I think I was starting to drag another topic off-topic so let me post here

Not threatened at all. Fortunately my child has already graduated from high school and do not any longer have to worry about his education including information on the invention of the dustpan. I have a bit of concern about the half-truths and lies being taught as part of black history.

from www.ishangohouse.com/Black%20Inventors.htm

This is the story of a little boy named Theo who woke up one morning and asked his mother, Mom, what if there were no Black people in the world? Well his mother thought about that for a moment, and then said, Son, follow me around today and let's just see what it would be like if there were no Black people in the world. Mom said, now go get dressed and we will get started.

Theo ran to his room to put on his clothes and shoes. His mother took one look at him and said, Theo, where are your shoes and those clothes are all wrinkled son, I must iron them. But when she reached for the ironing board it was no longer there. You see Sarah Boone, a black woman, invented the ironing board and Jan E. Matzelinger, a black man invented shoes.

Oh well, she said, please go and do something to your hair. Theo ran in his room to comb his hair, but the comb was not there. You see, Walter Sammons, a black man invented the comb. Theo decided to just brush his hair, but the brush was gone. Lydia O. Newman, a black female, invented the brush. Well this was a sight, no shoes, wrinkled clothes, hair a mess, even Mom's hair, without the hair care inventions of Madam C. Walker, well you get the picture.

Mom told Theo, let's do our chores around the house and then take a trip to the grocery store. Theo's job was to sweep the floor. He swept and swept and swept. When he reached for the dustpan, it was not there. You see. Lloyd P. Ray, a black man, invented the dustpan. So he swept his pile of dirt over in the comer and left it there. He then decided to mop the floor, but the mop, was gone. You see, Thomas W. Stewart, a black man. invented the mop.

Theo yelled to his Mom, Mom, I'm not having any luck. Well son, she said, let me finish washing these clothes and we will prepare a list for the grocery store. When the wash was finished, she went to place the clothes in the dryer but it was not there. George T. Samon, a black man, invented the clothes dryer. (end of quote)

From www.liesexposed.net?nfp/issue0112/blinn.htm

campaigns are spreading across America attempting to credit black "inventors" with certain inventions. One such campaign is promoted by IBM who offers a poster of "Famous Black Inventions." Included on this poster are pictures of blacks and their supposed inventions - including the traffic light.

While the black Garrett A. Morgan did submit and receive a patent for a traffic signal in 1923, he did not invent the traffic light. The first "traffic light" was created in London in 1868, used to control the traffic of pedestrians and buggies. It was illuminated by gas using green and red colors, and was manually operated by policemen who turned a lever to reveal the appropriate color to the appropriate lane of traffic. Railroads were already using a lighting system as well. It was a police officer, William Potts, who first improved on the gas-light invention, which required a police officer to operate. William Potts recognized the need for something better when he observed that police officers were spending much of their time directing traffic after the invention of the automobile. He created an electric lighting system using red, amber, and green to control automobile traffic in Detroit. It was first used in 1920 and was the herald of the modern traffic light. William Potts was not black. Garrett A. Morgan's traffic light of 1923 did not contribute significantly to the traffic light of today, but resembled train switching lights already in use.

When reading these lists of so-called inventions, which are especially prevalent on the Internet, it becomes painfully obvious the lies contained within those lists. These lists are especially popular on college campuses. Afrocentrism is the term used to describe the attempts to cover-up the truth of history by spreading lies which claim that the blacks of Africa actually created civilization. This ridiculous theory is being taught in many schools and even universities. Many college graduates think they are being intelligent when they state that without H. A. Jackson, we wouldn't have a kitchen table, which he "invented" on October 6, 1896. This is how ridiculous these lists have become. I am sure that the kitchen table was invented centuries ago, although I don't believe the blacks in Africa were furnishing their mud huts with kitchen tables. H.A. Jackson may have submitted an idea for a patent which was a special modification of the kitchen table, but he certainly did not invent it, and neither did his patent have any significance on the civilization of the world. This is also true for W. R. Davis, Jr., who is credited with inventing the library table - in 1878!

What many are doing is obtaining patent lists of blacks and then attempting to pass them off as inventions. Most of what these people are doing is taking a certain invention, modifying it in some way, and then patenting that modification. In other words, they are not patenting original creations. Many are just outright lying. One list credits Sarah Boone, a female black, with the invention of the ironing board in 1892. White people were ironing clothes on ironing boards long before 1892. (end of quote)

Is teaching little Theo that he would be barefoot, ungroomed and eating off the floor if it had not been for the contributions of blacks doing Theo, or anyone else, a favor?

It isn’t doing anyone a favor to lie, especially when the lie is meant to add to someone’s self identity, for when the lie is proven wrong, it will either severely strip away that persons security in self, or cause them to go into denial.

I could go around all day and spout off how great the (put your race here) people are, because of all the great stuff they have “invented”, but when they are as ridiculous as saying: well we wouldn’t have shoes without the blacks, or sex without the French, or trench coats without the British, or the sword without the Japanese. But most of the rudimentary inventions will surface across the world in slightly different forms depending on the people, but they will still exist.

For example: the sword, no one specifically invented it for the world, dozens of isolated cultures developed metalworking and slashing objects independently of each other. The same could be said for the shoe, or the shirt, or the spear, or the cart. I am sure there are some ingenious inventions that have been invented by black people that have not existed before then, or have not shown up in other cultures independently. I couldn’t name them, but I am not a great scholar of who made what.

But it is ridiculous to say that any specific person made the shoe, the table or the sword; for almost all cultures have made some version of them. Humans are ingenious inventors, and that is a wondrous thing.



Quane

It is inevitable. You are always going to have nutcases. Unfortunatly you will always have fools who suck this kind of stuff up. Sadly this allows this garbage to be passed off as truth. However in the end reality will win out.
The acheivements of "Blacks" worthy of remembrance will be upheld and the falsehoods will always crumble when examined in the light.

People who spend energy trying to falsely credit any person or group of people with accomplishments that were not theirs - are certainly misplacing their energy.

However, I also suspect that anybody who would put a lot of energy *into* researching and disproving that a specific racial group really did what they were credited with . . . is also running on questionable motivations and misplacing energy better spent elsewhere - like inventing stuff yourself for example!

Well, not all this stuff needs to be researched to be disproved. The table? Shoes? These things definitely existed prior to the 19th century. Does it require research to realize that Louis XIII did not go barefoot? Or that he probably did eat at a table?
Blacks definitely did invent many things, but stuff like this is obviously not true. It's like if I just decided to tell people that I invented the letter Q.

Hugo, I was originally in the racism thread which you were repeating what you wrote here, but Jaime put a stop to that so...now the two threads have paralell points.

I believe that black history has been neglected and indeed deserves its place and education to the fact. I am not talking about kitchen tables and dustpans. I believe you read a story meant for very young children. Actually Im kind of ashamed and suprised at this low blow. As one of our educated you should certainely know the difference between a 3rd grade childrens story and a real attempt to bring black history to light.

How about we jump to a more high school or college level, just for fun.

Who was Benjamin Banneker?

Also in 1791, Banneker created and published his acclaimed Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and Almanac and Ephemeris. In 1792 Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, white supremacist, and slave owner pronounced Blacks mathematically inferior. In response to Jefferson, Benjamin Banneker sent a copy of his almanac along with a twelve page twelve page letter to Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson requesting aid in improving the lot of American Blacks.

Banneker's Almanac's were compared favorable with Benjamin Franklin's Poor Richards's Almanac. However, in 1802 he stopped publishing his Almanac due to poor sales.

Banneker and the layout of Wash Dc.

Carver, George Washington (c. 1860-1943)
was a US agricultural chemist who revolutionised agriculture in the south of the country. He advocated the diversification of crops, crop rotation and the cultivation of peanuts, from which he made over 300 products.

