Quote of the Day: Teach Us To Question

 

Well, I would say the governor’s race in Virginia was decided based on the success of a right-wing propaganda campaign that told white parents that they needed to fight against their children being indoctrinated as race — as being called racists. But that was a propaganda campaign. And there are a lot of Black parents in Virginia. There are a lot of Latino parents in Virginia. And they were not being featured in that coverage. And what they wanted for their kids’ education, which is more teaching about race, more teaching about the history of racism, seemed to have fallen on deaf ears. So I think we should frame that question properly. And I don’t really understand this idea that parents should decide what’s being taught. I’m not a professional educator. I don’t have a degree in social studies or science. We send our children to school because we want them to be taught by people who have an expertise in the subject area. And that is not my job. When the, when the governor or the candidate said that he didn’t think parents should be deciding what’s being taught in school, he was panned for that. But that’s just the fact. This is why we send our children to school and don’t homeschool, because these are the professional educators who have the expertise to teach social studies, to teach history, to teach science, to teach literature. And I think we should leave that to the educators. Yes, we should have some say. But school is not about simply confirming our world view. Schools should teach us to question. They should teach us how to think, not what to think.

Nikole Hannah-Jones, journalist and founder of The 1619 Project, on “Meet the Press,” Dec. 26, 2021

Nikole Hannah-Jones has once again inserted herself into the middle of the debate over what should be taught, and who should decide what should be taught, in American public schools. As she is continually rewarded with such a pride of place in this debate, I can’t help but ask why her opinion should matter more than mine, or anyone else’s. Helpfully, she explains that white parents were duped by a propaganda campaign related to the Virginia governor’s race. One might logically ask, “How can such easily fooled parents be allowed to shape the curricula used to educate their children or other people’s children?” On the other hand, Hannah-Jones seems to be implying that the opinions of Black and Latino parents, who supposedly want more teaching about race in school, should be taken into account. While some parents may want more focus on race, there is evidence to suggest that parents were troubled by Fairfax County’s elimination of merit-based, race-blind admission at Thomas Jefferson High School and the state’s plans to eliminate advanced math programs.

Hannah-Jones also professes to believe that no actual information is or should be imparted in school, since the point of school is only to teach how to think. But then why did she and her colleagues at The New York Times dedicate a special issue of The New York Times Magazine to The 1619 Project, with the stated aim:

… to reframe American history by considering what it would mean to regard 1619 as our nation’s birth year. Doing so requires us to place the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are as a country.

The use of the word “requires” in that reframing effort certainly sounds like The New York Times intended the project to set us all straight. Likely realizing that such a re-educational effort would be difficult, the Times made sure to target a young and impressionable audience by launching a 1619 Project curriculum in U.S. schools, in partnership with the Pulitzer Center. Now that the Times has disseminated 1619 Project curriculum throughout schools, thus formulating the questions for teachers and students to ask, Hannah-Jones wants to leave it to the professional educators to teach history. If these teachers were so knowledgeable and qualified, why was The 1619 Project necessary at all? Hannah-Jones has an answer to that question too:

The problem is that our teacher preparation programs are not equipping educators with the knowledge that they need to teach this history better. When you look at the survey by Teaching Tolerance, they found that about half, or slightly more than half of American educators say they don’t feel equipped to teach about slavery. And they really struggle to teach about slavery.

To provide that answer with more context, it’s important to go back to the question as it was set up by Chuck Todd, “Meet the Press” moderator:

CHUCK TODD: When you look at our public schools, eight in ten public school teachers are white. Yet, half of the public school students are students of color. How do we improve that aspect of education in America?

NIKOLE HANNAH-JONES: So I don’t think that, you know, we have to have — we should definitely have more Black and Latino educators because that is what our country looks like. But I don’t think you have to be Black or Latino in order to teach a more accurate history.

How should we think about what Hannah-Jones says? I think that Nikole Hannah-Jones doesn’t think much of so-called “white people.” It sounds like she doesn’t think much of white teachers either, despite her assurances that all parents should trust them with the essential task of educating their children. Hannah-Jones has succeeded in encouraging me to question — to question her ulterior motives. I don’t think she wants to get at “the unvarnished truth.” I think she wants revenge.

Published in Group Writing
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 23 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Randy Webster Member
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    I graduated from high school in 1969.  I learned about slavery and how evil it was.  What else is there to learn?

