Don't mess with Texas on Twitter, Part 2.
Aren't PhD-holding historians supposed to know history? I explore this question with Dr Erik Loomis, a member of the History faculty at the University of Rhode Island.
Last sustained interaction I had with @ErikLoomis was schooling him -- a history PhD! -- on the Texas Revolution. He's regressed since.- Attaboy. RT @ErikLoomis: Continue supporting the white supremacist Texas Revolution!
- Oh, excellent. Let's do this again. RT @ErikLoomis: Texas--the only state to commit treason in defense of slavery twice!
- Let me walk y'all through why @ErikLoomis is mad on being shown an incompetent historian when it comes to the Texas Revolution. This is fun.
- In a nutshell, here's @ErikLoomis's contention: that Texas revolted in 1835-1836 to defend slavery from the Mexicans: bit.ly/QuOUyL
@jstrevino This is going to be hilarious. Keep drinking that historical myth kool aid! Texas--racist in 1836, racist in 2012.- Now here's the reality @ErikLoomis misses: the Mexicans never did anything to seriously threaten slavery in Texas: bit.ly/OJLB3S
- Yes it was! And it was never, ever enforced! Stay tuned, Erik! RT @ErikLoomis: Except make slavery illegal.
- For @ErikLoomis's benefit, let's walk through pre-Revolution tensions and disturbances in Texas, shall we? See how many involve slavery.
- Let's begin, @ErikLoomis w/ the Anahuac Disturbances, which DID involve slaves, but centered about customs collections: bit.ly/QuPHQs
- Let's continue the education of @ErikLoomis w/ the 1832 Battle of Velasco, in which no slaves or slavery was involved: bit.ly/QuPPiS
- Next, @ErikLoomis, we have the 1832 Turtle Bay Resolutions, only one of seven of which was slavery-related: bit.ly/QuQ0L5
- Then, @ErikLoomis, we have the Convention of 1832, in which slavery makes no appearance: bit.ly/QuQ6ST
- The next year, @ErikLoomis, we have the Convention of 1833, which requested a prohibition(!) on the slave trade: bit.ly/QuQctR
- I nearly forgot, @ErikLoomis, the 1832 Battle of Nacogdoches, which also didn't involve slavery at all: bit.ly/QuQnW2
- Of course, @ErikLoomis, the spark that set off the Texas Revolution, at Gonzales, also didn't involve slavery: bit.ly/QuQxg5
- Heck, @ErikLoomis, you can read about the precipitating causes of the Texas Revolution yourself. See slavery in here? bit.ly/QuQCAi
- There is also, for @ErikLoomis's benefit, the actual Texas Declaration of Independence, which fails to mention slavery: bit.ly/afg5Ya
- At this point, @ErikLoomis may wish to contrast these sources with 1860-1861 secession documents, which talk slavery ad nauseum.
- Now, were Texas Anglos racist, @ErikLoomis? Yes they were! The Republic's constitution expelled free blacks without special dispensation.
- But your contention, @ErikLoomis, that this was a primary reason for their rebellion in 1835-1836 is just incompetent history. For shame.
- One also suspects @ErikLoomis is generally ignorant of Mexican peonage, which was not massively better than outright enslavement.
