Michelle Obama has made the remark that the house she has been inhabiting for years, The White House, was "built by slaves". These days, the home built for the first U.S. president may serve as a home to a black woman whose biggest achievement is to have slept with a kitschy popular semi-black community organizer who has alienated most of the U.S. allies, doubled the budget deficits, and done similar things.
Bill O'Reilly has controversially supported Michelle Obama's suggestion that this change of the situation represents "progress" but he also analyzed these comments on his Factor from the viewpoint of a historian. He has provided his viewers with many facts about the actual workers who built the house for George Washington (who had an office in Philadelphia), the compensation they received, and the evolving status of slavery in these years.
His final point was that Michelle Obama's comment is somewhat misleading because the house was obviously not built "just by slaves", just like buildings today aren't built just by the construction workers. There have been others who were essential for the construction of the building, including immigrants, James Hoban, and the U.S. taxpayers who were providing the slaves with food and housing and their masters with a compensation.
The reaction reminded me why I just couldn't stand the contemporary America. It's full of absolutely fanatical, totally ideological, and obnoxiously loud leftists with no respect to the historical truth (or any truth, not to mention the freedom and other key Western values). Twitter, the same website that has terrorized and permanently suspended a Breitbart editor for mentioning that the new, politically correct remake of Ghostbusters was lousy (something that even this left-wing pig knows very well), is suddenly OK with the attacks by thousands of nasty scumbags against Bill O'Reilly. Far left-wing political websites reacted in a similar way.
What Bill O'Reilly has presented was nothing else than the historical truth. These slaves were used for a task of special importance by the U.S. government – that was compensating the slave masters and that was gradually preparing for abandoning slavery altogether. So there was nothing strikingly inhuman about the treatment of the slaves who were building the new home for the U.S. presidents. They were well-fed and had decent lodgings. The food they were receiving may have been better than what they eat today.
Whether someone wants to deny it or not, much of the change of the status of black workers between the 1790s and 2010s was just a bureaucratic rearrangement of a sort. The blacks are called free today but like all other free people, they are constrained by their wealth and the need to survive. In practice, the constraints aren't too different from what they used to be when these black construction workers were slaves. They have to work, otherwise they're in trouble. They get what they need and what most of them primarily need is food and housing. Well, maybe some water and sex, too. Let's not be distracted by irrelevant details.
And the employer – whether it's a slave owner or a modern company – has no good reason to make their lives miserable for no good reason. Companies aren't trying to hurt blacks just for the sake of it – but most slave owners in that era, especially those cooperating with the U.S. government, weren't doing such a thing, either. In practice, the difference is limited. Some decisions that used to be made by the slave owners are being made by the blacks themselves today. The modern approach looks more human and kosher to most of us – including me – but it's still plausible that many of the decisions about the blacks' lives were better when they were done by someone else.
The fanatical leftists don't give a damn about the question whether O'Reilly's comments are true or false. They don't want to see the food that these workers were receiving. Their curiosity is zero. Their passion for the truth is zero. Instead, what they want to do is to impose stringent taboos and brutal oversimplifications about all topics they consider sensitive on the whole society. They want to make everyone obliged to say that everything had to be absolutely terrible when slavery existed. They don't want to allow the people to know or investigate – or even think – about anything that could contradict these superficial and mostly untrue appraisals.
I do think that when all positives and negatives are added together, the civilization has made a progress when the blacks began to decide about their own life and jobs. On the other hand, I think that the world would become a better place if the fanatical dishonest leftists were turned into slaves now. They seem utterly unable to use their own brains or peacefully co-exist with the society and their freedom is more or less guaranteed to lead to nothing positive. Many nice new white and colorful houses could be built instead of the hostile tweets if someone had the capability of using these individuals' strength effectively and constructively – instead of encouraging them to pretend that they're thinkers which they're surely not.