TRUMP SLAMS SMITHSONIAN FOR HARPING ON HOW ‘HOW BAD SLAVERY WAS’

[Quag]

What if some of the slaves were into BDSM??

Did any ever ask them and what about those who werent?

 

[AZRWinger]

It wasnt founded as slave state? What frail white history book do I need to read to learn this? The one that taught you that slavers like Washington where heroes of liberty and freedom?

Parroting one of central lies of the 1619 project shows your unwillingness to question the radical Leftist dogma. Here is an excerpt from a critique from legitimate historians.

"One focus of the historians is the preposterous claim of the 1619 Project that a primary reason that the colonists launched the American Revolution was to protect slavery. “This is not true,” they say. “If supportable, the allegation would be astounding — yet every statement offered by the project to validate it is false.”

Historians Roast the 1619 Project | National Review

The dissenting historians are performing an important public service by making the dishonesty of The New York Times Magazine’s feature a matter of record.

www.nationalreview.com

There are numerous well researched critiques of the NYT propaganda project. Pause your name calling so you can inform yourself.

 

[Master Debator]

Parroting one of central lies of the 1619 project shows your unwillingness to question the radical Leftist dogma. Here is an excerpt from a critique from legitimate historians.

"One focus of the historians is the preposterous claim of the 1619 Project that a primary reason that the colonists launched the American Revolution was to protect slavery. “This is not true,” they say. “If supportable, the allegation would be astounding — yet every statement offered by the project to validate it is false.”

Historians Roast the 1619 Project | National Review

The dissenting historians are performing an important public service by making the dishonesty of The New York Times Magazine’s feature a matter of record.

www.nationalreview.com

There are numerous well researched critiques of the NYT propaganda project. Pause your name calling so you can inform yourself.

So you don't understand the difference between opinions and facts?

That figures. Its not a lie to suggest that the creation of their own independent slave state was an important motivation for the slaver Founders. That's called an opinion. Who cares if historians disagree on that opinion?

Its a fact that America was founded as a slave state. That's not opinion, that's just objective reality.

 

[snakestretcher]

Again, for people who have obviously never been to the National Museum of African American History and Culture, the top two floors are a celebration of Black music, art and influence on American life. Chuck Berry's Cadillac is up there. Took a picture of that for my dad. Its not all whips and depression soft whites.

Yep, if it wasn't for African slaves bringing their culture and music to the West, there would be no Blues, no Jazz, no Rock. American popular music was founded in black culture. Oh, and just to piss off the redneck element, we all have a black gene-even them.

 

[Cope]

Whiteness chart? What whiteness chart

 

[Cope]

Your racist mindset was demonstrated by the fact that you went straight to unmarried mothers with a bunch of kids, limited education, and higher per capita criminal activity, completing ignoring the long term broad based institutionalized racism greatly responsible for creating and perpetuating the conditions you reference.

BLAH BLAH BLAH You racist you! That card is long played out, simply untrue and makes you argue dumb things. Argue the data? Can't, can you so you try to attack the poster.
Excuses. Opportunity has existing for a LONG LONG time.

Much has been done over the last 50 years to make amends/repair harm done to the African American community as a whole, which is laudable, but anyone assuming that hundreds of years of slavery, repression, intimidation, and terrorizing of an entire community of American citizens can be fixed in 50 years is either a fool or a liar.

There is no repairing the damage caused by slavery. There is also no people alive today that are affected by it. They have had generations of AA to grant enhanced opportunities. They have had equal or greater opportunity to do the things that would make them, and their children successful.

They haven't. Primarily because of people like you saying they can't or the help isn't enough, or more needs to be done to 'repair'

When did you see the “original Whiteness chart”.

 

[Cope]

We can point to the policies put in place after the Civil War which were in place until the 1960s that did far more harm to black Americans being able to help themselves.

All sorts of policies have both helped and harmed all of us at one point or another.

The simple fact is that for generations now, AA existed and granted equal or better opportunities to those previously disenfranchised.

This argument would make sense if we there had been no raced based policies.

What are they now? What have then been for at least 2 generations? Why do immigrants of color come here now and out perform our own citizens of color?

 

[Jezcoe]

View attachment 67585711

The message of that chart is lost on people who don't want to understand the point of it.

 

[ElChupacabra]

All sorts of policies have both helped and harmed all of us at one point or another.

That's way too generalized. What policies the US government enacted that discriminated against white people based on their race?

The simple fact is that for generations now, AA existed and granted equal or better opportunities to those previously disenfranchised.

