• I Cast Fist
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Gotta love how the faux host, Brian Kilmeade, is already implying that 'murica being built off the backs of slaves and stolen land is “new history” instead of factual history

    • FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I find there’s usually an angle, rather than the wholesale reinvention of history. So I wonder what they’re aiming for here? (Or really, is it a literal bare faced rewriting of history because that feels like a sad escalation)

      If it were finding an “angle”, I suspect it’s going to be something like “native American tribes partnered with the colonies in their wars with each other, much of the land was bought in a voluntary way, only some of it was stolen etc”. And “it’s unfair to characterise the whole of America being built on slavery, state of Mississippi maybe, state of New York less so”. Or something like that.

      I’ve no idea what numbers they’d pull out for either of these, or where the actual objective truth lies.

      • Riskable
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The “angle” is that slavery is very inconvenient for their world view. If you want to Make America Great Again you have to pick a time in the past when it was great. For most on the Right that means a time before the civil rights movement but for another huge segment on the Right it’s the time when the country was founded… They truly believe the Constitution was perfect after the Bill of Rights (when the 2nd Amendment was added).

        • FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Interesting. I think it says something that they’re trying to erase slavery, rather than saying ‘ok it was a major economic factor but that’s ok’. Can’t tell if that significant or not…