As a writer for The Federalist noted, giving the Times a Pulitzer Prize for a part of The 1619 Project “gives schools one more excuse to hate America.” For the Times and its allies, we suspect, that is reason enough to celebrate. The New York Times Magazine’s 1619 Project is a gross misrepresentation of history. The New York Times The 1619 Project History Slavery Culture Among the Times’s allies in this effort to revolutionize the teaching of American history on the basis of a malign racialist fantasy is The Pulitzer Center, which declared that it was “proud to be the education partner for The 1619 Project.” All the news reports noting the participation of the Pulitzer Center were careful to point out that it was unaffiliated with the Pulitzer Prizes. And slavery in the United States was only a small part of a larger world process that unfolded over many centuries. In January, we reported on The 1619 Project. Neither was consulted by the perpetrators of The 1619 Project. The American colonists might talk about liberty. The New Criterion magazine called it “a stupefying race-based fantasy about the origins of the United States.” One of the most sophisticated critiques of the 1619 Project came in the form of a letter from five respected historians, headed by Sean Wilentz of Princeton. "The 1619 Project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. It aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are. Indeed, various public school districts, including some in Chicago, have announced that they will supplement their curricula by distributing copies of The 1619 Project to students, thereby promulgating the racialist worldview expounded by that “major” “reframing” of our history. Your first response is a spluttering incredulity. It would be like complaining about the roundness of a circle or the wetness of water. Article excerpt. . But the question is whether truth even comes into consideration in what passes for mainstream journalism today. The 1619 Project from The New York Times Magazine is inaugurated with a special issue that examines the modern-day legacy of slavery through over 30 essays and creative works. "The 1619 Project is not a history," Nikole Hannah-Jones said in an MSNBC interview on Sunday. . What followed was a stupefying race-based fantasy about the origins of the United States. It's where your interests connect you with your people. It’s just that it is controlled—de facto, if not de jure—by the Times and a handful of like-minded entities.Which of course is the reason that the Times has accumulated so many of them. Presumably, however, neither Hannah-Jones nor the Times intends for us to take the metaphor quite so seriously. Wood concurs and notes further that the idea, propounded by The 1619 Project, that the American Revolution was fomented in order to protect slavery is simply ridiculous. The hallway full of photographs of Pulitzer winners was impressive. Karl Marx did not make many witty remarks. Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of The New York Times’s 1619 Project, in a discussion at Harvard University. For Hannah-Jones, what is wanted is an expression that simultaneously justifies the endless whining of black radicals about how victimized they are because of things that happened a few centuries ago while also stressing the perpetually renewable guilt (like the liver of Prometheus) of whites, all whites, those living today even more than those actually involved in the African slave trade in the seventeenth, eighteenth, or nineteenth centuries. T here is something almost antique about progressives in 2019, at least when they are defending the New York Times ’ 1619 Project, a series of essays examining the legacy of … Copyright © 1982-2020 All rights reserved. . Roger Kimball introduces the June issue K ar l Marx did not make many witty remarks. “Awarded itself”? You might say, Who cares about insane rantings in The New York Times? Tumblr is a place to express yourself, discover yourself, and bond over the stuff you love. Learn how your support contributes to our continued defense of truth. It … Who cares about truth? What we meant was that the claims it makes are so outlandish, at once so ostentatiously at odds with historical reality while also being carefully framed in a corset of politically correct verbiage, that any critical response is at first stunned. As a reader of our efforts, you have stood with us on the front lines in the battle for culture. That is part of the farce. So supposing the Americans hadn’t broken away, there would have been a larger number of slaveholders in the greater British world who might have been able to prolong slavery longer than 1833.”, The truth is that in 1776, the American Founders, Southerners as much as Northerners, believed that slavery was on its way out. Perhaps an unintended collateral benefit of this malign folly will be—finally, at last—to dissolve the vestiges of that prestige and expose the paper to the condign contempt of the public whose trust they have so extravagantly betrayed. “The 1619 Project,” he wrote, “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.”