separate but equal- comment

[fafro24]

Hallo an alle
würde gern meine Hausaufgaben nächste Woche abgeben, könntet ihr mein Kommentar kurz korrektur lesen?
Vielen vielen Dank

"

Segregation in the U.S.A.: Jim Crow Laws

-Consider the Jim Crow Laws to comment on this phrase and the reasoning behind it-

“separate but equal”

“Separate but equal”, this is a contradiction. These three words were part of the Constitutional law that justified segregation in the United States, which was a problem in the United States up to the 1960s. With the Jim Crow Laws in 1876 Segregation really came to the climax. Black people were separated from white people and the other way around e.g. Black people were not allowed to marry white people, black people were not allowed to attend colleges, where white people were educated. Segregation was a big problem and the people were not threaten “separate but equal”, this is not possible.

Everyone who now lives in the U.S.A. has the same rights, this was not all the time like today. In the 19^th an 20^th century Segregation was a big problem in the United States. Black people were segregated from white people. Black people were not allowed to marry white people and the other way around, black people were not allowed to rent or buy a house, which was occupied by white people, black youths were not allowed to attend colleges, which were attended by white pupils.

The fact is that nobody can be threaten “separate but equal”. And as we saw in the past that did not work. Black people were really disadvantaged, they had less rights than the white population of America. So the quote “separate but equal” contradiction.

In my point of view this was not a democratic policy although the Declaration of Independence says that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights […]”. If everybody is created equal, why is not everybody threaten equal?

I want to emphasize that black people were not threaten equal and that it must have been really hard for them to live in the United States of America under that circumstances.

And I think it is really hard to imagine what happened in the U.S. because we live in a democratic country, where everybody has the same rights and everybody is threaten equal. Although that is not a long time ago only 50 years when the Civil Rights Movement started.

I hope that something like that will never happen again."

[Duckduck (Contributor)]

Hallo an alle
würde gern meine Hausaufgaben nächste Woche abgeben, könntet ihr mein Kommentar kurz korrektur lesen?
Vielen vielen Dank

Hallo fafro24! Ich habe Deinen Kommentar nun gelesen und möchte Dir ein paar Anmerkungen schicken, bevor ich ihn korrigiere.
Bitte schaue ihn noch einmal selber aufmerksam durch. Du wirst bemerken, dass Du Dich des Öfteren wiederholst. Das macht sich bei einem recht kurzen Kommentar gar nicht gut. Ich kennzeichne Dir die Stellen mal grün, OK?!
Außerdem hast Du einen entscheidenden Wortfehler, Du willst sagen "behandeln" aber schreibst "bedrohen". Da habe ich eine Weile dran geknabbert. Also schaue auch das noch einmal an.

Vielleicht möchtest Du auch noch mit einem Satz darauf eingehen, was der Ausdruck Jim Crow bedeutete und für was er stand (schau mal bei Wikipedia), wie die Schwarzen nach Amerika gekommen waren, wann und wie sie befreit wurden und dass sie auch viele Jahre später noch brutal unterdrückt und diskriminiert wurden. Und vielleicht auch noch einen Hinweis darauf, warum viele Weiße meinten, das Recht zu haben, Schwarze zu töten und zu quälen.

Dann kann korrigiert werden, ja?!

Grüße
Duckduck

"

Segregation in the U.S.A.: Jim Crow Laws

-Consider the Jim Crow Laws to comment on this phrase and the reasoning behind it-

“separate but equal”

“Separate but equal”, this is a contradiction. These three words were part of the Constitutional law that justified segregation in the United States, which was a problem in the United States up to the 1960s. With the Jim Crow Laws in 1876 Segregation really came to the climax. Black people were separated from white people and the other way around e.g. Black people were not allowed to marry white people, black people were not allowed to attend colleges, where white people were educated. Segregation was a big problem and the people were not threaten “separate but equal”, this is not possible.

Everyone who now lives in the U.S.A. has the same rights, this was not all the time like today. In the 19^th an 20^th century Segregation was a big problem in the United States. Black people were segregated from white people. Black people were not allowed to marry white people and the other way around, black people were not allowed to rent or buy a house, which was occupied by white people, black youths were not allowed to attend colleges, which were attended by white pupils.

The fact is that nobody can be threaten “separate but equal”. And as we saw in the past that did not work. Black people were really disadvantaged, they had less rights than the white population of America. So the quote “separate but equal” contradiction.

In my point of view this was not a democratic policy although the Declaration of Independence says that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights […]”. If everybody is created equal, why is not everybody threaten equal?

I want to emphasize that black people were not threaten equal and that it must have been really hard for them to live in the United States of America under that circumstances.

And I think it is really hard to imagine what happened in the U.S. because we live in a democratic country, where everybody has the same rights and everybody is threaten equal. Although that is not a long time ago only 50 years when the Civil Rights Movement started.

I hope that something like that will never happen again."

[fafro24]

Vielen Dank für die Vorschläge, habs jetzt nochmal überarbeitet !

Segregation in the U.S.A.: Jim Crow Laws

-Consider the Jim Crow Laws to comment on this phrase and the reasoning behind it-

“separate but equal”

“Separate but equal”, this is a contradiction. These three words were part of the Constitutional law that justified segregation in the United States, which was a problem in the United States up to the 1960s. With the Jim Crow Laws in 1876 Segregation really came to the climax. These laws instruct the Segregation of the white and the black population.

African Americans

were separated from Caucasians and the other way around e.g. the black population was not allowed to marry a white person, to attend colleges, where white people were educated. Segregation was a big problem and the people were not treated “separate but equal”, this is not possible.

