What is the 1619 Project
Hidden Agenda of the 1619 Project
What is the 1619 Project
The 1619 Project is an ongoing abomination focused on rewriting the history of Slavery in America, it was the brainchild of leftarded New York Times journalist, Nikole Hannah-Jones and developed by The NY Times Magazine in 2019 with the stated overt goal of 're-examining the legacy of slavery in the United States'. It was timed for the 400th anniversary of the arrival of the first Africans in Virginia. While its overt goal seems commendable, its covert goal is evident and reprehensible.
The New York Times claims that the content was 'deeply researched', and verified by teams of fact-checkers in consultation with historians. However, nearly all reputable Historians on both ends of the political spectrum have renounced the project as factually inaccurate, blatantly biased and cynical.
Oxford historian Richard Carwardine: "the idea that the central, fundamental story of the United States is one of white racism and that black protest and rejection of white superiority has been the essential, indispensable driving force for change—which I take to be the central message of that lead essay—seems to me to be a preposterous and one-dimensional reading of the American past."
Sean Wilentz, Professor of American History at Princeton criticized the 1619 Project’s “cynicism” and began quietly circulating a letter objecting to the project, and some of Hannah-Jones’s work in particular. The Wilentz letter garnered four noteable signatories—James McPherson, Gordon Wood, Victoria Bynum, and James Oakes, all reputable leading scholars in their field. They in turn sent their letter to top NY Times editors and the publisher, A. G. Sulzberger.
The letter sent to Times in part refers to “matters of verifiable fact” that “cannot be described as interpretation or ‘framing’” and says the project reflected “a displacement of historical understanding by ideology.” Wilentz and his fellow signatories didn’t just dispute the Times Magazine’s interpretation of past events, but demanded corrections.
The Real Goals of ‘The 1619 Project’
By Arthur Milikh - American Greatness
Teaching young people they have no country, that there is neither God nor justice, but only their own anger to right wrongs leads not to civilized self-rule but to fanaticism and self-destruction.
From Frederick Douglass to Martin Luther King Jr., many Americans have tried to bridge America’s racial divide. America’s newspaper of record believes it has discovered a new way. No longer preaching faith in the Constitution or civic brotherhood, the New York Times hopes that—by creating enough hatred for the nation’s founding, its ideals, and for America’s majority group—justice and harmony will somehow emerge. This, anyway, is the idea behind its “1619 Project.”
Its lead essay, written by activist Nicole Hannah-Jones, falsifies important parts of American history with a view to engineering this new approach. While it has been roundly debunked by a chorus of renowned academics for gross factual and thematic inaccuracies, its most outlandish claim is that the American Revolution was fought to protect slavery. The preeminent historian of the American Revolution, Gordon Wood, points out that he does not know “of any colonist who said that they wanted independence in order to preserve their slaves.” Nor does anyone else. There is no historical record.
For at least a generation, many colleges and universities have taught students that America fundamentally is a white supremacist regime in need of deconstruction. By offering an accompanying school curricula, the 1619 Project explicitly targets middle- and high-schoolers, so far largely untouched by this propaganda. But since the 1619 Project’s publication last August, tens of thousands of students in all 50 states have been taught parts of its curriculum. Complete Article - American Greatness
NYT Admits, at Last, That Its 1619 Project Is Wrong
By Brian Preston - PJ Media
In August 2019, The New York Times launched a project it called the 1619 Project. Its aim was to locate the founding of America to that year, 1619.
Because 1619 was the year the first slave ships arrived in the New World.
The Times explicitly sought to diminish America’s actual founding in 1776 by changing the focus from 1776 to 1619.
Because in 1776, the American revolutionaries laid out their “Why?” in the Declaration of Independence as they commenced the revolution to throw off the yoke of the British monarchy. The Times explicitly set out to re-write America’s answer to its central purpose. The Times set out to make liars of America's founders. Full Article PJ Media
New 1776 Initiative Aims to Counter ‘Lethal’ Narrative of 1619 Project
By Cole Carnick - Washington Free Beacon
A group of predominantly African-American academics, journalists, entrepreneurs, and community activists on Friday launched one of the most significant challenges yet to the New York Times’s controversial 1619 Project, which is named for the year slaves arrived in Virginia and argues that the United States was founded on racism.
Bob Woodson, a leader in the African-American community who has spent his career fighting to stave off the cycle of poverty and crime, argued on Friday that the 1619 Project’s message—that life outcomes for African Americans are shaped by the history of slavery and Jim Crow—is a "lethal" narrative that perpetuates a culture of victimhood in the African-American community. During the launch of his new 1776 initiative, named for the year America was founded, Woodson said the new group would challenge those who assert America is forever defined by past failures. Full Article - Washington Free Beacon
Slavery Was America’s “Birth Defect,” But It Doesn’t Define America
“The 1619 Project” published by New York Times Magazine has been described by several Civil War scholars as historically inaccurate.
But in the eyes of Bob Woodson, who has devoted the past several decades to helping people in troubled, low-income communities, its biggest problem is that it defines America as being incurably racist. Video - Youtube
Original Article Epoch Times - Jan Jekielek