Making Our founders Look good, At the Expense of Liberal Sounding Truth

IN A RECENT ARRICLE, we pointed out that what we want in historical writing is good, analytical truth, not biased reporting, liberal or conservative. And, if the truth sounds liberal, so be it, let the chips fall, without complaint or conservative indignation. Consider, for instance, Jamestown, 1607. The standard, conservative hagiographic, glory story is that the pioneers of 1607 braved the harsh wilderness, tried socialism, and since socialism in sharing all responsibilities collectively, always fails, they finally came to their senses, tried competitive individualistic capitalism, and built America. Jamestown indeed was a capitalistic venture, underwriten by the Virginia Company, which wanted its money back, and wanted profit. To this end the plan was to enslave the natives, and confiscate their gold and silver, just like the Spanish had done farther south. It worked for them, why not us? Other than that, they hadn't the slightest intention of doing a lick of work. This is a fact. They were ill prepared for labor of any sort, and since the Indians of Virgina turned out to be much more independent and hard to catch than the meek, obedient to authority Aztecs, and since they hardly bothered with gold and silver mining, the plan simply did not work out. So, the Virginia colony started starving to death, eating their dead, and stealing from the graves and storage buildings of the Indians, who resented it, sicne all the indians wanted to do was observe the newcomers, and help if they could. The Indians thought the settlers were insane, because of their complete lack of basic survival skills, which, it can be argued, they were. Sure, the settlers worked together to grow crops, once they stopped running around digging holes in the ground, but working together was not an experiment in socialism, it was desperation. Nothing would have worked, free market or otherwise, had it not been for native assistance, the eventual arrival of more ships from England, and the purchase of slaves in 1619. Does that sound liberal, or conservative? Well, since it does not reflect well on America's earliest founding, call it liberal. After all, liberals are the ones who do not like America, and do not glorify or celebrate it. Problem is, its the truth, and it does not make our ancestors look good. But no doubt we will continue to muddle through with our traditional, pro-Aamerican anti-truth conservative version, the one about bravery and hard work. Its more comforting, and makes our founders look better. Isn't that what we really want, rather than the damnable liberal sounding truth?