New York Times Magazine Declares War on America and History

Finally! Finally a mainstream left-wing entity is admitting its designs on "reframing" history. This had already been happening for years and years. We call it revisionist history aka tweaking the documentation, teaching, or telling of past events so that they support a particular modern narrative. But I cannot recall an instance where one of these mythomania-ites ever admitted to what they were doing .. until now.

So cheers to the NY Times for this singular brief moment of honesty. I cant wait to see this fictional fabrication that will no doubt be just too filled with falsehood and rage-bait to have room for facts such as how slaves were made so abundant, and who wanted to keep them vs who wanted to free them and, ya know, political party views on the matter, the nearly 3/4 of a million Americans that died in the war to set it right, things like this. I'm sure it will only be about: founders bad, America bad, white man bad, and maybe -just maybe- orange man bad too?

 

The very beginnings of "slavery" in America did not have to do with race. Thereafter, those in New York, Pennsylvania, New England, and Michigan, which had the majority of the country's population at the time, strongly opposed slavery.

Slavery as an institution really began with the muslims in Africa. Many of the very first Black slaves imported into the Americas were purchased from Arab traders. From there, the Portuguese and later British took over the slave trade on the West African Coast, and about 1 out of 4 of the slave traders were European Jews.

Brazil actually imported more slaves than the US did.

 

As Biden said, the Dem Party and its elites now support 'the ideological Spirit of Truth' over mere facts; and true history is just facts woven together to reflect genuine reality as a timeline narrative.

Once the ultra leftist NYT gets finished the facts will have almost nothing to do with their Politically Correct Spirit of Truth and will actually be nothing more than a blatant attempt at yet more leftist social engineering.

What's interesting is that the NYT would not be so ham-handed and blatant at this Politically Correct propaganda attempt if they did not feel that the Left was beginning to lose its ideological death grip over the thought processes of a huge percentage of the public.

 

Slavery was big business during the Roman empire, 500 years before Muslims and big business during the Egyptian empire 2000 years before Muslims!

 

Not many Arabs in West Africa.

 

Indentured servitude in early America is a better approximation to slavery in ancient Egypt than the institution of slavery .

 

Luckily we already know the New York Times is a far left organization that nobody takes seriously. It is refreshing to at least hear them being honest about their ****ed up agenda though.

 

Is this part of the other leaked internal Q&A showing the NYT despicable bias with how they need to make race the cornerstone of the election? They admit now that Russia is over, they have to shift the narrative again to race this time. Holy crap!!! You call yourselves journalists?

Anyone denying bias in the media has to start admitting reality. I know I know. They’ll deny until they die, still believing Trump is a Russian operative and CNN is centrist. But there has to be a point where you can’t keep lying to everyone and expecting them to keep believing it.

 

I am glad to see the America hating left come out of hiding. They have been telling lies to cover for their hatred for a long time now.

 

Sometimes, you just have to wonder what the NYTs is really after these days. Are they really doing a bit of bait and switch here? See, bad stuff bad, when in reality the message really is, pining for the good old days? I mean, the plantation is taking hits these days, and it isn't nearly as easy as perhaps the majority of ivy leaguers thought it would be to dominate and oppress the deplorables. Perhaps this is just their way of really getting that nuanced message out to their supremacist followers....

 

Slavery dominated the Americas well before white Europeans came to this continent. Native tribes would war each other and enslave women and children while slaughtering all the men.

 

I am gonna reserve judgment until I see more content. I assume they are claiming we were really founded in 1619 because the House of Burgress and Jamestown first met then. Ironically, I guess they want to ignore the fact that we were part of the British Crown, who was moving slaves, of all races over.

 

Even their own citizenry. That's how much of their naval crews were established.

 

No. White people obviously invented slavery. You don’t remember being taught that in school

 

Funny to see angry white men still in denial about slavery

 

Wait, are you the new account that was created the day after the shootings, that picks fights constantly and NEVER attempts to make a coherent argument? All you do is lash out with extremist talking points getting people to engage with you? Your check list the Russians hand you won’t work with me. Keep collecting your paycheck. Your profile and posting style is a dead giveaway as a plant. Moderators need to carefully observe what you’ve been doing since your first post. Hope they’re watching.

 

Daily reminder that indentured servants existed and that of all slaves brought to the new world, only roughly 5 percent ended up in the United States.

 

Funny that 9.2 million black people are in slavery at this very moment in Africa and nobody gives a ****. The difference is that the Muslims are castrating their black slaves to ensure they don't become a demographic problem for them. It is hilarious to see progressives incensed over slavery that happened centuries ago and completely oblivious to open slavery right out in the open today. I imagine the rationale is that since the slavers aren't white, the slavery is ok.

https://qz.com/africa/1333946/globa...hest-rate-of-modern-day-slavery-in-the-world/

 

Apparently you have no idea of the history of slavery as it's a human trait, not a race trait. Matter of fact, there is AMPLE slavery in today's modern world, however it's not the white man that is perpetuating this retched practices.

One in 200 people is a slave. Why?

 

Once again, as always, the NYT Trolling the RW like a champ.

And, just as predictably, the RW takes the bait hook, line, and sinker.

This 1619 Project really seems to have hit a nerve with some of the RW.

Monday Morning's expected display of something for the RW to feign outrage about.

 

Just pointing out the inaccuracies of the left continuing to try and race bait.

 

"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"

This is the villainous paragraph? Do you not understand what it means to attempt to 'reframe history'?

My Dad was a history buff. He once bought a book that took significant international military and diplomatic events such as wars etc, and began each chapter with a different map 'reframing' that map and the history , to center its perspective as though one country was dead center. If one chapter was about Germany's response to the treaty of Treaty of Versailles, the map of Europe made Berlin the center of that map as it told the German perspective. The next chapter 'reframed' that European map so that maybe say Moscow was the center of the focus as it told the same story about the Treaty of Versailles from the Russian point of view.

 

From your link, top two countries for slaves in Africa:
Eritrea 93 slaves per 1,000 - country more than half are Christian
Burundi 40 slaves per 1000 - country is 67% Christian, 1% Muslim

 

There is nothing wrong with reframing history to gain a new or different perspective. You seem to be easily confused. That isn't like rewriting history, such as claiming you had far more people at your inauguration than in fact attended. That is a cheesy lie, not reframing. Is that too complicated?

Is there something inaccurate about that quote from your link? Show me what is false in that statement.

 

Anybody who doesn't like the NYT can just ignore it.

Problem solved.

Besides, doesn't the RW have better things to do?

Like find out what happened to all those people who Trump sent to Hawaii to look into Obama's Birth Certificate?