The Times and the truth: the 1619 Project and the teaching of history
The NY Times isn’t convincingly pretending that it’s in any business but that of disseminating propaganda:
The NYT refused to issue any corrections [to its pieces from the 1619 Project, its campaign to make it seem as though slavery was the true founding principle of the American enterprise], it announced Thursday, despite a letter written by five historians concerned about the project’s “misleading” and “factual errors.” Some of the historians that signed onto the original letter expressed frustration and concern to the Daily Caller at the NYT’s unwillingness to issue corrections…
“The Times has not addressed our many citations of factual errors,” Oakes said in an email to the Daily Caller Sunday. “I am particularly distressed by Matt Desmond’s essay. It is based on a body of scholarship that has been subjected to severe criticism by experts in the field, experts who San [sic] the spectrum from mainstream economists to Marxist sociologists.”
“As a result Desmond repeats claims that cannot be substantiated by the evidence.”
I applaud the letter-writers, and yet if they thought the Times had a particle of interest in what historians say (rather than what Marxist historians say) on the subject, they are demonstrating remarkable naivete. The Times can find people who say exactly what the Times wants the public to hear, and is completely uninterested in airing anything that counters that message:
The NYT declined to issue any correction, writing that they “welcome criticism” but “don’t believe that the request for corrections … is warranted.”
In the letter to the editor, the historians cited specific examples of what they believe are factual errors and misleading commentary currently published in the project. One notable issue is the project’s depiction of the American Revolution.
“On the American Revolution, pivotal to any account of our history, the project asserts that the founders declared the colonies’ independence of Britain ‘in order to ensure slavery would continue,’” the historians’ letter to the editor reads. “This is not true. If supportable, the allegation would be astounding — yet every statement offered by the project to validate it is false.”
The historians also took issue with how the “1619 Project” portrayed “Abraham Lincoln’s views on racial equality.” The project “ignores his conviction that the Declaration of Independence proclaimed universal equality,” according to the letter published in the NYT.
The NYT defended its decision not to issue any corrections, writing that “numerous scholars of African-American history and related fields” were consulted prior to the project launching.
The Times has always had its problems with truth (Duranty, for example). But for years now, it has been lowering itself further to engage nearly constantly in the enterprise Iowahawk (David Burge) has described on Twitter as one of the main tools of the left:
1. Identify a respected institution.
2. kill it.
3. gut it.
4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect.#lefties— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) November 10, 2015
In this case, the Times is doing this to US history, as well as to the Times itself. And make no mistake about it, the Times’ project is not limited to publishing a few articles. The paper has an agenda involving education in the school system and elsewhere:
The project has gone on to include a five-episode podcast, a kids’ section of the print newspaper, and a broadsheet for the print newpaper that includes an article on how slavery is taught in U.S. schools as well as a history of slavery in 15 objects that was curated by the National Museum of African American History and Culture. The Pulitzer Center supported the project as an education partner, providing free reading guides, extension activities, lesson plans and physical copies of the magazine to educators across the country.
Teachers across all 50 states have accessed the Pulitzer Center educational resources since the project’s launch, and many have shared their students’ work by posting to Twitter and emailing student work to education@pulitzercenter.org. Educators from hundreds of schools and administrators from six school districts have also reached out to the Center for class sets of the magazine. Teachers are using the magazine in their classes to teach subjects ranging from English to History and Social Studies, and their engagement with the project has guided students in creating essays, poetry, visual art, performances, and live events that demonstrate their learning…
These events, which will continue into 2020, have been lively opportunities for both teachers and students to engage in the material and showcase their work. At Dunbar High School in Washington, DC, students interviewed Hannah-Jones, asking her about every aspect of her process from how she brought the idea to her editors to how she conceived of the audience for this project.
At one point, the conversation turned to Hannah-Jones’s own education and how she had come to the idea to commemorate the year 1619. A student asked: “At school, was this [year] really a topic, or were they trying to cover it up? Like, did you have to go and find it out for yourself?”
In response, Hannah-Jones described the one Black Studies class she had taken as a high schooler, and the book she read which described the significance of this year, called Before The Mayflower.
“I really started thinking about the year 1619 in high school,” Hannah-Jones said. But a lot of her knowledge since then, she said, came from her own research.
The theme recurred at the Smithsonian event, when Nikita Stewart asked a panel of educators to describe a lie about slavery that they learned as students, and how they unlearned it. As the panelists discussed the issue, several of them encouraged the students in the crowd to do their own learning.
Much much more at the link.
The media manages to be worse than academe.
Speaking falsehoods to power!!
I’ve become rather annoyed with the New York Times.
