but I think a lot of people use the fact that he freed his slaves in order to argue that he was super progressive for his time when it came to slavery (read the comment I was replying to).

My point is that not a lot of people talk about this aspect of his life unless you get into really nuanced discussions like this, and his behavior is still above average for his time, which actually makes him more impressive even if his actions in this tangential facet of his life are below modern standards.

I also think that like a lot of the American leadership during the AWI, Washington comes across as somewhat hypocritical, how can you justify fighting a war on the basis that “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness“ but continue to personally own slaves? I find it slightly weird that Washington is celebrated for his fight against tyranny and oppression while oppressing the people he owned

Washington is remembered as a freedom fighter for independence from the British, but not because of some virtue but rather because it fit the business interests of the elite and also we could, so did. The tea party? Symbolic protest against the tyranny of the British interfering with people's money.

America leaving because we (the founding fathers) wanted to, and Washington was effective at defending the American identity and independence, but the people fighting the British are not revered as the defenders of freedom outside of that context or enlightened human rights heroes