I have released enough documentaries over the years to recognize an
emerging pattern in terms of how the Left will respond. There are
really only two options: Either they?ll ignore my documentary entirely
(which is how most of the media responded to ?Am I Racist?,? even
though it was the top documentary of the decade). Or, in the
alternative, they?ll publish extremely low-effort, highly dishonest
articles, where they review some imaginary version of my documentary,
put words into my mouth, and take every important scene out of context.

That was the case with ?What is a Woman?,? when outlet after outlet
accused me of being a ?transphobe? who engaged in ?hate speech? ? even
though 99% of the movie involved me asking basic, straightforward
questions to self-described experts in gender ideology. And the other
1% was me asking why those experts were running away from me instead of answering my simple and straightforward questions.

So based on these experiences, when I released the first episode of my
newest series at the Daily Wire, which is called ?Real History,? I was expecting either a total media blackout, or a flood of desperate hit
pieces. After all, ?Real History? is a direct challenge to some of the
most important tenets of modern Leftism.

But interestingly enough, ?Real History? has not been met with a total
media blackout. Nor has it been bombarded with a series of incredibly
dumb and lazy smears. Instead, aside from a small number of YouTube
videos from historians ? which have mostly been positive, and very
thorough ? the only mainstream response to ?Real History? has come from
The Atlantic magazine, which considers itself to be the bastion of
Left-wing intellectual thought.

And right away, that got my attention. It?s not that The Atlantic is a trustworthy outlet. It?s obviously not. In fact, they?ve created
numerous high-level hoaxes in just the past couple of years, solely to influence elections. But at the same time, if The Atlantic ? and only
The Atlantic ? is coming after you, then it means you?ve done something unique. It means that you?ve rattled the people who, in elite circles
of the Democrat Party, are taken very seriously. Now, why might ?Real
History? have done that?

To answer that question, let?s see what The Atlantic says,
specifically.

Matt Walsh would like you to know you?ve been lied to. Last
month, the right-wing provocateur appeared on Megyn Kelly?s
show to discuss his new video series, Real History With Matt
Walsh. ? In Walsh?s account, the left believes that ?America
was built on slavery, and it has no right to exist, and every
white American carries, somehow, that legacy, that guilt in
their blood?; therefore progressives feel they have the ?moral
justification to just do whatever they want? to white people.
Walsh intends to stop this. So in Real History, he relentlessly
downplays the brutality of slavery in the United States.
Sanitizing slavery has become a core objective of the
reactionary right under Donald Trump?a malignant response to
the progressive left?s oversimplification of American history
for their own present-day ends. But the truest understanding
of slavery doesn?t serve any political faction. Rather, it
acknowledges the horrors of racial oppression while still
allowing us to see beyond them. ? Walsh also notes that the
descendants of Africans trafficked to what became the United
States are now in better socioeconomic shape than those whose
ancestors remained in the Old World or were transported to
Latin America or the Caribbean. He draws an odious conclusion
from this?American slavery wasn?t that bad?yet the point is
not entirely incorrect. Other far more serious thinkers have
made versions of it too.

There?s the sneering that you might expect from The Atlantic. They want
you to know that there are ?far more serious thinkers? than I am. But
for all their preening and all their arrogance, it?s clear that the
author of this piece, Thomas Chatterton Williams, has not even watched
Episode 1, ?The Real History of Slavery.? He couldn?t be bothered to
spend the hour to actually watch the show.

And I can make that claim with confidence, because there is absolutely
nothing in the episode ? or any episode of the series ? that
?relentlessly downplays the brutality of slavery in the United States.? Instead, the episode is a roughly hour-long look at what slavery
entailed, all over the world. And yes, as a matter of historical fact, Africans and the Barbary Pirates and the Ottomans generally treated
their slaves far, far worse than Americans and American colonists.
Americans weren?t known for floating canoes in the blood of their
slaves, for example. Nor were Americans known for sailing thousands of
miles away in order to snatch men, women and children from their homes,
throw them onto boats, and sexually assault them. That?s not
?downplaying? anything. It?s the truth. And ?serious thinkers? ? to use
The Atlantic?s terminology ? care about the truth, above all else.

