7 ms·

A Texan YouTuber once mentioned offhandedly that his history teacher father had taught him that the The Alamo was largely about slavery. This blew my Yankee-edu

A Texan YouTuber once mentioned offhandedly that his history teacher father had taught him that the The Alamo was largely about slavery. This blew my Yankee-educated mind. When I looked to research it more I found this piece, also from Texas Monthly, about that year's winner of "The Texas Historical Commission’s annual prize for the best work of Texas history." > Forget the Alamo https://www.texasmonthly.com/being-texan/forget-the-alamo/ https://www.texasmonthly.com/being-texan/forget-the-alamo/

theultdev 3y ago
[flagged]
- actionfromafar 3y ago
  Remember Joe Travis!
  - consumer451 3y ago
    Wow, thanks for making me search his name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Travis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Travis
- consumer451 3y ago
  Are you claiming that slavery had nothing to do with it? > The revolution began in October 1835, after a decade of political and cultural clashes between the Mexican government and the increasingly large population of Anglo-American settlers in Texas. The Mexican government had become increasingly centralized and the rights of its citizens had become increasingly curtailed, particularly regarding immigration from the United States. Mexico had officially abolished slavery in Texas in 1829, and the desire of Anglo Texans to maintain the institution of chattel slavery in Texas was also a major cause of secession. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution
  - theultdev 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - AlecSchueler 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - rayiner 3y ago
        [flagged]
        AlecSchueler 3y ago
        Don't know what that is but I was only teasing.
        theultdev 3y ago
        [flagged]
        boston_clone 3y ago
        Here's a link to the general provisions of the Texas Constitution from 1836. https://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/republic-texas-1836/general-provisions https://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/republic-texas-...
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        AlecSchueler 3y ago
        No trolling, just some light teasing. I found it disturbing that you were repeatedly accusing this publication of 'race baiting" with no real basis. We all need to recognise the gravity of the history of slavery and the continuing social stratification that its legacy is causing around the world. I think it's dangerous to make accusations like you have done here. I asked you several times to clarify what you were saying and only received vague spiels about the Spanish language somehow ensuring that English derivations must be free of racist connotations. This left me a little exasperated and I felt that a bit of light banter would highlight some of the vacuuity of the accusations I was reading. Totally fine if you think they've made a factual error but the accusation of race bait is a serious one and only serves to undermine any chance of such conversations being held with civility. Not everyone who says things you disagree with are trolling or baiting or acting with insiduous agendas.
SonOfLilit 3y ago
https://archive.is/3RDpO https://archive.is/3RDpO
dustincoates 3y ago
Eh, like many things, there were a lot of causes for The Texas Revolution, and, by extension, The Battle of the Alamo. It's pretty reductive, and from a 21st century POV, to say that it was about slavery first and foremost. There was a lot of unrest in Mexico around this time (Texas wasn't the only breakaway region), there were plenty of American settlers who didn't integrate with the Mexican culture (although there were plenty that did, and plenty Texians who fought for independence as well), and there was a significant geographical distance between Mexico City and the settlers. Slavery was a motivation for some, that is undeniable. But like much, it's more complicated than that.
- consumer451 3y ago
  I agree that there were many factors, and I didn't say the Alamo was all about slavery, but apparently a large component. Losing the ability to profitably harvest cotton was a major factor, according to this winner of that Texan historical prize. Learning history as kid in Massachusetts, the fact that slavery was any part of the Texas Revolution was never mentioned. > Texas Convention of 1836 > ... It also explicitly legalized slavery... [0] Somehow we were never taught any of that. But I get it, it's nicer to wrap up history in a nice bow when teaching children. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution
  - dylan604 3y ago
    >Learning history as kid in Massachusetts, the fact that slavery was any part of the Texas Revolution was never mentioned. That leads me to wonder what were you taught. It seems strange to me that my Texas education taught more about slavery than a New England state. How could slavery be left out like that. History classes for me were a long time ago, and there are definitely things I have to ask myself if they were not really taught, or I just didn't learn/retain/care when they were taught. For example, my recollection of WWII history classes was heavily focused on the European campaign while the Pacific campaign was much more limited. Is that bias on what I paid attention to, or was that how it was actually taught?
    - 3y ago
ZeroGravitas 3y ago
I now have to totally revaluate my beliefs about the historical moment in 1982 when Ozzy Osborne got arrested for pissing on the Alamo Cenotaph while wearing his wife's dress.

