"A lot of freepers have a fantasy history which only contains things which make the United States (or other relevant topic) look good, while noticeably absent is history showing the country in not such a good light."
You ignored my post, I said that 40 or 45 years ago I would have been supporting you, but I continued my study of American history and those childish, union taught lessons of anti American bigotry became balanced with historical truth and context.
And will try to be more polite this time.
Agree that there is a lot of anti-Americanism circulating around both the nation and the world, today.
However (however), on this topic ("Roots" and slavery), slavery is very much a part of American history, as much as the American Revolution or settling the West.
While "Roots" could have tended toward propagandistic, it did show an actual thing which happened in American history, even if it embellished that history a bit.
The point which personally trying to make is that that history should not be shied away from, it should not be ignored, it should not be "swept under the rug" or "covered up," and it should not be considered as though it didn't exist (which is what personally suspect some of the "move on" proponents actually propose).
That bad part of this country's history should be accepted. Not used as a figurative cudgel to beat down pro-Americanism or as a tool to further anti-Americanism. Just accepted as a dark spot on the nation's history, the same way the American Revolution is viewed as a bright moment in the country's past.
To recognize that does not threaten reputations about the United States (Americans and the world are aware that the United States had slaves), nor does it help increase anti-Americanism.
As the last comment in the article (the BBC comments) states, the subjugation of a people is not something new, and has happened to many ethnicities. Not acknowledging or fully accepting the United States' slavery is far more ruinous to opinion about the country than was "Roots."