    • #1
  2. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    And there are a lot of Black parents in Virginia. There are a lot of Latino parents in Virginia. And they were not being featured in that coverage. And what they wanted for their kids’ education, which is more teaching about race, more teaching about the history of racism,

    Says who?

     

    • #2
  3. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    And there are a lot of Black parents in Virginia. There are a lot of Latino parents in Virginia. And they were not being featured in that coverage. And what they wanted for their kids’ education, which is more teaching about race, more teaching about the history of racism,

    Says who?

     

    Excellent question

    • #3
  4. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    Oh wow, it made Wonkette as well.  Part of what they quoted:

    TODD: Is there an age restriction in your mind?

    HANNAH-JONES: About teaching what?

    TODD: Teaching sort of — when it comes to teaching our past, you know there’s this, and I think this is coming basically through a racial lens, but there’s this, you know, — parents are saying, “Hey, don’t, don’t make my kid feel guilty.” And, you know, and I know a parent of color is going, “What are you talking about? You know, I’ve got to teach reality.” When do you do it, and how do you do it?

    HANNAH-JONES: Well, I think you should just think a little bit about your framing. You said “parents,” and then you said “parents of color.” So the white —

    TODD: Right, it’s white parents —

    HANNAH-JONES: – is silent –

    TODD: – and parents of color. You’re – no. Fair point. Yeah.

    HANNAH-JONES: Right. White parents are not representing — as a matter of fact, white parents are representing fewer than half of all public school parents. And yet, they have an outsized voice in this debate.

    I don’t know that all white parents want one thing and that all black or latino parents want one thing, but it seems like an interesting data point.

    • #4
  5. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Lilly B: How should we think about what Hannah-Jones says? I think is that Nikole Hannah-Jones doesn’t think much of so-called “white people.” It sounds like she doesn’t think much of white teachers either, despite her assurances that all parents should trust them with the essential task of educating their children.

    The problem is that Hannah-Jones simply doesn’t think. And there’s lots of evidence to back me up.

    • #5
  6. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    Only some white people oppose CFR. I have no idea what the proportions are of supporters to negators.

    As a victim of CFR while working as a home health aide, the CFR viewpoint has permeated the society to such a point that many white people are  badly brain damaged. The recurring  theme of reparations and giving the less fortunate any and all required breaks, means that so many whites  think that every single thing should be framed with regards to race.

    When I spent time in the classroom in order to pass the state of Calif’s nursing assistant(NA)  coursework and get a license, it was made quite clear that any NA or home health aide who sees physical abuse, verbal abuse or theft that is going on is obligated to report such.

    That was the law. Period.

    So imagine my surprise when my catching a fellow employee going thru my purse and taking out a 20 dollar bill I needed for gas money, that when I reported this to the nursing agency, the reply was, “So sorry Carol, to realize you’ re a racist. You make a complaint   like this again, and we will fire you.”

    Why was this their reply? Because the employee who was a thief was latina.

    Two years later, I was dismissed from a  job, as my three latina co workers had raided the petty cash and taken the 57 bucks that was there. They then all pointed  their fingers at me. My employer stated, “I know you didn’t do it. But if they are angry that I do not fire you, while they claim you took the money, they may all quit. And they will tell people I am a racist. So I have to let you go.”

    My reply: “You do understand that if thievery is not stopped when it occurs in a household, it will only get worse, don’t you?” (Almost a year to the day I was re-hired to work there, with a significant raise for me, as one of those three thieves had helped herself to 30K in the client’s retirement monies, and had the client’s credit cards automatically debited for her grocery purchases, utility bills, and more.)

    1 of 2

    • #6
  7. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    2

    CFR even extends to the idea that no crime is too heinous for a person of color to be left un- punished. (On edit – I meant to type CRT. But CFR, or Critical Favored Race Theory, a term spawned by my typo, works just as well.)

    Yes, the infatuation with CFR theory extends even to homicide.

    Remember the case of the  the family of Kate Stenle, who not only had to deal with the tragedy of their daughter being cut down in her 20’s, but since the perp was latino, they had to witness his being  made into  a  hero as well? His heroics involved being drunk as a skunk, then miraculously “finding a gun” wrapped in a  handkerchief so he could go down to a tourist area and “shoot seals” on the pier. Of course he missed the seals and shot Kate up instead.

