Today (Nov. 9) I heard a black historian on NPR say that the “civil war” was fought in order to establish a framework for human rights.
He also said that black civil rights achieved by the war were overturned by the rollback of Reconstruction, put back in place by the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and was now being overturned again by Trump’s response to the caravan from Honduras.
As best as I could tell, this was an Identity Politics explanation of history with all of its contradictions and factual errors.
Identity Politics is based on the accusation that the white male is a racist and a misogynist. This is inconsistent with the belief that Washington, totally in the hands of white males, chose to fight a bloody civil war in order to bring human rights to black slaves. If white males are this idealistic and willing to make such a sacrifice for blacks, how is it that the white males are racists?
The black historian can’t have it both ways.
More
6 comments:
Revisionist history goes to the victor. Only these bastards aren't waiting to win, they have decided that they have already won.
Like "Congresswoman" ( I use that term lightly) Maxine Waters going to show those mean people on Wall street what a "strong black woman" can do to them now that she will be chair of Financial Services Committee. Can we just imagine? She knows how to lie, cheat, conduct underhanded and deceitful tactics so I guess she will do okay.
I'm sorry- why didn't the Republicans defend NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting when they held the house and senate? I'm damn tired of these liberal bastards using my tax money to propagate their democrat agenda.
Great explanation of the facts, without The revelry of opinion.
The longer the MSM controls what we see and hear, the more weekminded people will alter their views based on identity politics.
Revisionist, creative History will never work. I kept All my OLD World and American History Books.
You might be on to something there 11:07
Post a Comment