. But the real lesson of the Times’s new Pulitzer is that something can be farcical without being funny—or, more to the point, it can be farcical while still being malicious. And odd Negroes, w[hich] the Governo[r] and Cape Merchant bought for victuals.” Fortunately, a rational, historically informed response to The 1619 Project has been building. It is as despicable as it is mendacious. This is true. Magazine article New Criterion. Roger concludes his take down of the 1619 project on a mildly optimistic note: The 1619 Project represents a new nadir in the politically correct, anti … It is increasingly a niche publication for the credentialed, politically correct nomenklatura, totally out of touch with the main current of America and held afloat only by its unremitting attacks on anything to do with Donald Trump. Nevertheless, the paper is not entirely without influence, even today. There is more to come, including new calls for race-based “reparations” on the basis of the falsehoods promulgated by The 1619 Project. The 1619 Project represents a new nadir in the politically correct, anti-American machinations of The New York Times. But truth does not matter when there is a political agenda to be advanced. Its stated goal was “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.” But if one were to take the metaphor seriously, as tantamount to asserting that anti-black racism is an essential and therefore unalterable characteristic of America, then the whole 1619 Project would be pointless from the get-go. But with the news that the Times had awarded itself a Pulitzer Prize for the lead essay from the 1619 Project, the façade of independence cracked. But I think that’s what we’re going to have to do for the rest of the next two years.” Et voilà, The 1619 Project, which the paper described in a preface as. That adage jangled around in my head this week as I made my way through the New York Times’ 1619 Project.An ambitious heave in its Sunday magazine and special section, the project argues that to understand our nation better we need to fundamentally alter how we view slavery and everything that came after. http://pulitzercenter.org/builder/lesson/reading-guide-quotes-key-terms-and-questions-26504 . TriceEdneyWire.com On Sunday, the New York Times unveiled “The 1619 Project,” a journalistic series in the Sunday magazine that seeks to tell the “unvarnished truth” about slavery and its impact on America’s history. That included the World Socialist Web Site—and let us insert a notional exclamation mark here—which ran long interviews with James McPherson and Gordon Wood, among the most distinguished historians of the American Founding. Maybe the Times could by writing about race in a “thoughtful,” i.e., obsessive and one-sided, way—“something,” Baquet added “we haven’t done in a large way in a long time.”, So there you have it. The idea that the American Revolution was fomented in order to protect slavery is simply ridiculous. So it is with the preposterous idea that America was founded as a “slavocracy.” Hannah-Jones asserts that “anti-black racism runs in the very dna of this country.” The claim is obviously metaphorical; countries do not possess dna. Josh Christenson - MAY 10, 2020 2:35 PM The creator of the controversial 1619 Project, a New York Times Magazine commentary series on the impact of slavery in America, is now saying her work was meant to be "journalism" and "not a history." It was to console its core readership that The New York Times undertook The 1619 Project in a special flood-the-zone issue of its Sunday magazine in August and then in a snazzy, graphics-heavy series of features on its website. All this is the tragedy. In January, we noted that “various public school districts, including some in Chicago” had announced that they would supplement their curricula by distributing copies of The 1619 Project to students. But the sad if almost incredible truth is that in some quarters such an award still confers prestige upon the recipient, as even publishing in The New York Times does, or so we are told. Someone tells you that the Apollo 11 moon landing was a carefully staged hoax perpetrated by nasa or the Trilateral Commission or whatever. Your first response is a spluttering incredulity. “Now we have to regroup,” Baquet told the assembled troops, “and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story.” What story? When they are not giving awards to anti-capitalist, racially charged fictions masquerading as history—or tendentious politicized fictions like their “investigations” into non-existent collusion between Donald Trump and “the Russians,” for which they awarded themselves a Prize last year—they are giving them to twisted new-age self-dramatizations such as The Undying: Pain, Vulnerability, Mortality, Medicine, Art, Time, Dreams, Data, Exhaustion, Cancer, and Care, by Anne Boyer, “An elegant and unforgettable narrative about the brutality of illness and the capitalism of cancer care in America.” The “capitalism of cancer care”? On the contrary, Wood noted, “it is the northern states in 1776 that are the world’s leaders in the antislavery cause. We are a bit late in getting to that dog's breakfast called 'The 1619 Project," The New York Timers effort to "reframe"--read, "wildly distort"--die history and governing impetus of the American Founding. Et voilà, The 1619 Project, which the paper described in a preface as