same time.
Black history doesn’t belong in a ghetto. It’s part of a complex tapestry that is no respector of race or creed. Native Americans, Chinese, Irish, Japanese, Catholics, Jews – they all have their parts to play. Black history should become a tool that helps people recognize irrational prejudice in all its forms. In any event, seeing it in its proper perspective elevates Black history in the U.S. rather than minimizes it.
Imagine a curriculum that starts with, say, the early history of the caste system India, follows the career of Ghandi, both in South Africa and in India, and then looks at the remains of the caste system in India today. Then, and only then, does it go on to examine the history of Blacks in the U.S. and the career of Martin Luther King, applying the lessons and conclusions already reached about irrational prejudice and the Indian experience. That would be some history lesson, and the facile rationalizations often used by both Blacks and Whites would become nearly impossible.
Slavery and the Black experience in the U.S. was not a one-off deal. It’s merely one expression of a problem that has plagued mankind from the beginning of history and continues to do so today.
Africans were enslaving Africans long before the white man discovered the Niger river.
How long between the last slavery in Europe until the African slave traders were found? How did the slavery differ? Would Europeans of exported slaves if it wasn’t for the Africans enslaving Africians? Didn’t Europeans knew of Africans? Why didn’t they enslave them before?
The exportation of African slaves is the fault of enslaving Africans?
The Europeans were duped by slick salesmen!
And, how does this person know the difference between the decendants of African slaves and the decendants of African enslavers?
Maybe the country is not yet colourblind, but the only way we are all going to get through this delicate issue is not to be so petty as to not allow someone, who through no fault of his/her of their own, was born the oppressors colour, you have to accept the fact that we are not like that anymore, and protesting at a school appointing a white person to teach Black history in my opinion is no better than the racist crowds outside little rock high school in Arkansas.
Hey I’m an Anglo-Saxon with a bit of Irish mixed in, the Irish were oppressed for the best part of seven hundred years, but do I blame the people around me today for actions that have passed? No because I haven’t been a part of that, and neither have they.
‘Trying to even out the scales’ By exclusion will only make things worse.
Does a persons character itself, make their words any less true, in the event they are obviously so?
Are the words any less logical if the messenger, happens to be insane?
There are certain truths that remain truths regardless of who is speaking or teaching them.
It is perfectly possible for a white teacher to accurately teach a class on black history. Just like any class, there are supposed to be a clear set of objectives, and topics covered. Teachers all the time regardless of race, and discipline are reprimanded all the time for not following the curriculum. It is racist to assume all white teachers will teach with derogatory, or otherwise malicious intent.
Should I have taken American History from a Black professor, and assumed he would not represent the material accurately? I should have taken the class, I did take the class, I never even gave any kind of bias a second thought, and the professor was fine.
On the contrary, I took an introductory sociology class, taught by a Brazilian professor, who decided to teach Marxist theory, and give a history as to how the United States has perpetuated everything bad in this world. That actually didn’t offend me, and it was interesting nonetheless.
The following claims display criminal failure on the part of the educational system:
The raiding and slave taking that occurred in Africa was similar to that of slave practices in other parts of the word until the advent of chattel slavery, introduced from the outside. Africans were not holding slave markets and inviting outsiders to come purchase. Once the outsiders figured out that they could play one kingdom against another to get them to take slaves, they created a market that had not previously existed.
Slaves taken in small battles were used as domestic servants for small chiefdoms and wars were not waged for the purpose of taking slaves. It was the introduction of chattel slavery from outside Africa that created the market that began the slave wars within Africa. At the time that Europeans began taking slaves from Africa, Africa was host to several kingdoms that were pretty much at the level of many European kingdoms of the same era. In order to facilitate the slave trade, Europeans and Arabs destabilized those kingdoms so that they never had the opportunity to develop in the manner of European nation states.
The idea that 12 to 20 million people could be forcibly removed from Africa without having a deleterious effect on that continent’s development is ludicrous. Then, as the slave trade began to taper off, the Euopeans entered regions destabilized by their market demands and imposed artificial borders that disrupted the possibility of any natural political development within Africa.
It is probable that much of Africa would have lagged behind European nation-state development, anyway, due to the nature of food production in Africa prior to the introduction of American and Asian crops. However, “lagging behind” does not equate to the fairly thorough disruption that actually occurred.
Any statement that implies that the slave trade had no material effect on Africa or that it was simply an expansion of an indigenous practice is either criminally ignorant or maliciously so.
I think you guys ought to sue your school systems.
When I was in school, from the first grade to my senior year in high school, back in Texas, black kids didn’t have any thing but black teachers. White kids didn’t have any thing but white teachers. That’s because schools in Dallas were segregated back in the bad old days. But, black kids were taught by teachers who had a unique understanding of black history and black culture. White kids were taught by teachers who had a unique understanding of white history and white culture. Do we really want to have that degree of uniqueness back again?
Is that a typo? How would keeping non-black students from taking the class promote a better understanding?
I think I agree that if all else is equal, the black teacher should get the nod because he would be slightly more qualified. A part of teaching black history would be teaching about prejudice, and someone with firsthand experience would be more qualified than someone without. Of course, if the other non-black candidate could also demonstrate having experienced significant prejudice, then the advantage would be nullified and it would be a wash again.
In this specific case, I think part of the outrage lies with the old teacher going away from the job, for whatever reason. But assuming that he’s gone regardless and that there is no equally qualified black dude up for the job, i don’t see how the protesters have a leg to stand on.
A counter-argument could be made that black people might not be objective in their teaching of the history (as someone pointed out, an Israeli teaching about Israeli-Palestinian conflict would not be very good). However, even whites have some tie to the slavery issue, if only in their co-existence with people who want reparations for it, which may provoke a less than objective attitude towards it. The least biased person would be a foreigner from a country that has not experienced slavery, such as… (I have no clue)… Norway? So I think the solution to the problem is to hire a Norwegian, preferably a blonde female skier.
Windwalker - you are full of shit. The idea that an Israeli can’t teach about conflicts in the Middle East and be objective is silly. Not everyone is a blazing radical incapable of seeing the other side of an argument. Even if an Israeli hated every Palestinian with every fiber of his being, it wouldn’t preclude him from presenting an unbiased lesson on the histroy of the conflict. I also reject your proposition that all black people have been the victim of discrimination, and even more importantly that being a vicitm of discrimination ought to be a qualification (or makes one more qualified) at all for being a teacher of history.
All these assumptions about the way “black” and “white” people think and act and what their biases will be based on the color of their skins is sickening. The fact is that there are persons of all colors all along the political spectrum, and moreover, in a high school class, it isn’t proper for the teacher to inject more than a minimum of their own beliefs into the teaching to begin with.
Perhaps, but should a well-informed racist African American teach it? Or have a say about it?
The woman quoted in this article is a complete bigot, doing nothing to help the very cause she embraces. “Oberlin Black Alliance for Progress” my ass–spewing that kind of racist vitriol is regress, not progress.
[Wally]Putz.[/Wally]