Discussing the Highly Historically-Inaccurate Portrayal of the Life of Slave Rebel, Nat Turner, in the Film, “The Birth of a Nation”

The following correspondence originally took place on my Facebook wall, upon my post, “‘The Birth of a Nation’ Presents a Highly Historically-Inaccurate Portrayal of the Life of Slave Rebel, Nat Turner”

"The Birth of a Nation"

“The Birth of a Nation”

Rayn: *sigh* What a waste of an opportunity… It figures…

“The Birth of a Nation” Is an Epic Fail:
https://www.thenation.com/article/the-birth-of-a-nation-is-an-epic-fail/

Tammy S.: I had such high hopes. Your cousins are going to see it today… I can’t wait to hear their opinion.

“The Birth of a Nation” Presents a Highly Historically-Inaccurate Portrayal of the Life of Slave Rebel, Nat Turner

I originally posted the following information and commentary onto my Facebook wall…

2016-10-07-the-birth-of-a-nation-presents-a-highly-historically-inaccurate-portrayal-of-the-life-of-slave-rebel-nat-turner

“The Birth of a Nation”

“The Birth of a Nation” Is an Epic Fail:
https://www.thenation.com/article/the-birth-of-a-nation-is-an-epic-fail/

(Leslie M. Alexanderfirestorm of controversy has swirled around Nate Parker and his film The Birth of a Nation in the two months since several media outlets revealed that Parker and his co-author, Jean McGianni Celestin, stood trial for raping a young woman in 1999. Across the country, social media lit up as people debated Parker’s guilt, questioned whether to boycott the film, and expressed outrage about violence against women. As the storm raged, however, one critical issue went ignored. No one questioned the fundamental value or quality of the film. Based on the standing ovations it received at the Sundance Film Festival, we assumed that The Birth of a Nation was inherently valuable, inspirational, educational, and transformative.

We were wrong.

The Birth of a Nation claims to tell the true story of Nat Turner, leader of the bloodiest slave rebellion in United States history. A film on Turner is long overdue, and as a professional historian of the black experience in the nineteenth century, I have anxiously awaited one. I was especially encouraged by September’s issue of Vanity Fair, in which Parker stated that he had become “obsessed with the idea of telling Nat Turner’s story” and that he sought to create “historical fidelity in his depiction of the leader of the rebellion.”

After attending an advance screening of the film, however, I now know that Parker failed miserably in his mission. Contrary to his promises of “historical fidelity,” Parker created a deeply flawed, historically inaccurate movie that exploits and distorts Nat Turner’s story and the history of slavery in America. Nearly everything in the movie—ranging from Turner’s relationship with his family, to his life as a slave, and even the rebellion itself—is a complete fabrication. Certainly the film contains sprinklings of historical fact, but the bulk of Parker’s story about the rebellion is fictitious: Nat Turner did not murder his owner, nor did he kill a slave patroller. Turner’s rebellion was not betrayed by a young boy, or by anyone else involved in the revolt.

(Read entire article here…)

My Commentary: *sigh* What a waste of an opportunity… It figures…

“The People” Simply Cannot Delegate to the Government Rights Which They Do Not Have

I originally posted the following video and commentary onto my Facebook wall…

Government is Magic:

My Commentary: If government derives its power from “the people,” then they can only do those things which “the people” have the right to do… “The people” cannot delegate to the government rights which they do not have. This is bullet-proof logic, and yet, for the Statist, it simply does not compute, because they cannot accept the cold, hard truth that NO ONE HAS A RIGHT TO STEAL, OR INITIATE VIOLENCE against others…

“Understand then all of you, especially the young, that to want to impose an imaginary state of government on others by violence is not only a vulgar superstition, but even a criminal work. Understand that this work, far from assuring the well-being of humanity is only a lie, a more or less unconscious hypocrisy, camouflaging the lowest passions we possess.”
– Leo Tolstoy, “The Law of Love and the Law of Violence” (1908)

The Relationship Between Democide and Gun Control

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following artwork here, being shared by the page, “Vermont Voluntaryists,” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…

"I can think of 6 million reasons why ordinary citizens should own assault weapons"

“I can think of 6 million reasons why ordinary citizens should own assault weapons.”

My Commentary: Over 11 million, actually… if you’re including all victims.

Statists Can’t Seem to Wrap Their Heads Around Liberty

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following artwork here, being shared by the page, “Psychologic-Anarchist,” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…

"The argument for liberty is not an argument against organization, which is one of the most powerful tools human reason can employ, but an argument against all exclusive, privileged, monopolistic organization, against the use of coercion to prevent others from doing better." - Friedrich Hayek

“The argument for liberty is not an argument against organization, which is one of the most powerful tools human reason can employ, but an argument against all exclusive, privileged, monopolistic organization, against the use of coercion to prevent others from doing better.” – Friedrich Hayek

My Commentary: Something Statists can’t seem to wrap their heads around…