I’ve never even talked about or defended the ludicrous claims of the 1619 Project, so I don’t know even know why you’re bringing it up to me as a point of criticism.
But you pinged me to this thread (and I certainly don’t recall ever requesting that I be added to any American history ping list of yours), when our only prior interaction had been on another thread related to the history of slavery and abolition in America.
Nonetheless, claims about slavery in America being a British institution (as compared to a global one that had existed for time immemorial) are as ridiculous as those who claim that slavery is America’s original sin.
There existed abolition movements in both the colonies and in Great Britain. It just so happens that the British succeeded in abolishing it before America did.
There also existed Americans who, after independence was declared, were unwilling to manumit their slaves, and would not do so until forced to as a result of the Civil War.
So blaming the British for the obstinacy of American slaveholders, decades after independence was declared, rings hollow.
But that’s just me.
"I’ve never even talked about or defended the ludicrous claims of the 1619 Project, so I don’t know even know why you’re bringing it up to me as a point of criticism."
See post 1. - ("original post", if you prefer this phrase. IOW, scroll to the top. It's there.)
"you pinged me to this thread (and I certainly don’t recall ever requesting that I be added to any American history ping list of yours), when our only prior interaction had been on another thread related to the history of slavery and abolition in America."
I did which makes it on topic. You're not on the big ping list, it was a separate ping. Our prior conversation was unresolved by continued CW muck. The callous minimization of American abolitionism and the deeds of our Founding Fathers is a dark deception cooked up by progressive academics. I'm showing what they have omitted and one way how to get information out efficiently - this is how progressives fool people is that they hide inconvenient things. Now it's on YouTube.
"claims about slavery in America being a British institution (as compared to a global one that had existed for time immemorial) are as ridiculous"
They are not any more ridiculous than claims of slavery in the Caribbean. Somehow hard left wing historians have found success in convincing people that "American slavery" is somehow deeply unique and distinct, when every aspect appeared elsewhere in the Americas - all of which under European control prior to 1776. One of the most famous of these claims - the so called "Black Codes" - first appeared in Barbados! They were imported from the islands. Do you have the willingness to admit that? Somehow that too gets blamed on the U.S. Am I too zealous in favor of the U.S.? Absolutely. That's a feature, it's not a bug in the program.
At the end of the day, it wasn't the globe who controlled the Caribbean. It wasn't the globe who controlled the 13 colonies. This should not be difficult for you to grasp. It was controlled by the British Empire. Ergo, they are the topic. Simple! Yes.
"There existed abolition movements in both the colonies and in Great Britain."
No. Absolutely not. The timeline could not be more clear as to whom was first and whom was second. This is absolutely non-negotiable. I have a feeling you'll insist on ignoring The Timeline. So, The Timeline. America was first and deserves credit for it. The empire tried to stop us, which is the whole point, and they likewise deserve (dis)credit all the same for their recorded and provable misdeeds.
Oh, and in case you forgot, I didn't. The Timeline.
You are actively minimizing American abolitionism. That is why I pinged you and the rest here. By purposefully distorting the timeline and the historical record, you are, yes, you are, minimizing American abolitionism. It was in fact the first of its kind during the transatlantic period. The entire world would look different had the empire allowed American abolitionists to do their jobs unfettered.
"There also existed Americans who, after independence was declared, were unwilling to manumit their slaves, and would not do so until forced to as a result of the Civil War."
That's fine. What happened afterward is irrelevant. I don't care about you and your little group's Civil War navel gazing.
It was the progressives who so eagerly brought up 1619, and we could be and should be aggressively ramming it down their throats as thoroughly as we can. Fully exposed, they won't like the taste of it. But we keep letting them get away with it, as you're doing right now in this instant.
Perhaps you are a British citizen and not an American one - I never thought to ask. That would explain a lot. If that is so, well then to that point from here forward I apologize because that is my error to own, it is my failed assumption and that is my fault.
"So blaming the British for the obstinacy of American slaveholders, decades after independence was declared, rings hollow."
That's your own argument, not mine. So yes, it is just you. Absolutely just you all alone. First and foremost, I have no need to blame.... Isn't that beautiful! Real guilt is real and thorough guilt. It sounds crazy to say it, but I guess that's where you've pushed us to. We have the evidence.
My argument is: blaming pointing out the British for the obstinacy of American slaveholders, of the crown which you so desperately want to keep avoiding, decades after prior to independence was being declared, rings hollow loud and clear, my friend.
Easier to read - My argument is: pointing out the obstinacy of the crown which you so desperately want to keep avoiding, prior to independence being declared, rings loud and clear, my friend.