The 1619 Project

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Daniel1212 (Talk | contribs) at 03:24, March 6, 2020. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

The 1619 Project is a collection of revisionist history developed by The New York Times to "reframe" (in their words)[1] American history exclusively around slavery and racism, reading into history what the liberal revisionists can only wish was the reality.

The work has been roundly criticized,[2] including by prominent historians James Oakes,[3] Gordon S. Wood,[4] Victoria Bynum,[5] James McPherson,[6] and Richard Carwardine.[7]

The 1619 Project is named after the tragic year slaves from Africa first arrived in Virginia, and its premise is that America’s 18th-century founders fought a revolution “to ensure that slavery would continue,” that slavery was part of “the brutality of American capitalism … low-road capitalism … winner-take-all capitalism … racist capitalism.”

However, among other scholarly rebukes, Princeton historian Allen Guelzo criticizes the misrepresentative 1619 Project, finding that it presents ,

"slavery not as a blemish that the Founders grudgingly tolerated with the understanding that it must soon evaporate, but as the prize that the Constitution went out of its way to secure and protect. The Times presents slavery not as a regrettable chapter in the distant past, but as the living, breathing pattern upon which all American social life is based, world without end.” "The 1619 Project is not history: it is polemic, born in the imaginations of those whose primary target is capitalism itself and who hope to tarnish capitalism by associating it with slavery." [8]

References