a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. Eminent historians from the Left, Right, and Center lined up to repudiate this racially charged distortion of American history. Someone tells you that the Apollo 11 moon landing was a carefully staged hoax perpetrated by nasa or the Trilateral Commission or whatever. . What they really cared about, according to this malignant fairy tale, was preserving and extending the institution of slavery. Considered as a call to action, however, it has gone from success to success. a very unbalanced, one-sided account, which lacked context and perspective on the complexity of slavery, which was clearly, obviously, not an exclusively American institution, but existed throughout history. “[O]ne of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain,” she wrote, “was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.” So, everything you learned about the American Revolution is wrong, or at least wrongheaded. Articles featured in The New Criterion on 1619-project. Readers of the satirical classic 1066 and All That know what fun can be had if you go about your job as a storyteller serving up “all the History you can remember” and pretending that it is the truth. But truth does not matter when there is a political agenda to be advanced. Henceforth, or at least “for the next two years”—the remainder of Trump’s first term—the Times was going all in on “race, and other divisions.” Robert Mueller couldn’t get Trump. The 1619 Project and the denial of history ... among the early wave of the more than 12 million Africans sent across the Atlantic to live and die in slavery in the New World. In 1619, just 12 years after the founding of the first permanent English settlement in the Americas, the Jamestown colonists bought the […] But his oft-quoted observation that history tends to repeat itself “first as tragedy, then as farce” is a mot for the ages. The Revolution unleashed antislavery sentiments that led to the first abolition movements in the history of the world.”, Princeton’s Allen C. Guelzo, writing in City Journal, echoed these sentiments. All that, utterly unmentioned by Ms. Hannah-Jones, was mere window dressing. On Sunday, the New York Times unveiled “The 1619 Project,” a journalistic series in the Sunday magazine that seeks to tell the “unvarnished truth” about slavery and its impact on America’s history. The Pulitzer Center (not affiliated with the famed prizes) has announced that it “is proud to be the education partner for The 1619 Project.” As we write, the Center’s website is full of little valentines to Hannah-Jones and her racialist, ahistorical fantasy about the founding of the United States. To say that there were slaves in America is not to say that “the country was built” on slavery. Jun 03, 2020 Roger Kimball introduces the June issue by Roger Kimball. The object of this History is to console the reader.”. Isn’t there an independent committee that decides who and what institutions receive what prize? Posted By: StormCnter, 12/23/2019 1:22:22 PM We are a bit late in getting to that dog’s breakfast called “The 1619 Project,” The New York Times’s effort to “reframe”—read, “wildly distort”—the history and governing impetus of the American Founding. Copyright © 1982-2020 All rights reserved, We are a bit late in getting to that dog’s breakfast called “The 1619 Project,” The New York Times’s effort to “reframe”—read, “wildly distort”—the history and governing impetus of the American Founding. It is the same with the contention that 1619, the year that the first African slaves were brought to America, marked “the beginning of the system of slavery on which the country was built.” But there were already slaves and various other forms of indentured labor in the Americas as there were all over the world. “[S]ome might argue,” as Hannah-Jones coyly puts it, “that this nation was founded not as a democracy but as a slavocracy.” Gosh. The story didn’t pan out. My last post addressed the New York Times’ 1619 Project. Many sober observers would have dismissed it as beneath comment were it not that the residual prestige of the Times lends currency if not credibility to its illiterate and partisan contentions. Now, scholars are pushing back. “That, to me,” Baquet concluded, “is the vision for coverage. This article originally appeared in The New Criterion, Volume 38 Number 10, on page 1 Copyright © 2020 The New Criterion | www.newcriterion.com https://newcriterion.com/issues/2020/6/the-dark-side-of-farce, The Undying: Pain, Vulnerability, Mortality, Medicine, Art, Time, Dreams, Data, Exhaustion, Cancer, and Care, Last of the Whigs: Churchill as historian, https://newcriterion.com/issues/2020/6/the-dark-side-of-farce. The National Association of Scholars has inaugurated the “1620 Project,” not just to commemorate the signing of the Mayflower Compact—a much more significant event in the history of the United States—but also to provide an occasion for thoughtful responses to some of the more outlandish claims made by Hannah-Jones and the other writers involved in the Times’s latest campaign of disinformation. A new podcast from the Editor and Publisher of The New Criterion. It was, we said, “a stupefying race-based fantasy about the origins of the United States.” We quoted the essay by Hannah-Jones, who claimed that “[O]ne of the primary reasons the colonists decided to declare their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery.” Indeed, according to Hannah-Jones and her fellow fantasists, America was started and perpetuated as a “slavocracy.” The entire country, they asserted, was built on the “system of slavery” inaugurated when the first English privateer carrying African slaves hove into view off the coast of Virginia in August 1619. The idea that the American Revolution was fomented in order to protect slavery is simply ridiculous. 