1619 Project

[Meathead]

Not sure what you are asking here. In 1619 a first shipment of 20-30 African slaves arrived aboard a British ship in Virginia. With other ships of African slaves to follow and their enslaved descendants working on plantations and eventually as domestics and even artisans, agricultural and social life in the South was transformed in profound ways, ways that effected and eventually infected our whole country.

Actually black slaves were first brought by the Spanish into North America way back in 1526 (there may even have been a free African or two on Columbus’ ships) — but the 1619 date is a convenient one and more or less a natural storytelling hook used by the editors of the 1619 Project to frame their own African-American-centered history of the “real” founding and subsequent development of our country and society. Some of this language about a “real founding” moment was subsequently dropped, but the “project” I believe still aims at highlighting and presenting African-American stories, much as other histories highlight “Labor” voices or “the voices of the people.”

Has anyone here really read much of these new educational
materials and essays?

The authors of the essays that made up the original 100 page NY Times Special Edition, and most of the early educational materials created for courses based on it, were intentionally written by African Americans and stressed the African-American experience. They argued that a full and accurate description of our country’s history can’t simply begin in 1776 with the American Revolution being led by “Enlightened” revolutionary “Founding Fathers,” nor with the Pilgrims on the Mayflower.

The TV Hulu documentary evidently tries to be as broad and ambitious as the whole “1619 Project” once aspired to be. It may start in 1619 but proceeds right up to modern times. Probably worth watching — with open unbiased eyes — if one has the time.

So What? The 1498 Project was far more interesting than a foonote.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

It IS history
And while some of the facts may be skewed it is far less skewed than
In Fourteen Hundred and ninetytwo
Columbus sailed the ocean blue

AND if the facts make you feel bad then, perhaps, you should investigate those feelings rather than attack the cause.

It is history invented by a journalist with no history. That's why so many accredited historians have dumped this. The facts do not support your personal bias.

 

[Fueri]

Do you think knowing the actual factual history of the US is harmful to children?

1619 Project is not history. Never was.

 

[AMart]

Did they mention that negros owned slaves back then?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This 3 hour episode aired last night on ABC. I watched the first half of this last night and was very impressed, from the archive footage, to the overturning of the Voting Rights law by a conservative Supreme Court, to gerrymandering, to the fight for civil rights, this is not a finger pointing, accusatory series, but instead is a measured, fact based review of the struggle black Americans have faced since their arrival in this country. I'm looking forward to the watching the 2nd half of this and highly recommend it.

I believe if you have Hulu then there is a much more in depth, 6 hour version available.

https://www.hulu.com/series/the-1619-project-7ba3407a-299c-4a10-8310-bbcdd6ab4653

Hulu’s six-part 1619 Docuseries is an expansion of “The 1619 Project” created by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones and the New York Times Magazine. The series seeks to reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black...

www.hulu.com

Things that never happened

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Did they mention that negros owned slaves back then?

And Africa still has slavery

 

[odanny]

The responses on this thread, from people who have never even seen it but have only read reviews of it on conservative websites, serve as proof to validate everything that Nikole Hannah-Jones is revealing in her documentary.

You folks truly are a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The responses on this thread, from people who have never even seen it but have only read reviews of it on conservative websites, serve as proof to validate everything that Nikole Hannah-Jones is revealing in her documentary.

You folks truly are a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I don't do fiction

 

[Dadoalex]

It is history invented by a journalist with no history. That's why so many accredited historians have dumped this. The facts do not support your personal bias.

Which facts?
Trail of Tears?
Wounded Knee?
Giving syphilis to Black men?
Lynching?
Jum Crow?...

please illuminate me?

 

[Hellbilly]

I don't do fiction

You don’t do facts either.

 

[Dadoalex]

1619 Project is not history. Never was.

You mean as opposed to the heroics of slaughtering unarmed women and children at Wounded Knee?

Which parts of 1619 are not "history?"

 

[Fueri]

You mean as opposed to the heroics of slaughtering unarmed women and children at Wounded Knee?

Which parts of 1619 are not "history?"

The author said herself it was not history.

 

[Dadoalex]

The author said herself it was not history.

I'm asking you which parts are not history.
But you've never actually read the work so you wouldn't know.
You depend entirely on what your MAGAT handlers tell you to say.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You don’t do facts either.

You wouldn't know a fact if the fact was given to you

 

[Hellbilly]

You wouldn't know a fact if the fact was given to you

Nice comeback for an ignorant redneck.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Says the Biden supporter

I'm asking you which parts are not history.
But you've never actually read the work so you wouldn't know.
You depend entirely on what your MAGAT handlers tell you to say.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Nice comeback for an ignorant redneck.

Oh simp trying to insult calling a redneck a redneck

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Which facts?
Trail of Tears?
Wounded Knee?
Giving syphilis to Black men?
Lynching?
Jum Crow?...

please illuminate me?

Those facts are already being taught. Except for giving syphilis to black men. That never happened. The study simply didn't treat black men that had syphilis as they promised to do.

The 1619 Project has nothing to do with any of that anyway. The Project claims that the United States was created as an independent nation in 1619 with the arrival of the first slave, NOT 1776. The war of independence had nothing to do with autonomy or taxation. The fake history invented by the journalist was that the people in America discovered a plot by King George to end slavery and the war was solely to save slavery. Every other historical narrative is examined solely through the lens of slavery and skewed to support the import of the black race.

Sorry but y'all just aren't that important.

 

[Fueri]

I'm asking you which parts are not history.
But you've never actually read the work so you wouldn't know.
You depend entirely on what your MAGAT handlers tell you to say.

No, I depend on what the author said. She said, on Twitter:


[IMG]https://web.archive.org/web/20200829234333im_/https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1000118161574977536/MJ-FExjk_bigger.jpg[/IMG][B]Ida Bae Wells[/B]‏Verified account @[B]nhannahjones[/B]
FollowFollow @nhannahjones

"I’ve always said that the 1619 Project is not a history. It is a work of journalism that explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative and, therefore, the national memory. The project has always been as much about the present as it is the past."
6:29 AM - 27 Jul 2020

Now, of course, she has deleted that post, as she realized that the useful idiots of the world can run around claiming it is "accurate history", and that she can make money from their ignorance. In doing so she is, knowingly, reworking the history of even her own words in a dishonest fashion to suit her narrative and cash in. If that isn't irony, I don't know what is.

In other words, she is chock full of shit.

It is, however, still on the wayback machine BTW:

Ida Bae Wells on Twitter

“I’ve always said that the 1619 Project is not a history. It is a work of journalism that explicitly seeks to challenge the national narrative and, therefore, the national memory. The project has always been as much about the present as it is the past.”

web.archive.org

Here's your golf clap for buying that bullshit. ::golf clap::

 

[Hellbilly]

Those facts are already being taught.

That’s bullshit.