What are they now? What have then been for at least 2 generations? Why do immigrants of color come here now and out perform our own citizens of color?

Interestingly enough policies like AA are now being scrapped. There is now way one can not factor in the passed down psychology of previous generations to the new ones along with the conditions older policies created. This is why comparing citizens of color here to immigrant citizens of color doesn't work.

 

[j brown's body]

Parroting one of central lies of the 1619 project shows your unwillingness to question the radical Leftist dogma. Here is an excerpt from a critique from legitimate historians.

"One focus of the historians is the preposterous claim of the 1619 Project that a primary reason that the colonists launched the American Revolution was to protect slavery. “This is not true,” they say. “If supportable, the allegation would be astounding — yet every statement offered by the project to validate it is false.”

Historians Roast the 1619 Project | National Review

The dissenting historians are performing an important public service by making the dishonesty of The New York Times Magazine’s feature a matter of record.

www.nationalreview.com

There are numerous well researched critiques of the NYT propaganda project. Pause your name calling so you can inform yourself.

Not very many historians in the scheme of things.

They blasted the project's emphasis on Lord Dunmore's freeing slaves to fight for the British causing colonists to support independence in order to protect slavery. They felt it's overblown.

But in reading Rick Atkinson's first volume on the revolution, The British are Coming, he devotes an entire chapter to just that.

Historians can be territorial. This project went into a direction that is out of their territory,

 

[j brown's body]

Trump's attack on museum exhibitions reminds me of the Nazi attack on "degenerate art."

 

[Jezcoe]

Not very many historians in the scheme of things.

They blasted the project's emphasis on Lord Dunmore's freeing slaves to fight for the British causing colonists to support independence in order to protect slavery. They felt it's overblown.

But in reading Rick Atkinson's first volume on the revolution, The British are Coming, he devotes an entire chapter to just that.

Historians can be territorial. This project went into a direction that is out of their territory,

I read the 1619 Book.

I found ti to be good but at the time I felt that parts of it were a little too inflammatory for Students when it came to testing their thesis to contemporary politics.

Now I see that they were 100% spot on.

 

[Cope]

The message of that chart is lost on people who don't want to understand the point of it.

The point of it is that people want to fight against what founded this country, and make rules designed to promote others instead. Which is like swimming up stream at this point.

They don't want to have to do the same things to be successful. The problem with that thought is that it is basically enshrined and while certainly it CAN change, that change will be incremental and minute steps.

 

[Cope]

That's way too generalized. What policies the US government enacted that discriminated against white people based on their race?

Sure it is generalized because I am unwilling to go law by law to see who it helped and who it hindered. But surely you agree that not all laws hit everyone equally, right?

Interestingly enough policies like AA are now being scrapped. There is now way one can not factor in the passed down psychology of previous generations to the new ones along with the conditions older policies created. This is why comparing citizens of color here to immigrant citizens of color doesn't work.

They are because they are discriminatory. Hint: They have always been discriminatory, but now we have reached a point where they are still falling behind so it shows the AA either didn't do enough or was ineffective as a tool to promote them.

Did you inherit some bad psychological mindset from your great grandfather?
That is a ridiculous notion.
If they have experienced racism of today, or racism surrounding parents, I can buy that. But the cry isn't indivual racism, the cry of the past few years has been institutionalized racism, where we need a complete overhaul, and the promotion of one over another (read: Discrimination) in order to correct for this.

I mean, as long as you vote for me!

What the new immigrant vs the citizen comparison PROVES is that it isn't current policy that holds them back, and it certainly isn't institutionalized racism.

 

[NWRatCon]

The following is a link to the life story of one of my ancestor's brother's slaves, Lewis Jones. I provide it for context, and understanding of what slavery was like.

https://www.undertoldtexas.org/images/narratives-in-virtual/LEWIS%20JONES.pdf

This story exists because 100 years ago we knew that preserving first hand experiences was important to history. I'm neither ashamed nor proud that relatives owned slaves, because I wasn't alive then and had no influence on their behavior. But acknowledging reality, then as now, is vital to a functioning society.

 

[AZRWinger]

Kinda funny how people who couldn't wade through the first three pages of Das Kapital think they know a Marxist when they see one.
If you think there's such a thing as a Marxist Democrat you probably think a fat groomer Saint comes down your chimney on Christmas Eve.

Kinda funny how people insist on defending the Democrat's romantic infatuation with Marxism by attacking Santa Claus.

