The 1619 Project was never really about history. You all knew this, but now its creator, Nikole Hannah-Jones, admits that this social justice warrior project was never really about history. I mean, just look at the mission statement which says this project is “an ongoing initiative from The New York Times Magazine that began in August 2019, the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative.”
As Jones noted in a Twitter thread, “I’ve always said that the 1619 Project is not a history. It is a work of journalism that explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative and, therefore, the national memory. The project has always been as much about the present as it is the past.”
Oh, this is a fabulous, thoughtful thread. He is right: The fight over the 1619 Project is not about history. It is about memory. https://t.co/3Ji7SMUFo6
— Ida Bae Wells (@nhannahjones) July 27, 2020
I’ve always said that the 1619 Project is not a history. It is a work of journalism that explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative and, therefore, the national memory. The project has always been as much about the present as it is the past.
— Ida Bae Wells (@nhannahjones) July 27, 2020
The crazy thing is, the 1619 Project is using history and reporting to make an argument. It never pretended to be a history. We explicitly state our aims and produced a series of essays. Critique was always expected, but the need to discredit it speaks to something else.
— Ida Bae Wells (@nhannahjones) July 27, 2020
Further, the curriculum is supplementary and cannot and was never intended to supplant US history curriculum (which is pretty terrible but none of these folks seem concerned about that.)Teachers have used it in English, social studies, art, foods classes.
— Ida Bae Wells (@nhannahjones) July 27, 2020
“The crazy thing is, the 1619 Project is using history and reporting to make an argument. It never pretended to be a history,” she added.
"My life’s work is not about history, it’s actually about my ideological frame disguised as history." https://t.co/uy4asTC7in
— Kevin McMahon (@KevinMcMahonYAF) July 27, 2020
So in other words, it makes no fucking sense https://t.co/qrLn5AFfLd
— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) July 27, 2020
It's about "narrative" and "story," not history. This is actually a damning admission. https://t.co/uX4i6zuert
— Mo Mo (@MollyRatty) July 27, 2020
I too have been saying it’s not history since it was published. https://t.co/wthEzSiSdu
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) July 27, 2020
1619 admits what everyone already knew—it was always an information warfare op designed to get Americans to despise their country. pic.twitter.com/H7FoSEZbfV
— David Reaboi (@davereaboi) July 28, 2020
It’s just a story we made up to push a different narrative and rewrite history.
— (((AG))) (@AGHamilton29) July 28, 2020
Way to go, Pulitzer committee. pic.twitter.com/SwXU3ESv2i
At least she’s honest that her goal is to control the national narrative and thus control the nation’s very view of itself. Too bad her 1619 Project is dishonest as hell. https://t.co/x15xl0JxHO
— JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) July 27, 2020
Liberal reporter Michael Tracey was quite succinct regarding how he felt about this thread: “So in other words, it makes no f*cking sense,” he tweeted. Others also chimed in regarding Jones openly admitting that this really isn’t a journalistic or historical venture. It’s about peddling the ‘woke’ nonsense about American history. It’s providing the ammunition that’s spewed by lefty activists when they had a meltdown over President Trump delivering a speech at Mount Rushmore on the eve of Independence Day.
And no, 1619 project doesn’t really use history. One historian tried to correct their errors and was ignored, but then gave them a pass by saying people who criticize the project are the bigger concern. This is a bastardization of American history that should be ignored, but instead gets rewarded with a Pulitzer. So, now that’s clear, do I even need to tell you, folks, to ignore this historically illiterate trash at all costs?
It was an unintentional demonstration of how much of a bubble the media hacks live in. They never bothered to consider the hard academic work of progressive historians and never imagined those historians would undermine their bullshit claims. They're a bubble within a bubble.
— Sunny McSunnyface (@sunnyright) July 28, 2020
This is what happens when hacks run up against people who may often agree with them politically but who have actual beliefs and convictions. And who aren't just going to rubber-stamp some hack's bullcrap in the name of ideological solidarity.
— Sunny McSunnyface (@sunnyright) July 28, 2020
some shit from 200/300/400 years ago. People who've built careers and reputations and spent decades of their lives studying niche topics. You were bound to find a few who weren't going to go along with whatever the hack creative writer from the NYT wrote about their subjects.
— Sunny McSunnyface (@sunnyright) July 28, 2020
I disagree. It's now embedded in school curriculums and pop culture, even though more and more see it for what it is. https://t.co/9U5SKpVHK0
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) July 28, 2020
H/T Twitchy