Why the Left Has to Lie About American History
By: Scott Centorino
We must fight the efforts of the left to lie about and distort our history and who we are as an exceptional nation. CRT and the 1619 project are propaganda tools designed to forward the lies and deceptions of the secular progressive left to silence our true history and damage our nation, culture, traditions, and founding to their very core. We are resisting this deception.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Why the Left Has to Lie About American History
AMAC Exclusive by Scott Centorino
As the left vainly tries to deceive Americans into accepting the toxic reign of identity politics, they are forced time and again to contort American history and falsify heroic stories from our past because a truthful telling would reveal the mendacity of their narrative and the bankruptcy of their agenda. The forgotten tales of two Americans—both named James—are the perfect reminder of why.
Born in the 18th century, James Forten worked odd jobs along Philadelphia’s waterfront to support his mother and sister after his father died. By 1781, he was fifteen and old enough to volunteer to join the Continental Navy.
In his first taste of combat, he demonstrated his physical courage. But it took getting captured to demonstrate his moral courage.
A British warship, the Amphion , captured his ship’s crew off the coast of Virginia. The British captain quickly sensed his intelligence and made Forten a generous offer.
In exchange for freeing Forten from life as a prisoner of war, Forten would serve the British captain at his country estate in England.
Forten didn’t hesitate. He turned it down.
He told the British captain, “I have been taken prisoner for the liberties of my country and never will prove a traitor to her interest.” Instead of a comfortable life tutoring the captain’s sons, Forten re-joined his crewmates in a prison ship, waiting for freedom for himself and his country.
James Forten didn’t want comfort. He wanted to serve his nation.
Two centuries later, in 1961, Jim Zwerg joined his Fisk University classmate, John Lewis, to participate in bus trips through the Deep South to fight segregation.
These ‘freedom riders’ challenged the real Jim Crow, not what progressive activists today label as Jim Crow with shameful nonchalance. In a time of segregated drinking foundations, targeted fire hoses, and brutal killings, the real Jim Crow meant real risk.
Jim Zwerg accepted that risk gladly. He later said that “my faith was never so strong as during that time. I knew I was doing what I should be doing.”
When Zwerg’s Greyhound bus pulled into Montgomery, Alabama, the bus station appeared empty. Then the ambush came. From his window on the bus, Zwerg could see young white men outside holding baseball bats and chains.
The police had left. Their protection had abandoned the area.
But Zwerg stood up from his seat anyway, walked down the aisle, and got off the bus.
The crowd did what it came to do. It smashed Zwerg’s face with his suitcase, pinned his head down, and methodically knocked teeth out of his mouth. He only regained consciousness two days later. Newspapers published pictures of his bruised face and shocked the nation.
James Forten and Jim Zwerg shared courage, a sense of purpose, and a love for the promise of America.
But these attributes have seeded the American experience for centuries. What makes their stories so special, aside from their common name and age?
You might have guessed that James Forten and Jim Zwerg did not have race in common. One was white. One was black.
But it might surprise you to learn that James Forten, the Revolutionary War sailor, was black and Jim Zwerg, the civil rights activist, was white.
For each, their race made them singular targets in their time.
Every time James Forten sailed into a southern port, he risked seizure for chained slavery. Forten’s acceptance of that risk for the sake of the American cause as it existed then would befuddle the woke mob today, addicted as they are too crude and distorted history, as exemplified by the 1619 Project.
Jim Zwerg, on the other hand, knew the mob in Montgomery would treat him more harshly than his fellow passengers.
The stories of these two brave men do not conform to the identity politics narrative that has taken over our culture.
Remembering these tales—and others like them—can help bring our culture closer to Martin Luther King’s ideal, in which every individual is treated as a unique person with dignity and a soul that transcends their ethnic or racial identity.
If the antidote for tribalism is individualism, individuals like James Forten and Jim Zwerg show us the way.
Tags
Who is online
98 visitors
When did conservatism start thinking about race neutrality, XXJ'?
Speaking of being 'addicted to crude and distorted history', since the Royal Louise NEVER sailed into a 'southern port' Forten wasn't at any added risk, WAS HE?
Seriously Xx, at the time, every 'African' walking the streets of Philadelphia 'risked seizure for chained slavery'.
How I tire of these bias and uninformed loads of crap being dumped here on NT.
Black college student Dorothy Bell, 19, of Birmingham, Alabama, waits at a downtown Birmingham lunch counter for service that never came, April 4, 1963. She was later arrested with 20 others in sit-in attempts.
And yet when Kamala Harris went to North Carolina to meet with people who did a lunch counter boycott there one of them was excluded because he’s a life long Republican. And the governor of that state in his state of the state address this year talked about systemic racism in his state ignoring the just elected African American Lt. Governor of his state as if he didn’t matter because he’s a Republican. The GOP candidate for Lt. Governor in Virginia is a career military African American conservative Republican woman. Why did the non partisan congressional black caucus refuse to allow Rep. Byron Donalds to join?