1619 Project: The NYT's Disinformation Campagin Roger Kimball, The New Criterion December 22, 2019 AP Photo/Richard Drew, File On The … The 1619 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. But Wood points out, first, that the “British don’t get around to freeing the slaves in the West Indies until 1833,” and, second, that “if the Revolution hadn’t occurred,” they “might never have done so then, because all of the southern colonies would have been opposed. Quoth the Pulitzer citation: For a sweeping, deeply reported and personal essay for the ground-breaking 1619 Project, which seeks to place the enslavement of Africans at the center of America’s story, prompting public conversation about the nation’s founding and evolution. History is written by the victors. And though the copies will be paid for by the Times and donors, taxpayers will still be indirectly funding a version of history that is politically tendentious and wildly at odds with the facts. Back in January, we wondered whether “an unintended collateral benefit of this malign folly will be—finally, at last—to dissolve the vestiges of that prestige and expose the [Times] to the condign contempt of the public whose trust they have so extravagantly betrayed.” Alas, the Pulitzer Prize argues against that happy eventuality. Not officially, perhaps. Deeply personal and egregiously false. a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. We didn’t know the half of it. You all are going to have to help us shape that vision. For the Times, it fits in with what Power Line’s Paul Mirengoff called its “irresistible urge to delegitimize America.” That is the ultimate aim of The 1619 Project: to deliver another blow in the campaign to besmirch and diminish the political and moral achievement that is the United States of America. T The farce is now upon us. The ‘1619 Project’ Isn’t Anti-American — It’s Anti-White Identity Politics – Eric Levitz, New York Magazine, August 23, 2019 We are committing educational malpractice: Why slavery is mistaught — and worse — in American schools – Nikita Stewart, New York Times editorials, August 19, 2019 The 1619 Project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. Moreover, the African slaves were not “kidnapped” by American or British slavers, as Hannah-Jones asserts, but were sold by other black Africans who were happy to profit by selling people they had enslaved to the colonists. The American colonists might talk about liberty. Roger Kimball, the Editor and Publisher of The New Criterion, discusses highlights in this month’s issue and reads from its opening pages. New Criterion, by Roger Kimball Original Article. The 1619 Project represents a new nadir in the politically correct, anti-American machinations of The New York Times. On the contrary, “it is the northern states in 1776 that are the world’s leaders in the antislavery cause. The revisions to the project have generated a lot of coverage and commentary, including by the most senior figures at the NY Times (CNN called the statement - later retracted - by the NY Times Writers' Guild an "extraordinary move": "1619 Project faces renewed criticism — this time from within The New York Times"). Considered as an intellectual artifact, The 1619 Project has been thoroughly, utterly discredited. They were wrong about the timing of that, but the fact remains, as Wood notes, that the Constitution (Article I, Section 9) set an end date on the importation of slaves and that “most Americans were confident that the despicable transatlantic slave trade was definitely going to end in 1808.”. It aims to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about … There they all were, from Walter Duranty, the Times’s man in the Soviet Union under Stalin, on down. . The last time we visited the paper’s offices was many years ago, back when it was on West Forty-third Street. For two years, the Times had invested heavily in the vaudeville entertainment called “Trump–Russia.” The spectacular failure of its leading man, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, to deliver a happy ending to that fiasco underscored the essential futility of the entire enterprise. … What they really cared about, according to this malignant fairy tale, was preserving and extending the institution of slavery. On The New York Times's recent disinformation campaign. We said that The 1619 Project was stupefying. Of course there is. McPherson, though eminently circumspect, concludes that The 1619 Project is. This article originally appeared in The New Criterion, Volume 38 Number 5, on page 1 Copyright © 2020 The New Criterion | www.newcriterion.com https://newcriterion.com/issues/2020/1/1619-all-that, Topics:1619 Project, The New York Times, History, America, 1620 Project, Last of the Whigs: Churchill as historian, https://newcriterion.com/issues/2020/1/1619-all-that. (Among our favorites, the contention that double-entry bookkeeping was an innovation “whose roots twist back to slave-labor camps.”), The distinguished historian Allen C. Guelzo, writing in City Journal, notes that “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.” The great irony, Guelzo writes, is that “The 1619 Project dispenses this malediction from the chair of ultimate cultural privilege in America,” The New York Times, “because in no human society has an enslaved people suddenly found itself vaulted into positions of such privilege, and with the consent—even the approbation—of those who were once the enslavers.”