I noted the rapid memory-holing of the Trump Administration’s 1776 Commission’s report yesterday. Then I read this article about the report by the New York Times’ “culture reporter’ whose beat is intellectual life and “the world of ideas.” It is a useful barometer of the biases the Times’ staff has against core American values as well as the Left’s thinly-veiled contempt for much of what our culture is built upon. It also reveals the paper’s assumption about its readership’s biases.
Right at the start, the article thinks it is smearing the report and its authors by asserting “its claims derive from arguments that have long circulated on the right.” Ooooh, “the right.” THOSE demons and troglodytes. In truth, most of the “ideas” have represented majority historical and philosophical thought in the U.S. until the ascent of race conflict as the defining feature of the nation became the cant of the increasingly anti-American educational establishment.
Here are some of the report’s conclusions that the Times mocks:
“Scholars have noted that the report has curiously little to say about the Civil War itself, suggesting that slavery’s end was less the result of a bloody conflict and more a kind of inevitable flowering of antislavery “seeds” planted in the Declaration of Independence’s assertion that “all men are created equal.”
This, of course, comes from the publisher of the discredited “1619 Project.”
“The report argues that while fascism and communism may have been “bitter enemies in their wars to achieve global domination,” they were in fact “ideological cousins” that threatened the principles of “natural rights and free peoples” enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.”
Wait, what? Is there any serious controversy on this point? The Times, incredibly, is still showing signs of its pro-Stalin stance maintained by the infamous Communist-apologist Moscow correspondent Walter Duranty. Stalin murdered more people than Hitler; Mao murdered more than Hitler and Stalin combined. These are all brutal dictators whose totalitarian methods undeniably “threatened the principles of “natural rights and free peoples” enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.”
Now get this head-blaster:
But the report, he added, is perhaps less notable for what it says about America’s relationship to communism and fascism than what it omits.“Note that this historically innocent reader of this report would have no idea that the U.S.S.R. fought on the same side as the U.S. in World War II”…
That ignorant reader would have many to blame for the inexcusable gap in his knowledge, but not the report, because which side the USSR fought on is irrelevant to assessing its contempt for individual liberties and human rights.
“In its section on early 20th-century “Progressivism,” it describes the rise of the regulatory bureaucracy, a kind of unaccountable “shadow government” that the report characterizes as a betrayal of the founding principles.In order to keep up with the complexity of society, the report writes, early 20th century Progressives like Woodrow Wilson — here compared to the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini — envisioned a regulatory regime run by unelected experts, under which, as Wilson wrote, “the functions of government are in a very real sense independent of legislation, and even constitutions.”
That description of the regulatory government is absolutely accurate. The truth hurts. The Times is also appealing to that previously mentioned “historically ignorant” reader, who probably thinks it is a terrible and undeserved insult to compare a Democratic Party President to a fascist dictator. I think a strong case can be made that Wilson did more damage than Mussolini.
“History underscores the overwhelming importance of religious faith in American life,” it begins. “But some today see religious practice and political liberty to be in conflict and hold that religion is divisive and should be kept out of the public square. The founders of America held a very different view.”
The Times uses the cognitive dissonance scale to tie belief in the cultural importance of religion to those bigoted nutcakes, the religious right—you know, with all that laying on of hands and not wanting to bake gay wedding cakes and snakes and stuff. Them. However, the statement quoted from the report is accurate. We know the Founder held “a different view,” because they constantly brought religion and references to “the Creator’ into public discourse.
The Times attempts to expose the biases of 1776 Report, but only exposes its own, and ugly, disturbing biases they are.