Duranty is an excellent example of the problems The Grey Harridan has with the truth, but there are many others, from Herbert Matthews and Cuba to the biased and false coverage of Russia-gate. What turned me against the NYT, which I no longer consider to be trustworthy on any matter of importance, was its egregiously fallacious reporting on l’affaire Duke Lacrosse in 2006. Pravda on the Hudson is no better than Pravda on the Potomac.
The NYT seems bound and determined to reduce their readership to only leftist nitwits who will believe this stuff. As the older generation of such readers dies off, and the newer generation reads less and less, it seems to me the paper is doing nothing but committing hara-kiri.
In 1920, the NYT mocked Robert Goddard for asserting that rockets could fly into space and even reach the moon. Everyone knows, the Times lectured, the rockets need air to push against.
They didn’t get around to apologizing until July 1969.
Newton’s laws of motion date back to 1686.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kionasmith/2018/07/19/the-correction-heard-round-the-world-when-the-new-york-times-apologized-to-robert-goddard/#5ad763fa4543
It would be more worrying if this foolishness didn’t ultimately rebound to the detriment of the people who started it. The thing about real history is that it all makes sense. Not each individual act or event but when you connect them all together you can understand how what happened affects what is happening and how that affects what will happen.
Fake history doesn’t work like that. You can’t connect the dots. In fact, you usually end up with fake history at war with itself.
Mike
I want to suffer.
Good essay here by Sean Wilentz, the author of that letter to the NY Times, that goes into some of the errors in the 1619 project.
When we hear the phrase, “Speaking Truth to Power”, the people using it have a very different definition of “truth” than you and I. To them, “truth” is religious like belief that transcends facts and evidence. The NYT and many of the most influential others in the traditional media have become religious zealots and missionaries promoting their cult.
“how she conceived of the audience for this project,” the Hannah-Jones creature was asked. Which is followed by “I really started thinking about the year 1619 in high school,” Hannah-Jones said. But a lot of her knowledge since then, she said, came from her own research.
Which is immediately followed by “The theme recurred at the Smithsonian event, when Nikita Stewart asked a panel of educators to describe a lie about slavery that they learned as students, and how they unlearned it. As the panelists discussed the issue, several of them encouraged the students in the crowd to do their own learning.”
Yep, describe a lie about slavery that they “learned” as students, how they “unlearned” it, and go on to do one’s own self-guided “learning”, assuredly about how noble and superior blacks truly inherently are and what great cultures they had back in the old country.
It’s good, I think, to remember now and again that “culture” is an invention of the European enlightenment, so called, and as such may be considered an anachronism we place upon others (mostly, but not necessarily, older peoples and times).
It may or may not do injury to them or the memory or accounting of them, but will almost surely mess up our understanding of those older peoples as they understood themselves. We may at times think we know them better than they knew themselves, but I personally doubt we ever do. And moreover, as above, believe we tend to get in our own way, if we try to take those older peoples, nations, regimes, countries, etc., seriously in coming to interpret their ways and intentions while applying our modern language, concepts and so on, to them. It’s very complex stuff, but worth an occasional reflection, I believe.
“…some of the errors …”
Well, um, I guess that’s one way of putting it.
In any event, the NY Post—never, ever accused of elitism(!)—seems to believe that what is really needed is a “2019 Project”:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2019/12/25/ny-post-columnist-we-should-investigate-why-the-new-york-times-is-wrong-all-the-time-n2558526/
America is about freedom. Not slavery. If it was about slavery Africans wouldn’t travel to Mexico and try to sneak across the border.
Seriously. The American hearing left that tells you America is about slavery also tells you we need open borders so everyone can come here.
Seriously. WTF. On another comment thread I mentioned how badly this country wanted to kill me. Being southern Italian the KKK thought I was African.
They are not very bright
But I spent 20 years serving this country in the world’s finest Navy because it offers everyone the best deal in the world
Autocorrect. I hate it.
Search on medal of honor recipient Roy Beneviz. His speech about why he was proud to be an American. And a Green Beret.
Benevidez. I suck don’t I.
I would provide links but my laptop gave up the ghost. And maybe my phone has the capability but i haven’t figured it out.
The nice thing about fire axes and K-Bars is they don’t require electricity.
“they don’t require electricity.” [Steve57]
Our Achilles heel.
OT back to the other thread for one quick question. On a Christmas-day walk, my son was talking about Hannibal’s clever tactics — including taunting the Romans into skipping breakfast and crossing a freezing river to get themselves slaughtered by his well-fed, greased-up, well-prepared army. Steve, was that your reference from the glacier-fed river? The Tebbia?