    If an American citizen had done all this, they would have at least served 5 years for possession of a firearm, a serious no-no in San Francisco. But so many white liberals rallied to the man’s indictment, that he was able to afford $ 600 an hour or more attorneys and he beat the homicide rap. The Stenle family never got justice, because their daughter Kate was white.

    • #7
  8. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Lilly B: How should we think about what Hannah-Jones says? I think is that Nikole Hannah-Jones doesn’t think much of so-called “white people.” It sounds like she doesn’t think much of white teachers either, despite her assurances that all parents should trust them with the essential task of educating their children.

    The problem is that Hannah-Jones simply doesn’t think. And there’s lots of evidence to back me up.

    Well, what she thinks is wrong. But I think she knows what she’s doing and I don’t think we should assume good will on her part.

    • #8
  9. Joseph Stocks Member
    Joseph Stocks
    @JosephStocks

    I’m currently reading this book and I look at it as unintentional comedy. There are many humorous moments of this book. Here are some of the laugh-out-loud moments so far:

    1. The contention that the Revolutionary War was launched specifically to protect slavery. 

    2. A rather sloppily sleight of hand where someone argues that some blacks fought in the Civil War and a few pages later that is morphed into ‘blacks fought and won their freedom’ in the Civil War.

    3. A very explicit statement that blacks lead all minority groups when it comes to fighting injustice and that women, gays, and Hispanics need to recognize this. Also, a completely unveiled shot at Asian-Americans who don’t like being discriminated against in Ivy League admissions, they are told in no uncertain terms that this is unjust to believe. 

    4. A hilariously bizarre attempt at connecting slavery in slave plantations to the 11 year old fat black boy in Detroit who snacks on junk food. 
     
    5. A very obvious attempt to make you know that Native Americans were also slave owners and privileged despite suffering under the evils of white man. 

    I could go on but you get the point. 

    • #9
  10. She Member
    She
    @She

    Lilly B T(Quoting NHJ): The problem is that our teacher preparation programs are not equipping educators with the knowledge that they need to teach this history better. When you look at the survey by Teaching Tolerance, they found that about half, or slightly more than half of American educators say they don’t feel equipped to teach about slavery. And they really struggle to teach about slavery.

    What baffles me is how anyone can think (using the word loosely) that strenuous efforts to obliterate large swaths of the country’s history by removing all mention and sight of those in it one finds offensive or whose ideas one finds intolerable is somehow going to better “equip” those who “struggle” to teach about slavery, or that it will give them “the knowledge that they need to teach this history better.”

    Then there’s the absolute prohibition on upsetting people by talking about disturbing and triggering things.  There’s a paragraph in the Salvation Army’s recent unfortunate screed on race that states: “Take a personal inventory on race and discuss it with a friend.  If you engage a trusted Black or Brown friend, please make sure they have the emotional and mental capacity to handle this.”

    Slavery is an ugly subject, and the history of slavery is an ugly history, no matter where in the world, or at what time in world history or by whom, it was practiced.  If we are so fragile, if “Black and Brown friends” must be especially catered and condescended to because the very people who say they want to lift them up don’t believe they have either the emotional strength or the rational brains to sustain a discussion of the topic, then we really are doomed.

    Once again, I don’t understand how it is that we are supposed to have difficult conversations about things if we are not allowed to mention so many of the things that we are supposed to be having difficult conversations about.

    ***

    This is the Quote of the Day. December’s sign-up sheet is here.  Please sign up today!

    If you’re new at this game, it’s a easy way to get your feet wet and start a conversation; if you’re an old-timer, you already know the ropes.  Either way, we’re looking forward to your post.

    Another ongoing project to encourage new voices is our Group Writing Project. December’s theme is “Winter Lights and Dark Winter Nights.”  If you’d like to weigh in, please sign up for Group Writing too!

     

     

    • #10
  11. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    I graduated from high school in 1969. I learned about slavery and how evil it was. What else is there to learn?

