Thread by @RMFifthCircuit

History side-note moment: I read this 1776 report. I'll leave to others the various errors and whatnot. But it is a singularly bad piece of writing. Like how I wrote as a first year college student, but before my teacher told me to try again.

whitehouse.gov/wp-content/upl…

I keep scrolling expecting to find a sentence that begins "Webster's defines America as...."

But what is actually there is bad enough. For example, what is an immortal banner?

This makes us sound like children.

I'm a pretty hard core anti-communist. Cold warrior! But I'm not sure this pocket history of communist is that helpful.

Oh come on you absurd jerks (earlier in this ersatz college term paper, they'd announced that Teddy Roosevelt was one of these progressives, so Teddy=Mussolini, we are told)

Look, see, I love America's role in WWII, and we really kicked all sort of butts, is it too much to add "with our allies and friends across the world" in here.

Put aside the dubious argument in here, does anyone have any idea which are the "these" that are "indeed" the direct ancestors?

OK, I promised no merits, but this truly is horse manure. By the 18th century, we were a pretty crazy outlier on the slavery front amongst developed places.

I wonder why the movement to abolish slavery appeared in America and not, say, France.

Thanks for this pithy explanation of why republics fails. Class conflicts (COMMIES) and majorities. Great.

Anyway, In Conclusion, Webster's defines bad writing as this document. The End.

Seriously, you can teach history *and* patriotism, and it doesn't have to be like this. This makes the reader less informed, unless they had not heard of any of these ideas beforehand.