'During his time in Iowa, Carver made important discoveries in the field of plant pathology; in 1897 he reported on new species of fungi which have since been named after him - Taphrina carveri, Collectotrichum carveri and Metasphaeria carveri. At Tuskegee, Carver demonstrated the need for crop rotation and the use of leguminous plants, especially the peanut. Following his advice, farmers planted peanuts, which soon became the principal crop in the farming belt running from Montgomery to the Florida border. They were soon making more money from the peanut and its 325 by-products (including milk, cheese, face powder, printer's ink, shampoo and dyes) which were developed by Carver, than from tobacco and cotton. In 1921, following Carver's presentation to the Ways and Means Committee, the peanut was included in the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Bill to protect it from foreign competition. Carver also discovered 118 products which could be made from the sweet potato and 75 products from the pecan nut. Carver's other work included developing a plastic material from soya beans which Ford later used in part of his automobile, and extracting dyes and paints from the clays of Alabama. He received three patents, for a cosmetic (1925), a paint and stain (1925) and a process for producing paints and stains (1927).
http://george-washington-carver.com/george...skegee-14.shtml

Bessie Blount
was a physical therapist who worked with soldiers injured in W.W.II. Bessie Blount's war service inspired her to patent a device, in 1951, that allowed amputees to feed themselves.

The electrical device allowed a tube to deliver one mouthful of food at a time to a patient in a wheelchair or in a bed whenever he or she bit down on the tube. She later invented a portable receptacle support that was a simpler and smaller version of the same, designed to be worn around a patient's neck.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blblount.htm

David Crosthwait
'From 1925 to 1930, Crosthwait was the director of the research department for the Durham Company, investigating heating and ventilation methods. Crosthwait holds 39 U.S. patents for heating systems, vacuum pumps, refrigeration methods and processes and temperature regulating devices, and 80 international patents for the same. He is well known for creating the heating system for New York's famous Radio City Music Hall and Rockerfeller Center.
Crosthwait was an expert on heat transfer, air ventilation and central air conditioning. He was the author of a manual on heating and cooling with water and guides, standards, and codes that dealt with heating, ventilation, refrigeration, and air conditioning systems. During the 1920s and 30s, he invented an improved boiler, a new thermostat control and a new differential vacuum pump, all more effective for the heating systems in larger buildings.
http://inventors.about.com/library/invento...lcrosthwait.htm

Charles Drew
Charles Drew's system for the storing of blood plasma (blood bank) revolutionized the medical profession. Dr. Drew also established the American Red Cross blood bank, of which he was the first director, and he organized the world's first blood bank drive, nicknamed "Blood for Britain". His official title for the blood drive was Medical Director of the first Plasma Division for Blood Transfusion, supplying blood plasma to the British during World War II. The British military used his process extensively during World War II, establishing mobile blood banks to aid in the treatment of wounded soldiers at the front lines. In 1941, the American Red Cross decided to set up blood donor stations to collect plasma for the U.S. armed forces.
http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bldrew.htm

Thomas Jennings was the first African American to receive a patent, on March 3, 1821 (U.S. patent3306x). Thomas Jennings' patent was for a dry-cleaning process called "dry scouring". The first money Thomas Jennings earned from his patent was spent on the legal fees (my polite way of saying enough money to purchase) necessary to liberate his family out of slavery and support the abolitionist cause.

Under the United States patent laws of 1793 and 1836, both slaves and freedman could patent their inventions. However, in 1857, a slave-owner named Oscar Stuart patented a "double cotton scraper" that was invented by his slave. Historical records only show the real inventor's name as being Ned. Stuart's reasoning for his actions was that, "the master is the owner of the fruits of the labor of the slave both manual and intellectual". In 1858, the U.S. patent office changed the patent laws, in response to the Oscar Stuart vs Ned case, in favor of Oscar Stuart. Their reasoning was that slaves were not citizens, and could not be granted patents. But surprising in 1861, the Confederate States of America passed a law granting patent rights to slaves. In 1870, the U.S.government passed a patent law giving all American men including blacks the rights to their inventions.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljennings.htm

I am only in the J's Hugo, the list goes on and on and Ive only included for the most part older inventions and did not go to Z.

I am suspicious of your motives Hugo, to be talking mops and dustpans and purposely ignoring such a greater body of work done by African-Americans to downplay or bash black history month.

I could waste another huge amount of time and bandwidth writing about black peoples contributions to american culture in our wars, music, agriculture and cuisine, building roads and even breaking ground in Alaska.

Mathew Henson was part and parcel of Robert E Peary's expedition to the North Pole, however....
'The public of 1910 had no place for an African-American hero; so Henson was never given the recognition he earned through the 18 years and 7 highly dangerous, difficult Arctic journeys he endured with Peary. His rewards and recognition came gradually. In the 1930's he was made a member of the New York Explorers Club of which Peary had once been the President. All the other famous explorers knew how valuable Matt had been at the North Pole. Freuchen, Stefansson, MacMillan, Bartlett and others kept close friendships with him.'
http://www.matthewhenson.com/index4.htm

Then there is Cap't Mike Healy:
'A writer for the New York Sun newspaper described Captain Michael Morris Healy's reputation in Alaska waters in a 1894 article:

'Capt. Mike Healy is a good deal more distinguished person in the waters of the far Northwest than any President of the United States or any potentate of Europe has yet become. He stands for law and order in many thousands of miles of land and water, and if you should ask in the Arctic Sea, "Who is the greatest man in America?" the instant answer would be, "Why, Mike Healy." When an innocent citizen of the Atlantic coast once asked on the Pacific who Mike Healy was, the answer came, "Why, he's the United States. He holds in theses parts power of attorney for the whole country."
http://www.yukonalaska.com/akblkhist/healy.html

Shall I go on, or are you utterly bored with black achievement that has had no place in our history books or educational systems?

Next in line..... a supreme bashing when women finally get recognised for their achievements in history, who do not have a history month or recognition in school texts , almost completely ignored, except for the Betsy Ross flag. I grew up thinking only WHITE MEN had done anything of significance, ever. This is not the way to go about education, in my not so humble opinion.

I don't think anyone had a problem with recognizing valid inventions and contributions. I can only speak for myself, but the problem is not with well deserved recognition. The problems is with absurd claims only.

Well, if the absurd claims are about ironing boards, kitchen tables and dustpans, who has the problem here, really? Sniff sniff, I smell something rotten, and its not in a southern black kitchen but possibly someone who has a decayed pork to roast.

I can believe that the table was "invented" in Africa, but it would have happened so long ago that we can't be certain what colour the people who lived there then were.

Once that had happened, the invention of the kitchen was required (if defined as a built room specifically dedicated to food preparation), and that almost certainly happened in Central Asia or the Middle East (where towns and cities and what we know as houses were first built). Whoever they were, it is unlikely that they were what we would know today as "black", unless Ariel Sharon and Osama bin Laden qualify as "black".

As for multiple inventions of similar things (like swords), I think that's very true. In areas like this we can't credit anyone with "inventing" anything, but we can say that maybe without one particular strain of cultural influence, what we know as "swords" today might be very different.

I think this is particularly true of Western music, where we can uniquivocally say it would be very different today were it not for black influences. And not just the obvious things, like there would be no rap or soul or jazz. Go back further, and we find that the Spanish guitar and it's relatives like the lute, on which most white popular music of today is based, and we find that it wasn't there until the Moors - black Moslems - went to Spain.

So we'd be left with brass and woodwind instruments (that, in my shaky remembrance of music history, came originally from the Middle East, where they first discovered brass the metal), and strings that are hit or plucked (like harps or pianos). I think the viol family, on which most classical music relies very heavily, also came from north Africa originally in Classical (i.e. Graeco-roman) times, but my history is too shaky to know what colour the people who bourhgt them were.

We can safely say, then, that without black influences, it almost impossible to imagine what Western music would sound like today.

But it would be just stupid to say that Western music as it now stands was "invented" by anyone, let alone say that it was invented by black people. This is not a cut-and-dried case like Bell stealing Meucci's idea and claiming credit for the telephone.

I will try to ignore the insults. It is typical when you point out fallacies circulated among minority groups to be declared a racist, sexist, homophobe, etc. The issue is should lies and half-truths be taught as facts to either first graders or high schoolers. It seems to me the accomplishments of every racial groups can be woven into American and World History. It seems to me that there are enough achievements by blacks (some of which Artemise so graciously pointed out) that absurd claims that 19th Century black men invented the shoe and the kitchen table need not be taught.