    I’ve learned a lot about it since high school–about how slavery grew increasingly racist in our country, how it compared with slavery and slavery’s aftermath in South America, how it corrupted generations of people, how it compares to other systems of power over a class of people, how it related to a changing economy, the similarities between the way Democrats try to maintain their socio-economic position and the way the slaveowning class tried to maintain its socio-economic position, and on and on.  My latest reading on the topic has been this book:

    The Long, Lingering Shadow: Slavery, Race, and Law in the American Hemisphere, by Robert Cottrol (2013)

    It took a while for the book to become anything resembling a page-turner, and I haven’t yet read the final major section. (I am currently on a detour to some other books, one on biological immunity, and one by Alexander Solzhynitzen.) 

    Here is a sample from Cottrol’s book, though :

    Legal adoption was largely unknown in the United States until the 1850s. American law, like English law before it, did not provide mechanisms for legitimation of children born out of wedlock. Anglo-American culture, unlike the cultures of Spain and Portugal, did not provide much tolerance for open and acknowledged “second families” with enforceable claims to support and estates. If the mulatto child of a slave owner in Latin America could be adopted, legitimated, and brought into the dominant society, the possibilities for such in the United States were considerably less. This inability to formally recognize and care for such children contributed to strong patterns of racial exclusion in the United States. It also contributed to the American notion of caste that black and white were hermetically sealed categories with family connections across the races rarely acknowledged or given legal weight.

    Unfortunately, things like the 1619 project interfere with such learning.

    • #11
  12. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Randy Webster (View Comment):

    I graduated from high school in 1969. I learned about slavery and how evil it was. What else is there to learn?

    I’ve learned a lot about it since high school–about how slavery grew increasingly racist in our country, how it compared with slavery and slavery’s aftermath in South America, how it corrupted generations of people, how it compares to other systems of power over a class of people, how it related to a changing economy, the similarities between the way Democrats try to maintain their socio-economic position and the way the slaveowning class tried to maintain its socio-economic position, and on and on. My latest reading on the topic has been this book:

    The Long, Lingering Shadow: Slavery, Race, and Law in the American Hemisphere, by Robert Cottrol (2013)

    It took a while for the book to become anything resembling a page-turner, and I haven’t yet read the final major section. (I am currently on a detour to some other books, one on biological immunity, and one by Alexander Solzhynitzen.)

    Here is a sample from Cottrol’s book, though :

    Legal adoption was largely unknown in the United States until the 1850s. American law, like English law before it, did not provide mechanisms for legitimation of children born out of wedlock. Anglo-American culture, unlike the cultures of Spain and Portugal, did not provide much tolerance for open and acknowledged “second families” with enforceable claims to support and estates. If the mulatto child of a slave owner in Latin America could be adopted, legitimated, and brought into the dominant society, the possibilities for such in the United States were considerably less. This inability to formally recognize and care for such children contributed to strong patterns of racial exclusion in the United States. It also contributed to the American notion of caste that black and white were hermetically sealed categories with family connections across the races rarely acknowledged or given legal weight.

    Unfortunately, things like the 1619 project interfere with such learning.

    I so appreciate this comment and the book reference. I didn’t take @randywebster too literally, but read his take more as a general rebuttal against the idea that Americans haven’t been taught about slavery or racism. I’ve learned so much more since high school about so many things, with the usual result of realizing how little I know. There’s always more to learn. Just not from the likes of Hannah-Jones, who isn’t interested in actual history. Peter Wood makes a worthy effort to debunk the 1619 Project in his book 1620

    • #12
  13. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    Only some white people oppose CFR. I have no idea what the proportions are of supporters to negators.

    As a victim of CFR while working as a home health aide, the CFR viewpoint has permeated the society to such a point that many white people are badly brain damaged. The recurring theme of reparations and giving the less fortunate any and all required breaks, means that so many whites think that every single thing should be framed with regards to race.

    What does CFR stand for? I am used to CRT for critical race theory. The framing of everything with regard to race is a terrible path for any individual or country.

    • #13
  14. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    If we allow organized interests to determine policy as well as practices power will be centralized, narrowed and will serve the organized interests and with time it always gets worse more narrow more coordinated from the top.  Is there any reason for teachers to be organized?  Is there any reason for unions or governments to determine what kids should be taught?  Is there any reason all kids should be taught exactly the same  thing across states and the nation? I.E. no competition?  Is there any reason parents should not have choices where to send their kids to school even if too poor to select private schools?  We can’t do much nationally with these folks in the White House and some states can’t do anything rational, but those with Republican governors and mayors better get this key issue sorted out quickly or there will be no choices left.   I’ll say it again.  When Great Britain joined the EC, New Zealand’s socialist government, with the worst schools in the West, opted for individual choice in schools.  Money went to families, families chose schools, each school was independent run by the school’s teachers  with focus on parents to attract kids.  In one year they went to the top, just behind Singapore, budgets were cut, unions vanished, the economy boomed.  It is possible to have public schools that compete as if private, and unnecessary to compromise or work it out with unions.

