Good, it’s about time the Ministry of Propaganda got some push back.
This past September, I posted my own analysis of this massive lie about 1619.
The Lies of the New York Times 1619 Project...:
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!
1619: First Africans:
In August 1619 “20 and odd Negroes” arrived on the Dutch Man-of-War ship at Jamestown colony. This is the earliest record of Black people in colonial America. These colonists were freemen and indentured servants. At this time the slave trade between Africa and the English colonies had not yet been established.
Records from 1623 and 1624 listed the African inhabitants of the colony as servants, not slaves. In the case of William Tucker, the first Black person born in the colonies, freedom was his birthright. He was son of “Antony and Isabell”, a married couple from Angola who worked as indentured servants for Captain William Tucker whom he was named after. Yet, court records show that at least one African had been declared a slave by 1640; John Punch. He was an indentured servant who ran away along with two White indentured servants and he was sentenced by the governing council to lifelong servitude. This action is what officially marked the institution of slavery in Jamestown and the future United States.
Jamestown was not an American colony nor even a British Colony at that time, 1619.
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.
It was 1783! Americas 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 todays 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:
*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 20s to 30s. My Dads mother and one of her sisters died in their late 20s. Women in their families before and after the civil war lived into their late 70s to 80s.
Lincoln: The Founders did not make America racist or slaver. They inherited it that way!
PGA Weblog ^
Posted on 9/2/2019, 4:35:14 PM by ProgressingAmerica
Judge Douglas asks you, “Why cannot the institution of slavery, or rather, why cannot the nation, part slave and part free, continue as our fathers made it forever?” In the first place, I insist that our fathers did not make this nation half slave and half free, or part slave and part free. I insist that they found the institution of slavery existing here. They did not make it so, but they left it so because they knew of no way to get rid of it at that time.
When Judge Douglas undertakes to say that, as a matter of choice, the fathers of the Government made this nation part slave and part free, he assumes what is historically a falsehood. More than that: when the fathers of the Government cut off the source of slavery by the abolition of the slave-trade, and adopted a system of restricting it from the new Territories where it had not existed, I maintain that they placed it where they understood, and all sensible men understood, it was in the course of ultimate extinction; and when Judge Douglas asks me why it cannot continue as our fathers made it, I ask him why he and his friends could not let it remain as our fathers made it?
The Founding Fathers could not undo in just a few short years what the King spent over a century doing.
Because of the false teachings of progressivism, it has become one of the greatest of ironies that the “Great Emancipator” was also one of the most ardent defenders of the Founding Fathers - specifically on the topic of slavery.
It’s very much simple minded arrogance on the part of the NYT to do this as part of legitimizing the politically correct worldview at the expense of ignoring all sorts of important and obvious truths.
This sort of thing went on about 170 years ago regarding the John Frankin expedition to find the Northwest Passage. Even though Franklin was completely unsuited for this sort of endeavour (as he nearly died during a previous exploration of the Arctic in the 1820s), his widow Lady Jane Franklin was very influential in London society at the time and with their news media back then. She had them portray him as this tragic hero who likely died at the hands of native savages and refused to ever consider the likelihood that his ships both got caught in ice jams and that he and his crew tried to escape on foot and ending up being lost and even resorting to cannibalism, as what the indigenous peoples there told explorer John Rae and others who went to investigate what possibly happened. All of that to legitimize the idea of the superiority of the white, British, Protestant nation and culture over all others. Basically the same mentality all over again under a different can label.
re writing history
Slavery? We Were a Footnote
Whether out of ignorance, or by attempting to rewrite history in order to carry out an agenda, "Progressive Regressives" often utilize the claim that Thomas Jefferson and other Founders were "slave owners."
When countering that claim, it is well to ask those know-it-all 21st Century "elitists" to consider the historical context within which America's Founders found themselves, as well as the enormous contributions they and their generations made toward eradicating slavery from these shores and creating a constitutional republic which could, ultimately, affirm and protect the rights of ALL people:
Of special interest in that regard is Jefferson's Autobiography, especially that portion which states:
"The first establishment in Virginia which became permanent was made in 1607. I have found no mention of negroes in the colony until about 1650. The first brought here as slaves were by a Dutch ship; after which the English commenced the trade and continued it until the revolutionary war. That suspended...their future importation for the present, and the business of the war pressing constantly on the (Virginia) legislature, this subject was not acted on finally until the year 1778, when I brought a bill to prevent their further importation. This passed without opposition, leaving to future efforts its final eradication."