Yes, it took a great deal of research to conclude the kitchen table and shoes existed prior to ythe 19th Century

First off I am glad that Artemise pointed out that it was a child's story, and after reading it I think it just helps to say that many helpful creations of been contributed by different people - including different races of people.

Like I said before, to say they a race of people with no real liberties until the 1960s decided to sit down in the 19th C and think up things to patent is more absurd than any supposed "idea-stealing" anyone can claim happened.

Also, if people went to the Official websites that shows what has been invented instead of a little website that someone put up to criticize minorities, it could easily noted that some creations and techniques were not "inventions" but technological advances. And there is nothing wrong with advancing many previous utilities.

And like I have said before, there were many inventions blacks made to contribute. In fact, it is the fact that there are websites such as the one mentioned about blacks only making ironing boards and folding chairs that is the reason I believe Black History Month is still needed.

As an example and not a criticism, all I have heard Hugo say is how blacks have spent their years stealing common inventions and oppressing others with their Black History Month. However, I have not heard a single person say that these inventions and advances were dated as to the exact time. And not only that, but also the fact that a patent can only be given if it satisfies 3 objectives:
1) It must be nonobvious - a reasonable person would not have knowledge of the art
2) It must be novel - meaning it is new and different from previous inventions (it cannot be patented if it has been put to use atleast 1 year before)
3) It must be useful - meaning it must be efficient in some way
Patent Requirements

So to express that someone is arbitrarily applying patents to black people when the inventions are obvious is a lie in and of itself.

And... ...I'm pretty sure your son knows how smart and good a person George Washington was as well as every other "good" man in history taught the other 11 months of the year. But ask him if he knows who George Washington Carver is...he was also a smart and good man

Since the original question was:


I don't see how your attacks of motivation are bringing anything to the conversation. Since Hugo has acknowledged the contributions of black invention to society, I think the concern is with the passing of lies as historical fact. Nobody denies that Blacks have contributed to society a great number of inventions. Given that, why teach children of any age a history lesson full of false claims? Instead of laying claim to the creation of the ironing board, shoes, and the kitchen table, why not teach about items invented by African-Americans, or at the very least, credit these individuals with their changes to the ironing board, kitchen table, etc. rather than lying and saying they invented them. Let everyone be proud of the truth, don't build race-image upon deception.



From About.com. That's a noteworthy accomplishment, so why not state this rather than 'he invented the comb'? He did not invent the comb, he improved the design and invented a heated comb!
And John Matzelinger invented a shoe making machine, not shoes! Again, that is a great invention, so celebrate that. But there is no reason to claim he invented the shoe!!!!

As for putting great energy into researching and disproving these claims, it took about 2 minutes each on my lunch break! I typed the person's name into google and checked the first 5 or so pages that came up.

Gee, slim, are you a racist too. It is quite sad when you can't pose a simple question of if children should be taught half-truths as factual history without being accused of racism. It is a great way to attempt to shut down debate by inferring racist motives to the debator. What originally instigated this debate was a comment by Besus in the "Are blacks more racist than whites" debate on Jan 7, 4:22 a.m. Let me quote:

Others Blacks invented:

Mop
Pencil Sharpner
Clothes Dryer
Pen
Type Writing Machine
Printing Press
Lawn Mower
Auto Gear Shift
Engines
Traffic Light
Refrigarator
Heating Furnace
Air Conditoner
Trolley
Elevator
Mailbox
Light Bulb

I can name more if you want me to.

I wonder if these racist in the world know this.What if their was no blacks? No AC,Heater,Light and Cars,etc.(end of quotes)

I responded to his claims with evidence I thought contradicted his assertions. Guess that makes me a racist. Obviously Besus's education has led him to believe black men invented the light bulb and the printing press (at least he left out the kitchen table). I see many here obviously believe that teaching factual history is racist.

This is a disturbing statement.

So we should not validate claims that are made?

It looks like a revisionists history is not far away.


By the way... I invented the decimal point.

1. I do not see the connection between Black History Month, observed in the United States, and the story from a web page in Manchester, England.

2. Any so-called lists referred to in the opening post are not included.



This statement bothers me, particularly as it is immediately followed by a statement which can only be intended to be an example:



(which college graduates? What are their names? What number is "many?")

Afrocentrism is actually not a term "used to describe the attempts to cover-up the truth of history by spreading lies which claim that the blacks of Africa actually created civilization." Indeed, it is a term used to help correct a general system of teaching world history which excludes Africa in most ways, and which claims Columbus was a hero who "discovered" a continent upon which people already lived.

Since most archeologists, anthropologists, and historians agree that humans probably emerged, evolutionarily, in Africa, it seems more likely than not that so-called "civilization" also began there.

This thread is a perfect example of dramatizing a minor issue in order to discredit a larger, legitimate field of study. Hugo finds some silly story, full of misrepresentations, and (at least seemingly, from the topic title) then ties it somehow to Black History Month, and more, to university programs.

As for the question:


Of course it isn't. Thankfully, such stories are not common. Are there ignorant people who might believe such things? Sure. Just as there are ignorant people who think we never landed on the moon; people who don't know Helen Keller was an eloquent proponent of socialism; people who think Columbus was a hero.

Maybe you need to simply do a google search with these words "black history month little theo". You will find this a quite common story and is part of black history month programs in Great Britain, Canada, the US and elsewhere. I am glad we agree that the little Theo story is doing no one a favor.

Yeah well neither is the "great Paul Revere" story or the "George Washinton and the Apple tree" story. Or how about that great story about the first Thanksgiving. If you want to start getting angry how abot getting angry about those little "lies and half-truths" being taught throughout the year?

Or does that hit to close to home?

And since when was this month only about inventions? What happened to Harriet Tubman, MLK, Rosa Parks? There's a lot for me to be proud of. A lot more than could every be whisked away by some website.

I might add that 'white' history is full of lies. Our own Thanksgiving did not go down the way it is taught to childrenor adults, but its a nice pat little story about getting along with others and supposedly teaches american history. And the George Washinton cherry tree story?, but that is meant to teach children that lying is wrong, most likely from an outright lie in itself. The civil war was fought to free the slaves? The list could go on and on.

Quark beat me to it on the story being from England and being an isolated case and about civilization beginning in Africa, but I would like to mention that Garret A. Morgan not only submitted and recieved a patent for his traffic light in the US but also in Britain and Canada, which I believe qualifies him as inventor. It was used throughout the US until the invention of the one we use today. So you yourself have omitted information, and told a half truth to support your theory.

Morgan also invented the first gas mask, of which a refined model was used by the US army in WWI.

I cannot get anything off of liesexposed.net for some reason, only a title comes up, but I would be wary of getting technical information off of sites like these who may have their own disinformation agenda going on.

Oops!Looks like we were all posting at the same time, same thoughts.Sorry for the redundancy.

I agree, this story is not doing anyone any favours. However, you couch this within (or offer it as an example of) what seems to be a critique of the very idea of "Black History Month;" and you go as far as to declare that "Afrocentrism" is a term used to describe lies etc.

I say you are being a bit dramatic. We were taught all sorts of lies about history when we were growing up. The solution is to teach the truth, not ditch the history program altogether.

Your clever juxtapositioning of my responses seems to indicate some sort of irony. However, I do not support teaching untruths, regardless of the subject. But I also don't think you throw the whole thing away, and further, that this is not indicative of a program based on lies and deceit. Check out the book Lies My Teacher Told Me if you want to see how error-ridden our study of American history generally is. But I do think we should still be studying history.

You need to read closer the statement, I believe you were referring to, on Afrocentrism was part of a long quote. I don't agree with everything in that quote.

Much of the debate here seems to be that white lies somehow justify black lies. I think we should eliminate lies regardless of who is teaching them to our children or what racial group's agenda it supports. I have yet to see anybody support the little Theo story on it's own merits.Can I conclude that we all agree that lies should not be taught in history classes?

I do think history should be taught from a color-blind perspective. If a white guy had invented the dustpan it would not be taught in school.