theultdev 3y ago

[flagged]

actionfromafar 3y ago
Remember Joe Travis!
- consumer451 3y ago
  Wow, thanks for making me search his name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Travis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Travis
consumer451 3y ago
Are you claiming that slavery had nothing to do with it? > The revolution began in October 1835, after a decade of political and cultural clashes between the Mexican government and the increasingly large population of Anglo-American settlers in Texas. The Mexican government had become increasingly centralized and the rights of its citizens had become increasingly curtailed, particularly regarding immigration from the United States. Mexico had officially abolished slavery in Texas in 1829, and the desire of Anglo Texans to maintain the institution of chattel slavery in Texas was also a major cause of secession. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution
- theultdev 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - AlecSchueler 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - rayiner 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - AlecSchueler 3y ago
        Don't know what that is but I was only teasing.
        theultdev 3y ago
        [flagged]
        boston_clone 3y ago
        Here's a link to the general provisions of the Texas Constitution from 1836. https://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/republic-texas-1836/general-provisions https://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/republic-texas-...
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        AlecSchueler 3y ago
        No trolling, just some light teasing. I found it disturbing that you were repeatedly accusing this publication of 'race baiting" with no real basis. We all need to recognise the gravity of the history of slavery and the continuing social stratification that its legacy is causing around the world. I think it's dangerous to make accusations like you have done here. I asked you several times to clarify what you were saying and only received vague spiels about the Spanish language somehow ensuring that English derivations must be free of racist connotations. This left me a little exasperated and I felt that a bit of light banter would highlight some of the vacuuity of the accusations I was reading. Totally fine if you think they've made a factual error but the accusation of race bait is a serious one and only serves to undermine any chance of such conversations being held with civility. Not everyone who says things you disagree with are trolling or baiting or acting with insiduous agendas.

SonOfLilit 3y ago

https://archive.is/3RDpO https://archive.is/3RDpO

dustincoates 3y ago

Eh, like many things, there were a lot of causes for The Texas Revolution, and, by extension, The Battle of the Alamo. It's pretty reductive, and from a 21st century POV, to say that it was about slavery first and foremost. There was a lot of unrest in Mexico around this time (Texas wasn't the only breakaway region), there were plenty of American settlers who didn't integrate with the Mexican culture (although there were plenty that did, and plenty Texians who fought for independence as well), and there was a significant geographical distance between Mexico City and the settlers. Slavery was a motivation for some, that is undeniable. But like much, it's more complicated than that.

consumer451 3y ago
I agree that there were many factors, and I didn't say the Alamo was all about slavery, but apparently a large component. Losing the ability to profitably harvest cotton was a major factor, according to this winner of that Texan historical prize. Learning history as kid in Massachusetts, the fact that slavery was any part of the Texas Revolution was never mentioned. > Texas Convention of 1836 > ... It also explicitly legalized slavery... [0] Somehow we were never taught any of that. But I get it, it's nicer to wrap up history in a nice bow when teaching children. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution
- dylan604 3y ago
  >Learning history as kid in Massachusetts, the fact that slavery was any part of the Texas Revolution was never mentioned. That leads me to wonder what were you taught. It seems strange to me that my Texas education taught more about slavery than a New England state. How could slavery be left out like that. History classes for me were a long time ago, and there are definitely things I have to ask myself if they were not really taught, or I just didn't learn/retain/care when they were taught. For example, my recollection of WWII history classes was heavily focused on the European campaign while the Pacific campaign was much more limited. Is that bias on what I paid attention to, or was that how it was actually taught?
  - 3y ago

ZeroGravitas 3y ago

I now have to totally revaluate my beliefs about the historical moment in 1982 when Ozzy Osborne got arrested for pissing on the Alamo Cenotaph while wearing his wife's dress.