UNC System News: Foundations of American Democracy

[donbosco]

I put the over/under of the number of the "Federalist Papers" that the average NC state legislator has read at 1.5

yep

 

[superrific]

I put the over/under of the number of the "Federalist Papers" that the average NC state legislator has read at 1.5

I'll take the under on that easily.

The better question: how many of them could describe what the federalist papers are.

 

[lawtig02]

I have a hunch they just threw in MLK's Letter from a Birmingham Jail to avoid charges that it is focused otherwise entirely on white men. Not much diversity in those "Foundational" Documents, which is no doubt the point.

It would never happen, but the revised version of The 1619 Project is really an extraordinary work of cultural history. 99% of the critique was of a few sentences in the initial version, which the authors have now addressed to ensure accuracy. I've read it three times now and I'm amazed by (1) the quality of the writing and analysis, and (2) the lack of overt partisanship. It's not a "foundational" work, of course, but people who buy into the demagoguery of it are really missing out.

 

[Mulberry Heel]

It would never happen, but the revised version of The 1619 Project is really an extraordinary work of cultural history. 99% of the critique was of a few sentences in the initial version, which the authors have now addressed to ensure accuracy. I've read it three times now and I'm amazed by (1) the quality of the writing and analysis, and (2) the lack of overt partisanship. It's not a "foundational" work, of course, but people who buy into the demagoguery of it are really missing out.

No doubt, but MAGA Republicans would probably rather die than allow the 1619 Project to be used in any educational institution they control, which includes every public school and university in NC.

 

[donbosco]

It would never happen, but the revised version of The 1619 Project is really an extraordinary work of cultural history. 99% of the critique was of a few sentences in the initial version, which the authors have now addressed to ensure accuracy. I've read it three times now and I'm amazed by (1) the quality of the writing and analysis, and (2) the lack of overt partisanship. It's not a "foundational" work, of course, but people who buy into the demagoguery of it are really missing out.

I agree on the quality of the work...except...to assert that there were no enslaved Africans in the territory that would become the United States until 1619 is just wrong. To be sure, 1619 is a "foundational historical date" as Nikole Hannah-Jones asserts, but enslaved Africans had journeyed alongside Spaniards in the lands that would become the United States at least 50 years prior (St. Augustine was founded in 1565 -- The Spanish Captain Explorer Juan Pardo took an expedition into NC as far as Joara, in modern Burke County in 1567 and enslaved Africans were part of that party.