I was not taught about the dustpan in school. Ill have to check around to see which kids in my neighborhood are being taught about the dustpan, Ill bet ZERO.

In fact I was never taught about any black inventors at all. I was taught the lie that Thomas Edison discovered electricity and invented the first light bulb.

That story was not full of lies, actually a black man did invent a type of shoes, and I dont think its easy to explain patent law to 3 year olds. The story only begins with small things and moves on to larger inventions, if you read the whole thing. I believe its more symbolic than hard core facts, which are harder to teach young children.

If we want to stop lying, thats fine, we shall need to rewrite out Thanksgiving, stop teaching that ridiculous virgin story, Christmas and Easter as well, the two christain holidays are co-opted from pagan ones and everyone knows that christ was not born on Christmas.

Where do we start tearing history apart, I guess Columbus would be a good beginning. I am all for it. Ive always disliked the whole Columbus/Thanksgiving/Christmas/Easter/ farce, however what you are asking is impossible I think. And why concetrate on this particular situation of a story for 3 year olds?
Back in November I brought up the lie about Thanksgiving and if we should continue to teach american children this BIG lie, year after year! I didnt see your commentary there, of course you may have missed it.
http://www.americasdebate.com/forums/index...?showtopic=4221

It looks like almost everyone missed your Thanksgiving post. Actually you seem to be quite in agreement with me that "white" lies should not be taught to children. I certainly think the Thanksgiving story gives children a false view of white/indian relationships and should not be taught as history. We only disagree on the subject of "black" lies, which you seem to find acceptable.

Hugo,
I dont think my Thanksgiving post was missed, but completly passed on because noone really cares, its a 'white' peoples lie that covers up the massacre of indigenous people, and we get a nice fat turley dinner to boot. However, post a story about misconceptions in a story for black children that really has very little bearing on much and we have 21 posts so far.

I dont like teaching children outright lies, but Id like to have more than one link to prove that in our high schools and colleges students are being filled up with lies on black achievements. All there is is this kindergarden tale to base this whole scenario on. Your other link has nothing on it.

I never heard Edison discovered electricity, I did understand that he built the first feasible DC generator and power distribution system. And he did not invent the light bulb, he improved upon the vacuum which made the light bulb last long enough to be of any use, I understand that.

Some lies have been told for a long time, some for a few minutes. None of them are okay, so what is wrong with pointing them out?

I have no problem with dispelling white lies about the treatment of native-americans, erroneous credit for inventions and accomplishments, etc, I'm all for it. But we need to dispell as many of these falsehoods as possible with no regard to race.



I would agree with this, Artemise. Except that I don't understand why lying about these things to 9 year olds is okay?!? You pointed out some very good things that should be taught about black history. So why not teach these things, rather than outlandish claims?

Please believe me when I tell you that I don't care what color someone is, if they made contributions to society, then I will be the first to applaud them for it. But I don't like finding out credit is being given to someone when they don't deserve it, or that a writer is misrepresenting the truth. And it doesn't matter how old you are, you shouldn't be lied to.


For the record, the 'Little Theo' story can be found all over the world:

The Black Web Portal

USDA pamphlet (pdf format)

Guardian Chronicle (NYC police, community, youth, and you)

Reggae Zone

Care-Gear (online store)


Clearly it is not an isolated story, it is being used by at least one school district (I'm sure there are more, it's the first one I saw online), the USDA, and the NYC police to teach black history. Just wanted to point out that this is not simply in Manchester, England! Teach the truth, black or white or brown or yellow or green!

And, for the record, black history should be taught as part of everyday history, not just in the month of February!

Perhaps you need to re-read what you quoted? Let me translate: "Folks who lie about what other folks did are stupid."

Maybe you actually meant to quote and reply to the other part of what I said? Which translated said: "Folks who spend a lot of time trying to track down any lies about one racial group are at least a bit silly themselves"

I would say "Bowling for Columbine" would be a good educational flick.
But perhaps thats just me.

The Cartoon part of the movie was REALLY good, and the simple truth, but is this thought in the schools ?

It's just a point of fact, but the connection is that Black History Month is not a purely American celebration, but also takes place in the UK.

It's comparatively recent, and was bertainly inspired by the success of the BHM in the USA. It is necessarily somewhat lower in profile here since Britons with black African or Afro-Caribbean heritage are a much smaller group than black Americans in the USA (around 3% of the population - only about 8-9% of the total population in the UK is of ANY ethnic minority, regardless of colour). But it is here and it is pretty well established now.

I covered the front of house (bar, taking tickets, that kind of thing) at a show called "Me Memba When" in my local Arts Centre back in October. Some of the older members of the black community are in a group called Black Elders of Swindon, and they had written a show, featuring themselves, that looked back on their memories of their early lives, how they came to be in here, and so on. It was really a rather wonderful evening.

I felt rather jealous - elderly white Britons probably have similarly interesting stories to tell, but they don't have a festival to hang them from, and haven't (yet) had the idea of clubbing together to put on a good show like this. I think they should. I'd go see it.

Actually the primary target audience seems to be 1st thru 3rd graders. Now let me get past "little Theo". Criticisms of afrocentrism from an afrocentrist:

From this site.



Yes, falsehoods are being taught from kindergarten thru post-graduate studies. I guess I am just being a "silly" ice person.

Now from a critic of afrocentrism:

From this site

The idea is that the contemporary black experience is directly connected to African history and inherited African culture. The aim of the idea is to combat "Eurocentrism" (white man's history) by producing an "Afrocentric" account of history that celebrates black achievement and that responds to black ways of knowing (according to Afrocentrism, blacks do not think or feel the way whites do: as Asante puts it, "Africa is at the heart of all African American behavior"). Rewriting Western history as the history of how the West appropriated African achievements, Afrocentrism whitewashes that past (overlooking, for example, the fact that enslaving blacks is not a European invention, that Muslims have held black slaves, and that blacks have enslaved one another in the past and continue to do so today). At times, Afrocentrism even stoops to blatant misrepresentation, teaching such patent falsehoods as that Socrates and Cleopatra were black, that the ancient Egyptians were black, that Aristotle stole his ideas from black Egyptian intellectuals, and so on. Ancient Greece, according to Afrocentric thought, plagiarized Ancient Egypt. You can get a stiff dose of Afrocentric thought by reading Asante's The Afrocentric Idea. And you can get a stiffer antidote by reading the classic refutations of Afrocentrism, Mary Lefkowitz's Not Out of Africa: How Afrocentrism Became an Excuse to Teach Myth as History and her edited collection, Black Athena Revisited.

So the separatism we see espoused by minority orientations has a scholarly backing, as do the identity politics, the militant historical revisionism, the abiding hostility to Western history, Western culture, and white people that provides the frame for "orienting" minority freshmen. Indeed, Afrocentric scholars have been instrumental in institutionalizing the idea that expressing hate toward a putative "oppressor" (or member of an "oppressive" group) can be a legitimate, even central, component of campus culture. Hence the freedom with which Afrocentric scholars spout rabid anti-Semitic sentiments, both in and beyond the classroom.

Wellesley's Tony Martin, author of the telling Jewish Onslaught has become notorious for requiring students to read--as truth--the Nation of Islam's anti-Semitic screed, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, which argues that Jews were the "key operatives" in the African slave trade and so bear "monumental culpability in ... the black holocaust" (Henry Louis Gates, Jr., chair of African American Studies at Harvard, called the book "one of the most sophisticated instances of hate literature yet compiled").

Likewise, CUNY's Leonard Jeffries (who teaches that blacks are "sun people"--warm, humane--while whites are "ice people"--cold, hard) was stripped of his position as chair of CUNY's Black Studies department for making anti-Semitic remarks and arguing that rich Jews ran the slave trade. He subsequently won a $400,000 civil suit against CUNY for violating his rights, and continues there to this day, inciting outrage with his racist remarks. (end of quotes)

The lies, Artemise, simply start in kindergarten.

I don't see why Hugo is not addressing fact-based criticisms to the argument originally started. The questions as it began was about otright "lies and half-truths", where Hugo expressed that the blacks have spent the past 150 years or so patenting "obvious" and unnovel inventions, although I have already addressed this claim.