Red-herring.
Has nothing to do with what you aspired to @1.
And if you think that we are getting closer to MLK's ideal of racial identity transcendence based on lying, deception, omission, and delusion-that's just 'wack.' And we ain't going there with you.
we have made and will continue to make inroads in to the African American community. The outreach with support for historical black colleges, prison sentences reform, school choice, opportunity zones, and shared religious values as Dems become more secular is working. Even in urban areas we now have Republican African Americans running against democrat incumbents. We embrace MLK Jr’s dream.
Link?
That is untrue. And an insult. But what's new about that?
MLK Jr.'s was murdered while executing social justice work! Thus, Dr. King was a Social Justice "Warrior." Your royal "we" oppose, bitch, and fuss against social justice activities.
It's a "free" country - run whosoever you can in 2022, and we will deal with him or her at the time. Just goes to show you: There IS a fool born everyday-generally speaking of course!
Still waiting for that link Xx.
"The forgotten tales of two Americans ..."
Forgotten by whom?
If the CRT and 1619 project propaganda is allowed to prevail, along with the monument destroyers, most all of it will be by most everyone
You ran away like a scared cat about the 1836 Project didnt you?
XX, Texas was founded as a white supremacist republic, then state. Why does Texas think this should be glorified through an "1836 Project" ?
1836 is a Texas specific issue that means little to the rest of us. They should teach their history. They are using it to emphasize 1776 and flush the 1619 project down the drain where it belongs.
[Removed]
Conservatives in Texas devised this "1836 Project" as an answer to the "1619 Project" , that is quite obvious. But what is the point of the 1619 Project? That Americans have been given an incomplete history of this country that whitewashes certain aspects of it. Now, that has changed somewhat over the past few decades as history texts that go below the surface "founding fathers were perfect" theme (that generations of schoolkids grew up with) and go beyond the simple minded "patriotic" cheerleading theme that you present so incessantly on Newstalkers, but as long as we have right wingers wanting to drag us back to the white bread perspective as default American there will be a need for a "1619 Project".
Texas thinks it will counter the 1619 Project by lauding the founding of that state in 1836.
[r][emoved] that, in lauding a government that was founded on white supremacy (and it is in writing) Texas is actually , and presumably unwittingly, proving the 1619 Project's point.
Then WHY did they title it the '1836 Project' Xx?
Whatever the stated reason, it is a delusion like a lot of what those royal "we" users spout. The very ground itself in Texas will 'testify' against the lying delusional ones who try to white-wash the truth. Time has recorded the events of long ago. They can not be 'revised' - they are what they are.
So let Governor Abbott and the royal "we" users. . . spin until they just get dizzy and fall down.
Because that is the year that state won its national independence from Mexico and became its own country while it waited to be admitted as a state in our union. Why would anyone from another state suggest they shouldn’t celebrate their independence and and their history?
You can't have it both ways Xx. YOU are the one that claimed that:
So which is it? PICK ONE...
Conservative Republicans who want to whitewash American history into some white superhero story and obfuscate slavery, segregation, Jim Crow laws and the continuing battle of conservatives attempting to disenfranchise minority voters with conservative Republican voter laws where they had requested data on voting patterns by race and, with that data in hand, drafted a law that would "target African-Americans with almost surgical precision," the court said. These are the things conservative Republicans are desperate to make Americans forget.
Democrats have been on the wrong side of every major civil rights issue. As federalists the left was also against passing the bill of rights which is why even to this day they show nothing but disdain for the first and second amendments.
An individual's liberty to speak or defend themselves- they have no need of that for others only themselves.
Someone once said something to the effect of.
*Don't trust any who would limit our rights in any manner.
Clearly by "our" you mean something specific, so go ahead: Explain what you (really) mean. We're all. . .eyes.
In that example.
*Our rights refers to the people's rights who reside in the states under the constitution.
Now answer a question for me.
Why does the left hate liberty and free speech?
FortunateSon, you do understand that democrats have individual liberties in red-states too? It begs the question and so I ask you to try explaining what you mean in that example @4.1 again.
Read your own statement @4: An individual's liberty to speak or defend themselves- [democrats] have no need of that for others only themselves.
You make a declaration that democrats use liberties to "speak or defend" themselves, and then clearly state they hate doing so. Your question has no "punch."
Please try again, you have the liberty to do so.
[deleted]
The statement is untrue. Of course, we can prove that some conservatives use their liberty/ies to arrest and eliminate the liberties of others. As a for instance, take the confluence of red-state legislatures in near unison acting to pass voter laws in a rush to appease a single solitary loser who can't accept the will of the votes from the citizenry. (Y'all lost fair and square.)
That does seem to be the bottom line. For the rest it’s all about content control, view point discrimination, cancel culture, no religious liberty, no individualism, no economic choices or free speech rights. Just the privilege of being talked down and condescended to over the error of our evil beliefs.
