07/06/2018
In Up From Liberalism, the late William F. Buckley wrote "I note in passing that Lord Bertrand Russell reported that in McCarthy’s America, anyone caught reading Thomas Jefferson was likely to be packed off to jail". Russell actually said this, or something like it. You can see him defending it in the GUARDIAN here: Bertrand Russell and The US, Manchester Guardian, January 12, 1952. Russell’s point, to the extent that he had one, was Jefferson’s quotes about “a little rebellion” and “The Tree Of Liberty”, both of which are still exciting the SPLC’s anti-Patriot witch-hunters.
But it’s Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence that got banned from Facebook recently.
Reason Magazine has an item saying
Facebook Algorithm Flags, Removes Declaration of Independence Text as Hate Speech
The social media site has a difficult time telling the difference between white nationalist ravings and the writing of Thomas Jefferson.
By Christian Britschgi, July 3, 2018
I object to expression “white nationalist ravings” or the suggestion that, say, Jared Taylor’s opinions are that different from Jefferson’s.
However, Facebook did censor the Declaration of Independence. A patriotic group was serializing the Declaration of Independence on the Fourth of July, and they got to the part about the “merciless Indian Savages”.
"But part 10," writes Vindicator managing editor Casey Stinnett, "did not appear. Instead, The Vindicator received a notice from Facebook saying that the post 'goes against our standards on hate speech.'"
The post in question contained paragraphs 27 through 31 of the Declaration of Independence, the grievance section of the document wherein the put-upon colonists detail all the irreconcilable differences they have with King George III.
Stinnett says that he cannot be sure which exact grievance ran afoul of Facebook’s policy, but he assumes that it’s paragraph 31, which excoriates the King for inciting "domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages."
The removal of the post was an automated action, and Stinnett sent a "feedback message" to Facebook with the hopes of reaching a human being who could then exempt the Declaration of Independence from its hate speech restrictions.
Fearful that sharing more of the text might trigger the deletion of its Facebook page, The Vindicator has suspended its serialization of the declaration.
Reason’s Christian Britschgi goes on to say:
None of this is meant as a defense of referring to Native Americans as "savages." That phrasing is clearly racist and serves as another example of the American Revolution’s mixed legacy; one that won crucial liberties for a certain segment of the population, while continuing to deny those same liberties to Native Americans and African slaves. But by allowing the less controversial parts of the declaration to be shared while deleting the reference to "Indian savages," Facebook succeeds only in whitewashing America’s founding just as we get ready to celebrate it.
A more thoughtful approach to Independence Day — for both celebrants and social media companies alike — would be to grapple with those historical demons.
The “same liberties” the Signers of the Declaration wanted to deny the merciless Indian savages was the right to massacre white women and children — the full quote is
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
I assume Britschgi who is a recent university graduate, doesn’t know this (because it’s no longer taught in schools) but American Indian massacres were a real thing, before during and after the American Revolution.
The picture at the top of the page is Vanderlyn’s painting of the massacre and scalping of Jane McRea, which took place on July 27, 1777, and was done by Hurons who worked for General Burgoyne.
For more about America’s experience with merciless Indian savages, see:
Happening a hundred and fifty years before the Revolution, the 1622 slaughter in Wolstenholme Towne is still the largest mass murder ever committed in Virginia. [The Skulls Tell the Tale, By Hank Burchard April 25, Washington Post, 1980].
In the Minnesota Massacre of 1862, as pointed out by anthropologist John Greenway in the pre-purge National Review, “at least 800 whites were killed and 10,000 square miles of Minnesota cleared of settlers.” [Will The Indians Get Whitey, March 11, 1969, PDF]
The merciless Indian savages were real, and massacring women and children is not a civil right.
This is a content archive of VDARE.com, which Letitia James forced off of the Internet using lawfare.