Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   1776 has been 404'ed   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Followup, shot  
•       •       •

3778 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Jan 2021 at 10:03 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



141 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-01-20 5:50:23 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2021-01-20 8:17:12 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-01-20 8:39:09 PM  
Its been rescinded by EO. Plus it was plagiarized.
 
2021-01-20 8:43:06 PM  
Biden has hit the ground running. I love it.
 
2021-01-20 9:05:39 PM  
Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism
 
2021-01-20 9:23:08 PM  
Repeat.
 
2021-01-20 9:25:42 PM  
thank goodness.
 
2021-01-20 9:25:47 PM  
I don't even know what it was.
 
2021-01-20 9:25:52 PM  

spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism


because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.
 
2021-01-20 9:26:45 PM  

spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism


Yes and yes
See also the comment about 1865 being too obvious
 
2021-01-20 9:26:55 PM  

baorao: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.


I think 1861 Project would have been more appropriate for them.
 
2021-01-20 9:27:13 PM  

Fireproof: I don't even know what it was.


Fake nauseating history
 
2021-01-20 9:27:17 PM  
Seventy-six been eighty-sixed.

For you current and former restaurant-type people.
 
2021-01-20 9:27:36 PM  

Mrtraveler01: baorao: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.

I think 1861 Project would have been more appropriate for them.


You think they can count?
 
2021-01-20 9:27:46 PM  

baorao: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.


or 1920
 
2021-01-20 9:28:25 PM  

haknudsen: baorao: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.

or 1920


or 1964
 
2021-01-20 9:28:50 PM  
I swear! Sleepy Joe is a complete failure! AT BEING SLEEPY! Instead, we get is this hyperactive guy who signed 50 Executive Orders and swore in nearly 1000 appointees and right now he's changing the oil in my motorcycle! And I'm on the west coast.
 
2021-01-20 9:29:07 PM  

spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism


"1776" is a rallying cry for the militia movement.  Hence seditionist Boebert's "This is 1776" tweet, as a direct call to armed "revolution". It's coded for western chauvinists to understand 1619 as an attack on their sensibilities, and the 1776 report as the defense of that attack.

3%'ers take their name from the false belief that only 3% of Americans fought to overthrow Brittish rule in the Revolutionary War which occurred (not necessarily started) in the year 1776, signified with the Declaration of Independence, etc.

It's militia LARP fodder.
 
2021-01-20 9:30:17 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-01-20 9:30:44 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


Golly, ain't that a cryin' shame?
 
2021-01-20 9:31:28 PM  
It's like 732 for French white supremacists.
 
2021-01-20 9:31:34 PM  

baorao: haknudsen: baorao: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.

or 1920

or 1964


I'm surprised they didn't go with 1488.
 
2021-01-20 9:34:56 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-01-20 9:35:31 PM  

nmrsnr: [Fark user image 208x180] [View Full Size image _x_]


We'll be seeing that a LOT in the coming month.
 
2021-01-20 9:35:39 PM  
420 bro
 
2021-01-20 9:35:55 PM  
1790 was a good year.
https://copyright.gov/about/1790-copy​r​ight-act.html

Lots of good stuff promoting science and public education. Things that used to be priorities.

America would be really awful if presidential terms expanded like copyright terms. 28 years of Nixon followed by 28 years of Trump, ugh.
 
2021-01-20 9:35:55 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-01-20 9:39:24 PM  

spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?


Because 1776 is the traditional date of the founding of the country, not the revisionist 1619 date. It emphasised that point.
 
2021-01-20 9:39:46 PM  

spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism


It still isn't clear why the Red echo chamber got so fixated on the sort of well-intentioned series of features the NYT runs on slow news days, sermons directed firmly towards the choir.
 
2021-01-20 9:40:07 PM  
fark!

I haven't finished my book report for Ms. Wilson's class on how the pilgrims taught the Indians how to make fire and love Jesus yet
 
2021-01-20 9:40:14 PM  
SHUT. DOWN.
ALL THE TRUMP THINGS!!

Go Joe!
 
2021-01-20 9:41:56 PM  

Meatsim1: fark!

I haven't finished my book report for Ms. Wilson's class on how the pilgrims taught the Indians how to make fire and love Jesus yet


Captain America showed up and did it.  There, done.
 
2021-01-20 9:42:29 PM  

MikeyFuccon: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

It still isn't clear why the Red echo chamber got so fixated on the sort of well-intentioned series of features the NYT runs on slow news days, sermons directed firmly towards the choir.


Because it shattered the illusion that America's history has a dark side and that it wasn't just sunshine and rainbows.

The right doesn't want to confront that harsh reality.
 
2021-01-20 9:42:31 PM  
Whitehouse.gov/eugenics was a little on the nose even for Miller
 
2021-01-20 9:42:58 PM  
Day farking one. No time wasted. Love it. Competence and efficiency and having a plan.
 
2021-01-20 9:43:48 PM  

baorao: haknudsen: baorao: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.

or 1920

or 1964


or The 14 words project
 
2021-01-20 9:44:31 PM  

Alien Robot: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?

