We've Been Telling the Alamo Story Wrong for Nearly 200 Years. Now It's Time to Correct the Record

Time ^ | June 9, 2021 | Bryan Burrough

[al_c]

Imagine if the U.S. were to open interior Alaska for colonization and, for whatever reason, thousands of Canadian settlers poured in, establishing their own towns, hockey rinks and Tim Hortons stores. When the U.S. insists they follow American laws and pay American taxes, they refuse. When the government tries to collect taxes, they shoot and kill American soldiers. When law enforcement goes after the killers, the colonists, backed by Canadian financing and mercenaries, take up arms in open revolt.

[al_c]

Revisionists are coming after the Alamo now.

[al_c]

And, of course, Americans are the bad guys.

[coloradan]

Gaslighters gonna gaslight. Consider the source, Time Magazine. Yeah, no.

[MHGinTN]

Time’s source is lkely some leftist history professor at a leftist college or university. The left is determined to destroy America and American History in every wy they can imagine to do. Evil does not rest, it spreads like fecal runs.

[kiryandil]

Was Slime Fagazine’s Bryan Burrough always a ball-less faggot, or did he have them removed after he got “woke”?

[3RIVRS]

The Canadiens would have told the story the same way Texas did. Winners write history.

[LuxAerterna]

We knew this was coming.

[OKSooner]

Yep, here comes the woke version...

[Alas Babylon!]

Nope. Both Canada and the USA are democratic countries offering a very similar lifestyle and way of government.

Mexico, after gaining independence from Spain (who gave the original charters for Americans to settle in Texas) became a dictatorship under Generalisimo Santa Ana, and his tyranny caused the rebellion in Texas. Americans simply fight for their liberties (or used to), whether the dictator is a British King and his Parliament, or a Latin American Autocrat General.

[BusterDog]

I heard a snippet of the book writer’s interview on the radio, may have been NPR.

The thrust of it is that we need to teach that Santa Anna’s primary purposes in attacking the Alamo was to recapture lands illegally taken from Mexico and to free slaves.

[the OlLine Rebel]

Yup. And in “mainstream media”.

Tell me these jackasses don’t hate America.

Ask a Dem if he can say “I love America”.

He might say it, but rebuke him when he qualifies it with “...but....”

90% they cannot say they love America. 100% they cannot say they love it WITHOUT QUALIFIERS.

[ConservativeInPA]

Crazy. They must have a time machine where they go back and get new historical evidence. If that isn’t the case, I would trust what was written about the Alamo a century or more ago. The closer to the actual events the better.

[SoCal Pubbie]

Hey Bryan, how about Juan Abamillo, Juan A. Badillo, Carlos Espalier, Gregorio Esparza, Antonio Fuentes, Jose Maria Guerrero, Damacio Jimenez, Toribio Losoya, and Andres Nava? Ever hear of those guys?

[larrytown]

Yawn.

Santa Ana - “President”

Like most faulty revisionists - you are conned into buying their presumptions and premises, and/or their purposeful omissions of fact.

Winston Smith works at Time.

[G Larry]

They don’ call it “Yahoo News” for nothing.

[Rebelbase]

Conquest has always been a part of history and always will be.

[Skywise]

Except that’s a complete fabrication of the story Time and YOU KNOW IT.

[shanover]

I can’t believe I read Time as a kid. I couldn’t wait to get it in the mail. This and most other magazines are owned by a handful of leftist publishers and hire only writers who push the leftist /statist narrative and agenda. In most cases they can’t even give them away and are digital rags.

[euram]

Mexico encouraged Americans to come to TX to help them fight the Indians. There were few Mexican civilians in TX because of the Indian problem. It’s not the fault of Americans that Mexicans weren’t interested in moving to TX until it was tamed and made livable by Americans.

[Sans-Culotte]

I've been hearing this revisionist BS for years. The one part I agree with is the notion that the defenders knowingly gave their lives to buy more time for Houston. They had no way to know if Houston was successful at raising an army, and Houston's victory at San Jacinto was more of a fluke than a planned thing.

The author dismisses certain things out of hand, like the "Travis line" story. It may not have happened, but maybe it did. And his analogy of Canadians revolting in Alaska would make more sense if it involved a new regime taking over and abrogating the previous constitution, which Santa Anna did.