Furthermore, he uses a biased website of full-fledged criticism and a basic children's story whose means was to simplify complicated inventions and improvements such as the rotary engine and the imaging x-ray spectrometer to get at some of the basic things children can understand as a basis to end Black History Month.

And the reason why - which he has expressed several times - seems to be that his son who has graduated from high school does not know the first president of the united states, but can easily recite who created the dustpan.

And who is the culprit that is teaching such dastardly things? The evil Afrocentrists who are modern-day Nazis - skinheads if you will - who teach an entire generation of blacks to hate and retaliate against their white oppressors.

I know I can't be the only person who sees something wrong with this picture.

And please, stop with the child's story criticism. Children's stories aren't meant to be encyclopedias, they are meant to be oversimplifications for children to get a basic learning. In fact, most have morals...and it does not take a high school graduate with knowledge of a dustpan to understand that the purpose of this story is to show that many races have contributed to society...not just the one you hear about the other 11 months of the year.

Someone sure puts a lot of words in my mouth. It is one thing to use stories to educate small children in basic truths at a level they can understand. It is another thing to use simplistic stories to teach falsehoods. In my previous post I cited an afrocentrist who criticized some of the teachings of fellow afrocentrists. On the other citation, yes, it was from an opponent of afrocentrism. This does not mean the facts he stated were untrue. We actually have on college campuses professors teaching that white people are "ice people" and black people are "sun people". When "The Bell Curve" proposed genetic differences between blacks and whites thier was outrage. When black afrocentrists make even more absurd claims it is all to be swept under the rug. A bit of a double standard...is it not?

What absurd claims are swept under the rug? I know that Afrocentrism in and of itself is not some "evil scheme", so I will commit to what you are referring to as the most radical of black separatists. Now, if we allowed any of the most radical of white separatists to represent a whole culture - or even more to our point - White History, many people would be up in arms. So again, what double standard?

So I don't understand why bringing in an article in which an example of some flaiming black separatist who received compensation is in any way representative of what Black History - or even Afrocentrism - stands for.

Now do I agree with Afrocentrism? I would be lying if I said I whole-heartedly supported the ideals, but I do agree with its attempt to - as the Encyclopedia Britannica put it - "encourage the preservation and elevation of African-American expressive culture" and that it "has the psychological benefit of showing African-Americans... that they indeed have a heritage of value."

the link.

And even, if you do disagree and believe Afrocentrism is a harmful tool, I still do not understand what it has to do with Black History Month. Like I have said time and time again, it celebrates more than 19th C inventions, althoughI still do not see the problem with a simplified story for children. Let's look, where is the difference between expressing to an adult that no longer were police officers on dutyfor traffic signals becase of the invention of the atomatic stop sign, and telling a child that Morgan created what we now know as the stop light?

And if someone really wants to get technical, remember the lightbulb Edison is credited for creating. It was actually his team of 28 "Edison's Pioneers", and it was actually Lattimer, the only one black on the team, who is envisioned the fine carbon wire that lights up inside the lightbulb. Yet, where is the hypocrisy and hoopla? Atleast THIS story is taught to little kids. the link

And finally, I just felt I was summarizing what you said, not putting words in your mouth. The only paraphrase was of that article on Afrocentrism.

I don't recall where anybody called for an end to Black History Month, only the telling of the truth. Furthermore, I have provided links which show the story being used in documents intended for children, teens, and adults. It is not being used to teach children basic things they can understand. And if you want them to understand black history, then teach them black history, not lies as the story in question does.


Your right about children's stories being oversimplifications. The problem is that these are not oversimplifications. Shoes do not exist because of the lasting machine, they are made faster and easier because of it. You could brush your hair if not for Lydia Newman, but she did patent a new and improved brush on November 15, 1898 which was more durable and easier to keep clean. Ironing was made easier by Sarah Boone, her improvement was designed to be effective in ironing the sleeves and bodies of ladies' garments, but she certainly did not invent the ironing board. All I ask is that these discoveries and improvements be celebrated accurately. It does nobody any good to lie and misrepresent the accomplishments. And, for the billionth time, nobody has condoned lying about the light bulb either! A lie is a lie and should not be told, regardless of race. And just because the lie about Edison inventing the light bulb has been told for many years, it doesn't mean it's okay to start a whole new batch of lies today! It seems that we agree that lying is wrong, so why the long debate?

Ok, Ill go with you all on this.
When there is an acedemic upheaval and general across the board protest, from kindergarden upwards , which those people with children should lead, against teaching Thanksgiving or Columbus day as it is known today; when YOU BEGIN to teach your children that celebrating Thanksgiving is WRONG, because it is a celebration of the massacre of our indigenous people in this country, when you begin to tell children that Columbus did NOT discover America, but Amerigo Vepucci did, ' first maybe but not probable', that the 'discovery' of America meant that people already lived here and was NOT a discovery and the barbarians that came here enslaved the indigenus peoples and worked them and tortured them to find GOLD to take from the New World to the OLD and were responsible for mass genocide, then Ill take heed upon your calls of 'unfair' historical treatment and lying in storybooks.
When you teach the history of the Native American in European taking over of the New World and the continueing struggle of the Native American, forcing them onto reservations which they have not recouperated as of this day, having their best lands stolen from them by white settlers; when you stop lying about current treaties that are still not being kept, when you stop LYING about white americans being the 'good guys', then I 'might ' take your fingerpointing seriously and worry about 'Afrocentrisim' and its effects. So far I see none.

For now its not top'O'my list as a fringe group and has NOTHING TO DO with Black History Month. ( I read your links HUGO, and your edits are even fringe within the links!

I would like to mention that as far as history is known to this day, civilization and the beginning of 'man' was of african origin. That means that its very likely that africans discovered the wheel and fire, fishing and hunting methods, knew something of atronomy, herbal medicines and navigational methods; invented shoes, combs, and tables too, so mops and dustpans are nothing in comparison, hence the creators of this 1st to 3rd grade story are underestimating to a great extent the african achievment and you are acting spoiled and silly to be concerned about such things in the context of a much bigger picture. Its too easy, and utterly shameful, besides being a waste of time, to take the lowest common denominator on any given subject and try to make something of it.

Another comment that fails to address any facts and whose thesis is white lies justify black lies. Someone needs to go and try to revive her Thanksgiving Day post. Dr. Leonard Jeffries racism makes David Duke's pale in comparison. Could Duke maintain his racist views and be allowed to teach at any American college? Can anyone name a white college professor who is stridently racist? Maybe it is just silly to have a race debate section. We don't really need to debate these issues. What is utterly shameful is the conduct of some people in this debate who substitute personal attacks for debate. It reveals a certain mindset, a belief that the flaws of anyone, besides the white male, is not subject to political scrutiny. I have never condemned, in its entirety, either afrocentrism or black history month. The debates focus, do I need post the original question?, is should lies and half-truths be taught as history?

No, Artemise, I have no problems with the valid scientific theory of the Out of Africa theory being taught in schools. I do think you need to be real careful about assigning our original ancestors to any one race or assuming what skin color they originally were. I find the "ice people" and "sun people" theory as not a scientifically valid theory and should not be taught in schools. My educational experience was that by middle school I knew all about the evil white man's oppression of the Indians, Africans and women.

By the way, Vespucci did not discover America. There were people here when he landed. You know, those Indians that later played a role in that Thanksgiving story.

The ADL and the Jewish Defense League do not think this debate is silly. They have been engaged against the lies taught by Jeffries, Martin and others for many years.

From the ADL's website:



The silly, silly Jews. Why are they not concentrating on the Thanksgiving lie? Could it be possible it is because the Jews have suffered in the past from what started out as lies and half-truths and ended up in murder and genocide?

I hope no one think I am attacking people, because I am just stating the truth.

I debate exactly what other people said. During our "who more racist debate forum", the subject began to get off subject as the subject of BHM arose. These are Hugo's exact words.

"Was Thomas Edison black? Was Gutenberg black? Was Bill Clinton our first black President? If absurd claims of black inventions is what much of black history month consists of we need to get rid of it." At this point I only disagreed with Hugo's stance about BHM being about absurd claims of black inventions. SMORPHEUS made this reply to the statement.

