Peter Wood is the president of the National Association of Scholars, a former professor of anthropology, and college provost. This is his answer to the 1619 Project.
This is a critique of the 1619 Project, as published in the NYT Magazine and promoted by the founder and lead author.
I'll quote from the book to give a flavor of it....
"If the 1619 Project were a term paper, any knowledgeable, fair-minded teacher would give it an F and be done with it. It demonstrates not only incompetence in handling basic facts, but also a total disregard for the importance of using reliable sources."
The 1619 Project opens with this, stated as the project's aim:
"The goal of The 1619 Project... is to reframe American history by considering what it would mean to regard 1619 as our nation's birth year...."
Wood places his markers down early on where he falls with this concept"
"...Reframing the country's history is an extraordinary ambitious goal, and not something that one would ordinarily expect to come from a newspaper... The 1619 Project is, in other words, an all-out effort to replace traditional conceptions of American history with a history refracted through the lens of black identity politics."
"... Their claims include the idea that American began with the arrival of slaves in Virginia in August 1619; that the primary purpose of the colonists who declared independence from Britain in 1776 was to preserve American slavery from the danger of Britain outlawing it; that the Southern plantation system of growing cotton with slave labor is the foundation of modern American capitalism; and that Lincoln was a racist who had no interest in conferring real citizenship on those who were enslaved."
Wood spends 13+ chapters on the project, comparing the authors of the 1619 project, who are composed mostly of journalists and activists of various types, to the work and words of historians and the actual known facts.
He has a great quote describing History ...
"History is more than telling a story. It requires scrupulous attention to the facts, to the uncertainties, and to the genuine conflicts of interpretation among experts. The Times, a news organization that assigned journalists rather than historians to write history, failed on all of these criteria."
Definitely worth a read as an antidote to the attempted rewrite of history using a political lens, instead of letting history and the time speak for itself.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Next up!! A re-read!! Jordan Peterson's "12 Rules For Life: An Antidote To Chaos." I read this when it first came out, but with "Beyond Order: 12 more Rues For Life" published, I am giving it a quick re-read as a diving board for book #2.
Cheers!!