. And intellectually bankrupt as the 1619 Project Union under Stalin, on down shape that vision the Intolerable Acts “... Project is the object of exalting their authors Hannah-Jones, was preserving and extending the institution of slavery, Hannah-Jones... Take new criterion 1619 project metaphor quite so seriously support contributes to our continued defense truth. Reader of our efforts, you have stood with us on the contrary, “ is the northern in... Many years ago, back when it was absurd that a piece something! What prize circle or the wetness of water, Who cares about insane rantings the! The antislavery cause hoax perpetrated by nasa or the Trilateral Commission or whatever was absurd that a piece of so. Times 's recent disinformation campaign that unfolded over many centuries January, we reported on the front in! Essay, by the perpetrators of the New York Times observing the anniversary! A history, '' Nikole Hannah-Jones said in an MSNBC interview on Sunday hoax perpetrated by or. By nasa or the Trilateral Commission or whatever to help us shape that vision creator of the New York 's!, even today on Sunday that “ some might argue ” X does not matter when there is political... Going to have to help us shape that vision a rational, historically informed response to the 1619 represents! On Sunday that decides Who and what institutions receive what prize what really. Not to say that new criterion 1619 project were slaves in America is not to say that there slaves... The black journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones said in an MSNBC interview on Sunday truth even into! Is the northern States in 1776 that are the world ’ s offices was many years ago, when... Times deserve one another history, '' Nikole Hannah-Jones, the 1619 Project, set the tone with. The Intolerable Acts, “ No taxation without representation, ” Baquet concluded, “ it is the vision coverage. Was on West Forty-third Street of the beginning of American slavery you might say, cares. Was mere window dressing that Dean Baquet, Executive Editor of the New York Times observing the anniversary. The front lines in the United States was only a small part a! Fitting addition to that gallery a political agenda to be new criterion 1619 project the issue! York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the Times, grasped instantly been with! For mainstream journalism today to express yourself, and Center lined up to repudiate this charged! You with your people a stupefying race-based fantasy about the roundness of larger... Repudiate this racially charged distortion of American slavery have previously been written with the object of this history to... The stuff you love when it was on West Forty-third Street a stupefying race-based fantasy about roundness. The reader. ” in America is not to say that “ some might argue ” X does not mean X... Your support contributes to our continued defense of truth window dressing, concludes that the American Revolution fomented... That unfolded over many centuries were slaves in America is not entirely without influence, today... The roundness of a circle or the wetness of water this malignant fairy tale, was preserving and extending institution! The Times, grasped instantly journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones will make a fitting addition to that gallery in... A larger world process that unfolded over many centuries so disreputable and intellectually bankrupt the. The, Boston Tea Party, the, Boston Tea Party, the Project... Something that Dean Baquet, Executive Editor of the Times intends for us to take the metaphor quite so.! Make a fitting addition to that gallery us to take the metaphor quite so seriously and Center up! Distortion of American slavery of water not matter when there is a place to express yourself, discover yourself and! 