Friday, January 22, 2021

Just What Exactly about 1776 Does Biden Not Like?

Larry P. Arnn, President of Hillsdale College, served as the Chairman of the Presidential 1776 Commission, a commission appointed by the 45th President of the United States. The Commission issued its 1776 Report this past Monday, January 18, 2021. 

The report calls for a return to the unifying principles of the Declaration of Independence. It quotes the greatest Americans, black and white, men and women, in devotion to these principles. The report also calls for a civics education that fosters a reverence for our nation's unifying principles, beginning with accurate and honest teaching of American history. It is no partisan document.

Yet, on Wednesday, January 20, 2021, President Joe Biden abolished the 1776 Commission with one of his first executive orders after taking the oath of office.

Mike Gonzales, a senior fellow in Heritage's Allison Center for Foreign Policy and the Angeles T. Arredondo E Pluribus Unum fellow and one of the 1776 Commissioners, commented on President Biden's abolishment of the commission

All Americans should wish President Joe Biden well. To do otherwise would be churlish and self-defeating. It beggars belief, though, that one of his first intended acts was for his White House to take down the report issued Monday by the 1776 Commission, and on his first day as president, to disband the commission.

Is that really the priority? As one of the commissioners, I guess I’m flattered. But is the baying from the woke left so furious that dissolving a commission named after our nation’s founding, and deleting a report calling for teaching objective history, makes the top of the list?

The symbolism alone should give pause. But maybe the symbolism is the thing, and our new president wants to demonstrate his bona fides to the creators of the 1619 Project and their hard-left allies.

For the record, we commissioners intend to continue meeting and fulfilling the charges of our two-year remit. The Heritage Foundation will also continue to host the report, which you can henceforth find here.
You must read the 1776 report. I am grateful for the 1776 Commission and its superb work!

After you read the 1776 Report, I think you'll hard-pressed to understand why our new President felt the need to abolish it.

On the other hand, it might also explain the serious trouble we are in as a nation.


Christiane said...

Hello WADE,

I suspect this might include SOME of the reasons:

"In an executive order signed on Wednesday in his first day in office, Biden disbanded Donald Trump’s presidential 1776 Commission and withdrew a report it released Monday. Trump established the group in September to rally support from white voters and as a response to The New York Times’ “1619 Project,” which highlights the lasting consequences of slavery in America.

In its report, which Trump hoped would be used in classrooms across the nation, the commission glorifies the country’s founders, plays down America’s role in slavery, condemns the rise of progressive politics and argues that the civil rights movement ran afoul of the “lofty ideals” espoused by the Founding Fathers.

The panel, which included no professional historians of the United States, complained of “false and fashionable ideologies” that depict the country’s story as one of “oppression and victimhood.” Instead, it called for renewed efforts to foster “a brave and honest love for our country.”

Historians widely panned the report, saying it offers a false and outdated version of American history that ignores decades of research.

“It’s an insult to the whole enterprise of education. Education is supposed to help young people learn to think critically,” said David Blight, a Civil War historian at Yale University. “That report is a piece of right-wing propaganda.”

normally in such an undertaking, only the most reputable and honored American historians would included, but this did not happen. Your guess is as good as mine as to the 'why', but even a casual reading of the report showed me that the document is not so much a scholarly work as it is a politically-influenced product.

I had thought that the Heritage organization was more academically-oriented. (?)

Wade Burleson said...


I always appreciate your respectful disagreement. You model how we should be.

I know four of the commissioners personally, and their academic credentials are impeccable. I do agree with you - every historian comes to the table with a bias.

I personally like any historian who is biased toward favoritism of the year 1776 and distance myself from those historians who denigrate the year.

Christiane said...

Thank you, WADE

Sorry to be 'negative' as to viewing the document.
My maternal family of Ausbon's, Gray's, and Iredell's are known to pre-date 1776, and to have been slave holders. And many maternal ancestors 'left the union' for the Confederacy and include a war hero, Pr. Wm. James Ausbon (Siege of Petersburg) 17th NC troops,
so I also am partial to history and am inclined to feel a sense of devotion to the truth about it as best we can know that truth. I never felt closer to that part of the family than when I read a copy of a letter from McGibray Ausbon (Gib) who humbly asked for a suit of clothing to be made for himself from a blanket. . . . he was brother to my great-grandfather Joseph Gray Ausbon, one-time Clerk of the Courthouse of Washington County, NC. . . .

I think the 'words' left to us and passed down help us to know that these were REAL flesh and blood people who lived and struggled and worshiped in those times, and that our DNA 'matters' in its connection to them.

I do have an interest in seeing that the truth about what happened to the slaves is maintained, as the stories are grim, but there were also 'beloved' 'aunts' and 'uncles' that the Family took care of in their old age and they were mourned and buried with dignity, so to know the truth, we must know both sides of the Story, even the painful side, or the good parts don't mean as much in that they contrasted to what was evil.
I hope this makes sense. Your kind comment to me was a gracious one. Thanks again.

Rex Ray said...

I’ve a bone to pick with you. 😊
You wrote: “The Heritage Foundation will also continue to host the report, which you can henceforth find here.”

Well, I clicked on here, and printed 44 pages. It didn’t make sense; how could 1776 be discussing the Civil War? I finally realized you wrote most of it.

Our Dad would write something; put it in a magazine and read to his brothers. They finally got wise to him.

Biden had some good speech writers; He said he was going to unite America. If he wanted to be popular with the millions that voted Trump, he’d stop his impeachment.