    • #14
  15. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Oh wow, it made Wonkette as well. Part of what they quoted:

    TODD: Is there an age restriction in your mind?

    HANNAH-JONES: About teaching what?

    TODD: Teaching sort of — when it comes to teaching our past, you know there’s this, and I think this is coming basically through a racial lens, but there’s this, you know, — parents are saying, “Hey, don’t, don’t make my kid feel guilty.” And, you know, and I know a parent of color is going, “What are you talking about? You know, I’ve got to teach reality.” When do you do it, and how do you do it?

    HANNAH-JONES: Well, I think you should just think a little bit about your framing. You said “parents,” and then you said “parents of color.” So the white —

    TODD: Right, it’s white parents —

    HANNAH-JONES: – is silent –

    TODD: – and parents of color. You’re – no. Fair point. Yeah.

    HANNAH-JONES: Right. White parents are not representing — as a matter of fact, white parents are representing fewer than half of all public school parents. And yet, they have an outsized voice in this debate.

    I don’t know that all white parents want one thing and that all black or latino parents want one thing, but it seems like an interesting data point.

    I suspect that it is a minority of all parents who are interested in teaching Critical Race Theory.  Also I suspect a majority of black or latino parents do not want it taught or are indifferent to it.   Mostly Critical Race Theory is a vanity project of the intellectual class and it’s most ardent adherents are actually mostly white, paradoxically enough.   People outside the intellectual class tend to be hostile to CRT when it is explained to them.  Even if it is explained in a relatively neutral manner.  

    • #15
  16. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Thanks for the post, Lilly.

    My observation is that the idea in Hannah-Jones’s statement — that “[s]chools should teach us to question” and “should teach us how to think, not what to think” — is an argument that I’ve seen made on the political right as well, including here at Ricochet.

    I think that people should carefully consider why this would be the case.

     

    • #16
  17. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Lilly B (View Comment):
    I so appreciate this comment and the book reference. I didn’t take @randywebster too literally, but read his take more as a general rebuttal against the idea that Americans haven’t been taught about slavery or racism. I’ve learned so much more since high school about so many things, with the usual result of realizing how little I know. There’s always more to learn. Just not from the likes of Hannah-Jones, who isn’t interested in actual history. Peter Wood makes a worthy effort to debunk the 1619 Project in his book 1620

    Sure. I’m just trying to get a running start on my 2022 New Year’s Resolution to agree more without being agreeable.  

    • #17
  18. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Lilly B: CHUCK TODD: When you look at our public schools, eight in ten public school teachers are white. Yet, half of the public school students are students of color. How do we improve that aspect of education in America?

    Oh, that’s simple Chuck: just kill yourself. 

    (Chuck Todd is an huwite in an industry run and populated by huwites which eagerly propagandizes non-huwites into self-harming progressive points of view.)

    • #18
  19. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):
    Because the employee who was a thief was latina.

    You forgot to capitalize the t in laaa…TI! na.  You didn’t pronounce it the way Tony Montana would, you racist.

    • #19
  20. CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill Coolidge
    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill
    @CarolJoy

    We just watched the documentary “Crime on the Bayou” which was an excellent and quite  detailed film based on the tribulations of Gary Duncan, a black man who in 1966 and in Louisiana was indicted for the “crime” of touching a white boy’s elbow. Currently the Sundance Channel has it on its streaming on demand, under documentaries, on its movie list.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/17/movies/a-crime-on-the-bayou-review.html

    Had he simply pled guilty to the lie that he had slapped or hit the white boy, he would have paid a small fine and left after spending just the one night in jail.

    But his mother felt it was important that he fight the charge, as it was untrue and was brought about by the engrained attitude of the South at the time that blacks were sub human and had to know and understand their place in society.

    In fighting the charge, it was appealed all the way up, first through the Louisiana Supreme Court, where he lost. With the US Supreme Court finally weighing in  on the matter.