"I think you're missing the point of the black inventions list, however. The point is to show that Blacks have a long history of contributing to American Culture in forms which go beyond stereotypical connotations. That is the point of Black History month, to reinforce this idea and try to erase a predefined ideal of African-American History which begins with slavery and ends with the passage of the Civil Rights bill."

And Hugo replied, "Teacher: Yesterday we were discussing the Great Depression and how it permanently changed America's socioeconomic politics. Today, however, is February 1st let us turn to the subjects of the inventions of the mop, dustpan and pencil sharpener." " I am beginning to take a stand against Black History Month. "

Therefore, I believe my arguments have been very valid in defending why not only that bhm is not "full of lies and half-truths" but also that it should still be kept

SLIM, also I looked through your links that showed where this story is posted, not that it is being taught to people of all ages. In fact this is what you had to say in response to an earlier post Artemise said about this story being told to 3rd graders.
"I would agree with this, Artemise. Except that I don't understand why lying about these things to 9 year olds is okay?!?"

So now that I have addressed that children are mostly being told this story, I would also like to point out that the entire argument about the "half-truths" of BHM lies in one line that spoke of a brush and comb invention (you can include the ironing board, but it is a valid invention). This comes up to one sentence of a 3 page story that deals with automobiles, lightbulbs, household chores, and hair care.

At one time, slim asked why not just so a black person invented the shoe lasting machine. This is EXACTLY what the story says. And before this post I made sure that every person in the story was the original patent holder.

So again, I must ask: Where are the lies and half-truths?!? And please, before you answer this question, please at least read the story being referred to in this debate.

Did the notice the IF in my statement "If absurd claims.....". In other words my stance was never that black history month was entirely about absurd claims attributed to black inventors. If I invent a new type of tire, I will not claim to have invented the wheel. The little Theo story is full of these misrepresentations. If I am part of a team that creates an invention, I will not claim to be the sole inventor of the product. I must admit I find the lies of Martin and Jeffries more disturbing, but their lies would have no market if 18 year olds were not already predisposed to believe their garbage.

While I haven't agreed with all of Hugo's posts on this thread, I have to say I agree with this.

I find it easier to believe that all the races evolved from a common ancestor of indeterminate skin colour than to think that white and Asians evolved in Africa from blacks and then left unchanged. It is far more likely that they evolved to match the circumstances they found themselves in - skin pigmentation to protect us from UV being less important in Northern climes, it stopped being produced to save resources. Hooded eyes became useful to protect form the cold winters and strong winds in Central Asisa, and so on.

If these ideas are feasible for the races that left Africa, how much more likely is it that black skin is an evolved adaptation to strong equatorial and tropical sunlight, rather than the original state of all of the first humans, because we arose in Africa so the people that never left there until written history begins have had that much longer to adapt to it?

I think it's more likely and more credible that original there were no distinct races, but just variable pigmentation of the kind found naturally in many species that don't rely on camouflage (feral domestic cats, for instance, or wild red foxes - some of which are black or white naturally).

The extremist fringe Afrocentrist belief that black Africans (as, for example, found in NoI ideas) are somehow "purer" humans representing what we all should have been just doesn't wash.

But going back to the original question, I think that this example is just a reason to be very careful when trying to oversimplify any history to make it more accessible. It is a very thin line to walk between accessibility of real historical facts and simple fabrication to support an unspoken (and often unconscious) idealogical position.

quote]At one time, slim asked why not just so a black person invented the shoe lasting machine. This is EXACTLY what the story says.[/quote]
I stand corrected on this point, as the story posted here said "and Jan E. Matzelinger, a black man invented shoes" and I did not do my homework. Upon re-reading the story from another site (it's original form) it does state he invented the shoe lasting machine. Thank you for correcting me, and I apologize for the sloppiness on my part!


Wow, a personal challenge. I'll tell you right now that in my family the pilgrims and indians have nothing to do with Thanksgiving. We use it as a day to bring friends and family together, enjoy the wonderful things we have in our lives, and do not celebrate it as a tribute to the white man or the massacre of natives. My Native American friends are the same way. As a matter of fact, I don't know anybody that treats as anything but a day to catch up with friends and family that you may not get to see except once or twice a year. School may put the pilgrim/indian spin on it, and it should be told accurately, but since you challenged us individually ("YOU BEGIN"), I already have!

And while there are still many things that must be done to make amends with Native Americans, the government has come a long way in trying to do the right things. Speaking from personal experience, tribal government has sovereignty, are able to give preferential treatment in their hiring practices for tribal businesses, tax breaks and aid for establishing businesses, in most places operate the only legal casinos (a great source of revenue for their people), and often work closely with state and local government in protecting their heritage.

I also accept the idea that man originated from Africa, it makes sense.


Actually, I was agreeing that "I believe that black history has been neglected and indeed deserves its place and education to the fact." Then I was merely asking that if Artemise believed the story was being taught to 3rd graders how that made lying okay?



"You see, Sarah Boone, a black woman, invented the ironing board" - African American, Sarah Boone, patented an improvement to the ironing board (U.S. Patent #473,653) on April 26, 1892.

"Walter Sammons, a black man, invented the comb." - Walter Sammons of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania received U.S. patent #1,362,823 on December 21, 1920 for an improved comb that straightened hair. According to Walter Sammons' patent he invented a heated comb that removed kinks from the hair.

"Lydia O. Newman, a black female, invented the brush." - African American, Lyda
Newman of New York, New York patented a new and improved brush on November 15, 1898.

"Lloyd P. Ray, a black man, invented the dustpan" - African American inventor, Lloyd Ray, patented a new and useful improvement in dust pans. (a short wooden handle - the dust pan itself was already in use)

"Thomas W. Stewart, a black man, invented the mop." - Thomas Stewart of Kalamazoo, Michigan, patented a new type of mop (U.S. patent #499,402) on June 11, 1893. Thomas Stewart had invented a clamping mop that could wring the water out of itself by the use of a lever.

"William Purvis, black man, invented the fountain pen." - William Purvis of Philadelphia invented and patented improvements to the fountain pen in 1890. William Purvis made several improvements to the fountain pen in order to make a "more durable, inexpensive, and better pen to carry in the pocket." Purvis used an elastic tube between the pen nib and the ink reservoir that used a suction action to return any excess ink to the ink reservoir, reducing ink spills and increasing the longevity of the ink. Fountain pens were first patented as early as 1809

"the lawn mower was invented by John Burr, a black man." - On May 9, 1899, John Albert Burr patented an improved rotary blade lawn mower. Burr designed a lawn mower with traction wheels and a rotary blade that was designed to not easily get plugged up from lawn clippings. John Albert Burr also improved the design of lawn mowers by making it possible to mow closer to building and wall edges.

"They made their way over to the car, and found that it just wouldn't go. You see, Richard Spikes, a black man, invented the automatic gear shift" - Richard Spikes patented an improved automatic gear shift in 1932. Funny, Ford offered their first car for sale in 1903, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have done that it 'it just wouldn't go'!

"Garrett A. Morgan, a black man invented the traffic light." - Earnest Sirrine of Chicago, Illinois patented (976,939) perhaps the first automatic street traffic system in 1910. Sirrine's system used the non illuminated words "stop" and "proceed". Lester Wire of Salt Lake City, Utah invented (unpatented) an electric traffic light in 1912 that used red and green lights. James Hoge patented (1,251,666) manually controlled traffic lights in 1913, which were installed in Cleveland, Ohio a year later by the American Traffic Signal Company. Hoge's electric-powered lights used the illuminated words "stop" and "move". William Ghiglieri of San Francisco, California patented (1,224,632) perhaps the first automatic traffic signal using colored lights (red and green) in 1917. Ghiglieri's traffic signal had the option of being either manual or automatic. Around 1920, William Potts a Detroit policeman, invented (unpatented) several automatic electric traffic light systems including an overhanging four-way, red, green, and yellow light system. The first to use a yellow light. Garrett Morgan was issued a patent for an inexpensive to produce manual traffic signal in 1923.

