Erik Haugen @ech@qoto.org

@freemo @mk Yeah, I always wondered why there was so much emphasis recently (like the last 15 years) on wealth disparity in the US rather than quality of life for lowest X% of wealth.

@dangillmor The quote from the guidelines is this: "Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit"

I do not like the way that is worded, but I think that basically just means it is calling for instruction like this:

(https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/united-states-history-primary-source-timeline/national-expansion-and-reform-1815-1880/pre-civil-war-african-american-slavery/) "In Southern cities, many worked at a variety of skilled trades as well as common laborers. It was not unusual for those working in the cities to put away enough money to buy their freedom. Indeed, Southern cities, as well as many in the North, had large free black populations."

The guidelines go on to require teaching about Tulsa and Rosewood (AFAICT) so, I don't know – it sounds better than when I was in school.

@CStamp @tombarkas @StillIRise1963 @_L1vY_ Yeah, I'm wondering what teachers and textbooks will actually say because of this section of the guidelines.

The guideline section OP is about, I believe, is this: "Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit"

For example, I think teaching this factoid here with this tone seems appropriate, and would also satisfy the guideline:

(https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/united-states-history-primary-source-timeline/national-expansion-and-reform-1815-1880/pre-civil-war-african-american-slavery/) "In Southern cities, many worked at a variety of skilled trades as well as common laborers. It was not unusual for those working in the cities to put away enough money to buy their freedom. Indeed, Southern cities, as well as many in the North, had large free black populations."

Or – do we have some reason to believe FL teachers need to dust off their 1920s textbooks that talk about how wonderful slavery was?

(I do not like how this guideline is written, however, and hope it gets redone after these hearings, at least.)

@StillIRise1963 The article quotes someone as denying that the standards teach that slavery was beneficial. Who's correct?

"Slavery is beneficial" a bizarre claim to make, and a lot of media these days is making bizarre claims like this. Is it true? Would a state or textbook actually teach this in 2023? This is 1920s stuff. It doesn't really pass the smell test, and would be *quite extraordinary* if true. It would be great if we could all be a little more discerning and skeptical about headlines, yes?

I think this is the quote from the standards that the complaints are about: "Clarification 1: Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit" (p.6) FWIW: I join in the complaint about this line, to say the least! Some slaves were obviously experts in skilled trades, but come on. But, let's be clear: it doesn't actually say that slavery is, on net, beneficial, and the rest of the standards, I think, quite clearly make the opposite case:

The standards go on to talk about the heroes of abolition (p.7,13), the harsh conditions of slaves particularly in american British colonies (they were especially bad in the colonies compared to the conditions of slaves in the rest of the world! p.10 "overwhelming death rates" etc) How Dred Scott etc impacted free people, also illegal slave trading (p.12) etc, etc, etc.

I don't know I didn't read the whole thing it's like hundreds of pages.

But hopefully these hearings get that line on p.6 fixed.

@Mattstamatic @futurebird It's like everything they do ends up being a sad story about unintended consequences.

@Mattstamatic @futurebird I'm not sure what you're saying – do you feel like $10 for dinner parking is absurdly high? (I was thinking it's probably more than an hour, but anyway I've paid this kind of price before for dinner.)

@Mattstamatic @futurebird "Increasing the cost of *anything* should be a last resort" – I agree! But I also think that the state artificially *decreasing* the cost of pretty much anything is also usually a really bad idea.

@blitzen @futurebird we libertarians disapprove of building codes that require parking to be available before new business construction is permitted.

@Mattstamatic @futurebird if people had to pay more it would encourage them to use other options. At least I think that's the point.

Like, suppose you're going out to dinner, relatively nearby: if you knew you'd have to pay $10 for parking, would that encourage you to take public transit or uber, or maybe even walk? (It sure would for me!)

If you find you're doing that every time you go anywhere, hmm – maybe you don't even need a car?

And for OP I think that is a win.

@futurebird libertarian here: my head didn't explode, but I'm not happy about those laws you mentioned.

@SkatyG Well there's https://www.commonsensemedia.org/

@dannotdaniel @freemo @luckytran yes, you are.

@jeffcliff @barney @freemo Your ableist privilege is showing...

@freemo @jeffcliff @barney yeah I guess I see your point, especially for that particular job.

@jeffcliff @barney @freemo they're kind of a problem; these are obviously facts about masks that make them somewhat if a problem. I'm not sure I approve of banning them anywhere, though.

For kind of the reasons outlined here I've sort of avoided wearing them as much as possible, But I'm happy to wear them in your store if you ask or whatever makes you comfortable.

@freemo @barney you suggest masks make things harder for deaf people therefore you are a fascist. 😂

@freemo @john I have this vague sense of discomfort about Mastodon because of the extensive culture of defederating/blocking/banning on some major instances. It will be interesting to see how/if it plays out. e.g. think how impoverished we'd be here on qoto without any sauropod updates. #patchyverse