3 ms·

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 harv

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?
- consumer451 3y ago
  > It seems strange to me that my Texas education taught more about slavery than a New England state. Me too! As I grow older, so many of my early supposistions have been proven wrong. Regarding WWII, this has been one of the most interesting threads on HN which I have participated in. For a further example of "it's more complicated than we are taught in school" see my crazy comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40089205 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40089205
- dabbledash 3y ago
  You probably spent a lot more time on the details of TX history than they did in Mass
  - dylan604 3y ago
    But don't you think it would be the Texans white washing the slavery aspect than the northern states? That's my point of confusion.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]

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?

consumer451 3y ago
> It seems strange to me that my Texas education taught more about slavery than a New England state. Me too! As I grow older, so many of my early supposistions have been proven wrong. Regarding WWII, this has been one of the most interesting threads on HN which I have participated in. For a further example of "it's more complicated than we are taught in school" see my crazy comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40089205 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40089205
dabbledash 3y ago
You probably spent a lot more time on the details of TX history than they did in Mass
- dylan604 3y ago
  But don't you think it would be the Texans white washing the slavery aspect than the northern states? That's my point of confusion.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]