"John Standard, a black man, invented the refrigerator" - In his patent for the refrigerator John Standard declared, "This invention relates to improvements in refrigerators; and it consists of certain novel arrangements and combinations of parts." This means that John Standard was saying that he had found a way to improve the design of a refrigerator that he looked at a existing refrigerator and made it better. Contrary to popular folklore John Standard did not invent the very first refrigerator, however, every patent represents something that has not be done before and most utility patents are issued for what is called an "improvement." Improvements are the work of inventors and often it is the improved design that succeeds.

"Frederick Jones, a black man, invented the air conditioner" - The 'Apparatus for Treating Air' (U.S. Pat# 808897) granted in 1906, was the first of several patents awarded to Willis Haviland Carrier. The recognized 'father of air conditioning' is Carrier, but the term 'air conditioning' actually originated with textile engineer, Stuart H. Cramer. Jones developed an air-conditioning unit for military field hospitals.

"Alexander Miles, a black man, invented the elevator." - Alexander Miles of Duluth, Minnesota patented an electric elevator (U.S. pat#371,207) on October 11, 1887 (see patent below). Alexander Miles did not invent the first elevator, however, his design was very important.

All information from About.com.

I do believe these would qualify as 'lies and half-truths".

They are all valid contributions to life as we know it, and should be celebrated, but they way they are presented are DEFINITELY not accurate.

Just a point of info, The Little Theo story has versions which differ slightly. My original quotation of the story where it was claimed shoes were a 19th Century invention was a cut and paste.

I will give in on my position enough to say that the claims made by the Theo story are slight misrepresentations of fact. Possibly the author of the story should have said that such and such inventors 'patented' specific inventions or improvements on previously known inventions, and went on to explain what patents are. Perhaps the author should be called on this misrepresentation and made to revise the story to be more acurate. Im sure 7 year olds will be able to comprehend patents and therefore history will be set straight to a closer degree of truth. I think it was most likely an oversight by whoever wrote the story, not an intention to decieve, but to explain is simple terms black achivement. In my mind this story is for a much younger age group.



Slim, I made it personal because I have no hopes nor evidence that the Thanksgiving story will be taught other than the lies already in place and taught by schools across america every year. Perhaps, as I said, those with children should go right down to their schools tomarrow and INSIST that these lies of history be stopped IMMEDIATELY! (Aint gonna happen.) The Thanksgiving story after all is so nicey nice, whats the harm? No?



What did I say Hugo? Please dont edit out only to support your own arguement, which is exactly what you did in your links. I know my own words:


As to 'sun people and ice people' being taught in colleges... History and especially creation/evolution/the beginnings of man are not factual but theory. Theist colleges are teaching (theories of) Genesis, Womens Studies are teaching (theories of) the matriarchy, and African American studies may be teaching
( theories of) sun and ice people, I dont know. The purpose of college is to encourage people to THINK, I thought. I dont believe prehistory can be taught but is conjecture and open to debate. Many natives do NOT believe the Bering Straight theory is correct. Some natives also believe that civilization came from Atlantis and Muir. What are they teaching in Native colleges? No matter what, you cannot teach fact because fact is unknown, so theories are continually posed.

Now both Julian and yourself propose that we cannot know what race people were from the beginning. Scientists tell us we all came from apes in Africa. The Pliestocene was very hot in Africa during the supposed evolution of our species, which would make sense that all humans were initially black. I dont quite understand how it could be otherwise, if youve looked at a chimp or a gorilla lately, you both certainely dont think we came out from apes all shiny white and then scorched enough over millions of years to 'get' black? So if race cannot be determined, what color do YOU think humans were? Lets not border on the ridiculous in some negligable idea that maybe we were semi white or possibly calico?
In a book I read long ago and I cant remember who, yet it was really well known the author claims that only men previously have written books on evolution and that from a womans point of view it certainly occured differently, with awesome back-up, an idea that we did not come out of trees and run across the plain, lose our hair and stand upright, that its very likely we went to the seaside, because it was so damn hot and also humans resemble certain marine mammals in their evolution, and that vegitarian animals do not bring back and share food, so the mighty Ape/human male dragging food back to nuclear family is an impossibility, a survival mechanism that would have taken too long to develop for the species to survive.
The point is, noone knows. Maybe civilization did not develop only in Africa, something many indigenous people believe.

I see nothing wrong with all kinds of theories up for grabs and studying the possibilities in college.
Also, many studies in college today are about correcting what were complete and total lies in the teaching of history AND lack of inclusion of people of color and women in the past. ( by the way HUGO, noone ever mentioned 'white males', I said White Americans, once again, you misrepresent, several times, in a topic which you claim to abhor misrepresentation!)

As to Jeffries and Martin, I need to do more research,( Jeffries is a respected scholar of African studies from what I can tell, who is asked by many universities to plan their studies programs), but as you stated, they are invited by student organizations and are not permanent professors; not teachers but lecturers. David Duke was an elected Representative and lectured at Harvard (!!! for crying out loud, Im sure KKK theory really impressed our future leaders), Oxford, Vanderbuilt and Cambridge Universities.
http://www.duke.org/biography.html

The ADL, IMO is a whole other topic, as anyone who critisizes the Jewish/Israeli block immediately comes under accusation of anti-semitism, and I have plenty of critisizm there, as any healthy thinking adult might. The ADL seems to think that Jews and/or Israel are 100% beyond reproach for anything, based on the WW2 genocide. Sorry. This is NOT the case; they deserve to be brought under critisizm as much as any other.

Students have a right to invite lecturers of any ilk to their Universities and make up their own minds, unless we are looking for indoctrination, not learning, that means freedom of thought. At one time it might have been seen as dissident or controversial to invite MLK to speak at a university, or Ghandi on topics of non-violence.
Universities are bodies of learning and free thought. Unless you are suggesting censorship or a personal curriculum of one particular thought/ideology, where do you want to go?
What about theological U.'s? Creationism is absurd really, or is it?, Adam and Eve, 7 days of creation, virginity, resurrection of several days dead people, and all that blather. What do you want to do about that?
Are these 'truths'? Or are we all and especially students debating the great questions: From where we came, HOW we came to be, what is our purpose? Any number of theories can be debated. Then Hugo, they graduate, get a job, and get on with reality as its dealt, life as it is. However mental flexibility, sound judgement, and tolerance of diverse ideologies is what is really taught and amazingly, noone really cares who invented the dustpan at that point, just that someone said 'invented' instead of 'patented'.

This is quite an issue and rather than read every argument in detail, lets be fair as white people and say, White Society has and still attempts to conceal or suppress achievement by blacks. They even went so far as to attempt to portray blacks as incapable of "Love" , or having enduring romance between a black man and black woman or even Family Values.

When we speak of ancient people who ruled the world and were civilized by the standards of the era, how many know that Ramses, who ruled Eygpt and the Middle East was black. Or Hannibal the 16 year old who conquered the Roman Army was black.

Its time for America to be honest about all this, but it does no service for blacks to make exaggerated claims either, if your black don't give the racist a known lie to point to. You have much as a race of people to be proud of, for one overcoming the adversity of slavery and even worse what happened afterwards.

Blacks had little time to rejoice in their new freedom after the Civil war, dumped into a society full of hatred and fear, with nothing, no property, no education, only hope. Blacks who worked there way North seeking work, found a new enemy and more hatred by white northeners who were loosing their jobs to starving former slaves who would work for a quarter of the white mans wage to to eat.

While white men were gaining wealth and enterprise from Farming land given to them in the form of Land Grants, blacks were held in chains and slavery, nearly all the land other than the first 13 States was handed out in Land grants or made available for nearly nothing more than homesteading the land. HOW many black people were given a land grant. How much wealth is in the hands of those white peoples descendants today from that land through inheritance.

I am not a bleeding heart liberal on the issue of race, but blacks do have some fair and rightful issues that need to be resolved, Reparations is not one of them, but Equal Protection under the law is, and holding one race in chains while handing out free land to others is one of those issues.