Jefferson also observed:
"Where the disease [slavery] is most deeply seated, there it will be slowest in eradication. In the northern States, it was merely superficial and easily corrected. In the southern, it is incorporated with the whole system and requires time, patience, and perseverance in the curative process."
He explained that,
"In 1769, I became a member of the legislature by the choice of the county in which I live [Albemarle County, Virginia], and so continued until it was closed by the Revolution. I made one effort in that body for the permission of the emancipation of slaves, which was rejected: and indeed, during the regal [crown] government, nothing [like this] could expect success."Below is another quotation, cited in David Barton's work on the subject of the Founders and slavery, which also cites the fact that there were laws in the State of Virginia which prevented citizens from emancipating slaves:
"The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this and learn to imitate it; for man is an imitative animal. This quality is the germ of all education in him. From his cradle to his grave he is learning to do what he sees others do. If a parent could find no motive either in his philanthropy or his self-love for restraining the intemperance of passion towards his slave, it should always be a sufficient one that his child is present. But generally it is not sufficient. . . . The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such circumstances. And with what execration should the statesman be loaded who permits one half the citizens thus to trample on the rights of the other. . . . And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep for ever. . . . The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest. . . . [T]he way, I hone [is] preparing under the auspices of Heaven for a total emancipation."A visit to David Bartons web site (www.wallbuilders.com) provides an essential, excellent and factual written record of the Founders' views on the matter of slavery. One source he does not quote, I believe, is the famous 1775 Edmund Burke "Speech on Conciliation" before the British Parliament, wherein he admonished the Parliament for its Proposal to declare a general enfranchisement of the slaves in America.
Burke rather sarcastically observed that should the Parliament carry through with the Proposal before it: "Slaves as these unfortunate black people are, and dull as all men are from slavery, must they not a little suspect the offer of freedom from that very nation (England) which has sold them to their present masters? from that nation, one of whose causes of quarrel with those masters is their refusal to deal any more in that inhuman traffic?"
He continued: "An offer of freedom from England would come rather oddly, shipped to them in an African vessel, which is refused an entry into the ports of Virginia or Carolina, with a cargo of three hundred Angola negroes. It would be curious to see the Guinea captain attempting at the same instant to publish his proclamation of liberty and to advertise his sale of slaves." Ahhh, how knowledge of the facts can alter one's opinion of the revisionist history that has been taught for generations in American schools (including its so-called "law schools"!!)
Human beings are allotted ONLY A TINY SLIVER OF TIME ON THIS EARTH. (Pardon shouting) Each finds the world and his/her own community/nation existing as it is.
If lawyers and judges cared enough to educate themselves (in this day of the Internet) on the history of civilization and America's real history, and if they used that knowledge and the resulting understanding, to do as much on behalf of liberty for ALL people as did Thomas Jefferson and America's other Founders, the world in the next century would be a better place.
Remember: Thomas Jefferson was only 33 years old when he penned our Declaration of Independence which capsulized a truly revolutionary idea into a simple statement that survives to this day to inspire people all over the world to strive for liberty!
The Declaration of Independence is in our DNA.
It did not outright abolish slavery at the time but from that moment on it made it problematic and led to its ultimate abolishment.
Nothing regarding history today is taught in context.
What should be celebrated about 1619 is the creation of the Virginia House of Burgesses...the first example of self-government in the Western Hemisphere. The experience of self-government is what set the English colonies apart from the Spanish, French, Dutch and Portuguese colonies in the Americas and is why the Founding Fathers were able to establish the United States with representative government. When the Spanish colonies won their independence, they lacked that experience and their subsequent history was much less happy.
The changing map below shows the states with slavery and those without from 1789 evolving to 1861!
The changing map below shows the states with slavery and those without from 1789 evolving to 1861!
How very Stalinist of the NY Times. History is a lot more complex then modern Democrat Fascist Party ideologues can deal with so they trying to re-write it to fit their political bigotry.
Thanks for the ping.
One thing I noticed immediately that I haven’t seen anybody else discuss: Did you notice that this interview was on wsws.org? The World Socialist Web Site? That in/of itself is somewhat shocking.
Mainly, I am happy to see some historians speaking out. I wish there were more of them. In the end, it’s not enough of them. Progressives have been doing damage to our history for over a century, it’s time to push back with or without the historians’ help.