Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Right Wing ‘Journalist’ Angry that ’12 Years a Slave’ Doesn’t Depict Happy Slaves

  1. #1
    Senior Member DiabloViejo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    13,777

    Angry Right Wing ‘Journalist’ Angry that ’12 Years a Slave’ Doesn’t Depict Happy Slaves

    Right Wing ‘Journalist’ Angry that ’12 Years a Slave’ Doesn’t Depict Happy Slaves


    Americans Against The Tea Party
    March 6, 2014
    http://aattp.org/right-wing-journali...-happy-slaves/


    You’d think that the subject of slavery would be off limits for the partisan rhetoric of conservatives. Well, you have no idea.

    Yes, there are a few conservative voices who are actually ‘disappointed’ with their perceived ‘negative portrayal’ of slavery in the movie “12 Years a Slave.”

    Writing in the American Spectator, James Bowman wants to know where all happy slaves were in the movie. How about their story?

    "If ever in slavery’s 250-year history in North America there were a kind master or a contented slave, as in the nature of things there must have been, here and there, we may be sure that Mr (sic) McQueen does not want us to hear about it. This, in turn, surely means that his view of the history of the American South is as partial and one-sided as that of the hated Gone With the Wind."

    Why anyone would want to launch a PR campaign for the most despicable period in our nation’s history is unknowable. But when reading Bowman’s piece, you can’t help but wonder if it wouldn’t be so out of place on Stormfront.org or some other white supremacist website.

    "Yes, there was much cruelty and hardship in the slave-owning South, as there has been in most of the rest of the world most of the time, and Mr. McQueen’s camera is all over that. But it strains ordinary credulity to suppose that there was nothing else."

    Maybe Bowman could write his next column about all the missing happy Jews in Holocaust movies.

    To give a little credit to the American Spectator’s readers, the comment thread that opened up beneath the article was mostly filled with people wondering what the hell Bowman was thinking. “Is this article a joke of some sort?” one commenter asked.

    The piece, entitled “Propaganda is Not ‘Reality’ or ‘Truth’” is a new low in right wing punditry. Anyone who would suggest that a movie based on a historical account of slavery is simply a propaganda ploy, deserves to be relegated to the fringe and shamed out of mainstream online publications.



    Oh yes Massa, I am sooooooo happy!
    If there is a dangerous forum ... that's the one. -- LWW (referring to BD NPR)

    First off ... nothing will stop ass killings entirely. -- LWW (AKA Vladimir Ulyanov, AKA WV Slim, AKA MrsLWW, .....)

    Where did there CEO go yo work at loser? -- LWW (Demonstrating his masterful command of the English language while masquerading as his wife Vladimir.)


  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ballarat Australia
    Posts
    5,833
    Back in thems there days West Virginy must hav been the happyest state of all (instead of the most miserable), due to plantations overflowing with happy slaves. Not very well known, freemen had secret networks so that they kood sneak south to bekum happy slaves on plantations.
    mac.
    Last edited by cushioncrawler; 03-08-2014 at 09:14 PM.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Glenville, WV
    Posts
    344
    West virgina seseeded from the confedersee and went back to the union side.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ballarat Australia
    Posts
    5,833
    THIS IZ NEWS TO ME -- I WILL READ UP ON IT. MAC.
    In the context of the American Civil War, the border states were slave states that had not declared a secession from the Union and later joined the Confederacy. Four slave states had never declared a secession: Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri. Four others did not declare secession until after the Battle of Fort Sumter: Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia—after which, they were less frequently called "border states". Also included as a border state during the war is West Virginia, which broke away from Virginia and became a new state in the Union in 1863.[1][2]

    In all the border states there was a wide consensus against military coercion of the Confederacy. When Abraham Lincoln called for troops to march south to recapture Fort Sumter and other national possessions, southern Unionists were dismayed, and secessionists in Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia were successful in getting those states to also declare independence from the U.S. and to join the Confederate States of America.[3]

    In Kentucky and Missouri, there were both pro-Confederate and pro-Union governments. West Virginia was formed in 1862-63 from those northwestern counties of Virginia which had remained loyal to the Union and set up a loyalist ("restored") state government of Virginia. Though every slave state except South Carolina contributed some white troops to the Union as well as the Confederate side,[4] the split was most severe in these border states, with men from the same family often fighting on opposite sides. About 170,000 Border state men fought in the Union army and 86,000 in the Confederate army[5]

    Besides formal combat between regular armies, the border region witnessed large-scale guerrilla warfare and violent raids, feuds and assassinations.[6] Violence was especially severe in eastern Kentucky and western Missouri. The single bloodiest episode was the Lawrence Massacre in Kansas in 1863.[7]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •