Historically inaccurate 1619 Project ‘perfect tool for making angry, anti-American activists,’ critic says

Originally Published on BizPacReview

While thousands of educators across the nation continue to adapt materials from the discredited 1619 Project into their curriculum as the media runs interference against claims of Critical Race Theory being taught in schools, prominent scholars are speaking up about the goal, not to educate, but to produce “angry, anti-American” “left-wing social activists.”

In 2019, New York Times Magazine journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones began the 1619 Project as a “much-need corrective,” in her opinion, toward the understanding of the past. Since then her revisionist history, which critiques every aspect that predated the founding of America up to and including the present, has been disseminated with apparent impunity for the founders’ alleged purveyance of falsehoods.

In fact, as Fox News Digital reported, American Federation of Teachers union president Randi Weingarten has openly supported the project saying, “All of a sudden you’re hearing people … who are trying to ban the 1619 Project, because it is trying to … actually teach a factual version of oppression in America.”

Such notions were readily discredited by historians who demanded The New York Times correct the inaccuracies which ultimately led even Hannah-Jones to admit that she is “not a professional educator” and she does not possess “a degree in social studies or science” and so her work is not history.

Therefore, as Mary Graber, the author of “Debunking the 1619 Project” concluded, the goal of using these materials is to make students, “activists, which is what a lot of teachers want to do. There are too many woke teachers. They’ve been trained in colleges of education to produce not knowledgeable citizens, but left-wing social activists.”

“The 1619 Project is the perfect tool for making angry, anti-American student activists,” Graber told Fox News and added that it is essentially, “history told through the lens of critical race theory…” as it substitutes “objectivity with narrative storytelling.”

City University of New York Graduate Center professor James Oakes furthered Graber’s point on this selective lens by stating, “When you say racism is built into the DNA of the United States, or that it’s America’s original sin – [it means] those things are unchanging. And that, to me, is not just ahistorical, it’s almost anti-historical.”

To that point, Kentucky State University political science professor Wilfred Reilly told Fox News, “Of course, slavery was part of the history of the United States.”

“The problem with the 1619 Project is that it makes extraordinary sweeping claims,” he said while pointing out that “in 1619 there wasn’t any United States of America,” so that is enough to discredit her claims that racism is intrinsic in the fabric of the founding…