Because 1776 is the traditional date of the founding of the country, not the revisionist 1619 date. It emphasised that point.


You know that wasnt the point of the 1619 project right?

No wonder you're a Trump supporter.
 
2021-01-20 9:44:51 PM  

quatchi: SHUT. DOWN.
ALL THE TRUMP THINGS!!

Go Joe!


Fox News: "Biden has decided to tarnish his presidency by just reversing everything Trump did.  Wait, why are you all cheering?  STOP THAT!"
 
2021-01-20 9:46:03 PM  

Alien Robot: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?

Because 1776 is the traditional date of the founding of the country, not the revisionist 1619 date. It emphasised that point.


That's certainly a huge load of dumbass bad faith bullshiat.

The 1619 Project isn't some revisionist attempt to change the "date of the founding of the country." It plots the origins and consequences of slavery from the arrival of the first slaver ships to the colonies, in 1619. Much as it galls you to face it, slavery is an important part of this country's history, and recognizing that fact is how we can move forward and deal with its ongoing social and economic consequences.

Of course, you know that. You don't believe any of the shiat you're posting.
 
2021-01-20 9:46:23 PM  

Fireproof: I don't even know what it was.


Recommendations for history curriculum that told as accurate a story about slavery as Song of the South told about Reconstruction.
 
2021-01-20 9:47:01 PM  
A few weeks ago the local right-wing fascists got tired of getting beat in court and put together a web site stating how they wanted to "take back" the local school system and forklifted chunks of 1776 as their demands.

When the insurrection at the Capital happened they teachers did as they should and talked about it with the class.

The right-wingers went nuts and called the school and sent anonymous threats to the teachers via email.  It got serious enough that one of them had to be cleared out for a bomb threat.

They said that educators shouldn't be discussing these sorts of things with students and they're using it to indoctrinate the kids.

Pretty sure that threatening to blow up a school because you don't like what's being discussed tells students everything they need to know about them.
 
2021-01-20 9:52:18 PM  

Mrtraveler01: baorao: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.

I think 1861 Project would have been more appropriate for them.


Maybe it should've been called the 1488 project.
 
2021-01-20 9:54:30 PM  

Bloody William: Alien Robot: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?

Because 1776 is the traditional date of the founding of the country, not the revisionist 1619 date. It emphasised that point.

That's certainly a huge load of dumbass bad faith bullshiat.

The 1619 Project isn't some revisionist attempt to change the "date of the founding of the country." It plots the origins and consequences of slavery from the arrival of the first slaver ships to the colonies, in 1619. Much as it galls you to face it, slavery is an important part of this country's history, and recognizing that fact is how we can move forward and deal with its ongoing social and economic consequences.

Of course, you know that. You don't believe any of the shiat you're posting.


Pointing out that America has flaws means you hate America!
 
2021-01-20 9:55:38 PM  
Fahk yo' imperialism!
 
2021-01-20 9:56:00 PM  

baorao: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?
I'm guessing it was just an attempt to use patriotism

because the 1865 Project was a little too obvious.


Anyone try the Epik server or that one owned by two Russians where Parler is hoping to live?
 
2021-01-20 9:56:54 PM  
Funny reply in there:

every time joe revokes one of his executive orders, you have to do a shot. Break out your stunt liver.
 
2021-01-20 9:58:37 PM  

IDisME: Funny reply in there:

every time joe revokes one of his executive orders, you have to do a shot. Break out your stunt liver.


I'm Irish.  I was born with a stunt liver.
 
2021-01-20 9:58:59 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Alien Robot: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?

Because 1776 is the traditional date of the founding of the country, not the revisionist 1619 date. It emphasised that point.

You know that wasnt the point of the 1619 project right?

No wonder you're a Trump supporter.


From the original introduction on the NY Times site:

"The 1619 project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country's history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative."

And this:

pbs.twimg.comView Full Size


And the banner she refers to:

d2eehagpk5cl65.cloudfront.netView Full Size
 
2021-01-20 9:59:25 PM  

Bloody William: It plots the origins and consequences of slavery from the arrival of the first slaver ships to the colonies, in 1619


Precisely. The ideological story that naive Americans like to tell themselves about the magical founding of the country in 1776 were enlarged by an actual historical investigation into the economic systems that created the country that started far earlier than Paul Revere's little ride. For the reactionaries nothing "happened" that was noteworthy between the Puritans arrival and the Battle of Bunker Hill--so that is literally all they pretend happened.
 
2021-01-20 10:00:36 PM  

Bloody William: Alien Robot: spongeboob: Why was this called 1776 wasn't it a response to the 1619 project?

Because 1776 is the traditional date of the founding of the country, not the revisionist 1619 date. It emphasised that point.

That's certainly a huge load of dumbass bad faith bullshiat.

The 1619 Project isn't some revisionist attempt to change the "date of the founding of the country."


pbs.twimg.comView Full Size
 
Displayed 50 of 141 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.