Prove it with a trust worthy source
Funny. Define "trust-worthy source."
Great post. Well said and right on.
The more MBFC has negative things to say about a source the more trustworthy that source is. Any thing they endorse is by virtue of that alone untrustworthy. It’s that simple.
Here you are carrying the load! Slow night? Of course, some conservative would make it weird! That you want to have your own version of what is right and wrong with the country and stick to that as 'gospel' is your business. I don't have to like it or placate those tendencies. "Truth is equal parts truth." Deal with it!
The conservative vision of what is right and wrong with the country is the correct one. Whether you like or placate is not that important to me. Our view point regarding politics, economics, and America is the one most closely aligned with the truth.
Untrue. For one thing, some conservatives put forth a 'gospel' which is another gospel of their own imagining. Another thing, some conservatives have another conservatism that holds to a cult of personality and not to long-lasting policy/ies.
But, you are entitled to your opinion as long as you wish to hold it.
Thank you for giving me your permission to hold to my particular points of view religious and political.
Conservative Christians are the largest source of charitable contributions to ease human suffering, feed the poor, help the sick, provide disaster relief, and so much more.
Do you know how petty that sounds? You are willing to divide the church (although I do not know if your statement is true or not!) into schisms. Just astounding!
Great! Conservatives are good givers. I will make a note of it. Although, I am sure they love to give to causes they support and not to causes in general (that help causes conservatives do not support)! And that is probably where the most need exist at times, yes? All the same, good on conservatives . . .
But that is not what you STATED in @4.1.15:
In this comment you are making a statement about the Church. Advancing a bit, in one stroke you divided the Church into two parts, at least!
Is that what you meant to do? Did you make a 'leap' to invent church conservatism versus church liberalism in giving?
Your links do not mention church charitable giving in terms of conservative, liberal, or progressive. So why do it here? Churches are not in the 'habit' of giving to remark on it as bragging rights either! Churches simply give out of love what they have where they can!
Wtf are you talking about? It was a majority of Democrats who took an ideal that a Democrat President (Kennedy) had envisioned called the "civil rights act", co-authored, passed it with a majority of Democrats in the house, passed it with a majority of Democrats in the Senate then signed it into law by a Democrat President. Then they did the same thing the following year with the voting rights act.
1964 Civil Rights Act: By party and region
The House of Representatives:
The Senate:
If you're saying "Some Democrats have been on the wrong side of every major civil rights issue", I suppose that would be accurate, but then it would also be accurate to say "Some Republicans have been on the wrong side of every major civil rights issue" and continue to do so as they still fight against lgtbq civil rights and equal pay for women. I find it hilarious when some conservative Republican makes some ignorant declaration about Democrats being bad for minorities without addressing the elephant in the room, that being the fact that 85% of African Americans and the vast majority of most minority groups who are seeking civil rights and supporting civil rights issues vote Democrat. Apparently some conservative Republicans also believe that minorities and black Americans are just too ignorant or stupid to know what's best for them.
Yawn. That comment is such a generalization and so lacking in any context that is is meaningless. I certainly hope you understand that the arguments surrounding the creation of the constitution were far more complex than what you described, and of course that the Democratic Party that dominated the old south is completely different from the modern Democratic Party.
As bad as the historic democrat party was, today’s is far worse.
Photo Credit: Library of Congress
Birmingham, Alabama residents viewing the bomb-damaged home of Arthur Shores, an attorney with the NAACP, on September 5, 1963. Shores’ campaign in 1963 to integrate the Birmingham public schools brought violence to him and other residents. Shore’s home was fire-bombed on August 20 and September 4 in retaliation for black parents registering their children at white schools. The September 4th bomb injured Shores’ wife .
White supremacists burned down Wilmington, North Carolina’s Daily Record newspaper building in their 1898 attempt to overthrow the city’s biracial government.
(Library of Congress/Corbis/VCG/Getty Images)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HYAnkk1kXTc
Omg this is getting tiresome. What is so hard about admitting that America isn’t perfect and has a history filled with some really good things and some really shitty things? It’s a country like every other, and it’s history reflects that.
According to some people, the fifties were the perfect ideal.
Even with segregation, etc.
We never said we or our founders were perfect. We and genuine history recognize and cover the mistakes that were made. Even the founders knew it wasn’t perfect and that they set us on a course to build. More perfect Union.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
On July 23,1877 the anti-Chinese riots started when 8,000 people gathered in the vacant “sand lot” in front of City Hall for another labor gathering. It didn’t take long before it devolved into a racist mob.
"Everything was orderly until an anti-Coolie procession pushed its way into the audience and insisted that the speakers say something about the Chinese,” historian Selig Perlman wrote in The Anti-Chinese Agitation in California . “This was refused and thereupon the crowd which had gathered on the outskirts of the meeting attacked a passing Chinaman and started the cry, 'On to Chinatown.'"
Along the way, the mob destroyed property, burned Chinese laundries and threatened all challengers. The police were next to useless.