 

[Jezcoe]

The point of it is that people want to fight against what founded this country, and make rules designed to promote others instead. Which is like swimming up stream at this point.

They don't want to have to do the same things to be successful. The problem with that thought is that it is basically enshrined and while certainly it CAN change, that change will be incremental and minute steps.

The point of the chart is that those attributes are seen as being white when they are atttributes that are universal.

 

[AZRWinger]

So you don't understand the difference between opinions and facts?

That figures. Its not a lie to suggest that the creation of their own independent slave state was an important motivation for the slaver Founders. That's called an opinion. Who cares if historians disagree on that opinion?

Its a fact that America was founded as a slave state. That's not opinion, that's just objective reality.

I understand now. You are uninformed about the origin of the talking point you parrot. The contemporary ridiculous lie the US was founded to preserve slavery springs from the NYT propagandists who created the 1619 project. The linked article presents the fact based analysis illustrating the claim the colonies revolted to preserve slavery is nothing but partisan invective not fact.

 

[Master Debator]

I understand now. You are uninformed about the origin of the talking point you parrot. The contemporary ridiculous lie the US was founded to preserve slavery springs from the NYT propagandists who created the 1619 project.

You're uninformed. That's called an opinion and its not even one I share. I don't share the opinion with the author that slavery was in any danger from British sentiment at the time. Its still an objective fact that what the Founders created was indeed a Slave State.

The linked article presents the fact based analysis illustrating the claim the colonies revolted to preserve slavery is nothing but partisan invective not fact.

The linked article is to someone else's opinion, what I'm relaying to you are facts. America as founded was a Slave State and the creation of this Slave State predates the creation of the Democratic Party.

 

[Cope]

The point of the chart is that those attributes are seen as being white when they are atttributes that are universal.

You'd think so, right?

They aren't and people have been fighting against having to do them to be successful for awhile now.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

BLAH BLAH BLAH You racist you! That card is long played out, simply untrue and makes you argue dumb things. Argue the data? Can't, can you so you try to attack the poster.
Excuses. Opportunity has existing for a LONG LONG time.

If you don’t want your blatantly racist viewpoint being called out, don’t post your blatantly racist viewpoint.

There is no repairing the damage caused by slavery. There is also no people alive today that are affected by it. They have had generations of AA to grant enhanced opportunities. They have had equal or greater opportunity to do the things that would make them, and their children successful.

They haven't. Primarily because of people like you saying they can't or the help isn't enough, or more needs to be done to 'repair'

Ending slavery didn’t end the inexcusable, horrific abuses of African Americans that continued for many decades after the end of the Civil War, and enactment of civil/equal rights laws hasn’t been the panacea that folks like you falsely claim.

 

[Cope]

If you don’t want your blatantly racist viewpoint being called out, don’t post your blatantly racist viewpoint.

Ending slavery didn’t end the inexcusable, horrific abuses of African Americans that continued for many decades after the end of the Civil War, and enactment of civil/equal rights laws hasn’t been the panacea that folks like you falsely claim.

No, but the people dying who lived through it did.

At some point, I'll just say bye if you cannot control the urge to call things or views, or people racist, when it is a blatant LIE

 

[RaleBulgarian]

At some point, I'll just say bye if you cannot control the urge to call things or views, or people racist, when it is a blatant LIE

Your racist viewpoints, as expressed in your posts, are self-evident.

 

[Cope]

Your racist viewpoints, as expressed in your posts, are self-evident.

Bye bye

 

[AZRWinger]

Not very many historians in the scheme of things.

They blasted the project's emphasis on Lord Dunmore's freeing slaves to fight for the British causing colonists to support independence in order to protect slavery. They felt it's overblown.

But in reading Rick Atkinson's first volume on the revolution, The British are Coming, he devotes an entire chapter to just that.

Historians can be territorial. This project went into a direction that is out of their territory,

A simple search shows a number of historian objections to the 1619 conjecture. It's easy to throw shade hiding behind vague generalities like the "scheme of things".

Dunmore's offer to free slaves who fought with the British was made after the revolution began. Lexington and Concord had all ready erupted into battle. The Continental Congress had met earlier.

Here is a quote from the AI summary of Atkinson's position.

"While some colonists, especially wealthy white slave owners, were certainly motivated by economic concerns stemming from British restrictions, Atkinson suggests it's an oversimplification to solely attribute the Revolution to a desire to protect slavery. He emphasizes the ideals of liberty and basic rights as key drivers of the war, according to his YouTube talk. "

Greater scheme of things. Indeed.