Seems the suggestion is it was just so hard before the invention of the cotton gin and ever so much easier after its invention - for the slaves. (That's teaching empathy? Damn.)
Because, you know, those slaves caught a break (or something). (Damn)
Which neglects the facts - there was nothing that made life for the slave easier - they were slaves. Freedom brought relief, not the freaking cotton gin.
and
the invention of the cotton gin increased the number of slaves imported and sold because even the not-so-wealthy cotton farmers could produce more cotton, thereby needing more slaves, and slavery expanded into non-slave states (at the time) due to increase in, and start-up of, cotton production in those states.
An increase in the number of people exported and sold as slaves is not a good thing. It is not a measure for teaching empathy.
Yes, pulling the cotton fibers from the cotton seed by hand is hard work - but the cotton gin in no way made life easier for the slaves.
To pretend the slaves somehow had it better because of the cotton gin is to pretend that one tiny, insignificant invention (as it relates to the realities of being a slave) changed the lives of slaves for the better - it didn't.
It made the lives of the slave owners better - by making them wealthier, so they could buy and sell more slaves.
Students getting the idea that the invention of the cotton gin somehow improved the life of a slave is not something that should be taught, suggested, or even hinted at, because it's just plain bullshit.
So, no, bringing a cotton boll to school in hopes of showing children how hard it was on slaves to separate the fiber from the seed by hand prior to the invention of the cotton gin does NOT teach empathy.
It boosted the economy of the slave-owning states and created greater wealth for slave owners, but it did not improve anything for the slaves.
It was a piss poor lesson and the very fact that anyone thinks it was a lesson in empathy proves that.
= new reply since forum marked as read