The 1619 Project is history as a partisan political operation. NYT is trying to promote “The Story of African-Americans: Slavery and Civil Rights” as THE Master Narrative of America. Implicitly, that means “The Ellis Island Story” (a sequel the “The Columbia Project”) is no longer the Master Narrative.
Two observations. I understand why the Party believes “The African-American Story” is critical for its political needs. Without the moral credit of the Civil Rights Era, its narrative around multiculturalism and personal liberation AND its political coalition fall apart.
Second, you are going to have hard time making the story of historically 10-12 percent of the population define the meaning of the experience of everyone else. Maybe 40-50 percent can relate, kind of, but of course even the allies will insist on the dignity of their own stories.
But you will have a hard time selling it to the 40 percent who need to be erased if not demonized by that story.
The NYT always lies. Even after the death marches out of Phnom Penh were well known, Anthony Lewis at the NYT was still making excuses for Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. I don’t see why the NYT has a problem with slavery since they were ok with genocide.
Oblio, I suspect that the NYT is merely preparing the ground for the Democratic candidate (whomever he/she/xhe/it/they will be) to run on a platform of “REPARATIONS” for all descendants of slaves (whatever that might mean, AKA define according to need).
Hence “Project 1619!!!”—to explain to all of us (mostly deplorables—“the 40 percent”?) why this is the RIGHT and JUST (oh, and POLITICALLY ASTUTE, so they believe) thing to do.
In a nutshell, AmeriKKKa sucks. Pay them all what they deserve—and get the Democratic candidate elected to boot!!
(Just another Democratic Party “sure thing”!!)
Barry Meislin, not “merely” but including, or at least including talk of reparations, even if they make very little progress.
The point is to Wave the Bloody Shirt to keep the Others demonized and most importantly the coalition together. But if the African-American victimization narrative weakens, all the victim narratives weaken.
Ann,
Thanks very much for the Wilentz article. Fascinating. I only wish he’d provided some footnotes with sources.
:>)
I also only (!) wish I could shove it under the noses of certain persons near & dear to me, who would then actually read and consider it.
Oblio on December 26, 2019 at 1:49 pm said:
…
Second, you are going to have hard time making the story of historically 10-12 percent of the population define the meaning of the experience of everyone else. Maybe 40-50 percent can relate, kind of, but of course even the allies will insist on the dignity of their own stories.
But you will have a hard time selling it to the 40 percent who need to be erased if not demonized by that story.
* * *
So far they have managed to make the story of historically less than 1% percent of the population define the meaning of the experience of everyone else.
Maybe 5-10% can relate to trans-gender victimization, but the feminists who were heretofore allies are definitely insisting on the dignity of their own stories.
We will see if the 90-95% who are neither victims nor victimizers (because the baying about bigotry is a false story requiring a huge twisting of facts and motivations) eventually allow themselves to be erased, the way a large number have already allowed themselves to be demonized.
Yes kai. The Romans.
Funny to hear that battle of 2,000-plus years ago referred to twice in two days in such separate arenas.
the first major battle of the Second Punic War, fought between the Carthaginian forces of Hannibal and the Roman Republic in December of 218 BC, on or around the winter solstice. It was a resounding Roman defeat with heavy losses, with only about 10,000 out of 40,000 Romans surviving…. In this battle, Hannibal got the better of the Romans by exercising the careful and innovative planning for which he was famous. The impetuous and short-sighted opposing general, the consul Tiberius Sempronius Longus, allowed himself to be provoked into a frontal assault under physically difficult circumstances and failed to see that he was being led into a trap.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Trebia
You learn more more from you defeats than you do from your victoriesi
“You learn more from you defeats than you do from your victories.”
So true. After WWI the French built the Maginot line to repel the Germans and the Germans built the autobahn so they could drive around it.
So true Ray. I think we who have served in the armed forces are more aware of the importance of learning history
When the Navy was tasked to go fight in the rivers of Vietnam they dusted off their records of the Seminole wars. If you don’t know your history you will get someone, maybe a lot of.someones, killed. Does anybody want to write those letters about how I got a child, brother or sister, husband or wife killed because I was too stupid or lazy to do.my homework?.
If it didn”t work yesterday, or 50.years ago, or 150 years ago you can bet your 889 it won’t work today. So figure something because if you are getting paid the big bucks to call yourself a leader that is your job.
Apparently the Democrat party has learned from being defeated by Donald Trump in 2016 that they must see to it that he has a landslide victory in 2020. Only they know why this is their conclusion. We merely witness the phenomenon from afar and scratch our heads in puzzlement.
The Navy’s lesson learned system.is NLLIS. Navy Lessons Learned Information System.
As you can see I am passionate about this. Because if is.preventable, and you don’t prevent it,.that is unforgivable.