Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Here’s a science based book, by an actual scientist, that explains a ton about why people are eager to embrace certain arguments and overlook their weaknesses while rejecting others and ignoring their strengths: https://www.amazon.com/Case-Against-.../dp/0393254690
To a significant extent, it's hard wired into our heads. Thousands of years of evolution have conditioned us to perceive things in ways that help us, comfort and reinforce us, and aid us in bonding with others.
Perception is reality. That’s true. But it’s not necessarily fact. |
You liked Factfulness. In many ways, 1619 is the same kind of project, makes people take a look at subject from a different (and fact-based) perspective, and the idea that a bunch of people are up in arms over the idea that slavery was an important issue in the American revolution (the most common complaint about the project) kind of makes the point.
Of course slavery was an issue in the Revolution. For example, not a lot of people are really aware of how prevalent or extensive slavery was in the North, or how many of the Northern signers of the declaration owned slaves. I grew up near the family seat of the Livingston family in upstate NY, for example, one of whom signed the Declaration and another of whom was on the five person committee drafting it, and at the time not only did they own slaves but they also operated a traditional Dutch patroon that imported indentured servants who became, effectively, serfs, and there is little doubt one of their objections to the British revolved around the pressures the British were bringing to bear on both slavery and serfdom. The fact that the revolution was run by slaveowners, north and south, motivated by a desire to preserve property is an important point made by 1619 (though it's quite an old point in historical terms, certainly, you find it made quite strenuously in the Dred Scott decision, for example, though there it's argued that its a motivation that should be embraced rather than rejected). (By the way, serfdom remained in upstate NY until the very early 19th century, so it survived the Revolution by more than a quarter century).
Its good to see these points being picked up by popular culture as well. If you haven't seen it, watch Turn on Netflix, it's about a spy ring Washington was running in NY and Long Island, and does a good job pointing out some of the moral ambiguity of the war. It depicts slaves on Long Island and in NY in the period, and has a bit of a punch on the issue at the end.