I do believe Affirmative action, and a little help or hand out to a black family is a pitilence compared to what we should do as a nation to help black people overcome several hundred years of suppression and racism. In the beginning of all this in America, young black men had no father to learn a trade from, young women were used as breeding stock to produce more slaves, they were not taught morality about sex, they were breeding stock. Have we done anything to repair all this. Yeah , Affirmative Action and a few Food Stamps.

Yes, you need to do more research. Jeffries and Martin are permanent professors, David Duke was not, though I am now aware that racist white professors are not unheard of in universities. (Thanks Eeyore)

Jeffries...a respected professor. Black anti-semites might agree. not many others do. I realize you have no problems teaching fiction as history (except when it is the white male version) that is where we disagree.

A bit more on the "ice people" theory being taught as history. From Henry Louis Gates, Jr (a true black historian) critique.



I realize Artemise has no problems with it being taught that Jews are descended from a pure neanderthal strain. I'm sure Hitler would not have either. Them Jews can be criticized too.

I must say to slim that when I looked up the truths of the story of THeo, I looked for actual patents and didn't delve as far as apparently slim has. So I will say that there are more misrepresentations than I previously thought.

And I agree that an oversimplification is a half-truth is a lie. But I must say that in responding to Hugo's last comment and to reiterate what others have said.

Using (what Hugo has coined) "white lies" is not in an effort to justify "black lies". Many people seem to argue that one wrong is no excuse for another. However, we know that many of the oversimplifications and maybe the half-truths we learned as children were not in any way detrimental to us.

THIS is the reason why people have used the examples of "white lies". Or at least the reason I have. Yeah, maybe the Amer. Revolution wasn't as neat and tidy as we would have hoped. And maybe Edison didn't "create" the lightbulb himself. And - in reference to Theo - maybe the story was truly oversimplified (maybe to some, too much). But can you really say there is no lesson in it all? I mean let's face it, as in depth and informative as it was to us, would a bunch of 9 year olds really want to read Slim's posting before the Little Theo story begun?

You say we need to stop teaching kids oversimplifications and half-truths. Lies. Period. That's all well and good and all, but how many of us would really want that? I would be hard-pressed to keep the TV on and allow my child to watch the cartoon about a land being founded by murderers, rapists, and thieves.

I have not said anything of the kind. You have constantly put words in my mouth and what appears to be purposefully misrepresenting my posts, editing where you see fit, leaving out supporting arguement ( in my own words) which has backed your theory and saying I condone things I have never even heard of. All this on a topic about misrepresentation. And once again white males were never mentioned. If you cannot restrain yourself from inventing half truths which can easily be debunked within the same thread by actually reading what was said, how do you expect others to stick to formal truths and facts?
Doctor heal thyself.

So you do not like having your statements misrepresented? But yet it is no problem that professors in colleges misrepresent history, to the detriment of other racial groups, simply to support a bankrupt ideology.

Yes, what you are doing is arguing with very little knowledge of the subject at hand. There is a difference between "criticizing" zionism, Isreal and the ADL, and the rantings of extreme afrocentrists which make Mein Kampf look like a lesson in tolerance by comparison.

As a student of history I despise misrepresentations, distortions, selective usage of facts and outright lies in the teaching of history. A lie is a lie is a lie and whether it's being told from a Africentric OR Eurocentric viewpoint it is equally odious to me.

I don't give much creedence to Dr. Leonard Jeffries, Dr. Francis Cress Welsing (The Isis Papers) or any other historian who skews things in racially supremacist propaganda. There always have been supremacists among historians, scientists, artists, politicians, theologians and what have you. The trick is not failing to be critically questioning of the pronouncements and pontifications of "experts."

That said, it is a gross exaggeration to the infinite degree by Hugo to equate the "ravings" of Africentric scholars with Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf.
I challenge you Hugo to provide concrete evidence that Jeffries or any Africentric scholar that shares his anti-Semetic sentiments has ever written a treatise on harassment and hatred of Jews as scurrilous as Hitler's screed.

You can dump on Black History Month for its distortions all you like Hugo. I feel the exact same way about the lies told about White History every month in general and American history in particular. I'm not here to debate whose version of history is "correct." I'm far more interested in the history that hews most closely to the TRUTH without the embellishment, white-washing and sugar coating.

Let me quote a reputable black historian, Henry Louis Gates, Jr. from "Black Demogogues and Psuedo-Scholars"

A book popular with some in the “Afrocentric” movement, “The Iceman Inheritance: Prehistoric Sources of Western Man’s Racism, Sexism, and Aggression,” by Michael Bradley, argues that white people are so vicious because they, like the rest of mankind, are descended from the brutish Neanderthals. More to the point, it speculates that the Jews may have been the “‘purest’ and oldest Neanderthal-Caucasoids,” the iciest of the ice people; hence (he explains) the singularly odious character of ancient Jewish culture.

Crackpot as it sounds, the book has lately been reissued with endorsements from two members of the Africana Studies Department of the City College of New York, as well as an introduction by Dr. John Henrik Clarke, professor emeritus of Hunter College and the great paterfamilias of the Afrocentric movement.

Dr. Clarke recently attacked multiculturalism as the product of what he called the “Jewish educational mafia.” And while Dr. Leonard Jeffries’s views on supposed Jewish complicity in the subjection of blacks captured headlines, his intellectual cohorts such as Conrad Muhammad and Khallid Muhammad address community gatherings and college students across the country purveying a similar doctrine. College speakers and publications have played a disturbing role in legitimating the new creed. Last year, U.C.L.A.’s black newspaper, Nommo, defended the importance of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the notorious Czarist canard that portrays a Jewish conspiracy to rule the world. (Those who took issue were rebuked with an article headlined: “Anti-Semitic? Ridiculous -- Chill.”) Speaking at Harvard University earlier this year, Conrad Muhammad, the New York representative of the Nation of Islam, neatly annexed environmentalism to anti-Semitism when he blamed the Jews for despoiling the environment and destroying the ozone layer. (end of quotes)

I don't think Hitler ever accuse Jews as being neanderthals, I guess blaming them for the hole in the ozone level would have required Hitler to have foreknowledge of later events.

Why should we be concerned? From the same article.



I think Gates (and MLK) has made my point.

Hugo,
What started as a post about a childrens story turned into something else. With subsequent posts you injected new people and theories with minmum information and then purported I agreed with these teachings even though I said I needed to do more research.

I never argued sun and ice people because Id never heard of this, nor Martin , Id seen some stuff on Jeffries in relation to Universities and African studies. I did argue the right to have all types of theories discussed in colleges.

I mentioned the ADL because in my opinion they are another group who crys wolf all too often and most of the time I dont take them seriously. You then injected another author (Bradley) and suddenly I was supposed to agree with him also, although I never heard of him and never posted after saying I needed to investigate.

This debating style is particularily twisted, and forces one to defend themselves and not the subject at hand.

You are right about one thing, this debate has gone out of my field of knowledge, and until I have time to find out more I cannot post on the new information, hence I did not.

Well this is interesting!

I find it strange how this debate has shifted from Black History Month and a children's story with misrepresentations and oversimplifications to Afrocentrism and various Afrocentric scholars.

But, if this is where the debate is going...I will happily oblige and follow

First...on Afrocentrism/Afrocentricity. I have never once hear of Jeffries or whomever else Hugo mentioned, nor have I heard of the "ice people" debate. I studied Africana Studies in college for almost 4 years and none of that was discussed in our studies...probably because it's not widely accepted stuff.

Hugo, I must ask...since you seem to enjoy speaking about Afrocentrism...have you read Afrocentricity (Molefi Kete Asante, 1970)? He is pretty much considered the "father" of such Pan-African thought, so I'm curious if you're familiar with his book. If not, I wonder what definition of "Afrocentric" you are using. Asante defines Afrocentricity (as simply as I can make this) as Blacks being represented in history and cultural studies as subjects rather than side-thoughts and some sort of "result" of Europe. It's not about giving Africans credit where credit is not due...it's about looking at things from an African point of view...a little excerpt from an article of his entitled "Afrocentricity: The Theory of Social Change":


(bolded parts for emphasis)

Another scholar of Afrocentrism is Ivan van Sertima. He wrote one of the books that details theories about West Africans traveling to the Americas, entitled They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America. The book is in its 21st printing. I