It is appalling, but not surprising, that history in high school classrooms is still being taught from a white-centric perspective in 2025. I think that any individuals who are trying to refocus American slavery as an "us vs them" issue without also exploring the "white vs black" aspect are knowingly leaving out the worst truths in favor of a candy coated lie. A lie where slaves played an integral part in making America the great nation that it is, so the horrible human rights abuses that were committed are somehow justified. The fact that those injustices continue to affect people in marginalized communities to this day, despite the "abolishment" of slavery, is proof that racism played and still plays a huge part in our shared history.
I hope one day people will get tired of hearing the white washed versions of how our countries were "founded" and actually want to know the truth. The truth that real human history in North America is filled with harrowing, awful, violent, hard-to-look-at atrocities committed by mainly white, Christian men upon anyone they deemed to be "other" in pursuit of their own selfish goals of power and greed. It's sad to think that not much has changed. I guess the real kicker is: until we can truly learn from our history we are doomed to keep repeating it, ad nauseam.
I've been meaning to get back to you, but the last week has got away from me. Your comment is fantastic. I think you highlighted several important takeaways. The need to contextualize how "us vs. them" is constructed in different slave societies, the desire to distract from contextualizing to hold onto some important narratives, the legacies and ramifications whose consequences continue to be felt. Everything you pointed to are very important points which need to be explored and examined.
Part of the challenge we face in studying history is avoiding a limited view of the past. Sometimes this happens by applying a favorite model or theory to the past. Sometimes it happens as a consequence of pushing back against narrowing lenses. While it is certainly true that the question of slavery revolves around structuring power and giving in to greed, there are also negotiations around slavery, anti-slavery, and abolitionism that are easy to overlook even though they are an important part of the history.
Frederick Douglass' second of three autobiographies frames slavery as part of a cultural structure that can be as much a prison to the white slave-owner. A very different kind of prison with very different rules and consequences. Still, it's remarkable for a runaway slave to describe slavery as culturally determined and as an inherited way of negotiating with the world as much as a way to structure power and give in to greed.
Your argument revealing the struggle for religion to find a reason why Christianity isn’t a reason to assume a black person [or a woman - my addition] is equal is compelling. Dehumanization is integral to subjugation in all cultures. I respect Isabel Wilkerson’s work on explaining how caste systems are created and why they work. They work, even though we have other words for them like racism, sexism, elitism - because caste systems eliminate the need to recognize what humans have in common - including religious beliefs, freedom, and a desire to live safely - as having any influence on how those in a lower caste should be treated. It reduces every argument against subjugation to “it doesn’t matter; they are not worthy” and excuses all inhumane treatment.
I’ve been meaning to reply for a while, now, and it’s just slipped my mind. I still haven’t read Wilkerson. I have the book. It’s on my list. I’m hoping I’ll get to it. Your comment has me wondering if society can exist without creating castes?
Not sure a truly civilized country could exist without castes, but I’ve become jaded enough to believe that will never happen. Perhaps all we can ever achieve is pockets of tasteless areas, even if the pocket is only as small as our own homes.
Your argument revealing the struggle for religion to rationalize
why Christianity isn’t a reason to assume a black person [or a woman - my addition] is equal is compelling. Dehumanization is integral to subjugation in all cultures. I respect Isabel Wilkerson’s work on explaining how caste systems are created and why they work. They work, even though we have other words for them like racism, sexism, elitism - because caste systems eliminate the need to recognize what humans have in common - including religious beliefs, freedom, and a desire to live safely - as having any influence on how those in a lower caste should be treated. It reduces every argument against subjugation to “it doesn’t matter; they are not worthy” and excuses all inhumane treatment.
It is appalling, but not surprising, that history in high school classrooms is still being taught from a white-centric perspective in 2025. I think that any individuals who are trying to refocus American slavery as an "us vs them" issue without also exploring the "white vs black" aspect are knowingly leaving out the worst truths in favor of a candy coated lie. A lie where slaves played an integral part in making America the great nation that it is, so the horrible human rights abuses that were committed are somehow justified. The fact that those injustices continue to affect people in marginalized communities to this day, despite the "abolishment" of slavery, is proof that racism played and still plays a huge part in our shared history.
I hope one day people will get tired of hearing the white washed versions of how our countries were "founded" and actually want to know the truth. The truth that real human history in North America is filled with harrowing, awful, violent, hard-to-look-at atrocities committed by mainly white, Christian men upon anyone they deemed to be "other" in pursuit of their own selfish goals of power and greed. It's sad to think that not much has changed. I guess the real kicker is: until we can truly learn from our history we are doomed to keep repeating it, ad nauseam.
I've been meaning to get back to you, but the last week has got away from me. Your comment is fantastic. I think you highlighted several important takeaways. The need to contextualize how "us vs. them" is constructed in different slave societies, the desire to distract from contextualizing to hold onto some important narratives, the legacies and ramifications whose consequences continue to be felt. Everything you pointed to are very important points which need to be explored and examined.
Part of the challenge we face in studying history is avoiding a limited view of the past. Sometimes this happens by applying a favorite model or theory to the past. Sometimes it happens as a consequence of pushing back against narrowing lenses. While it is certainly true that the question of slavery revolves around structuring power and giving in to greed, there are also negotiations around slavery, anti-slavery, and abolitionism that are easy to overlook even though they are an important part of the history.
Frederick Douglass' second of three autobiographies frames slavery as part of a cultural structure that can be as much a prison to the white slave-owner. A very different kind of prison with very different rules and consequences. Still, it's remarkable for a runaway slave to describe slavery as culturally determined and as an inherited way of negotiating with the world as much as a way to structure power and give in to greed.
Your argument revealing the struggle for religion to find a reason why Christianity isn’t a reason to assume a black person [or a woman - my addition] is equal is compelling. Dehumanization is integral to subjugation in all cultures. I respect Isabel Wilkerson’s work on explaining how caste systems are created and why they work. They work, even though we have other words for them like racism, sexism, elitism - because caste systems eliminate the need to recognize what humans have in common - including religious beliefs, freedom, and a desire to live safely - as having any influence on how those in a lower caste should be treated. It reduces every argument against subjugation to “it doesn’t matter; they are not worthy” and excuses all inhumane treatment.
I’ve been meaning to reply for a while, now, and it’s just slipped my mind. I still haven’t read Wilkerson. I have the book. It’s on my list. I’m hoping I’ll get to it. Your comment has me wondering if society can exist without creating castes?
Not sure a truly civilized country could exist without castes, but I’ve become jaded enough to believe that will never happen. Perhaps all we can ever achieve is pockets of tasteless areas, even if the pocket is only as small as our own homes.
Your argument revealing the struggle for religion to rationalize
why Christianity isn’t a reason to assume a black person [or a woman - my addition] is equal is compelling. Dehumanization is integral to subjugation in all cultures. I respect Isabel Wilkerson’s work on explaining how caste systems are created and why they work. They work, even though we have other words for them like racism, sexism, elitism - because caste systems eliminate the need to recognize what humans have in common - including religious beliefs, freedom, and a desire to live safely - as having any influence on how those in a lower caste should be treated. It reduces every argument against subjugation to “it doesn’t matter; they are not worthy” and excuses all inhumane treatment.