Everyone who now lives in the U.S.A. has the same rights, this was not all the time like today.

The fact is that nobody can be treated “separate but equal”. And as we saw in the past that did not work. Black people were really disadvantaged, they had less rights than the white population of America. So the quote “separate but equal” is a contradiction.

In my point of view this was not a democratic policy although the Declaration of Independence says that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights […]”. If everybody is created equal, why is not everybody threaten equal?

I want to emphasize that black people were not threaten equal and that it must have been really hard for them to live in the United States of America under that circumstances.

And I think it is really hard to imagine what happened in the U.S. because we live in a democratic country, where everybody has the same rights and everybody is threaten equal. Although that is not a long time ago only 50 years when the Civil Rights Movement started.

The start of the end of Segregation was in 1955 when Rosa Park did not want to give her seat in a bus to a white person, so she was arrested. In 1964 the Apartheid ended with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which said that Segregation is not allowed in public places.

I hope that something like that will never happen again.

[Duckduck (Contributor)]

Vielen Dank für die Vorschläge, habs jetzt nochmal überarbeitet ! Ja fafro, das sehe ich, aber leider nur den Anfang. Die "treat"-"threaten" Verwirrung kommt aber noch einige Male unten vor. Außerdem, bitte nimm es mir nicht übel, fehlt inhaltlich wirklich noch etwas. Ich könnte es einfach einbauen, aber es ist ja Deine Aufgabe. Ich gebe Dir einen Tipp und Du guckst insgesamt noch einmal drüber, ja:

Die Phrase "seperate but equal" sollte - gesetzlich festgelegt - bedeuten, dass Weiße und Schwarze zwar streng getrennte, aber doch qualitativ vergleichbare öffentliche Einrichtungen benutzen sollten. Die Wirklichkeit aber sah ganz anders aus. Es kam zu einer furchtbaren Ausgrenzung und gleichzeitig waren alle Einrichtungen der Schwarzen unterfinanziert; um von rassistisch motivierten Verfolgungen gar nicht zu reden!
Und erst, wenn Du das ausführst, wird deutlich, warum historisch gesehen die Phrase einen Widerspruch in sich selbst darstellt.
Unten führst Du den Begriff "Apartheid" ein, der gehört ja nun eher nach Südafrika, wenn inhaltlich auch eng verwandt mit der Rassentrennung in den USA. Aber ein Hinweis darauf wäre auch nicht falsch.

Segregation in the U.S.A.: Jim Crow Laws

-Consider the Jim Crow Laws to comment on this phrase and the reasoning behind it-

“separate but equal”

“Separate but equal”, this is a contradiction. These three words were part of the Constitutional law that justified segregation in the United States, which was a problem in the United States up to the 1960s. With the Jim Crow Laws in 1876 Segregation really came to the climax. These laws instruct the Segregation of the white and the black population.

African Americans

were separated from Caucasians and the other way around e.g. the black population was not allowed to marry a white person, to attend colleges, where white people were educated. Segregation was a big problem and the people were not treated “separate but equal”, this is not possible.

Everyone who now lives in the U.S.A. has the same rights, this was not all the time like today.

The fact is that nobody can be treated “separate but equal”. Siehst Du, hier fehlt die obige Ausführung. Denn theoretisch könnte man ja zwei Gruppen zwar trennen, aber ihnen die genau gleiche Lebensqualität bieten. Dann ginge die Phrase OK (nicht, dass ich eine solche Politik jemals befürworten würde). Dass es in den USA nicht geklappt hat, lag ja daran, dass die Weißen, die die Macht hatten, Schwarze für schlechtere Menschen hielten und sie eben viel schlechter ausstatteten und benachteiligten. And as we saw in the past that did not work. Black people were really disadvantaged, they had less rights than the white population of America. So the quote “separate but equal” is a contradiction.

In my point of view this was not a democratic policy (Zumal die Schwarzen faktisch kein Wahlrecht hatten, d.h., ihnen wurde bis in das 20. Jh. hinein die Teilnahme an den Wahlen fast unmöglich gemacht.) although the Declaration of Independence says that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights […]”. If everybody is created equal, why is not everybody threaten equal?

I want to emphasize that black people were not threaten equal and that it must have been really hard for them to live in the United States of America under that circumstances.

And I think it is really hard to imagine what happened in the U.S. because we live in a democratic country, where everybody has the same rights and everybody is threaten equal. Although that is not a long time ago only 50 years when the Civil Rights Movement started.

The start of the end of Segregation was in 1955 when Rosa Park did not want to give her seat in a bus to a white person, so she was arrested. In 1964 the Apartheid ended with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which said that Segregation is not allowed in public places.

I hope that something like that will never happen again.

Du hast ja noch ein bisschen Zeit, nicht?
Lies Dir bitte die Seiten noch einmal durch und denke etwas nach. Wenn Du schon eine HA abgibst, kann die ja auch gleich gut sein, oder?

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%BCrgerrechtsbewegung
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plessy_v._Ferguson
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rassentrennung

Wirklich freundliche Grüße
Duckduck

[Duckduck (Contributor)]

So fafro, Du hast ja offenbar sowieso nicht wieder reingeguckt, aber ich möchte doch ein weiteres Mal darauf hinweisen, dass CROSS POSTING IN DIESEM FORUM NICHT GESTATTET IST!!!

Wenn wir Euren Beitrag auch in einem anderen Forum sehen, werden wir ihn hier nicht korrigieren. Das sind die Regeln dieses Forums. Bitte haltet Euch daran! Dazu auch noch einmal die Worte des Chefs:

ftopic6356.html?hilit=cross%20posting

Duckduck