U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-16-2019, 07:06 PM
 
Location: Japan
10,992 posts, read 4,530,669 times
Reputation: 7040

Advertisements

... or so says the New York Times in a new collection of essays bashing the country.
Quote:
The 1619 Project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are.

Our democracy's founding ideals were false when they were written...

If you want to understand the brutality of American capitalism...

 
Old 08-16-2019, 07:36 PM
 
16,198 posts, read 4,267,388 times
Reputation: 11447
True - nothing much changed in the South after the signing...we have relatives that were here long before it was the USA and they were all "free" and did Town Meetings and all the rest. Some of them were Loyalists some Not...it was largely a crap shoot and a few who were on the "wrong side" ended up in Nova Scotia and did very well (actually one became world famous).

The economy South of Mason Dixon Line didn't really change with the declaration of our independence. Do you think a slave or indentured servant down there experienced any immediate changes?

The only difference for slavery, women and many others was that their heads were counted (3/5th in one case) for representation. They still couldn't vote.

Even for the bigwigs it was mostly a matter of just getting a bit more profit or land, etc....

As one example, in the decade before the Founding Ben Franklin was in London mentioning the King on his and other "founders" behalf for 1/4 of Ohio. The King turned him down...but if the King would have said Yes, old Ben wouldn't be the Ben we know in history.

That shouldn't be hard to fathom. In theory the lack of a Monarch here should be a big plus...but, in practice...I'd say the UK is every bit (or more) "free" than we are....an opinion, of course.

Politics here have been gamed for so long that maybe they should say the USA ENDED.....like maybe 1880 or so?
 
Old 08-16-2019, 10:47 PM
 
Location: New Mexico
6,864 posts, read 3,802,951 times
Reputation: 12940
Ironically, the first legislative assembly in America was established in 1619 in Jamestown so there is some actual reason to observe the beginnings of the country in that year.
 
Old 08-18-2019, 02:00 PM
Status: "but it depends on what the definition of "is" is." (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
3,781 posts, read 668,878 times
Reputation: 1200
America then was a British colony, not an independent nation. AFAIK there is no official 'founding' date for England, but if there is, that would be the 'founding.'

Interesting that in the recent leaked townhall meeting of NYT staffers, one of the staffers made reference to racism as the foundation of the US. It looks like the NYT propaganda campaign starts already.

The funny thing is, there are horrible examples of racist writings in the NYT from the early 20th century. Eugenics and 'scientific racism' were all the rage among the intellectual elite of the time.
 
Old 08-18-2019, 07:03 PM
 
Location: NJ
17,099 posts, read 11,943,118 times
Reputation: 11010
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment View Post
... or so says the New York Times in a new collection of essays bashing the country.
M Obama said we have to rewrite our history. she was reading from the socialists playbook and now we know what she meant. The socialists propaganda machine keeps rewriting our history and destroying our culture one statue at a time.
 
Old 08-18-2019, 07:09 PM
 
30,328 posts, read 15,727,034 times
Reputation: 20373
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment View Post
... or so says the New York Times in a new collection of essays bashing the country.
Another New York Times failure.

They should really hire some fact checkers.

The black "slaves" arriving in 1619 were indentured servants just like the white indentured servants that arrived. On those ships were also blacks that were not indentured servants but free men.
 
Old 08-19-2019, 12:31 PM
 
Location: West Coast of Europe
21,887 posts, read 19,508,775 times
Reputation: 8657
When speaking of such historical things, it makes more sense to speak of the US, not of America because back then the whole double continent was called America.

Slavery began even earlier in what is now Latin America.
 
Old 08-19-2019, 12:45 PM
 
18 posts, read 946 times
Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Another New York Times failure.

They should really hire some fact checkers.

The black "slaves" arriving in 1619 were indentured servants just like the white indentured servants that arrived. On those ships were also blacks that were not indentured servants but free men.
also thr ship came from barbados and not from Africa.
 
Old 08-19-2019, 01:02 PM
 
5,129 posts, read 1,010,249 times
Reputation: 2034
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Another New York Times failure.

They should really hire some fact checkers.

The black "slaves" arriving in 1619 were indentured servants just like the white indentured servants that arrived. On those ships were also blacks that were not indentured servants but free men.
Not legally speaking but practically speaking, isn't an indentured servant a form of slavery? If so, the NY Times would be correct in using "slaves" but they should specify the type of slavery.
 
Old 08-19-2019, 02:47 PM
Status: "but it depends on what the definition of "is" is." (set 21 days ago)
 
Location: Clyde Hill, WA
3,781 posts, read 668,878 times
Reputation: 1200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eumaois View Post
Not legally speaking but practically speaking, isn't an indentured servant a form of slavery? If so, the NY Times would be correct in using "slaves" but they should specify the type of slavery.
The indentured servants were largely voluntary workers. IIRC they typically had contracts lasting 7-10 years, and after that were free to go.

I was not aware that the Africans who arrived (from a Dutch ship) in 1619 were anything but chattel slaves. I'd be interested in seeing a reference on this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top