You know, the whole nearly 100 years of legalized slavery after the revolution thing.
I'm afraid not. That's literally the point of the civil war, and the perpetual tension between the slave and free states. It's why the founding fathers tried to abandon their slaves. It's why Jefferson had to get rebuked about declaring slavery to be inherently immoral in the Declaration of Independence. It's why there was a Christian schism between the slave and free states. The very fundamental basis of the Civil War is sewn into the fact that a Liberal society can not tolerate slavery at any length, and a Slaveocracy will always have to resort to unlimited force to resist the pressure of Liberalism. It's no surprise that the Abolitionist movement starts in the heart of Liberalist thought in England.
It's why even the slave states argued that blacks could enjoy the benefits of rights and citizenship, but slavery was needed to civilize them as a race first. It's a paternalistic argument, but it's paternalistic argument rooted in Liberalism. A very Progressive notion of uplifting a people by making them dependent, and providing them with welfare.
Slavery itself was not even race-based. In all of human history slavery was almost never race based. Most people enslaved their own peoples, particularly those of a criminal or under class. In the US, there was no restriction that slaves could only be black, as there were still white slaves and indentured servants; as well as black slave masters. The only reason that slavery became more racialized in the US is because African slaves were cheap. The triangle trade had allowed African kingdoms to sell great swathes of people, and these were kingdoms whose economies existed for the purposes of slavery, including the now more infamous Kingdom of Benin demonstrated by the response to "Woman King". Slavery was, of course, not a racial issue to the Africans. If the Portuguese or Arabs were paying, then buy god, the Africans were going to provide them.
As far as the Liberals and the Christians were concerned, all people could embrace liberty & individualism if they a) were free from dependency, b) accepted a Christian ethic. The Slaveocrats argued that all people could still do it, but just not yet, they need to wait until their 99 year lease came up.
Back to the question that took this discussion here, when was America truly founded? You never answered. I don't even know WTF you are trying to do here. You have been asserting that a nation is defined by its values, yet you are discussing deeply rooted and widespread violations of said values. I don't see how, for example, indentured servitude helps your case. You are just acknowledging that there were violations of America's supposed values that I left as of yet unmentioned in this conversation.
It's also odd that your bring up Jefferson. He believed blacks to be inferior to whites in many ways. His views on race and slavery were complex and contradictory. You cite his stated opposition to slavery, but he owned slaves himself.
That wasn't the question you asked. And it's 1776.
You have been asserting that a nation is defined by its values, yet you are discussing deeply rooted and widespread violations of said values.
Some nations are defined by their values. Not all nations are the same, the US is one that is defined very explicitly by it's values.
You are just acknowledging that there were violations of America's supposed values that I left as of yet unmentioned in this conversation.
I've mentioned them several times, including slavery and racial discrimination.
No state is a perfect state. You are going to find hypocrisy so long as you look for it. The issue of slavery, which a wrote a ton about, was a difficult political compromise that inevitably lead to the Civil War. Slavery could not co-exist with Liberalism, and as a result it killed 2% of the population when the adjustment was made. Every single person knew the slavery issue was never going to go away because slavery and liberalism are antithetical. It never did until one, and only one, destroyed the other.
The American Experiment is based in the question of whether or not a Liberal society, based on values, can actually survive. Sorting out those contradictions is hard.
It's also odd that your bring up Jefferson. He believed blacks to be inferior to whites in many ways. His views on race and slavery were complex and contradictory. You cite his stated opposition to slavery, but he owned slaves himself.
He also tried to free those slaves, and was prevented by his own state from doing so. I don't see your point. He founded two countries based off of Liberalism and tried to fulfill his principles.
That wasn't the question you asked. And it's 1776.
You're right. I forgot how I phrased the idea. It was when did Americans become American. It's still unanswered.
No state is a perfect state. You are going to find hypocrisy so long as you look for it.
Racialism has been a permanent feature of America, though, and a major one. Most white Americans didn't support interracial marriage until the 1990s. By that point, we already had anti-white racial policies and a metastasizing anti-white culture.
The American Experiment is based in the question of whether or not a Liberal society, based on values, can actually survive.
I'd like to answer the question: No. I'm tired of being of being experimented on. I'm tired of letting BLM burn up the country, Jewish idpol organizations running amok like the one in the OP, Great Replacement, groomers, etc. It's over. It has failed. America's values were much better when they were less liberal.
You never asked that question at all, but it's still 1776.
Racialism has been a permanent feature of America, though, and a major one. Most white Americans didn't support interracial marriage until the 1990s. By that point, we already had anti-white racial policies and a metastasizing anti-white culture.
No, it's been a progressive feature in America. The American intellectual class tried to create a concept of 'white' around which the US could be ethnically constructed, and would still integrate the tens of thousands of abandoned Germans which would otherwise could have caused an absolute epidemic of racial and ethnic violence in America.