    What the case was concerned with was the Constitutionally-framed idea that each and every citizen should have the right to a jury trial. Until this case was heard, if a matter was deemed a “minor matter” in a state court, it was the usual process in the South to have it be open-and-shut, judge ruling only, with no jury trial possible. 

    In the county Duncan lived in, the judge was one of the most notorious racists in the nation. This was a  man whose wheeler-dealing gave his county so much income from oil revenues, with him skimming off at the top, bottom and middle, that few people, even white people, ever said no to him when he said yes. Had Duncan been in his court room, he might have ended up with ten years, if anything went wrong with the court proceeding. However, most likely if things went smoothly Duncan  would have simply pled guilty and paid a small fine.

    The movie is not only an excellent representation of what he went through, but an important record of what blacks went through in their day to day lives in the Deep South. 

    However I could not help but think we have taken an almost 180 degrees turn around in the opposite direction. Look at a person of color the wrong way at work, stick up for yourself in any work-related dispute with  a  person of color, and HR will deem you a racist and add the incident to your file. (As if it is not already difficult to achieve promotions due a body who is white, when various rules have decreed people of color ,must be first ones hired and promoted, in large companies and government agencies everywhere in the nation.)  

     

    • #20
  21. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    We just watched the documentary “Crime on the Bayou” which was an excellent and quite detailed film based on the tribulations of Gary Duncan, a black man who in 1966 and in Louisiana was indicted for the “crime” of touching a white boy’s elbow. Currently the Sundance Channel has it on its streaming on demand, under documentaries, on its movie list.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/17/movies/a-crime-on-the-bayou-review.html

    Had he simply pled guilty to the lie that he had slapped or hit the white boy, he would have paid a small fine and left after spending just the one night in jail.

    But his mother felt it was important that he fight the charge, as it was untrue and was brought about by the engrained attitude of the South at the time that blacks were sub human and had to know and understand their place in society.

    In fighting the charge, it was appealed all the way up, first through the Louisiana Supreme Court, where he lost. With the US Supreme Court finally weighing in on the matter.

    What the case was concerned with was the Constitutionally-framed idea that each and every citizen should have the right to a jury trial. Until this case was heard, if a matter was deemed a “minor matter” in a state court, it was the usual process in the South to have it be open-and-shut, judge ruling only, with no jury trial possible.

    In the county Duncan lived in, the judge was one of the most notorious racists in the nation. This was a man whose wheeler-dealing gave his county so much income from oil revenues, with him skimming off at the top, bottom and middle, that few people, even white people, ever said no to him when he said yes. Had Duncan been in his court room, he might have ended up with ten years, if anything went wrong with the court proceeding. However, most likely if things went smoothly Duncan would have simply pled guilty and paid a small fine.

    The movie is not only an excellent representation of what he went through, but an important record of what blacks went through in their day to day lives in the Deep South.

    However I could not help but think we have taken an almost 180 degrees turn around in the opposite direction. Look at a person of color the wrong way at work, stick up for yourself in any work-related dispute with a person of color, and HR will deem you a racist and add the incident to your file. (As if it is not already difficult to achieve promotions due a body who is white, when various rules have decreed people of color ,must be first ones hired and promoted, in large companies and government agencies everywhere in the nation.)

    Did the documentary mention that the judge was a Democrat?

    • #21
  22. Lilly B Coolidge
    Lilly B
    @LillyB

    CarolJoy, Not So Easy To Kill (View Comment):

    However I could not help but think we have taken an almost 180 degrees turn around in the opposite direction. Look at a person of color the wrong way at work, stick up for yourself in any work-related dispute with a person of color, and HR will deem you a racist and add the incident to your file. (As if it is not already difficult to achieve promotions due a body who is white, when various rules have decreed people of color ,must be first ones hired and promoted, in large companies and government agencies everywhere in the nation.)

     

    Seems to me that’s an example of the revenge mentality taking hold, and destroying our system of justice in the process. Obviously it’s not and never has been perfect, but it’s designed to uphold ideals of justice and individual rights that it seems more and more Americans don’t even value.

    • #22
  23. Podkayne of Israel Inactive
    Podkayne of Israel
    @PodkayneofIsrael

    That Zany Redhead is back with more shenanigans!

    • #23
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.