Posted on 08/25/2019 2:20:04 PM PDT by ProgressingAmerica
There is an interesting line in the 1619 Project that many would have perhaps glossed over because they have heard it so many times. It is this:
The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie. Our Declaration of Independence, approved on July 4, 1776, proclaims that "all men are created equal" and "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights." But the white men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst.
No, no, don't gloss past this. Stop right here. Examine this. Who first made this claim? Refuting this is all too easy, for those adept in when/where the Founders said what. But that's been done. I'm not interested in a defense, let others defend. Who first made this claim? Here's a hint: it wasn't progressives. It wasn't communists nor socialists either.
On July 4th, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was adopted. Just a month later, parliament funded the creation of a rebuttal to the "Declaration of the American Congress". Initially, this rebuttal was published anonymously, but it later was revealed to have been authored by John Lind. However, the An Answer to the Declaration of the American Congress, written late in 1776, became popular in part because of it's other contributing author. Most of you have heard of him.
His name was Jeremy Bentham.
Yup, that very same Jeremy Bentham who would become widely known as the father of utilitarianism. Funny that, no?
Anyways, here is what the British government's funds produced. You should read all 100+ pages, but in particular, my focus is on the response to the very last grievance.
ARTICLE XXVII.
He has excited domestic insurrections among us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.The article now before us consists of two charges, each of which demands a separate and distinct consideration. The one is, that his Majesty— "has excited domestic insurrections among them;" the other— "that he has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of their frontiers the merciless Indian Savages."
By his Majesty, in the first charge, is meant— not his Majesty, but— one of his Majesty's Governors. He, it seems, excited domestic insurrections among them— Be it so— But who are meant by them? Men in rebellion; men who had excited, and were continuing to excite, civil insurrections against his Majesty's government; men who had excited, and were continuing to excite, one set of citizens to pillage the effects, burn the houses, torture the persons, cut the throats of another set of citizens.
But how did his Majesty's Governors excite domestic insurrections? Did they set father against son, or son against father, or brother against brother? No— they offered freedom to the slaves of these assertors of liberty. Were it not true, that the charge was fully justified by the necessity, to which the rebellious proceedings of the Complainants had reduced the Governor, yet with what face can they urge this as a proof of tyranny? Is it for them to say, that it is tyranny to bid a Have be free? to bid him take courage, to rife and assist in reducing his tyrants to a due obedience to law? to hold out as a motive to him, that the load which crushed his limbs shall be lightened ; that the whip which harrowed up his back shall be broken;that he shall be raised to the rank of a freeman and a citizen? It is their boast that they have taken up arms in support of these their own self-evident truths — " that all men are equal" — " that all men are "endowed with the 'unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" Is it for them to complain of the offer of freedom held out to these wretched beings? of the offer of reinstating them in that equality, which, in this very paper, is declared to be the gift of God to all; in those unalienable rights with which, in this very paper, God is declared to have endowed all mankind?
It's a small world after all.
The very same British who just spent years opposing every colonial attempt to abolish slavery and the slave trade up until Independence, now arrogantly takes the high road for what they created. It's utterly laughable.
What's important though, is to notice what the NY Times and this screed from 1776 have in common. They both dance around the bush about the undeniable fact that it was Britain(And Dutch, Spain, etc) who brought these slaves here in the first place. Now many will say "You're just shifting the blame", as if someone wants to level the charge that Ukraine did it. Nobody's "blaming" anybody. Guilt is not a synonym for "blame", and that guilt doesn't go away no matter how much the progressives want to pray for it to stay away.
However, Edmund Burke supported the colonists.
Since the city and state of New York were named after James Stuart, the Duke Of York, an inveterate slave trader, the 1619 New York Times will have to be politically correct, and change it’s name.
How about The Daily Worker ?
“How about The Daily Worker?”
Or
The Daily Proletariat
We are “equally” endowed by the creator with the right to protect ourselves from oppressive entities!!
The NYT soon to become one of those rags at the checkout counter.
Half the states abolished slavery or enacted gradual emancipation.
Half didn’t.
Sounds like a mixed beginning.
At a later time, about one white man per slave gave his life in a war, for whatever reason it began, became a war to free the slaves.
I guess that wasn’t enough.
How ‘bout Truth (”Pravda”) or News (”Izvestia”)?
I know there were a great many casualties in the Civil War - but isn’t that ratio on the high side?
The number of men who died during the Civil War: I include those who died of “camp diseases” (deaths due to the spread of diseases in military camps involving as they did assembleges of men from various places), as does Jeffrey Rogers Hummel.
https://www.amazon.com/Emancipating-Slaves-Enslaving-Free-Men/dp/0812693124
A few months ago, I started posting this little historical exercise about Slavery in pre America:
Slavery was, not yet a reality, even in any British Royal American Colonies by 1619.
1619: The year, the first Endentured Africans, not slaves, were brought to Jamestown, is drilled into students’ memories, but overemphasizing this date distorts history!
Jamestown was not American nor even a British Colony at that time, 1619.
https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/slavery
Before going to the link above, everyone, ask yourself a simple question:
In what year did the former British/American Colonies, become America/the USA and recognized by the world powers as America.
Hint, It was not in 1619.
1783! America’s independence was recognized by Britain in 1783.
The Emancipation Proclamation was in 1863, 80 years after we became a recognized country.
This year,2019, will make freedom from Slavery/1863, for 156 years in America, the USA. Thanks to the The Emancipation Proclamation being declared in 1863.
The US had legal slavery for 80 years! Liberal liars scream “400 years” of slavery, and it is a complete lie.
At this point, blacks in today’s America, have been free for much longer than their ancestors were slaves! (nearly twice as long).
*How many union soldiers died to free the Slaves: - Quora:
https://www.quora.com/How-many-union-soldiers-died
*Approximately 110,000 Union Soldiers died due to battle-related causes during the Civil War. Around 250,000 died of disease. Yes, you were more likely to die of illness later than on the battlefield. The deadliest battle for both sides was the infamous Battle of Gettysburg, totaling more than 50,000 casualties.
At least 360,000 Union soldiers died from battle causes or illnesses linked to their service in the Civil War. More suffered from physical and mental wounds for most of their lives post Civil War.
Women born just before, during and after the Civil War in the battleground states often died in their 20’s to 30’s. My Dad’s mother and one of her sisters died in their late 20’s. Women in their families before and after the civil war lived into their late 70’s to 80’s.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.