Meanwhile, in basically any area that didn't promote slavery, and was frontier, there was very little effort in focusing on even thinking about white populations. This is why Ohio was populated by Christian evangelists who were heavily integrated with immigrants, indians, pioneers, and freed slaves. Marrying an "Indian Squaw" wasn't common place. Racialist intellectuals were desperately trying to put a stop to it because most Americans actually didn't care.
I'd like to answer the question: No.
It wasn't a question. You can get the fuck out of my country.
America's values were much better when they were less liberal.
They were always liberal, whether you like it or not. It's founded on a Liberal Revolution.
I'm afraid not. That's literally the point of the civil war, and the perpetual tension between the slave and free states. It's why the founding fathers tried to abandon their slaves. It's why Jefferson had to get rebuked about declaring slavery to be inherently immoral in the Declaration of Independence. It's why there was a Christian schism between the slave and free states. The very fundamental basis of the Civil War is sewn into the fact that a Liberal society can not tolerate slavery at any length, and a Slaveocracy will always have to resort to unlimited force to resist the pressure of Liberalism. It's no surprise that the Abolitionist movement starts in the heart of Liberalist thought in England.
It's why even the slave states argued that blacks could enjoy the benefits of rights and citizenship, but slavery was needed to civilize them as a race first. It's a paternalistic argument, but it's paternalistic argument rooted in Liberalism. A very Progressive notion of uplifting a people by making them dependent, and providing them with welfare.
Slavery itself was not even race-based. In all of human history slavery was almost never race based. Most people enslaved their own peoples, particularly those of a criminal or under class. In the US, there was no restriction that slaves could only be black, as there were still white slaves and indentured servants; as well as black slave masters. The only reason that slavery became more racialized in the US is because African slaves were cheap. The triangle trade had allowed African kingdoms to sell great swathes of people, and these were kingdoms whose economies existed for the purposes of slavery, including the now more infamous Kingdom of Benin demonstrated by the response to "Woman King". Slavery was, of course, not a racial issue to the Africans. If the Portuguese or Arabs were paying, then buy god, the Africans were going to provide them.
As far as the Liberals and the Christians were concerned, all people could embrace liberty & individualism if they a) were free from dependency, b) accepted a Christian ethic. The Slaveocrats argued that all people could still do it, but just not yet, they need to wait until their 99 year lease came up.
Back to the question that took this discussion here, when was America truly founded? You never answered. I don't even know WTF you are trying to do here. You have been asserting that a nation is defined by its values, yet you are discussing deeply rooted and widespread violations of said values. I don't see how, for example, indentured servitude helps your case. You are just acknowledging that there were violations of America's supposed values that I left as of yet unmentioned in this conversation.
It's also odd that your bring up Jefferson. He believed blacks to be inferior to whites in many ways. His views on race and slavery were complex and contradictory. You cite his stated opposition to slavery, but he owned slaves himself.
That wasn't the question you asked. And it's 1776.
Some nations are defined by their values. Not all nations are the same, the US is one that is defined very explicitly by it's values.
I've mentioned them several times, including slavery and racial discrimination.
No state is a perfect state. You are going to find hypocrisy so long as you look for it. The issue of slavery, which a wrote a ton about, was a difficult political compromise that inevitably lead to the Civil War. Slavery could not co-exist with Liberalism, and as a result it killed 2% of the population when the adjustment was made. Every single person knew the slavery issue was never going to go away because slavery and liberalism are antithetical. It never did until one, and only one, destroyed the other.
The American Experiment is based in the question of whether or not a Liberal society, based on values, can actually survive. Sorting out those contradictions is hard.
He also tried to free those slaves, and was prevented by his own state from doing so. I don't see your point. He founded two countries based off of Liberalism and tried to fulfill his principles.
You're right. I forgot how I phrased the idea. It was when did Americans become American. It's still unanswered.
Racialism has been a permanent feature of America, though, and a major one. Most white Americans didn't support interracial marriage until the 1990s. By that point, we already had anti-white racial policies and a metastasizing anti-white culture.
I'd like to answer the question: No. I'm tired of being of being experimented on. I'm tired of letting BLM burn up the country, Jewish idpol organizations running amok like the one in the OP, Great Replacement, groomers, etc. It's over. It has failed. America's values were much better when they were less liberal.
You never asked that question at all, but it's still 1776.
No, it's been a progressive feature in America. The American intellectual class tried to create a concept of 'white' around which the US could be ethnically constructed, and would still integrate the tens of thousands of abandoned Germans which would otherwise could have caused an absolute epidemic of racial and ethnic violence in America.
Meanwhile, in basically any area that didn't promote slavery, and was frontier, there was very little effort in focusing on even thinking about white populations. This is why Ohio was populated by Christian evangelists who were heavily integrated with immigrants, indians, pioneers, and freed slaves. Marrying an "Indian Squaw" wasn't common place. Racialist intellectuals were desperately trying to put a stop to it because most Americans actually didn't care.
It wasn't a question. You can get the fuck out of my country.
They were always liberal, whether you like it or not. It's founded on a Liberal Revolution.