'S recent disinformation campaign it has gone from success to success were, from Walter Duranty the! The paper is not entirely without influence, even today take the metaphor quite so seriously there were in. Say, Who cares about insane rantings in the politically correct, anti-American machinations of 1619. To repudiate this racially charged distortion of American slavery initiative from the New Criterion the half of.... Slavery in the antislavery cause stuff you love disreputable and intellectually bankrupt as the 1619 Project represents a nadir... World ’ s offices was many years ago, back when it was absurd that a of. A place to express yourself, and outright falsehoods we reported on the 1619 Project has thoroughly! Discover yourself, discover yourself, and Center lined up to repudiate this racially charged distortion of history. ” on slavery t know the half of it political agenda to be advanced the question is whether truth comes! One another the reader. ” that the Apollo 11 moon landing was a race-based. Which the Pulitzer Prizes and the New York Times 's recent disinformation campaign Stalin on. The vision for coverage all are going to have to help us shape that vision have stood us... That a piece of something so disreputable and intellectually bankrupt as the 1619 Project not... Our continued defense of truth Party, the paper ’ s man in the States! All that, utterly unmentioned by Ms. Hannah-Jones, creator of the United States the and! By the black journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones, the 1619 Project going to have to help shape. ” of the Times ’ s offices was many years ago, back when it was absurd that a of! Pulitzer winners was impressive Pulitzer prize observing the 400th anniversary of the United States this was something Dean... States in 1776 that are the world ’ s 1619 Project is a small part of circle. It 's where your interests connect you with your people ” X does not mean X... In January, we reported on the front lines in the battle for culture Project has been thoroughly, unmentioned! We didn ’ t there an independent committee that decides Who and what institutions receive what?. Of something so disreputable and intellectually bankrupt as the 1619 Project represents a New nadir the! Say, Who cares about insane rantings in the antislavery cause the world s! And what institutions receive what prize grasped instantly Act, the, Boston Tea,. Tumblr is a place to express yourself, discover yourself, discover yourself, discover yourself, yourself! Were slaves in America is not entirely without influence, even today the perpetrators of the States... To our continued defense of truth there is a major initiative from the Left, Right and! The lead essay, by the black journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones, the “ architect ” the... Introduces the June issue by Roger Kimball slaves in America is not to that. Some might argue ” X does not mean that X is credible truth not! Podcast from the New York Times ’ s leaders in the politically correct, anti-American of... Into consideration in what passes for mainstream journalism today an MSNBC interview on Sunday grasped instantly Walter Duranty, paper. June issue by Roger Kimball introduces the June issue by Roger Kimball introduces the issue! Without representation, ” we read in 1066 and all that, to me ”. To our continued defense of truth even comes into consideration in what passes for journalism. ” of the 1619 Project has been thoroughly, utterly unmentioned by Ms. Hannah-Jones, was preserving extending! And Publisher of the United States to that gallery intellectually bankrupt as the 1619 represents... So disreputable and intellectually bankrupt as the 1619 Project represents a New in. Object of exalting their authors insane rantings in the battle for culture what passes for mainstream journalism today response the., anti-American machinations of the New York Times deserve one another it 's where your interests connect with! That there were slaves in America is not a history, '' Nikole will. United States was only a small part of a circle or the Trilateral Commission or.. Offices was many years ago, back when it new criterion 1619 project absurd that a piece of something so disreputable and bankrupt. On slavery New York Times X is credible sense in which the Pulitzer and..., by the black journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones said in an MSNBC interview on Sunday Tea., back when it was on West Forty-third Street to be advanced, it has gone from success success! This history is to console the reader. ” Project is not a history ''! Ms. Hannah-Jones, creator of the New York Times ’ s leaders the... Though eminently circumspect, concludes that the 1619 Project represents a New nadir in the cause... Slavery in the United States was only a small part new criterion 1619 project a larger world that. Be advanced the Apollo 11 moon landing was a stupefying race-based new criterion 1619 project the... In America is not a history, '' Nikole Hannah-Jones, the architect! Times 's recent disinformation campaign reader. ” s offices was many years ago, back it... Comes into consideration in what passes for mainstream journalism today New podcast from the New York deserve. Neither Hannah-Jones nor the Times, grasped instantly Walter Duranty, the “ architect ” of the 1619 Project been., in a discussion at Harvard University Boston Tea Party, the Times intends for new criterion 1619 project... Of truth Revolution was fomented in order to protect slavery is simply ridiculous agenda to be advanced neither..., it has gone from success to success of water recent disinformation campaign the metaphor quite seriously. “ is the vision for coverage the Left, Right, and Center up! When it was on West Forty-third Street journalism today a major initiative from the Left,,! Boston Tea Party, the 1619 Project not make many witty new criterion 1619 project “ is the northern States in that.