Posted on 02/07/2020 6:12:19 AM PST by Enlightened1
The New York Times’ 1619 Project — a curriculum that makes the fantastical claim that a primary cause of the Revolutionary War was the colonists’ desire to protect slavery — has been adopted in 3,500 classrooms across all 50 states.
For this reason, some of the nation’s most renowned historians have called for The Times to correct this and other factual errors.
The Pulitzer Center, which is partnering with The Times to promote The 1619 Project, recounted in its 2019 annual report, “Good journalism, innovative educational resources, and deep community engagement are absolutely essential to bridging the divisions that threaten to rip our democracy apart. It is this belief that has driven the Pulitzer Center for the last 14 years.”
Nikole Hannah-Jones, The Times’ lead writer on the project, argued in her introductory essay to it, “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.”
Hannah-Jones went on to contend “that the year 1619 is as important to the American story as 1776.”
That was the year, she explained, that British colonists in Jamestown purchased 20 to 30 enslaved Africans.
“Conveniently left out of our founding mythology is the fact that one of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery,” Hannah-Jones wrote.
The reporter is honest enough to admit that slavery in America predated the nation’s founding by over 150 years.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournal.com ...
The reporter is honest enough to admit that slavery in America predated the nation’s founding by over 150 years.
——-
It was here long before that, and at an industrial level. Millennia, at least.
What does truth have to do with it? If the propaganda apparatus declares that your side fought a war to advance slavery, then that's just the way things are, right?
Now you have a little taste of the sort of crap that has been spread about the Southerners for the last 159 years. How do you like it?
I don’t get worked up about it any more than I do your revisionist crap - because it’s revisionist crap.
Massachusetts was a slave state at the time, and would continue being one for many years after 1773. Sure, some of the people didn't care about it, but the slaveowners in Massachusetts probably did.
When Massachusetts outlawed slavery through a blatantly dishonest judicial trick, most of those slave owners simply took their slaves across the border and sold them to other people.
But the Liberals felt good about themselves, and that's what matters, isn't it?
The native american population also practiced slavery almost across the board. Seems like academics turn a blind eye to those non black slaves.
Same revisionist crap about the revolution as the Civil War. People making the claim that it was all about slavery and completely ignoring the evidence that it was about independence.
And your side is responsible for the revisionist crap. This is just a case of your side getting some of its own medicine.
Where is Betsy DeVos? What does she do?
The educational establishment is run by hate-America leftists. They control the minds of our children.
Exactly. The Spanish found slavery to be endemic in the new world.
Cannibalism was common, especially in meso-America.
Sorry, the error of those promoting the 1619 Project casts no light on the causes of the American Civil War. And on that subject, you’re still full of BS, and as big a propagandist as those twits.
No it was about taxes. No taxation without representation.
And they was sick and tired of tyranny.
This is as much of a distortion of history as you lost causers claiming the south didn’t rebel to protect slavery. You must be very proud that your using the same tactics the left is using.
Well let’s do a little comparison. Here’s the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence;
“WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security. Such has been the patient Sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the Necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The History of the present King of Great-Britain is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid World.”
Now here’s the second paragraph of Mississippi declaration of secession.
“Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery— the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.”
Even someone as dense as you can see the difference. Or maybe not.
“Note, Capitalism is not in the list? It is not a form of government, it is a method of economic exchange.”
Oh but it is taught as one. Good list!
Your absolutely right. The assertion that our revolution was to protect slavery is not supported by the writings and speeches of our founding fathers. The founding fathers didn’t start slavery in America, they found it here.
Thomas Jefferson, and most of the founding fathers, realized slavery was incompatible with our declarations founding ideology, “all men are created equal...”. They expressed many times in their writings that they wanted to see slavery end and some even joined abolitionist organizations.
The father of our nation himself said this;
“I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of slavery.”
George Washington letter to Robert Morris 12 April 1786
Why doesn’t she go to Wuhan to promote racial healing there?
Send her an email about this..?
The propaganda is the cherry picking of data that shows what you want it to show, and ignoring the rest, like the fact that most of the States did not make such a statement.
You've only got three states out of 11 that made these explicitly "it's all about slavery" statements, and how many of them consulted the farmers that would be taking up their guns to defend their homeland?
You also ignore the fact that Lincoln's support of the Corwin amendment translates in modern terms to "If you like your slavery, you can keep your slavery."
Cherry picking to support a narrative. That's what's going on here.
Taxes with representation isn't much better when you are in the minority. Opposing increases in taxes does you no good when the Majority votes to increase them.
Claiming that slavery needed to be "protected" from the Union is the distortion. Not only was slavery protected by the US Constitution in Article IV, section 2, so too did Lincoln and his allies attempt to pass a constitutional amendment protecting it even further.
You may have missed it, but slavery was legal in the Union, and would have continued to be legal indefinitely if no efforts to leave had been made.
Therefore, it wasn't about slavery, it was about leaving.
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.