It was last August when we first reported on the 1619 Project, the New York Times Magazine’s “major initiative” that seeks to examine our country’s history as if it began in 1619, the year the first slave ship arrived in Virginia.
2020 Democratic presidential candidates Pete Buttigieg and Beto O’Rourke were all-in on redefining the foundation of America as the beginning of the slave trade, but one prominent Civil War historian argued that the project “left most of the history out,” and in December five historians wrote a letter to the New York Times asking that it publish “prominent corrections of all the errors and distortions presented” in the 1619 Project.
Now Cathy Young has a piece at The Bulwark also arguing that the 1619 Project “rests on bad history and misrepresented facts.”
Slavery was America’s original sin. The 1619 Project’s attempt to recast it as America’s foundation rests on bad history and misrepresented facts. https://t.co/wzxGt786PT
— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) February 9, 2020
Today, there are (as yet) no plans to remove or rename the Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial. But the 1619 Project certainly does come after the Founding Fathers, and more: It argues that black slavery was not just America’s original sin but its original base, the cornerstone of the republic and the institution that shaped virtually every aspect of its society and culture. What’s more, it suggests that in some sense the Founders were indeed, just like the Confederates, fighting to preserve slavery.
Corey A. DeAngelis, director of school choice at the Reason Foundation, noted back in January that the Buffalo, N.Y., school district had adopted the New York Times Magazine into its curriculum, as other schools have as well.
Public schools in Buffalo New York are now mandating The 1619 Project from New York Times to be a part of the curriculum: pic.twitter.com/aWAk5gG9ji
— Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) January 25, 2020
It looks like this is happening in New Jersey and Washington DC as well: pic.twitter.com/ABuptxlLtZ
— Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) January 25, 2020
“Some districts have gone a step further by developing special programs wholly dedicated to a study of the project.”
Nearly every historian negatively reviewed the 1619 Project. It’s in large part fiction.
— Sanford Lyle (@southbaytrading) January 25, 2020
So historically inaccurate history. Perfect.
— Veterans for Liberty (@Vets4AP) January 26, 2020
It's not about what the facts are. It's about the narrative they can use for influencing future serfs.
— ??Secessionist??? (@Secessionist16) January 25, 2020
The widely discredited 1619 Project of the @NYTimes and "All the news that fits the agenda."
— Soquel by the Creek (@SoquelCreek) January 25, 2020
I like the business model. Combining state media with state education. A joint committee would be useful to unlock additional synergies.
— Boxer (@chillywillers) January 26, 2020
Home-schooling looking better every day.
— mog1717 (@mog1717) January 25, 2020
But then your first-graders in Brooklyn and elsewhere would miss the public schools’ Drag Queen Story Hour.
Slavery pre-dates the founding and was in place for longer beforehand than after. It would be nice if instead of trying to revise history, this project simply chronicled it.
— Alex Lekas (@TheAlexLekas) February 10, 2020
1619 Project became an effort to deconstruct U.S. rather than merely shine light on unconscionable parts of our history. It throws baby out w/bath water and stubbornly refuses to recognize that our founding principles are the very ideas that ultimately doomed slavery.
— @ssn26 (@26ssn) February 9, 2020
They know exactly what they are doing. It's not new. See the 1980s / college courses and campuses. We live in a TLDR society. 140 characters. Click bait. They know that – they bank of ignorance. It's literally in their manual.
— Silence DoGood (@cbjm1972) February 10, 2020
That’s like saying blood-letting is the original sin of American medicine.
It was a common practice of the time globally. It played no part in the Founding principles.
— Jose Pro Se (@Jose_Pro_Se) February 10, 2020
America inherited slavery.
The Articles of Confederation, which was the first governmental structure of the independent colonies, outlawed slavery in new Northwest Territories, laying the groundwork for the newly-birthed nation's opposition to slavery.
— Return to Reason (@mymundanemind) February 10, 2020
Slavery was not America's original sin, and you cowards give up ground to your progressive masters when you start from that point.
— #UkraineFinalPiece How many knew? (@OdietamoLives) February 10, 2020
Slavery was America's original sin? Bull hockey. The Dutch and the Portuguese were WAAAY ahead of the colonies in the slave trade. The percentage of slave owning property owners in the colonies and states were a minority. Get outta here with this nonsense.
— Chuck Runamok (@WayTooMuchGear) February 10, 2020
It's was England, Portugal and Spain's practice. There was no United States in 1619. And it was England and the United States who led the world to abandon slavery, through Christian teaching and works, and through technology.
— Veegersbeeper (@Veegerbeeper) February 10, 2020
Historical racism is indeed a foundation… for excuses for irresponsible, feckless and tragic behavior.
Kids can hide behind this wall or crush it.
But it takes teachers who want what's best for students to show them the way.
— Andrew Cole (@AndrewC47126578) February 10, 2020
Those teachers are now being handed the New York Times Magazine’s special edition on the 1619 Project and being told to teach history from it, so good luck.
Historians ask New York Times for ‘prominent corrections’ of the distortions presented in the 1619 Project https://t.co/iCLwV6NXW9
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) December 21, 2019