But that would put Biden between a rock and a hard place because he’d probably have to face Trump in the next Presidential Election.

RB Kuter said...

Thanks for again bringing to our attention a matter that deserves review and scrutinizing. This is one of the reasons I have followed your blog for years.

I have mixed feelings about this one. I am anxious to support anything that validated true history, especially American history. I am of the opinion that our education system is definitely run by activists that push the left/socialist/liberal agenda and has for decades. I also believe that there is a battle raging between American nationalists against "globalists", whose sect has dominated American political leadership for decades. Both major political parties are dominated by the "globalist" agenda.

Trump represented the extremity of nationalism and challenged the established globalist system which is so much in control and so embedded in the political structure that their ideology is very unlikely to be extracted by anyone. Things have gone too far to be reversed at this point.

I believe this is the basis for Biden's abolishment of the Report and dismantling the Commission. It was very predictable for a couple of reasons.

First, I believe Trump was in error by not choosing a Commission consisting of entirely historian scholars who would likely be objective in their report. At least that would have displayed an attempt to have an unbiased, non-political, final product.

As much as I hate to say it, my impression is that Trump had a pre-set agenda that was sure to result in the Report being biased in favor of the outcome he wanted. His motive was to confront the extremely liberal biased teaching that is going on now using an extremely conservative political slant to undermine the leftist presentation of history that demonizes the US in all schools from K-1 to the highest graduate levels.

Second, it seems obvious to me that Biden would abolish the Report and Commission to eliminate opposition to the current liberal education agenda that distorts US history and supports the globalists' strategy of removing the national identity of all countries. Of course, he would remove it and, along with the majority of his colleagues, choose instead to push an agenda that demonizes America which contributes to the movement to unravel traditional American prioritization of being strongly identified as a sovereign, independent, nation. That form of "nationalism" directly competes against the concept of "globalization" which requires the corporate rule of the planet with no regard to the sovereign rule of any individual nation.

(Personally, I believe this all fits into God's pre-determined, announced prescription of "The End Times" and setting the stage for a global leader who has no regard for the sovereignty of any nation.)

IF I am correct and this IS reflective of the path unfolding toward God's predestined conclusion to this worldly kingdom as portrayed in the Bible then the continued progression of the liberal/globalist takeover is inevitiable.

Scott Shaver said...

If you're genuinely interested in finding the truth about slavery, perhaps you should turn your attention to African tribal human trafficking and the Muslim slave traders who expanded the industry along with the Dutch.

Scott Shaver said...

RB Kuter:

How would your projection change if a more amillenial as opposed to premillenial eschatology actually unfolded?

RB Kuter said...

"White House Announces It Will Codify Federal Abortion Law"

"Codifying Roe v. Wade would take the question of safe and legal abortion out of the Supreme Court’s hands by passing legislation in Congress that guarantees women in every state the right to unfettered access to abortion care."

Bottom line, return to increased, unfettered, slaughter of innocent children.

The saddest collateral destruction resulting from today's decadent society.

RB Kuter said...

Scott asked,"How would your projection change if a more amillenial as opposed to premillenial eschatology actually unfolded?"

For me, that is like asking for my projection of what would happen to all of us if there had not been a crucifixion of Jesus Christ.

I assess things in the Bible on the basis of,"unless I am convinced that interpreting Scripture in literal terms would in some way take it out of context with the rest of Scripture, I go with the 'literal' presentation".

I find that the premillennial view is most consistent with the context of the description of the closure to this dispensation as portrayed in Old Testament prophecy as well as New Testament and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Whereas the "amillennial" approach is similar to the effort to distort the reality of true events as in those who propose that the entire Creation story, Adam, Eve, the serpent, were simply allegorical.

No offense intended. I realize a lot of scholars more learned than I would disagree, and that's okay with me.

Christiane said...

sometimes we can try to LISTEN to those who 'know' from slavery,
and their voices were recorded in the 1930's before they passed away.

Here is a sample from the US Library of Congress:

I'm for going to 'source' materials for 'authenticity' if possible.
This gives 'voice' to those who lived through experiences we cannot know ourselves.
Once we hear them or read their words,
we can then form our OWN OPINION about what we have heard;

rather than
reading opinions of people who never listened and whose narrative may not be 'authentic'.

Source materials are important, but sometimes overlooked. Real historians do search out and try to locate from as many 'source' materials as possible.

We can 'assume' from the voices and writings of the dead who lived through the old times;
but their voices are their own. That they lived and spoke and wrote tells us more than we can 'assume' or 'guess' but only if we LISTEN to THEM in an authentic way first, and sometimes this IS POSSIBLE.

In the coming impeachment trial in Feb.
the prosecutors will show us the actual voices and pictures of what was said.
So we know. In case there are those who did not LISTEN. So they know.
We will ALL BE WITNESSES at that trial, to see and hear for ourselves. This is a good thing that this happens, I believe, make of it what we will.

Rex Ray said...


Got this today, and passed it on. So, I’ll do it here.

“WE spent 738 billion dollars on defense in 2020, and the Capitol building was taken in 10 minutes by Duck Dynasty and a guy in a deerskin bikini.”

Christiane said...

REX RAY, that's hysterical LOL


You always did cheer me up. :) Thanks!

Christiane said...

REX RAY, this woke me up this morning !

Rex Ray said...


That lady sure knew about the John Birch Society from her experience. They had her father brain-washed for him to give them all that money!

They took a good man’s name (John Birch) and used it as a foundation for their twisted philosophy.

Scott Shaver said...

Most premillenialists mischaracterize the amillenialsim IMO.