But The Atlantic doesn?t care about the truth. That?s why, in 2019,
they published an article entitled, ?The Fight Over the 1619 Project Is
Not About the Facts.?

What?s remarkable about this headline is that, indeed, the fight over
the 1619 Project was about the facts. All of the history was completely
wrong ? including their claim that Americans fought the Revolutionary
War to preserve slavery. But The Atlantic ran cover for the 1619
Project at the time, because it served the narrative of the Democrat
Party. It advanced racial grievances, which they saw ? correctly, for a
time ? as a pathway to power.

The point of ?Real History,? on the other hand, is not to advance the interests of the ?MAGA movement,? or anyone else. The point is to
communicate historically accurate information that?s deliberately
hidden from us, at every stage in our lives. Schools don?t talk about
it. The media doesn?t talk about it. Movies don?t talk about it.
Telling the truth is not ?downplaying? anything. By contrast, it?s the
fake intellectuals in the Left, people like the writers at The
Atlantic, who have been downplaying the reality of the African and
Ottoman slave trades for generations.

https://youtu.be/PQu1n_OC1eE

But according to The Atlantic, so-called ?MAGA revisionists,? along
with the Trump administration, are the problem here.

So let?s read on from their review of ?Real History.?

Back in March, [Trump] strong-armed a host of institutions by
issuing an executive order called ?Restoring Truth and Sanity
to American History,? which directs federally funded museums,
monuments, and parks to remove materials that promote
?corrosive ideology.? Last month, the park service obliged,
eliminating an outdoor exhibit at Independence National
Historical Park, in Philadelphia, where George Washington?s
house once stood. The exhibit honored nine slaves who toiled
at the residence ? Trump and his allies seem unwilling to
tolerate virtually any acknowledgment that America subjugated
Black people. Rather than making a dispassionate case against
the idea that the country was founded to enslave Africans,
MAGA is taking down plaques commemorating basic facts, such
as Washington?s slaveholding. In Real History, Walsh turns the
clock back further still.

Notice the sleight of hand here.

They?re strongly implying that the Trump administration ordered the
park service to remove an exhibit about the fact that George Washington
owned slaves. But that?s actually not true. If you read the Executive
Order, it orders the parks service to remove anything promoting a
?corrosive ideology? that demonizes Americans. And as The Washington
Post reported, the parks service interpreted that Executive Order as
broadly as possible. It?s a form of ?malicious compliance.?

The Post reported:

the removals were in line with President Donald Trump?s March
executive order directing the Interior Department to eliminate
information that reflects a ?corrosive ideology? that
disparages historic Americans. National Park Service officials
are broadly interpreting that directive to apply to information
on racism, sexism, slavery, gay rights or persecution of
Indigenous people.

See how that works?

The Trump administration issues an order, telling agencies to stop
advancing an anti-white, anti-American agenda. Democrats then remove
displays of slavery. And then Democrats say, ?Hey, you made us remove
displays of slavery!?

And by the way, it?s especially ironic that they lump ?Real History? in
with this. Again, if this guy had watched the show ? which he clearly
hasn?t ? he?d know that we talk, at some length, about Washington?s
slaves. And in particular, we talk about his white indentured servants,
who ran away around the time of the start of the Revolutionary War.
Washington put out advertisements, seeking the return of these white
runaways. And there were many more white runaways than black runaways
at Washington?s estate. But no one at The Atlantic wants to talk about
this, because it complicates their narrative that only blacks were
victimized by slavery in America. So they hide the truth, and then they
accuse us of being the liars.

What?s funny about all of this is that, back in 2019, The Atlantic put
out an article stating that ?reparations? could mean ?telling the
truth? about uncomfortable historical facts. So in that sense, you?d
think they?d be happy about Real History. You?d think they?d consider
it a form of reparations. Apparently not.

In reality, The Atlantic, like so many other bastions of Left-wing ?intellectualism,? is collapsing in on itself. Their ideology is
incoherent. They have no idea what they stand for, or how to construct
even the most basic argument about anything they believe in.

This is a big, big problem for the Left in general.

--
Democrats and the liberal media hate President Trump more than they
love this country.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.11
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)